perm filename MSG3[JNK,JMC] blob
sn#750922 filedate 1984-04-09 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00518 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00075 00002 ∂17-Jan-84 0916 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:trattnig@diablo Commercial Dataflow Processors
C00077 00003 ∂17-Jan-84 1153 ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA Dretske dinner
C00078 00004 ∂17-Jan-84 1743 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ID Mail/Feigenbaum, Engelmore
C00080 00005 ∂17-Jan-84 2348 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #8
C00104 00006 ∂18-Jan-84 1201 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:CET@SU-AI Call for Nominations for IBM Fellowship
C00106 00007 ∂18-Jan-84 1223 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Appointment
C00108 00008 ∂18-Jan-84 1704 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI Newsletter No. 15, January 19, 1984
C00123 00009 ∂18-Jan-84 2004 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rivest's office
C00124 00010 ∂19-Jan-84 1507 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA "no. theory sem., changed time"
C00126 00011 ∂19-Jan-84 1511 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Meeting
C00128 00012 ∂19-Jan-84 1716 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00130 00013 ∂19-Jan-84 2348 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Past & Next AFLB talk(s)
C00137 00014 ∂20-Jan-84 0926 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Area D planning
C00139 00015 ∂20-Jan-84 0931 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Graphics Forum--New Journal Need Comments
C00142 00016 ∂20-Jan-84 1316 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA ibm fellowship
C00144 00017 ∂22-Jan-84 0220 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #4
C00154 00018 ∂22-Jan-84 1625 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #9
C00178 00019 ∂23-Jan-84 1054 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA DEC INTRO / SCRIBE NOTES
C00180 00020 ∂23-Jan-84 1105 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA McCarty Lectures
C00184 00021 ∂23-Jan-84 1649 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats, feb.3
C00185 00022 ∂23-Jan-84 2235 ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA reminder on why discourse wont go away
C00187 00023 ∂24-Jan-84 0911 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA IBM Fellowship Nominations
C00189 00024 ∂24-Jan-84 1435 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on tech reports and lecture notes
C00193 00025 ∂24-Jan-84 1459 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA IBM Fellowship Nominees
C00195 00026 ∂25-Jan-84 1000 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA num. th. sem. thursday
C00196 00027 ∂25-Jan-84 1055 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rivest Lecture
C00197 00028 ∂25-Jan-84 1124 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Journals Coming In
C00198 00029 ∂25-Jan-84 1232 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA [Ivan Sag <sag@Su-psych>: Dinner with Morris Halle]
C00201 00030 ∂25-Jan-84 1422 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Advisory Panel Letters
C00202 00031 ∂25-Jan-84 1519 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition
C00205 00032 ∂25-Jan-84 1715 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Ph D Admissions
C00208 00033 ∂25-Jan-84 1721 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 16, January 26, 1984
C00237 00034 ∂25-Jan-84 1726 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA New Building
C00239 00035 ∂25-Jan-84 2226 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Ph D Admissions
C00243 00036 ∂25-Jan-84 2309 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Ph D Admissions
C00245 00037 ∂25-Jan-84 2346 CLT SPECIAL SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00247 00038 ∂25-Jan-84 2348 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI
C00248 00039 ∂26-Jan-84 0230 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #5
C00261 00040 ∂26-Jan-84 0301 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #5
C00274 00041 ∂26-Jan-84 0837 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA seminar abstract
C00276 00042 ∂26-Jan-84 0837 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SPECIAL SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00279 00043 ∂26-Jan-84 1156 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier Re: Ph D Admissions
C00281 00044 ∂26-Jan-84 1523 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Lenat meeting
C00283 00045 ∂26-Jan-84 1601 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Bush@SRI-KL.ARPA seminar announcement
C00286 00046 ∂26-Jan-84 1758 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA response forms for Forum
C00287 00047 ∂26-Jan-84 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier 27-Jan-84 JMC Re: Ph D Admissions
C00293 00048 ∂26-Jan-84 2252 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Ph D Admissions
C00298 00049 ∂27-Jan-84 0832 LB@SRI-AI.ARPA Administrative Staff Meeting
C00299 00050 ∂27-Jan-84 0954 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA [avi%ucbernie@Berkeley (Avi Wigderson): Re: speakers]
C00301 00051 ∂27-Jan-84 1217 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Building Meeting
C00303 00052 ∂27-Jan-84 1504 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Building Meeting
C00304 00053 ∂27-Jan-84 1532 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA Conference: Themes from David Kaplan
C00306 00054 ∂27-Jan-84 1630 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA courses and degrees
C00307 00055 ∂27-Jan-84 1658 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Bell Fellowship Nominations went out
C00309 00056 ∂27-Jan-84 1702 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA 1984-85 Research Offsets
C00310 00057 ∂27-Jan-84 1736 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Research offset
C00312 00058 ∂27-Jan-84 2130 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@diablo Re: Ph D Admissions
C00314 00059 ∂27-Jan-84 2233 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI
C00315 00060 ∂28-Jan-84 0116 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
C00321 00061 ∂28-Jan-84 2020 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Seminar on Wednesday
C00323 00062 ∂29-Jan-84 1232 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA comp. number theory seminar
C00328 00063 ∂29-Jan-84 1238 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA oops
C00329 00064 ∂29-Jan-84 1426 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:veatch@whitney Re: Lisp As Language Course, P.S.
C00332 00065 ∂29-Jan-84 1427 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:jtli%ucbesvax@Berkeley Re: comp. number theory seminar
C00334 00066 ∂29-Jan-84 1503 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Lunch/Admissions
C00335 00067 ∂29-Jan-84 1527 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lawler%ucbernie@Berkeley Re: Seminar on Wednesday
C00338 00068 ∂29-Jan-84 1534 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: courses and degrees
C00340 00069 ∂29-Jan-84 2036 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA SPECIAL REMINDER on why discourse wont go away
C00344 00070 ∂29-Jan-84 2233 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Lunch/Admissions
C00346 00071 ∂30-Jan-84 0152 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lawler%ucbernie@Berkeley Re: Seminar on Wednesday
C00348 00072 ∂30-Jan-84 0853 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Csli bboard
C00350 00073 ∂30-Jan-84 0855 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA driving to bats
C00351 00074 ∂30-Jan-84 1151 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA csli bboard
C00352 00075 ∂30-Jan-84 1432 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Forum Reception
C00354 00076 ∂30-Jan-84 1603 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Birds of a Feather Sessions
C00358 00077 ∂30-Jan-84 1631 SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA new BBOARD HPP-Lisp-Machines
C00359 00078 ∂30-Jan-84 2209 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #10
C00387 00079 ∂31-Jan-84 0830 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Talkware seminar Mon Feb 6, Tom Moran (PARC)
C00391 00080 ∂31-Jan-84 1201 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA reminder about thursday's seminar
C00393 00081 ∂31-Jan-84 1222 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA car pools for friday
C00395 00082 ∂31-Jan-84 1610 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI Vazirani's BATS talk
C00396 00083 ∂31-Jan-84 1818 YAO@SU-SCORE.ARPA Kannan's visit
C00398 00084 ∂01-Feb-84 0003 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI Reminder: next AFLB talks
C00402 00085 ∂01-Feb-84 0232 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #6
C00432 00086 ∂01-Feb-84 1042 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA staff relations
C00434 00087 ∂01-Feb-84 1127 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next lunch
C00435 00088 ∂01-Feb-84 1134 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting on Tuesday
C00436 00089 ∂01-Feb-84 1141 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Foundations seminar
C00438 00090 ∂01-Feb-84 1730 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA newsletter no. 17, February 2, 1984
C00465 00091 ∂01-Feb-84 1735 YAO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re Kannan's visit
C00466 00092 ∂02-Feb-84 0115 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #10
C00494 00093 ∂02-Feb-84 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #11
C00519 00094 ∂02-Feb-84 0252 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Talk today at SRI by Tom Brown of Kestrel Institute
C00521 00095 ∂02-Feb-84 1030 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Dietary Restrictions
C00522 00096 ∂02-Feb-84 1252 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition
C00526 00097 ∂02-Feb-84 1411 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA Philosophy Colloquium
C00528 00098 ∂02-Feb-84 1606 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats friday
C00529 00099 ∂02-Feb-84 2040 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00532 00100 ∂02-Feb-84 2051 @SRI-AI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00535 00101 ∂03-Feb-84 0231 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #7
C00569 00102 ∂03-Feb-84 0822 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00572 00103 ∂03-Feb-84 0823 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Friday staff meeting
C00573 00104 ∂03-Feb-84 0830 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Dec 20
C00574 00105 ∂03-Feb-84 1141 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA McCarthy Lectures on the Formalization of Commonsense Knowledge
C00578 00106 ∂03-Feb-84 2358 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #12
C00598 00107 ∂04-Feb-84 1034 YM Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
C00605 00108 ∂04-Feb-84 1318 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA Foundations Seminar
C00607 00109 ∂05-Feb-84 0007 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #13
C00624 00110 ∂05-Feb-84 0959 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Foundations planning meeting
C00626 00111 ∂06-Feb-84 0217 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #8
C00633 00112 ∂06-Feb-84 0852 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
C00637 00113 ∂06-Feb-84 1122 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA agenda
C00638 00114 ∂06-Feb-84 1128 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA No lunch
C00639 00115 ∂06-Feb-84 1454 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Provost's lecture series
C00640 00116 ∂06-Feb-84 1551 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:LAURI@SRI-AI.ARPA Talk by Ken Church
C00642 00117 ∂06-Feb-84 1716 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
C00644 00118 ∂06-Feb-84 2051 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ullman@diablo oops.
C00645 00119 ∂06-Feb-84 2056 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA next meeting
C00646 00120 ∂07-Feb-84 0805 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA letter re software royalty policy
C00649 00121 ∂07-Feb-84 0830 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Re: No lunch
C00651 00122 ∂07-Feb-84 0937 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Stanford Linguistics Colloquium on 7 Feb.
C00653 00123 ∂07-Feb-84 1549 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Issues in Perception, Cognition, and Language. February 13
C00657 00124 ∂07-Feb-84 1736 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next meeting
C00658 00125 ∂07-Feb-84 1739 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI Reminder: next AFLB talks (and no talks)
C00661 00126 ∂08-Feb-84 1331 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Edinburgh
C00662 00127 ∂08-Feb-84 2243 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 18, February 9, 1984
C00691 00128 ∂09-Feb-84 2147 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00693 00129 ∂10-Feb-84 0928 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Engdahl and Cooper visit
C00695 00130 ∂10-Feb-84 1546 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA Linguistics Colloquium
C00698 00131 ∂11-Feb-84 0005 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #14
C00728 00132 ∂11-Feb-84 0121 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #15
C00750 00133 ∂11-Feb-84 0215 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #16
C00785 00134 ∂11-Feb-84 1747 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Graduate students at CSLI
C00788 00135 ∂11-Feb-84 2236 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #17
C00819 00136 ∂11-Feb-84 2320 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #18
C00840 00137 ∂13-Feb-84 1422 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Faculty lunch]
C00842 00138 ∂13-Feb-84 1736 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
C00846 00139 ∂13-Feb-84 2021 MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA complexity theory primer
C00849 00140 ∂13-Feb-84 2150 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA tuesday am c1 seminar
C00851 00141 ∂14-Feb-84 0126 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
C00856 00142 ∂14-Feb-84 0828 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI DEC 2060 ACCOUNTS
C00858 00143 ∂14-Feb-84 1418 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA two things
C00861 00144 ∂14-Feb-84 1719 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA semantics of programming languages seminar
C00863 00145 ∂14-Feb-84 1740 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA February 20th: Issues in Perception, Cognition, and Language
C00867 00146 ∂15-Feb-84 0002 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI Reminder: next AFLB talk
C00870 00147 ∂15-Feb-84 0943 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA new building
C00872 00148 ∂15-Feb-84 1100 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA House for sale
C00874 00149 ∂15-Feb-84 1224 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI DEC 2060
C00876 00150 ∂15-Feb-84 1429 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Kent Curtis <curtis%nsf-cs@CSNet-Relay>: recruiting]
C00879 00151 ∂15-Feb-84 1531 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting on Feb 23
C00880 00152 ∂15-Feb-84 1603 HOBBS@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Hugh Kenner
C00882 00153 ∂15-Feb-84 1719 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 19, February 16, 1984
C00902 00154 ∂15-Feb-84 1928 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grey Tuesday Reminder
C00904 00155 ∂15-Feb-84 2052 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #19
C00930 00156 ∂16-Feb-84 1043 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00932 00157 ∂16-Feb-84 1657 PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA Last pass on fixing a meeting time
C00933 00158 ∂16-Feb-84 2032 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Conference on Computer Algebra
C00935 00159 ∂16-Feb-84 2217 @SRI-AI.ARPA:halvorsen.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Re: Last pass on fixing a meeting time
C00936 00160 ∂17-Feb-84 0901 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA sabbatical leave
C00937 00161 ∂17-Feb-84 1354 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:golub@navajo Missing black book
C00938 00162 ∂17-Feb-84 2105 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
C00944 00163 ∂18-Feb-84 0122 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kaplan.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Visit by George Miller
C00947 00164 ∂18-Feb-84 0224 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA furniture for trailors
C00951 00165 ∂18-Feb-84 0316 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Monday (Feb 20) meeting of the class
C00954 00166 ∂18-Feb-84 0913 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grey Tuesday
C00956 00167 ∂18-Feb-84 1058 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kay.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Re: furniture for trailors
C00958 00168 ∂19-Feb-84 1700 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA S/C plan
C00959 00169 ∂19-Feb-84 2022 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Tuesday's meeting of the discourse seminar
C00961 00170 ∂20-Feb-84 0934 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00962 00171 ∂20-Feb-84 0943 @SRI-AI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C00963 00172 ∂20-Feb-84 1738 ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Lewis
C00964 00173 ∂20-Feb-84 1950 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #20
C00993 00174 ∂20-Feb-84 2255 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Science Education Lunch
C00996 00175 ∂21-Feb-84 0220 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #9
C01014 00176 ∂21-Feb-84 0800 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA SYSTEM SHUTDOWN
C01016 00177 ∂21-Feb-84 0927 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C01018 00178 ∂21-Feb-84 0932 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Cheriton re-appointment
C01019 00179 ∂21-Feb-84 0936 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Todats Events
C01020 00180 ∂21-Feb-84 1036 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Re: sabbatical leave
C01021 00181 ∂21-Feb-84 1351 @MIT-MC:AUGUST@JPL-VLSI ADDITION TO MAILING LIST
C01022 00182 ∂21-Feb-84 1440 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA next meeting
C01023 00183 ∂21-Feb-84 1836 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA c1 seminar
C01025 00184 ∂21-Feb-84 2111 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA salaries
C01026 00185 ∂21-Feb-84 2201 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Darpa Proposal
C01027 00186 ∂22-Feb-84 0001 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI AFLB talks for this week and the next one:
C01032 00187 ∂22-Feb-84 1033 JUTTA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Presentation by Steve Chen
C01034 00188 ∂22-Feb-84 1115 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
C01037 00189 ∂22-Feb-84 1137 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #20
C01066 00190 ∂22-Feb-84 1154 JUTTA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Steve Chen's presentation on 7 March
C01067 00191 ∂22-Feb-84 1222 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA QUME QVT103 TERMINAL DEMO
C01069 00192 ∂22-Feb-84 1322 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Student Applicant Interview Trips
C01072 00193 ∂22-Feb-84 1435 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Visitor from Ireland
C01074 00194 ∂22-Feb-84 1439 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA grammar
C01075 00195 ∂22-Feb-84 1758 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #21
C01099 00196 ∂23-Feb-84 0854 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI Newsletter No. 20, February 23, 1984
C01111 00197 ∂23-Feb-84 0914 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
C01114 00198 ∂23-Feb-84 0917 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
C01117 00199 ∂23-Feb-84 0923 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:rodrigue@LBL-CSAM Re: Industry lecturers
C01118 00200 ∂23-Feb-84 1011 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Congratulations
C01119 00201 ∂23-Feb-84 1015 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lantz@diablo Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
C01122 00202 ∂23-Feb-84 1019 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:pratt@navajo Average time to graduation
C01123 00203 ∂23-Feb-84 1032 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Average time to graduation
C01125 00204 ∂23-Feb-84 1033 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:A.SANDY@[36.40.0.210] Re: QUME QVT103 TERMINAL DEMO
C01127 00205 ∂23-Feb-84 1138 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA General Advisors
C01128 00206 ∂23-Feb-84 1141 YEARWOOD@SU-SCORE.ARPA Courses and Degrees
C01130 00207 ∂23-Feb-84 1155 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@diablo Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
C01132 00208 ∂23-Feb-84 1214 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Feb 27 meeting of Issues in Perception, Cognition and Language
C01135 00209 ∂23-Feb-84 1708 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Summer Housing for Visiting Faculty
C01136 00210 ∂23-Feb-84 2105 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
C01139 00211 ∂24-Feb-84 0041 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C01145 00212 ∂24-Feb-84 1202 LB@SRI-AI.ARPA Monday's meeting
C01146 00213 ∂24-Feb-84 1449 ASHOK@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS course clashes
C01148 00214 ∂24-Feb-84 1516 @SRI-AI.ARPA:desRivieres.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Talk and Visit by David McAllester
C01150 00215 ∂24-Feb-84 1518 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: CS course clashes
C01151 00216 ∂24-Feb-84 1653 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA IBM Fellowship Applications
C01153 00217 ∂24-Feb-84 1655 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI-TURING
C01154 00218 ∂26-Feb-84 2005 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
C01156 00219 ∂27-Feb-84 0748 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA ACCOUNTS ON DEC-20 AT CSLI
C01158 00220 ∂27-Feb-84 1025 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA automatic deduction seminar
C01160 00221 ∂27-Feb-84 1029 HOBBS@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Pat Hayes
C01161 00222 ∂27-Feb-84 1031 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA automatic deduction seminar
C01163 00223 ∂27-Feb-84 1054 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Hayes' talk at CSLI Colloquium, Thursday, March 1
C01165 00224 ∂27-Feb-84 1805 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay BATS
C01167 00225 ∂28-Feb-84 1054 LB@SRI-AI.ARPA Next meeting
C01168 00226 ∂28-Feb-84 1138 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:berglund@diablo My Gray Tuesday Thoughts
C01173 00227 ∂28-Feb-84 1145 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:berglund@diablo Teaching Input So Far
C01179 00228 ∂29-Feb-84 0017 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI AFLB talks for this week and the next one:
C01184 00229 ∂29-Feb-84 0230 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #10
C01212 00230 ∂29-Feb-84 1035 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI A Seminat TODAY 4:15pm - Sedgewick on Algorithm Animation
C01215 00231 ∂29-Feb-84 1332 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA
C01220 00232 ∂29-Feb-84 1334 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA next c1 seminar (March 6th)
C01222 00233 ∂29-Feb-84 1515 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Sergei Nirenburg
C01223 00234 ∂29-Feb-84 1547 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #22
C01249 00235 ∂29-Feb-84 1555 RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA Re: Sergei Nirenburg
C01250 00236 ∂29-Feb-84 1557 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA QUESTEL--French online bibliographic databases
C01253 00237 ∂29-Feb-84 1645 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #23
C01274 00238 ∂29-Feb-84 1702 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 21, March 1, 1984
C01296 00239 ∂29-Feb-84 1821 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tomorrow's meeting
C01299 00240 ∂01-Mar-84 0928 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kay.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Re: Sergei Nirenburg
C01300 00241 ∂01-Mar-84 0958 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA cabin
C01301 00242 ∂01-Mar-84 1036 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Ray Jackendoff's affiliation
C01303 00243 ∂01-Mar-84 1323 PAPAG@SU-SCORE.ARPA D. S. Johnson's talk today
C01304 00244 ∂01-Mar-84 1545 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI & Philosophy Conference
C01313 00245 ∂01-Mar-84 1609 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
C01315 00246 ∂01-Mar-84 1634 RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA Thanks
C01317 00247 ∂02-Mar-84 0051 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ARK@SU-AI Sigma Xi Membership Drive
C01319 00248 ∂02-Mar-84 0929 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in language, perception and cognition
C01322 00249 ∂02-Mar-84 1014 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C01325 00250 ∂02-Mar-84 1528 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Metrics Conference
C01329 00251 ∂04-Mar-84 1204 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on why DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
C01332 00252 ∂05-Mar-84 1409 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA GB
C01334 00253 ∂05-Mar-84 1817 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:Guibert.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Talk by David McAllester: Mon. Mar. 12 at 11:00 at PARC
C01338 00254 ∂06-Mar-84 0237 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #11
C01373 00255 ∂06-Mar-84 1112 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA The Artificial Intelligence Report
C01375 00256 ∂06-Mar-84 1159 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #24
C01403 00257 ∂06-Mar-84 1305 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #25
C01428 00258 ∂06-Mar-84 1337 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Logging on at sri-ai
C01430 00259 ∂06-Mar-84 1615 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #26
C01463 00260 ∂06-Mar-84 1624 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Call for Papers on Combinatorial Algorithms on Words
C01466 00261 ∂06-Mar-84 1722 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting 3/8/84
C01467 00262 ∂06-Mar-84 1742 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Call for Papers - Errata
C01468 00263 ∂06-Mar-84 1826 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA GB
C01469 00264 ∂07-Mar-84 1142 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Salaries
C01471 00265 ∂07-Mar-84 1151 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Announcement from the Dept. of the Army
C01474 00266 ∂07-Mar-84 1534 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier influencing admissions: now is your chance
C01476 00267 ∂07-Mar-84 1632 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #27
C01502 00268 ∂07-Mar-84 1823 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 22, March 8, 1984
C01535 00269 ∂07-Mar-84 1824 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA GB
C01536 00270 ∂07-Mar-84 2031 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: influencing admissions: now is your chance
C01538 00271 ∂07-Mar-84 2235 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Situation semantics seminar
C01540 00272 ∂08-Mar-84 0535 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ARK@SU-AI.ARPA Re: Sigma Xi Membership Drive
C01544 00273 ∂08-Mar-84 1220 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Dave MacQueen Visit and Talk
C01547 00274 ∂08-Mar-84 1222 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Dave MacQueen
C01549 00275 ∂08-Mar-84 1516 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley March 13--UCB Cogsci Seminar
C01554 00276 ∂08-Mar-84 1548 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction Seminar
C01557 00277 ∂08-Mar-84 1556 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction Seminar
C01560 00278 ∂08-Mar-84 1630 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA CHANGES: David McAllester 3:30 p.m. Mon. Mar. 12 at PARC
C01564 00279 ∂08-Mar-84 1705 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA March 13--UCB Cogsci Seminar
C01570 00280 ∂08-Mar-84 1753 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Building Meeting
C01572 00281 ∂08-Mar-84 1755 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: influencing admissions: now is your chance
C01574 00282 ∂08-Mar-84 1929 @SRI-AI.ARPA:EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA New SRI Phone Book
C01577 00283 ∂08-Mar-84 1929 @SRI-AI.ARPA:EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA New SRI Phone Book
C01580 00284 ∂08-Mar-84 1943 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA New SRI Phone Book
C01584 00285 ∂08-Mar-84 2102 REID@SU-SCORE.ARPA admissions status: whiteballs
C01586 00286 ∂08-Mar-84 2301 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: admissions status: whiteballs
C01588 00287 ∂08-Mar-84 2353 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
C01591 00288 ∂09-Mar-84 0151 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C01594 00289 ∂09-Mar-84 1336 ICHIKI@SRI-AI.ARPA Richard Larson talk late
C01595 00290 ∂09-Mar-84 2228 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #28
C01617 00291 ∂09-Mar-84 2324 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #29
C01639 00292 ∂10-Mar-84 1433 @SRI-AI.ARPA:sag%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA visits by J.D. Fodor, Crain, Pelletier, Klein & Tait
C01641 00293 ∂10-Mar-84 1819 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
C01649 00294 ∂11-Mar-84 2316 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
C01652 00295 ∂12-Mar-84 0947 BMOORE@SRI-AI.ARPA visit by Ray Turner
C01654 00296 ∂12-Mar-84 1157 WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA [BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA: Building Meeting]
C01657 00297 ∂12-Mar-84 1402 BERGLUND@SU-SCORE.ARPA Salary Survey Survey
C01659 00298 ∂12-Mar-84 1419 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA David McAllester TODAY, 3:30 p.m. Room 3312 PARC
C01663 00299 ∂12-Mar-84 1424 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Dave MacQueen TOMORROW, 9:30 a.m. at Ventura
C01665 00300 ∂12-Mar-84 1921 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Inference Seminar
C01669 00301 ∂13-Mar-84 1357 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Date for Computer Forum 1985
C01670 00302 ∂13-Mar-84 1519 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Next quarter's situation semantics seminar
C01672 00303 ∂13-Mar-84 1520 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA New position
C01674 00304 ∂14-Mar-84 0234 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #12
C01699 00305 ∂14-Mar-84 1040 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA A new course: Visual sensing by humans and computers
C01704 00306 ∂14-Mar-84 1421 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Bell Fellowship Awarded to John Lamping
C01706 00307 ∂14-Mar-84 1431 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay bats
C01714 00308 ∂14-Mar-84 1553 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA 84-85 postdocs
C01716 00309 ∂14-Mar-84 1804 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 23, March 15, 1984
C01736 00310 ∂15-Mar-84 0847 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty lunches
C01737 00311 ∂15-Mar-84 1308 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA today's meeting
C01739 00312 ∂15-Mar-84 1424 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA Area CL meetings to begin next Monday
C01743 00313 ∂15-Mar-84 1541 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Thursday Colloquium
C01744 00314 ∂15-Mar-84 1638 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 20
C01750 00315 ∂15-Mar-84 1735 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS440
C01751 00316 ∂16-Mar-84 0823 HALPERN.SJRLVM1@csnet-relay.arpa Knowledge seminar March 23 at IBM with Lotfi Zadeh and Ron Fagin
C01755 00317 ∂16-Mar-84 1004 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Ph.D. admissions report
C01757 00318 ∂16-Mar-84 1517 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA goodbye to Amy
C01758 00319 ∂16-Mar-84 1521 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Commencement
C01759 00320 ∂16-Mar-84 1530 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lantz@diablo Xerox 1984 University Equipment Grant Program
C01770 00321 ∂16-Mar-84 1533 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier Ph.D. admissions report
C01775 00322 ∂16-Mar-84 1537 pang%ISL.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Special Seminar given by Tom Leighton
C01777 00323 ∂16-Mar-84 1602 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:santha%ucbernie@Berkeley Re: Special Seminar given by Tom Leighton
C01779 00324 ∂17-Mar-84 0000 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Abstract for Manacher's talk
C01782 00325 ∂17-Mar-84 0006 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Last AFLB this quarter
C01784 00326 ∂18-Mar-84 1341 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA DOWNTIME ON TURING
C01786 00327 ∂19-Mar-84 1425 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA scheduling the Automatic Seminar
C01788 00328 ∂19-Mar-84 1430 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA scheduling the Automatic Seminar
C01790 00329 ∂20-Mar-84 0939 SHIEBER@SRI-AI.ARPA An invitation
C01792 00330 ∂20-Mar-84 1338 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEMINAR -- March 27
C01796 00331 ∂20-Mar-84 1341 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Visit by Vavasis
C01798 00332 ∂20-Mar-84 1956 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:mis%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA
C01801 00333 ∂21-Mar-84 0231 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #13
C01822 00334 ∂21-Mar-84 1322 @MIT-MC:MILLGRAM@MIT-OZ bibliographical database
C01824 00335 ∂21-Mar-84 1234 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:BRESNAN.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA visit by Abdelkader Fassi Fehri
C01827 00336 ∂21-Mar-84 1854 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA Course Announcement -- Lisp: Language and Literature
C01835 00337 ∂21-Mar-84 2001 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:poser%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Labov talk
C01837 00338 ∂21-Mar-84 2038 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 24, March 22, 1984
C01856 00339 ∂22-Mar-84 0859 @SRI-AI.ARPA:MICHELE@SU-CSLI.ARPA DOWNTIME ON TURING
C01857 00340 ∂22-Mar-84 0908 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE name addition
C01858 00341 ∂22-Mar-84 1031 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Csli-folks list
C01860 00342 ∂22-Mar-84 1043 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@navajo For unto us a child is born,
C01862 00343 ∂22-Mar-84 1440 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA trailers
C01864 00344 ∂22-Mar-84 1454 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA PS on trailers
C01865 00345 ∂22-Mar-84 1554 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA csli-folks list
C01867 00346 ∂22-Mar-84 1626 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DFH@SU-AI.ARPA
C01869 00347 ∂22-Mar-84 2342 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE name addition
C01870 00348 ∂23-Mar-84 0227 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #14
C01880 00349 ∂23-Mar-84 0821 @MIT-MC:cmacfarl@BBN-UNIX add me
C01881 00350 ∂23-Mar-84 0854 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA ONR Research Opportunities
C01882 00351 ∂23-Mar-84 1120 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Names and Addresses for CSLI Reports Distribution List
C01885 00352 ∂23-Mar-84 1328 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA Area CL (formerly C) meeting next Wednesday
C01888 00353 ∂23-Mar-84 1523 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kay.PA%parc-gw.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa Re: Csli-folks list
C01890 00354 ∂23-Mar-84 1659 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE beginnings
C01892 00355 ∂23-Mar-84 1823 @MIT-MC:LARRY@JPL-VLSI ENDINGS
C01894 00356 ∂24-Mar-84 0620 @MIT-MC:ZIPPY@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01899 00357 ∂24-Mar-84 1241 @MIT-MC:KDF@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01901 00358 ∂24-Mar-84 1602 @MIT-MC:ALAN@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01903 00359 ∂24-Mar-84 2345 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01905 00360 ∂25-Mar-84 0720 @MIT-MC:KDF@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01907 00361 ∂25-Mar-84 1948 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01910 00362 ∂25-Mar-84 1949 @MIT-MC:DonWinter.pasa@PARC-GW Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01912 00363 ∂25-Mar-84 2007 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01915 00364 ∂25-Mar-84 2252 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01918 00365 ∂25-Mar-84 2304 @MIT-MC:RMS.G.DDS@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01919 00366 ∂26-Mar-84 0830 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Re: csli-folks list
C01920 00367 ∂26-Mar-84 1209 @MIT-MC:LEVITT@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01924 00368 ∂26-Mar-84 1441 @MIT-MC:Laws@SRI-AI Determinism
C01928 00369 ∂26-Mar-84 1509 @MIT-MC:DAM@MIT-OZ Determinism and Choice
C01932 00370 ∂26-Mar-84 1522 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Free will explained
C01934 00371 ∂26-Mar-84 1545 @MIT-MC:BATALI@MIT-OZ What free will isn't.
C01939 00372 ∂26-Mar-84 1933 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE What is "intelligence"...
C01944 00373 ∂26-Mar-84 1933 @MIT-MC:AGHA@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01948 00374 ∂26-Mar-84 1947 @MIT-MC:LEVITT@MIT-OZ What free will is.
C01951 00375 ∂26-Mar-84 2010 @MIT-MC:ALAN@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01954 00376 ∂26-Mar-84 2010 @MIT-MC:Zdybel.PA@PARC-GW Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01956 00377 ∂26-Mar-84 2248 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01959 00378 ∂26-Mar-84 2322 @MIT-MC:ISAACSON@USC-ISI Zapping Zippy
C01961 00379 ∂27-Mar-84 0910 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM [Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>: So you want to criticize? ]
C01971 00380 ∂27-Mar-84 0958 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats transportation
C01972 00381 ∂27-Mar-84 1004 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats
C01980 00382 ∂27-Mar-84 1242 @MIT-MC:LEVITT@MIT-OZ free will, "Matter, Mind, and Models"
C01983 00383 ∂27-Mar-84 1348 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Advisory Panel Visit
C01986 00384 ∂27-Mar-84 1606 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA corrections to S&A
C01987 00385 ∂27-Mar-84 1843 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01991 00386 ∂27-Mar-84 2005 @MIT-MC:Info-COBOL-Request@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01993 00387 ∂27-Mar-84 2131 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01996 00388 ∂27-Mar-84 2313 @MIT-MC:RMS.G.DDS@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C01999 00389 ∂27-Mar-84 2346 @MIT-MC:RMS.G.DDS@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C02001 00390 ∂28-Mar-84 0003 @MIT-MC:DonWinter.pasa@PARC-MAXC Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
C02003 00391 ∂28-Mar-84 0227 @MIT-MC:JMC@SU-AI determinism and choice
C02005 00392 ∂28-Mar-84 0430 @MIT-MC:GUMBY@MIT-MC Phil-sci vs COBOL
C02007 00393 ∂28-Mar-84 0930 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY Re: determinism and choice
C02011 00394 ∂28-Mar-84 1041 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA LSA Directory
C02013 00395 ∂28-Mar-84 1118 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:mis%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Seminar announcement
C02017 00396 ∂28-Mar-84 1134 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 3
C02021 00397 ∂28-Mar-84 1203 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA housing needed 1985
C02023 00398 ∂28-Mar-84 1401 @MIT-MC:JMC@SU-AI determinism and choice
C02026 00399 ∂28-Mar-84 1421 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting
C02028 00400 ∂28-Mar-84 1426 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA FACULTY MEETING
C02029 00401 ∂28-Mar-84 1454 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA paragraphs
C02038 00402 ∂28-Mar-84 1613 @MIT-MC:Hewitt@MIT-OZ determinism and choice
C02041 00403 ∂28-Mar-84 1623 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA bats direction
C02045 00404 ∂28-Mar-84 1636 @MIT-MC:Hewitt@MIT-OZ determinism and choice
C02048 00405 ∂28-Mar-84 1724 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA oren says
C02050 00406 ∂28-Mar-84 1731 @MIT-MC:DAM@MIT-OZ determinism and choice
C02052 00407 ∂28-Mar-84 1757 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 25, March 29, 1984
C02078 00408 ∂29-Mar-84 0044 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
C02082 00409 ∂29-Mar-84 0623 @MIT-MC:ABOULANGER@BBNG Re: determinism and choice
C02085 00410 ∂29-Mar-84 0656 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY Re: determinism and choice
C02090 00411 ∂29-Mar-84 0837 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY deliberation and choice
C02093 00412 ∂29-Mar-84 0910 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE quantum effects...
C02095 00413 ∂29-Mar-84 1100 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Cannon printer
C02097 00414 ∂29-Mar-84 1103 WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Rod Burstall's Arrival
C02099 00415 ∂29-Mar-84 1106 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA bats confusion
C02102 00416 ∂29-Mar-84 1228 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar in foundations of mathematics (Professor Kreisel)
C02105 00417 ∂29-Mar-84 1230 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@Xerox.ARPA T.A. Help?
C02108 00418 ∂29-Mar-84 1251 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
C02110 00419 ∂29-Mar-84 1253 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PCOHEN@SRI-AI.ARPA COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT -- ASPECTS OF ANAPHORA
C02114 00420 ∂30-Mar-84 0007 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Limits of determinism.
C02121 00421 ∂30-Mar-84 0053 @MIT-MC:JCMA@MIT-OZ Limits of determinism.
C02126 00422 ∂30-Mar-84 0238 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #15
C02149 00423 ∂30-Mar-84 0709 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:cooper%wisc-ai.uwisc@wisc-crys.ARPA Wisconsin downtime
C02151 00424 ∂30-Mar-84 1111 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA [DISRAEL@BBNG: Re: housing needed 1985]
C02154 00425 ∂30-Mar-84 1113 MADSEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Course
C02160 00426 ∂30-Mar-84 1122 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA FACULTY LUNCH
C02161 00427 ∂30-Mar-84 1325 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA TA meeting next Thursday
C02164 00428 ∂30-Mar-84 1444 @MIT-MC:MINSKY@MIT-OZ Limits of determinism.
C02165 00429 ∂30-Mar-84 1507 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Limits of determinism.
C02166 00430 ∂30-Mar-84 1514 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Advisory Panel
C02167 00431 ∂30-Mar-84 1530 JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA paragraphs
C02169 00432 ∂30-Mar-84 1555 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Study of University Spinoff Firms
C02170 00433 ∂31-Mar-84 1421 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tentative Agenda
C02172 00434 ∂31-Mar-84 2115 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA First Day of Classes
C02174 00435 ∂31-Mar-84 2123 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty meeting - April 2
C02176 00436 ∂01-Apr-84 1030 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA A talk on ``Subliminal perception: its affect on mood"
C02179 00437 ∂01-Apr-84 1712 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Correction on Subliminal perception seminar.
C02181 00438 ∂02-Apr-84 0805 @SRI-AI.ARPA:KJB@SU-CSLI.ARPA Reminder
C02182 00439 ∂02-Apr-84 0846 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:golub@navajo
C02183 00440 ∂02-Apr-84 1022 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Psychology: subliminal perception seminar
C02185 00441 ∂02-Apr-84 1023 @SRI-AI.ARPA:JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA introduction, summaries, trailers
C02187 00442 ∂02-Apr-84 1102 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Seminar on information content
C02190 00443 ∂02-Apr-84 1109 ZAUDERER@SU-SCORE.ARPA AWARDS
C02194 00444 ∂02-Apr-84 1134 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DYMETMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA CL
C02195 00445 ∂02-Apr-84 1239 HALPERN.SJRLVM1@csnet-relay.arpa Knowledge seminar on April 6 d
C02200 00446 ∂02-Apr-84 1509 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C02202 00447 ∂02-Apr-84 1550 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction seminar
C02203 00448 ∂02-Apr-84 1554 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction seminar
C02205 00449 ∂02-Apr-84 2128 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New HPP Administrative Assistant
C02207 00450 ∂03-Apr-84 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA 03-Apr-84 JMC SAIL and ALTO accounts
C02210 00451 ∂03-Apr-84 0757 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Hartmannis
C02212 00452 ∂03-Apr-84 1052 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:LAURI@SRI-AI.ARPA Morphology!
C02216 00453 ∂03-Apr-84 1318 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:desRivieres.pa@Xerox.ARPA LISP: Language and Literature -- 1st Meeting Thursday
C02218 00454 ∂03-Apr-84 1320 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:desRivieres.pa@Xerox.ARPA LISP: Language and Literature -- 1st Meeting Thursday
C02220 00455 ∂03-Apr-84 1334 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Time for Faculty meetings
C02222 00456 ∂03-Apr-84 1346 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:Kiparsky.PA%xerox.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa Re: Morphology!
C02224 00457 ∂03-Apr-84 1534 @MIT-MC:EJS@SU-AI ODing
C02225 00458 ∂03-Apr-84 1656 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Paragraphs
C02227 00459 ∂03-Apr-84 1659 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA
C02228 00460 ∂03-Apr-84 1916 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GROSOF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ANNOUNCING: NONMONOTONIC REASONING SEMINAR first meeting is 4/11
C02232 00461 ∂03-Apr-84 2229 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI.ARPA SAIL accounts
C02233 00462 ∂03-Apr-84 2235 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: SAIL accounts
C02234 00463 ∂04-Apr-84 0830 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FAT.SIGL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Seminar, April 9
C02237 00464 ∂04-Apr-84 0931 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Name change
C02238 00465 ∂04-Apr-84 0946 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA Area CL meeting today - Goguen and Meseguer
C02240 00466 ∂04-Apr-84 1035 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA test
C02241 00467 ∂04-Apr-84 1104 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 10
C02247 00468 ∂04-Apr-84 1129 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:TYSON@SRI-AI.ARPA Mail forwarding from SRI-AI
C02250 00469 ∂04-Apr-84 1252 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:mis%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA S.P.A. - Seminar in Protocol Analysis
C02255 00470 ∂04-Apr-84 1252 AHNGER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Special TGIF this week
C02257 00471 ∂04-Apr-84 1347 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Advisory Panel Visit
C02262 00472 ∂04-Apr-84 1513 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Emma and Mail
C02263 00473 ∂04-Apr-84 1838 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 26, April 5, 1984
C02298 00474 ∂04-Apr-84 1859 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
C02302 00475 ∂04-Apr-84 2353 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Winter/Spring potluck
C02304 00476 ∂05-Apr-84 0334 @MIT-MC:bts%unc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY forwarded from USENET
C02306 00477 ∂05-Apr-84 0730 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY AI: science or engineering?
C02309 00478 ∂05-Apr-84 0736 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY nonmonotonic reference request
C02311 00479 ∂05-Apr-84 0759 @MIT-MC:steve%brl-bmd.arpa@CSNET-RELAY Re: forwarded from USENET
C02313 00480 ∂05-Apr-84 0838 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Bloom county
C02314 00481 ∂05-Apr-84 0904 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Thursday Dinner
C02315 00482 ∂05-Apr-84 0925 @MIT-MC:crummer@AEROSPACE AI Revealed
C02316 00483 ∂05-Apr-84 1105 @MIT-MC:v.dimare@UCLA-LOCUS Why a Computer Scientist is not an Engineer?
C02319 00484 ∂05-Apr-84 1122 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Message of 4-Apr-84 16:12:47
C02321 00485 ∂05-Apr-84 1121 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Awards
C02323 00486 ∂05-Apr-84 1421 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE artificial intelligence
C02325 00487 ∂05-Apr-84 1429 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rhodes and Marshall Scholarships
C02326 00488 ∂05-Apr-84 1623 @MIT-MC:Tong.PA@XEROX Re: artificial intelligence
C02329 00489 ∂05-Apr-84 1704 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction talk
C02332 00490 ∂05-Apr-84 1718 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
C02334 00491 ∂05-Apr-84 1719 WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Schedule for Advisory Panel Meetings on Friday
C02337 00492 ∂05-Apr-84 1720 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction talk
C02340 00493 ∂05-Apr-84 1741 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar on Logic an Parallel Computation
C02345 00494 ∂05-Apr-84 2121 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Limits of determinism.
C02348 00495 ∂05-Apr-84 2317 @MIT-MC:JCMA@MIT-OZ Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
C02350 00496 ∂05-Apr-84 2317 @SRI-AI.ARPA:PETERS@SU-CSLI.ARPA Progress on additions to Ventura Hall
C02354 00497 ∂06-Apr-84 0217 @MIT-MC:steve@BRL-BMD Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
C02355 00498 ∂06-Apr-84 0719 @MIT-MC:JCMA@MIT-OZ Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
C02357 00499 ∂06-Apr-84 0818 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Reminder
C02358 00500 ∂06-Apr-84 0916 @MIT-MC:steve@BRL-BMD Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
C02360 00501 ∂06-Apr-84 0933 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Re: Limits of determinism.
C02363 00502 ∂06-Apr-84 0946 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
C02365 00503 ∂06-Apr-84 1017 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Mathematical Sciences Research Institute--Future Program-Computational Complexity.
C02367 00504 ∂06-Apr-84 1058 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA test
C02368 00505 ∂06-Apr-84 1213 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
C02369 00506 ∂06-Apr-84 1221 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
C02371 00507 ∂06-Apr-84 1222 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
C02376 00508 ∂06-Apr-84 1317 AHNGER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Special TGIF today!
C02377 00509 ∂06-Apr-84 1828 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Limits of determinism.
C02381 00510 ∂06-Apr-84 2240 GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA cl1 burstall lecture
C02383 00511 ∂07-Apr-84 2314 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Advisory Panel Visit
C02391 00512 ∂09-Apr-84 0716 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Schedule of meetings
C02392 00513 ∂09-Apr-84 0916 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Mailing lists
C02394 00514 ∂09-Apr-84 0956 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
C02396 00515 ∂09-Apr-84 1022 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:PCOHEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Aspects of Anaphora
C02397 00516 ∂09-Apr-84 MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA 09-Apr-84 JMC Undergraduates, and CS
C02400 00517 ∂09-Apr-84 1421 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:Feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA bats on april 20
C02402 00518 ∂09-Apr-84 1931 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier Re: Undergraduates, and CS
C02405 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂17-Jan-84 0916 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:trattnig@diablo Commercial Dataflow Processors
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Jan 84 09:16:35 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 17 Jan 84 09:14:04-PST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 84 09:12:28 pst
To: Super@Score
Cc: Dennis@MIT-XX
Subject: Commercial Dataflow Processors
From: Werner Trattnig <trattnig@diablo>
From: srini%ucbernie@Berkeley (Vason P. Srini)
During the Hawaii conf, TI and Bell Labs presented their dataflow
processors. This happened on Jan. 6, 1984. If you want to get copies of the
proceedings please write to CS Dept., USL, Lafayette, LA 70504 or contact
Dr. Bruce Shriver. These dataflow processors are going to be next
generation signal processors for the US Navy. These products will be
commercially availablein 1986. The funding for the Bell Labs project is 30M.
I think TI project has a similar level of funding. The Air Force has
recently awarded a major contract to Bell Labs for the next generation
dataflow processors. I thought you might be interested in knowing these
developments. With regards. Vason Srini.
∂17-Jan-84 1153 ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA Dretske dinner
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Jan 84 11:53:29 PST
Date: Tue 17 Jan 84 11:52:43-PST
From: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Dretske dinner
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
After Fred Dretske's talk on Thursday, there will be a dinner at
Sue's Kitchen (reportedly very good). If you are interested in
attending, let me know by Thursday at noon so I can make reserva-
tions.
Thanks,
John Etchemendy
-------
∂17-Jan-84 1743 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ID Mail/Feigenbaum, Engelmore
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Jan 84 17:43:38 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 17 Jan 84 17:20:53-PST
Date: Tue 17 Jan 84 17:22:40-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ID Mail/Feigenbaum, Engelmore
To: HPP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Sumex-Staff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Admin@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Berg@SU-SCORE.ARPA, BERGMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
OSTROV@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Although most of the HPP is at Welch Road, the ID Mail address for Ed
Feigenbaum and for Ellie Engelmore remains BUILDING 460, Room 226.
Ellie
-------
∂17-Jan-84 2348 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #8
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Jan 84 23:46:18 PST
Date: Tue 17 Jan 1984 22:43-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #8
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 18 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 8
Today's Topics:
Programming Languages - Lisp for IBM,
Intelligence - Subcognition,
Seminar - Knowledge-Based Design Environment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 12 Jan 84 15:07:55-PST
From: Jeffrey Mogul <MOGUL@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: lisp for IBM
[Reprinted from the SU-SCORE bboard.]
Does anyone know of LISP implementations for IBM 370--3033--308x?
Reminds me of an old joke:
How many IBM machines does it take to run LISP?
Answer: two -- one to send the input to the PDP-10, one
to get the output back.
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 12 Jan 1984 21:28-PST
From: Steven Tepper <greep@SU-DSN>
Subject: Re: lisp for IBM
[Reprinted from the SU-SCORE bboard.]
Well, I used Lisp on a 360 once, but I certainly wouldn't recommend
that version (I don't remember where it came from anyway -- the authors
were probably so embarrassed they wanted to remain anonymous). It
was, of course, a batch system, and its only output mode was "uglyprint" --
no matter what the input looked like, the output would just be printed
120 columns to a line.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 13 Jan 84 06:55:00-PST
From: Ethan Bradford <JLH.BRADFORD@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: LISP (INTERLISP) for IBM
[Reprinted from the SU-SCORE bboard.]
Chris Ryland (CPR@MIT-XX) sent out a query on this before and he got back
many good responses (he gave me copies). The main thing most people said
is that a version was developed at Uppsula in Sweden in the 70's. One
person gave an address to write to, which I transcribe here with no gua-
rantees of currentness:
Klaus Appel
UDAC
Box 2103
750 02 Uppsala
Sweden
Phone: 018-11 13 30
------------------------------
Date: 13 Jan 84 0922 PST
From: Jussi Ketonen <JK@SU-AI>
Subject: Lisp for IBM machines
[Reprinted from the SU-SCORE bboard.]
Standard Lisp runs quite well on the IBM machines.
The folks over at IMSSS on campus know all about it --
they have written several large theorem proving/CAI programs for
that environment.
------------------------------
Date: 11 January 1984 06:27 EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE @ MIT-MC>
Subject: intelligence and genius
I should have thought that if you can make a machine more or
less intelligent; and make another machine ABLE TO RECOGNIZE
GENIUS (it need not itself be able to "be" or "have" genius)
then the "genius machine " problem is probably solved: have the
somewhat intelligent one generate lots of ideas, with random
factors thrown in, and have the second "recognizing" machine
judge the products.
Obviously they could be combined into one machine.
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 15 January 1984, 00:18-EST
From: Marek W. Lugowski <MAREK%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Adrressing DRogers' questions (at last) + on subcogniton
DROGERS (c. November '84):
I have a few questions I would like to ask, some (perhaps most)
essentially unanswerable at this time.
Appologies in advance for rashly attempting to answer at this time.
- Should the initially constructed subcognitive systems be
"learning" systems, or should they be "knowledge-rich" systems? That
is, are the subcognitive structures implanted with their knowledge
of the domain by the programmer, or is the domain presented to the
system in some "pure" initial state? Is the approach to
subcognitive systems without learning advisable, or even possible?
I would go off on a limb and claim that attempting wholesale "learning"
first (whatever that means these days) is silly. I would think one
would first want to spike the system with hell of a lot of knowledge
(e.g., Dughof's "Slipnet" of related concepts whose links are subject to
cummulative, partial activation which eventually makes the nodes so
connected highly relevant and therefore taken into consideration by the
system). To repeat Minsky (and probably, most of the AI folk: one can
only learn if one already almost knows it).
- Assuming human brains are embodiments of subcognitive systems,
then we know how they were constructed: a very specific DNA
blueprint controlling the paths of development possible at various
times, with large assumptions as to the state of the intellectual
environment. This grand process was created by trial-and-error
through the process of evolution, that is, essentially random
chance. How much (if any) of the subcognitive system must be created
essentially by random processes? If essentially all, then there are
strict limits as to how the problem should be approached.
This is an empirical question. If my now-attempted implementation of
the Copycat Project (which uses the Slipnet described above)
[forthcoming MIT AIM #755 by Doug Hofstadter] will converge nicely, with
trivial tweaking, I'll be inclined to hold that random processes can
indeed do most of the work. Such is my current, unfounded, belief. On
the other hand, a failure will not debunk my position--I could always
have messed up implementationally and made bad guesses which "threw"
the system out of its potential convergence.
- Which processes of the human brain are essentially subcognitive
in construction, and which use other techniques? Is this balance
optimal? Which structures in a computational intelligence would be
best approached subcognitively, and which by other methods?
Won't even touch the "optimal" question. I would guess any process
involving a great deal of fan-in would need to be subcognitive in
nature. This is argued from efficiency. For now, and for want of
better theories, I'd approach ALL brain functions using subcognitive
models. The alternative to this at present means von Neumannizing the
brain, an altogether quaint thing to do...
- How are we to judge the success of a subcognitive system? The
problems inherent in judging the "ability" of the so-called expert
systems will be many times worse in this area. Without specific goal
criteria, any results will be unsatisfying and potentially illusory
to the watching world.
Performance and plausibility (in that order) ought to be our criteria.
Judging performance accurately, however, will continue to be difficult
as long as we are forced to use current computer architectures.
Still, if a subcognitive system converges at all on a LispM, there's no
reason to damn its performance. Plausibility is easier to demonstrate;
one needs to keep in touch with the neurosciences to do that.
- Where will thinking systems REALLY be more useful than (much
refined) expert systems? I would guess that for many (most?)
applications, expertise might be preferable to intelligence. Any
suggestions about fields for which intelligent systems would have a
real edge over (much improved) expert systems?
It's too early (or, too late?!) to draw such clean lines. Perhaps REAL
thinking and expertise are much more intertwined than is currently
thought. Anyway, there is nothing to be gained by pursuing that line of
questioning before WE learn how to explicitly organize knowledge better.
Over all, I defend pursuing things subcognitively for these reasons:
-- Not expecting thinking to be a cleanly organized, top-down driven
activity is minimizing one's expectations. Compare thinking with such
activities as cellular automata (e.g., The Game of Life) or The Iterated
Pairwise Prisoner's Dilemma Game to convince yourself of the futility of
top-down modeling where local rules and their iterated interactions are
j very successful at concisely describing the problem at hand. No reason
to expect the brain's top-level behavior to be any easier to explain
away.
-- AI has been spending a lot of itself on forcing a von Neumannian
interpretation on the mind. At CMU they have it down to an art, with
Simon's "symbolic information processing" the nowadays proverbial Holy
Grail. With all due respect, I'd like to see more research devoted to
modeling various alleged brain activities with high degree of
parallelism and probabilistic interaction, systems where "symbols" are
not givens but intricately invovled intermediates of computation.
-- It has not been done carefully before and I want at least a thesis
out of it.
-- Marek
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1984 12:40 EST
From: GLD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: minority report
From: MAREK
To repeat Minsky (and probably, most of the AI folk: one can
only learn if one already almost knows it).
By "can only learn if..." do you mean "can't >soon< learn unless...", or
do you mean "can't >ever< learn unless..."?
If you mean "can't ever learn unless...", then the statement has the Platonic
implication that a person at infancy must "already almost know" everything she
is ever to learn. This can't be true for any reasonable sense of "almost
know".
If you mean "can't soon learn unless...", then by "almost knows X", do you
intend:
o a narrow interpretation, by which a person almost knows X only if she
already has knowledge which is a good approximation to understanding X--
eg, she can already answer simpler questions about X, or can answer
questions about X, but with some confusion and error; or
o a broader interpretation, which, in addition to the above, counts as
"almost knowing X" a situation where a person might be completely in the
dark about X-- say, unable to answer any questions about X-- but is on the
verge of becoming an instant expert on X, say by discovering (or by being
told of) some easy-to-perform mapping which reduces X to some other,
already-well-understood domain.
If you intend the narrow interpretation, then the claim is false, since people
can (sometimes) soon learn X in the manner described in the broad-
interpretation example. But if you intend the broad interpretation, then the
statement expands to "one can't soon learn X unless one's current knowledge
state is quickly transformable to include X"-- which is just a tautology.
So, if this analysis is right, the statement is either false, or empty.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1984 20:09 EST
From: MAREK%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: minority report
From: MAREK
To repeat Minsky (and probably, most of the AI folk): one can
only learn if one already almost knows it.
From: GLD
By "can only learn if..." do you mean..."can't >ever< learn unless..."?
If you mean "can't ever learn unless...", then the statement has
the Platonic implication that a person at infancy must "already almost
know" everything she is ever to learn. This can't be true for any
reasonable sense of "almost know".
I suppose I DO mean "can't ever learn unless". However, I disagree
with your analysis. The "Platonic implication" need not be what you
stated it to be if one cares to observe that some of the things an
entity can learn are...how to learn better and how to learn more. My
original statement presupposes an existence of a category system--a
capacity to pigeonhole, if you will. Surely you won't take issue with
the hypothesis that an infant's category system is lesser than that of
an adult. Yet, faced with the fact that many infants do become
adults, we have to explain how the category system can muster to grow
up, as well.
In order to do so, I propose to think that the human learning
is a process where, say, in order to assimilate a chunk of information
one has to have a hundred-, nay, a thousand-fold store of SIMILAR
chunks. This is by direct analogy with physical growing up--it
happens very slowly, gradually, incrementally--and yet it happens.
If you recall, my original statement was made against attempting
"wholesale learning" as opposed to "knowledge-rich" systems when
building subcognitive sytems. Admittedly, the complexity of a human
being is many an order of magnitude beyond that what AI will attempt
for decades to come, yet by observing the physical development of a
child we can arrive at some sobbering tips for how to successfully
build complex systems. Abandoning the utopia of having complex
systems just "self-organize" and pop out of simple interactions of a
few even simplier pieces is one such tip.
-- Marek
------------------------------
Date: Tue 17 Jan 84 11:56:01-PST
From: Juanita Mullen <MULLEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: SIGLUNCH ANNOUNCEMENT- JANUARY 20, l984
[Reprinted from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution.]
Friday, January 20, 1984 12:05
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
SPEAKER: Harold Brown
Stanford University
TOPIC: Palladio: An Exploratory Environment for Circuit Design
Palladio is an environment for experimenting with design methodologies
and knowledge-based design aids. It provides the means for
constructing, testing and incrementally modifying design tools and
languages. Palladio is a testbed for investigationg elements of
design including specification, simulation, refinement and use of
previous designs.
For the designer, Palladio supports the construction of new
specification languages particular to the design task at hand and
augmentation of the system's expert knowledge to reflect current
design goals and constraints. For the design environment builder,
Palladio provides several programming paradigms: rule based, object
oriented, data oriented and logical reasoning based. These
capabilities are largely provided by two of the programming systems in
which Palladio is implemented: LOOPS and MRS.
In this talk, we will describe the basic design concepts on which
Palladio is based, give examples of knowledge-based design aids
developed within the environment, and describe Palladio's
implementation.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂18-Jan-84 1201 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:CET@SU-AI Call for Nominations for IBM Fellowship
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Jan 84 12:01:00 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 18 Jan 84 11:19:47-PST
Date: 18 Jan 84 0955 PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <CET@SU-AI>
Subject: Call for Nominations for IBM Fellowship
To: faculty@SU-SCORE
CC: Tajnai@SU-SCORE
Dr. Paul called from IBM Yorktown Heights yesterday. It is time for
us to send in our student nominations for the IBM Fellowship.
The IBM is now considered a 2-year fellowship. The second year is
not automatic, but will be granted on the recommendation of the
Department.
This is a very busy and stressful time of the year for me, and I need
your assistance and cooperation. I must have your nominations in time
for a decision to be made by Wed. Feb. 1. I want to notify the students
then so they can start putting together their packages.
We will nominate between 6 and 8 students.
Carolyn
∂18-Jan-84 1223 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Appointment
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Jan 84 12:23:32 PST
Date: Wed 18 Jan 84 11:58:33-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Appointment
To: bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
ReSent-date: Wed 18 Jan 84 12:00:02-PST
ReSent-from: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-to: CSD-Senior-Faculty: ;
One point was not clear in our discussion of the appointment of Rosenschein
as a consulting faculty member. The committee recommended that he be appointed
as an ASSOCIATE consulting professor. Let me know if you disagree with
this by Friday, Jan 20.
-GENE
-------
∂18-Jan-84 1704 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI Newsletter No. 15, January 19, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Jan 84 17:03:53 PST
Date: Wed 18 Jan 84 16:50:06-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: CSLI Newsletter No. 15, January 19, 1984
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
CSLI Newsletter
January 19, 1984 * * * Number 15
It's a shorter newsletter this week, one that will be less of a
test of net mail. We're looking at different ways of handling the
Newsletter to make it both convenient and accessible. Please let me
know if you have any ideas or preferences about how it could be done.
- Dianne Kanerva (DKanerva@SRI-AI)
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *THIS* THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Redwood Hall Presentation of "Application of Theorem Proving
G-19 to Problem Solving" (C. Green), secs. 1-5
by Kurt Kololige
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "A Short Companion to the Naive Physics
Conference Room Manifesto"
by David Israel, BBN Labs (author present)
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall by Jon Barwise
Rm G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Aspects of Cognitive Representation"
Rm G-19 by Fred Dretske, U. Wisconsin, Madison
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Redwood Hall "A Philosopher Grapples with the Above"
Rm G-19 (i.e., the previous two seminar topics)
by John Perry
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Discussion led by Stanley Peters
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall by Jon Barwise
Rm G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "How Words Are Represented in the Mind"
Rm G-19 by Morris Halle, MIT Linguistics & Philosophy
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
LECTURES BY DAVID MCCARTY
Professor David McCarty, of the Ohio State University Philosophy
Department, will give a series of three lectures on his recent
research on realizability and computability. The first lecture
provides a general introduction, and attendance at it will be
beneficial in following the other two. The dates, places, and titles
are:
Tuesday, January 24, 9:30-11:15 a.m.,
Ventura Hall Seminar Room (C1 Seminar),
"Mathematics in the Realizability Universe."
Wednesday, January 25, 4:15-5:30 p.m.,
Mathematics Department, Faculty Lounge, 383N,
"Recursive Set Theory and Realizability."
Friday, January 27, 4:00-5:30 p.m.,
SRI Computer Science Laboratory Conference Room EL369
(visitors should plan to arrive early enough to be directed
to the conference room as guests of Meseguer and Goguen),
"Denotational Semantics and Realizability."
Abstracts of the lectures will follow in a message later this week.
- Jose Meseguer
-----------
ISSUES IN PERCEPTION, LANGUAGE, AND COGNITION (PSYCH 279)
WHEN: Monday January 16, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology), room 100
WHO: Professor George Sperling
NYU Psychology Dept. and the Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill.
WHAT: The Logic of Perception
ABSTRACT: The logic of perception involves using unreliable, ambiguous
information to arrive at a categorical decision. The talk will
emphasize concepts and examples; an illustrative movie will be shown.
The prototypical phenomenon is multiple stable states in response to
the same external stimulus, together with path dependence, usually in
the form of hysteresis. The mathematical description is in terms of
potential theory (energy wells, etc.) or catastrophe theory. Neural
models with local inhibitory interaction are proposed to account for
these phenomena; these models are the antecedents of contemporary
relaxation methods used in computer vision. New (and old) examples
are provided from binocular vision and depth perception, including a
practical demonstration of how the perceptual decision of 3D structure
in a 2D display can be controlled by an (irrelevant) brightness cue.
NEXT WEEK: Dr. Dave Nagel, Assoc. Dir. Life Sciences, NASA-Ames.
"Decisions and Automation."
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch will be held each Thursday at Ventura Hall on the
Stanford University campus as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of
TINLunch papers are at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
January 19 David Israel (Guest of Fernando Pereira)
January 26 Stanley Peters
February 2 Carl Pollard
February 9 Geoff Pullum
-----------
POPL 1984 ELEVENTH ANNUAL ACM SIGACT/SIGPLAN SYMPOSIUM
ON PRINCIPLES OF PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
POPL 1984 will be held in Salt Lake City, Utah, January 15-18.
(The skiing is excellent, and the technical program threatens to match
it!) For additional details, please contact
Prof. P. A. Subrahmanyam Phone: (801) 581-8224
Department of Computer Science ARPANET: Subrahmanyam@UTAH-20
University of Utah (or Subra@UTAH-20)
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112.
-----------
1984 IEEE LOGIC PROGRAMMING SYMPOSIUM (UPDATE)
Student Registration Rates
In our original symposium announcements, we failed to offer a
student registration rate. We would like to correct that situation
now. Officially enrolled students may attend the symposium for the
reduced rate of $75.00. This rate includes the symposium itself (all
three days) and one copy of the symposium proceedings. It does not
include the tutorial, the banquet, or cocktail parties. It does
however, include the Casino entertainment show. Questions and
requests for registration forms by US mail to:
Doug DeGroot Fernando Pereira
Program Chairman SRI International
IBM Research or 333 Ravenswood Ave.
P.O. Box 218 Menlo Park, CA 94025
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 (415) 859-5494
(914) 945-3497
or by net mail to:
PEREIRA@SRI-AI (ARPANET)
...!ucbvax!PEREIRA@SRI-AI (UUCP)
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
SEMINAR ON FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
[NOTE: The following announcement is from G. Kreisel in the Stanford
Philosophy Department. Those interested in participating in the
seminar should contact Kreisel at 497-2980 to arrange a time.]
In order to prepare an encyclopedia article on "Contemporary
Logic," I propose to go over the main directions of research during
the last 25 years, roughly, since the Cornell Conference. If I am not
mistaken, there are (relatively few) main directions, some having
begun, others having ended during that period, or both.
It would be very helpful to me if colleagues, especially those
with a background different from mine, were to take part in the
seminar to check and correct the perspective that is (at best)
adequate for the part of the subject that happens to be vivid to me.
WARNING: At least without much information supplied by others, I
should not be able to treat the logical aspects of natural language at
a level of sophistication comparable to that of the venerable parts of
logic. However, some old mathematical dialects of that language, and
their analyses (under the slogan of informal rigor) will be examined
in the light of lessons provided by contemporary logic.
EXAMPLE: the more highly advertised constructivist dialects.
Samples of examinations: (a) relative merits of rigorous analyses
compared to paraphrasing, either by another such dialect or in
set-theoretic language; (b) merits--for the phenomena of interest to
constructivist tribes--of the ideas most prominent in their dialects.
- G. Kreisel
-----------
-------
∂18-Jan-84 2004 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rivest's office
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Jan 84 20:04:22 PST
Date: Wed 18 Jan 84 20:03:00-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rivest's office
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
PHD-Distribution-list: ;
Ron Rivest will be in MJH 246; phone: 7-1963.
GENE
-------
∂19-Jan-84 1507 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA "no. theory sem., changed time"
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 19 Jan 84 15:07:13 PST
Date: Thu 19 Jan 84 15:01:40-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: "no. theory sem., changed time"
To: aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
the responses i have gotten so far indicate a fairly pronounced preference
for holding the computational number theory seminar on thursday, instead of
tuesday. hence, the first meeting will be next thursday
Thursday, 1/26, 2:15-3:15 p.m., Margaret Jacks Hall 301
this is shortly after aflb, so anyone who comes up (or down) for aflb can
stay for number theory seminar. hope to see you there,
joan
-------
∂19-Jan-84 1511 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 19 Jan 84 15:11:44 PST
Date: Thu 19 Jan 84 15:03:01-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gray Tuesday Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
Gene and I have set the date for the Gray Tuesday meeting for Tuesday, February
21st, at 2:30 in Jacks 252. For those of you who may be new to this, Gray
Tuesday is an annual meeting at which the faculty reviews the progress of the
PhD students. Marilynn Walker and I will be preparing a handout which
summarizes each student's academic record and comments that have been made
at previous meetings.
I will remind everyone of the meeting a few more times before it happens so that
those of you who will be unable to attend can get comments to me beforehand.
If anyone has any suggestions as to how to format the information summarizing
student status, please send them to me.
-------
∂19-Jan-84 1716 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
First Meeting Winter Quarter
SPEAKER: Prof. David McCarty, Ohio State University
TITLE: Recursive Set Theory and Realizability
TIME: Wednesday, Jan. 25, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
Special Meeting
SPEAKER: Dr. Jean-Yves Girard, CNRS Paris
TITLE: Introduction to Pi-1-2-Logic
TIME: Monday, Jan. 30, 3:15-5:05 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
∂19-Jan-84 2348 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Past & Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 19 Jan 84 23:48:33 PST
Date: Thu 19 Jan 84 23:48:35-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Past & Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
Because of a SNAFU in my hyper-duper-automagic-software for message
posting you didn't get the abstract of today's talk. I am really
sorry. (... and also back to simpler systems.)
Note the special talk tomorrow (Friday, 1/20) at 2:15 in MJH352 !!!
Please be on time because the room is due at 3:15 !!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
P A S T A F L B T A L K
1/19/84 - Prof. Susan Landau (Wesleyan University)
"Solvability by radicals is in polynomial time"
Determining if a polynomial has roots expressible in radicals is a
question whose history goes back to the Babylonians. Galois provided
a constructive (though double exponential time) criterion for
determining which polynomials have roots expressible in radicals. We
provide a polynomial time algorithm to answer the question. (This talk
represents joint work with Gary Miller).
******** Time and place: Jan. 19, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
N E X T A F L B T A L K (S)
Special AFLB meeting:
1/20/84 - Prof. Bernard Chazelle (Brown University)
"Filtering search: a new approach to query-answering"
We introduce a new technique for solving problems of the following
form: preprocess a set of objects so that those satisfying a given
property with respect to a query object can be listed very
effectively. Among well-known problems to fall into this category we
find range query, point enclosure, intersection, near-neighbor
problems etc. The approach which we take is very general and rests on
a new concept called filtering search. We show on a number of
examples how it can be used to improve the complexity of known
algorithms and simplify their implementations as well. In particular,
filtering search allows us to improve on the worst case complexity of
the best algorithms known so far for solving the algorithms mentioned
above.
******** Time and place: Jan. 20, 2:15 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
1/26/84 - Andrei Broder (Stanford & IBM San Jose)
"Flipping coins in many pockets"
(Byzantine agreement on random values)
Randomized protocols in networks were shown to achieve agreement among
processors even in situations when no deterministic algorithms exist.
Also agreement on a random value (externally provided to each
processor) can be used to achieve Byzantine agreement (agreement in
the presence of malicious processors) in constant expected time. A
natural question is whether it is possible to generate this value
uniformly at random inside the network. This talk presents a
cryptography based protocol that allows agreement on a fair coin, if
less than half of the processors are faulty. This protocol requires
3*t + 3 phases, where t is the number of faulty processors. It will
be shown that t + 1 is a lower bound.
This is joint work with Danny Dolev (Hebrew University & IBM San Jose)
******** Time and place: Jan. 26, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for the winter quarter have been filled
so far.
For more information about future AFLB meetings and topics you might
want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂20-Jan-84 0926 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Area D planning
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Jan 84 09:26:00 PST
Date: Fri 20 Jan 84 09:25:57-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Area D planning
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
To those of you who consider yourselves at least half in area D:
We need to make plans on who we want to bring here next year, either
in some permanent way, or as a visitor or postdoc. The postdoc
applications will not be in until mid February, but we should be ready to
act on them by having other plans made. Thus I would like for you to
a) think about your own expectations for next year
b) think about who would like to have as a visitor for next year
c) thin about trade offs between salary and other activities, like workshops,
travel, etc.
We will schelule a meeting for week after next. In the mean time, discuss these
items with each other, and with the three project managers (Bob, Stan and me).
Thanks,
Jon
p.s. In case you wonder why this has come from me, I am now the Foundations
area co-coordinator, JRP having taken over a combined NL area.
-------
∂20-Jan-84 0931 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Graphics Forum--New Journal Need Comments
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Jan 84 09:31:48 PST
Date: Fri 20 Jan 84 09:28:48-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Graphics Forum--New Journal Need Comments
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I am placing a sample copy of Computer Graphics Forum (vol. 2, no. 1 March 1983)
on our current journal shelve for your comments. Even though it is vol. 2 it
is new since volume 1 is only now available on subscription. The journal
costs $64 per year and is the journal of the European Association of Computer
Graphics. The sample issue includes: GKS-Implementation Overview and Inquiry;
Report on the EEC Workshop on Certification of Graphics Software;
Image Handling-The Bringing Together of Computer Graphics and Image Processing;
A new general purpose method for large volume production of contour charts;
Geography Algorithms Project; Graphics Standards+ the Pace Quickens.
SCOPE: covers all aspects of the theory and practice of computer graphics. It
features original reseach work, tutorial and review articles, and accounts
of practical developments and applications. It also reports on activities
of the Eurographics Association and other graphics events.
It is a qterly.
Let me know what you think of the journal and if you recommend that I purchase.
I am especially interested in hearing from those who feel the journal is
directly related to their current research. Responses could vary from
definitely need, buy and review within so many years, of overall interest
in general that it should be added, do not purchase etc.
Harry
-------
∂20-Jan-84 1316 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA ibm fellowship
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Jan 84 13:16:15 PST
Date: Fri 20 Jan 84 11:26:32-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: ibm fellowship
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
i am writing to you once again on behalf of the fellowship committee. as you
should all have heard from her, carolyn tajnai wants first-cut recommendations
for the ibm fellowship in really soon--if possible by next week. please send
your recommendations to her at tajnai@score; i'm sure carolyn can also provide
clarification of the terms of the fellowship and any information you think you
need in order to pick the best qualified (and most likely to succeed) can-
didates.
thanks,
joan
-------
∂22-Jan-84 0220 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #4
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Jan 84 02:20:02 PST
Date: Saturday, January 21, 1984 11:48AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #4
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Sunday, 22 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Seminar at Berkeley,
Implementations - Arrays
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 84 08:38:41 PST
From: McGeer%UCBDali@Berkeley (Rick McGeer)
Subject: A Seminar Announcement (at Berkeley)
The Bagel: A Systolic Concurrent Prolog Machine.
Prolog Seminar Wednesday, Jan 25 13:30 Evans 597
Ehud Shapiro
The Weizmann Institute of Science
Rehovot 76100, ISRAEL
Draft, November, 1983.
Abstract
It is argued that explicit mapping of processes to processors is
essential to effectively program a general-purpose parallel computer,
and, as a consequence, that the kernel language of such a computer
should include a process-to-processor mapping notation.
The Bagel is a parallel architecture that combines the concepts of
dataflow, graph-reduction, and systolic arrays. The Bagel's kernel
language is Concurrent Prolog, augmented with Turtle programs as a
mapping notation.
Concurrent Prolog, combined with Turtle programs, can easily
implement systolic systems on the Bagel. Several systolic
process structures are explored via programming examples,
including linear pipes (sieve of erasthotenes, merge sort,
natural-language interface to a database), rectangular arrays
(rectangular matrix multiplication, band-matrix multiplication,
dynamic programming, array relaxation), static and dynamic
H-trees (divide-and-conquer, distributed database), and chaotic
structures (a herd of Turtles).
All programs shown have been debugged using the Turtle graphics
Bagel simulator, which is implemented in Prolog.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 17 Jan 84 07:00:32-EST
From: Ken%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
Subject: Arrays in Prolog
When I was visiting ICOT, Ehud Shapiro suggested a way to
incorporate mutable arrays into Prolog. His idea is that
you have predicates for creating arrays, referencing
elements, and updating that in principle could have been
written in Pure Prolog using ordinary terms. The updating
in principle works by copying the entire array except for
the changed element. The idea though was that behind the
scenes the system would be using real arrays and if one
tried to use an old (obsolete) version of an array one got
an error or failure (its a matter of taste which one).
Well, I implemented his scheme in LM-Prolog. (It took less
than one hour since the Lisp Machine provides arrays and
LM-Prolog is designed to be extensible.) Then I showed it
to people here in Uppsala and we came up with the idea that
the old versions of an updated array may be useful and
besides its nicer to have a more complete implementation.
Manny Rayner had recently sketched out a rather different
scheme for solving the same problem. After a few hours of
discussion with Lars-Henrik Eriksson and Manny we worked out
a solution that we are happy with. I implemented it
yesterday and would like people to tell me what they think
of it.
The basic idea is that an old array reference is a data
structure which contains old indices and values for elements
that have been updated and a pointer to another array
reference or the real array. An array reference of the most
recent version of an array has practically no overhead over
an array reference in Lisp or Pascal. Older versions of
arrays don't even exist is other programming languages and
the overhead for their use is proportional to the number of
updates that have been performed since it was created. One
difficulty is that an array update is fairly expensive. It
needs to create at least one new array reference (in the
current implementation that takes 5 words) and needs to do
trailing. Several compile-time optimizations are possible.
In the case where the relevant part of the program is
deterministic and the variables holding the old array
references are not used after being updated, then in
principle all this could compile to just ordinary array
references and updates.
A couple of interesting features of our scheme:
(1) Arrays can be created as initialized or not. If not then
they behave as if they are full of independent variables.
This is handy when the array is being used as a table but is
not being updated.
(2) All of the Lisp Machine array features are available.
Multiple dimensions, overlays, offsets, etc. Also for
initialized arrays the array elements can be 1 bit, 2 bit, 4
bit, 8 bit, 16 bit or 32 bit long. This means that, E.g.
character strings can be represented at least 8 times more
densely than if lists are used as in other Prologs.
(3) Old arrays references are garbage collectable. All
consing, including the construction of the array itself, is
done on the equivalent of the local stack, so that the
memory they use are reclaimed upon failure.
(4) If an old array reference is being used a lot then it
could be converted to being an ordinary array for improved
lookup at the cost of memory. This should perhaps be viewed
as control information that the user provides. This part of
the scheme is not yet implemented.
All this and yet the three predicates involved
(CREATE-ARRAY, UPDATE, and LOOKUP) could have been written
in Pure Prolog.
I've neglected to give a list of useful applications for
arrays, character and bit strings since any book on
algorithms is full of them. Also, this scheme very easily
generalizes to any large data structure which one normally
deals with by side-effecting elements. (E.g. hash tables,
record structures...)
Comments ?
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂22-Jan-84 1625 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #9
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Jan 84 16:25:11 PST
Date: Sun 22 Jan 1984 15:15-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #9
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Monday, 23 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 9
Today's Topics:
AI Culture - Survey Results Available,
Digests - Vision-List Request,
Expert Systems - Software Debugging,
Seminars - Logic Programming & Bagel Architecture,
Conferences - Principles of Distributed Computing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Jan 84 14:50:21 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: How AI People Think - Cultural Premises of the AI Community...
[Reprinted from the Rutgers bboard.]
How AI People Think - Cultural Premises of the AI Community...
is the name of a report by sociologists at the University of Genoa, Italy,
based on a survey of AI researchers attending the International AI conference
(IJCAI-8) this past summer. [...]
Smadar.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 84 13:08:34 PST
From: Philip Kahn <kahn@UCLA-CS>
Subject: TO THOSE INTERESTED IN COMPUTER VISION, IMAGE PROCESSING, ETC
This is the second notice directed to all of those interested
in IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER VISION, etc. There has been a great need,
and interest, in compiling a VISION list that caters to the specialized
needs and interests of those involved in image/vision processing/theory/
implementation. I broadcast a message to this effect over this BBOARD
about three weeks ago asking for all those that are interested to
respond. Again, I reiterate the substance of that message:
1) If you are interested in participating in a VISION list,
and have not already expressed your interest to me,
please do so! NOW is the time to express that interest,
since NOW is when the need for such a list is being
evaluated.
2) I cannot moderate the list (due to a lack of the proper type
of resources to deal with the increased mail traffic). A
moderator is DESPERATELY NEEDED! I will assist you in
establishing the list, and I am presently in contact with
the moderator of AILIST (Ken LAWS@SRI-AI) to establish what
needs to be done. The job of moderator involves the
following:
i) All mail for the list is sent to you
ii) You screen (perhaps, format or edit, depending upon
the time and effort you wish to expend) all
incoming messages, then redistribute them to the
participants on the list at regular intervals.
iii) You maintain/update the distribution list.
Needless to say, the job of moderator is extremely rewarding
and involves a great deal of high visibility. In addition,
you get to GREATLY AID in the dissemination and sharing of
ideas and information in this growing field. Enough said...
3) If you know of ANYONE that might be interested in such a
list, PLEASE LET THEM KNOW and have them express that interest
to me by sending mail to KAHN@UCLA-CS.ARPA
Now's the time to let me know!
Philip Kahn
send mail to: KAHN@UCLA-CS.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jan 84 15:14:04 EST
From: Lou <STEINBERG@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Expert systems for software debugging
I don't know of any serious work in AI on software debugging since
HACKER. HACKER was a part of the planning work done at MIT some years
ago - it was an approach to planning/automatic programming where
planning was done with a simple planner that, e.g., ignored
interactions between plan steps. Then HACKER ran the plan/program and
had a bunch of mini-experts that detected various kinds of bugs. See
Sussman, A Computer Model of Skill Acquisition, MIT Press, 1975.
Also, there is some related work in hardware debugging. Are you aware
of the work by Randy Davis at MIT and by Mike Genesereth at Stanford on
hardware trouble shooting? This is the problem where you have a piece
of hardware (e.g. a VAX) that used to work but is now broken, and you
want to isolate the component (board, chip, etc.) that needs to be
replaced. Of course this is a bit different from program debugging,
since you are looking for a broken component rather than a mis-design.
E.g. for trouble shooting you can usually assume a single thing is
broken, but you often have multiple bugs in a program.
Here at Rutgers, we're working on an aid for design debugging for
VLSI. Design debugging is much more like software debugging. Our
basic approach is to use a signal constraint propagation method to
generate a set of possible places where the bug might be, and then use
various sorts of heuristics to prune the set (e.g. a sub-circuit
that's been used often before is less likely to have a bug than a
brand new one).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 84 8:39:38 EST
From: Paul Broome <broome@brl-bmd>
Subject: Re: Expert systems for software debugging?
Debugging is a black art, not at all algorithmic, but almost totally
heuristic. There is a lot of expert knowledge around about how
to debug faulty programs, but it is rarely written down or
systemetized. Usually it seems to reside solely in the minds of
a few "debugging whizzes".
Does anyone know of an expert system that assists in software
debugging? Or any attempts (now or in the past) to produce such
an expert?
There are some good ideas and a Prolog implementation in Ehud Shapiro's
Algorithmic Program Debugging, which is published as an ACM distinguished
dissertation by MIT Press, 1983. One of his ideas is "divide-and-query:
a query-optimal diagnosis algorithm," which is essentially a simple binary
bug search. If the program is incorrect on some input then the program
is divided into two roughly equal subtrees and the computation backtracks
to the midpoint. If this intermediate result is correct then the
first subtree is ignored and the bug search is repeated on the second
subtree. If the intermediate result is incorrect then the search
continues instead on the first subtree.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 84 19:25:30-PST (Fri)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!nielsen @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Expert systems for software debuggin - (nf)
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.4980
The Knowledge Based Programming Assistant Project here at the University of
Illinois was founded as a result of a very similar proposal.
A thesis you may be interested in which explains some of our work is
"GPSI : An Expert System to Aid in Program Debugging" by Andrew Laursen
which should be available through the university.
I would be very interested in corresponding with anyone who is considering
the use of expert systems in program debugging.
Paul Nielsen
{pur-ee, ihnp4}!uiucdcs!nielsen
nielsen@uiucdcs
------------------------------
Date: 01/19/84 22:25:55
From: PLUKEL
Subject: January Monthly Meeting, Greater Boston Chapter/ACM
[Forwarded from MIT by SASW@MIT-MC.]
On behalf of GBC/ACM, J. Elliott Smith, the Lecture Chairman, is
pleased to present a discussion on the topic of
LOGIC PROGRAMMING
Henryk Jan Komorowski
Division of Applied Sciences
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Dr. Komorowski is an Assistant Professor of Computer Science,
who received his MS from Warsaw University and his Phd from
Linkoeping University, Linkoeping, Sweden, in 1981. His current
research interests include applications of logic programming to:
rapid prototyping, programming/specification development envir-
onments, expert systems, and databases.
Dr. Komorowski's articles have appeared in proceedings of
the IXth POPL, the 1980 Logic Programming Workshop (Debrecen,
Hungary), and the book "Logic Programming", edited by Clark and
Taernlund. He acted as Program Chairman for the recent IEEE
Prolog tutorial at Brandies University, is serving on the Program
Committee of the 1984 Logic Programming Symposium (Atlantic
City), and is a member of the Editorial Board of THE JOURNAL OF
LOGIC PROGRAMMING.
Prolog has been selected as the programming language of the
Japanese Fifth Generation Computer Project. It is the first
realization of logic programming ideas, and implements a theorem
prover based on a design attributed to J.A. Robinson, which
limits resolution to a Horn clause subset of assertions.
A Prolog program is a collection of true statements in the
form of RULES. A computation is a proof from these assertions.
Numerous implementations of Prolog have elaborated Alain
Colmerauer's original, including Dr. Komorowski's own Qlog, which
operates in LISP environments.
Dr. Komorowski will present an introduction to elementary
logic programming concepts and an overview of more advanced
topics, including metalevel inference, expert systems
programming, databases, and natural language processing.
DATE: Thursday, 26 January 1984
TIME: 8:00 PM
PLACE: Intermetrics Atrium
733 Concord Avenue
Cambridge, MA
(near Fresh Pond Circle)
COMPUTER MOVIE and REFRESHMENTS before the talk.
Lecture dinner at 6pm open to all GBC members.
Call (617) 444-5222 for additional details.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 84 1006 PST
From: Rod Brooks <ROD@SU-AI>
Subject: Shaprio Seminars at Stanford and Berkeley
[Adapted from the SU-SCORE bboard and the Prolog Digest.]
Ehud Shapiro, The Weizmann Institute of Science
The Bagel: A Systolic Concurrent Prolog Machine
4:30pm, Terman Auditorium, Tues, Jan 24th, Stanford CSD Colloq.
1:30pm, Evans 597, Wed., Jan 2th, Berkeley Prolog Seminar
It is argued that explicit mapping of processes to processors is
essential to effectively program a general-purpose parallel computer,
and, as a consequence, that the kernel language of such a computer
should include a process-to-processor mapping notation.
The Bagel is a parallel architecture that combines concepts of
dataflow, graph-reduction and systolic arrays. The Bagel's kernel
language is Concurrent Prolog, augmented with Turtle programs as a
mapping notation.
Concurrent Prolog, combined with Turtle programs, can easily implement
systolic systems on the Bagel. Several systolic process structures are
explored via programming examples, including linear pipes (sieve of
Erasthotenes, merge sort, natural-language interface to a database),
rectangular arrays (rectangular matrix multiplication, band-matrix
multiplication, dynamic programming, array relaxation), static and
dynamic H-trees (divide-and-conquer, distributed database), and
chaotic structures (a herd of Turtles).
All programs shown have been debugged using the Turtle graphics Bagel
simulator, which is implemented in Prolog.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 20 Jan 84 14:56:58-PST
From: Jayadev Misra <MISRA@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: call for Papers- Principles of Distributed Computing
CALL FOR PAPERS
3rd ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC)
Vancouver, Canada
August 27 - 29, 1984
This conference will address fundamental issues in the theory and
practice of concurrent and distributed systems. Original
research papers describing theoretical or practical aspects of
specification. design or implementation of such systems are
sought. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the
following aspects of concurrent and distributed systems.
. Algorithms
. Formal models of computations
. Methodologies for program development
. Issues in specifications, semantics and verifications
. Complexity results
. Languages
. Fundamental results in application areas such as
distributed databases, communication protocols, distributed
operating systems, distributed transaction processing systems,
real time systems.
Please send eleven copies of a detailed abstract (not a complete
paper) not exceeding 10 double spaced typewritten pages, by MARCH
8, 1984, to the Program Chairman:
Prof. J. Misra
Computer Science Department
University of Texas
Austin, Texas 78712
The abstract must include a clear description of the problem be-
ing addressed, comparisons with extant work and a section on ma-
jor original contributions of this work. The abstract must pro-
vide sufficient detail for the program committee to make a deci-
sion. Papers will be chosen on the basis of scientific merit,
originality, clarity and appropriateness for this conference.
Authors will be notified of acceptance by April 30, 1984. Ac-
cepted papers, typed on special forms, are due at the above ad-
dress by June 1, 1984. Authors of accepted papers will be asked
to sign ACM Copyright forms.
The Conference Chairman is Professor Tiko Kameda (Simon Fraser
University). The Publicity Chairman is Professor Nicola Santoro
(Carleton University). The Local Arrangement Chiarman is Profes-
sor Joseph Peters (Simon Fraser University). The Program Commit-
tee consists of Ed Clarke (C.M.U.), Greg N. Frederickson (Pur-
due), Simon Lam (U of Texas, Austin), Leslie Lamport (SRI Inter-
national), Michael Malcom (U of Waterloo), J. Misra, Program
Chairman (U of Texas, Austin), Hector G. Molina (Princeton), Su-
san Owicki (Stanford), Fred Schneider (Cornell), H. Ray Strong
(I.B.M. San Jose), and Howard Sturgis (Xerox Parc).
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Jan-84 1054 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA DEC INTRO / SCRIBE NOTES
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Jan 84 10:53:42 PST
Date: Mon 23 Jan 84 10:23:47-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: DEC INTRO / SCRIBE NOTES
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
******************************************************************************
Any of you have not received your copy of the DEC-20 INTRODUCTION and SCRIBE
CLASS NOTES and still wish to receive them, please send mail to:
LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA Michele Leiser
CSLI Computer Facility
Ventura Hall
Stanford, CA 94305
******************************************************************************
-------
∂23-Jan-84 1105 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA McCarty Lectures
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Jan 84 11:05:04 PST
Date: Mon 23 Jan 84 09:39:13-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: McCarty Lectures
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
LECTURES BY DAVID MCCARTY
Professor David McCarty, of the Philosophy Department at Ohio
State University, will give a series of three lectures on his recent
research on realizability and computability. The first lecture
provides a general introduction, and attendance at it will be
beneficial in following the other two. The dates, places, and titles
are:
Tuesday, January 24, 9:30-11:15 a.m.,
Ventura Hall Seminar Room (C1 Seminar):
I. "Mathematics in the Realizability Universe"
A. Five impossible (but nonetheless desirable) things
B. Classical and intuitionistic logics
C. Heyting's interpretation
D. Kleene realizability for set theory
E. Making five impossible things possible
Wednesday, January 25, 4:15-5:30 p.m.,
Mathematics Department, Faculty Lounge, 383N:
II. "Recursive Set Theory and Realizability"
A. RETs, isols, and isolic integers
B. Turning sets into realizability sets
C. An isomorphism theorem
D. Reconstructing a classical theory
E. The structure of constructive P(N)
Friday, January 27, 4:00-5:30 p.m.,
SRI Computer Science Laboratory Conference Room EL369
(visitors should plan to arrive early enough to be directed
to the conference room as guests of Meseguer and Goguen):
III. "Denotational Semantics and Realizability"
A. Intuitionistic information systems
B. A "Brower's Theorem" for information systems
C. Answer to a question of Plotkin
D. Constructive and effective denotational semantics
E. Recursivizing the "extra information"
-------
∂23-Jan-84 1649 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats, feb.3
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Jan 84 16:49:38 PST
Date: Mon 23 Jan 84 16:47:16-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: bats, feb.3
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: avi%ucbernie@UCB-VAX.ARPA
the next BATS meeting will take place at berkeley on february 3,
10 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. please let me know asap if you plan to attend so
that i can let the organizers know how many to expect for lunch.
thanks,
joan
(jf@su-score)
-------
∂23-Jan-84 2235 ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA reminder on why discourse wont go away
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Jan 84 22:34:55 PST
Date: 23 Jan 1984 2232-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: reminder on why discourse wont go away
To: csli-folks at SRI-AI
Tomorrow is our third meeting. John Perry will give his second presentation.
I am happy to say we managed to have Keith Donnellan from UCLA for
next week.
I attach Perry's abstract. Time:3.15pm,Ventura Hall.
I will go through a short discourse using the semantical notions explained
last time, and make some suggestions as to how these notions connect
up with accounts of discourse structure from Grosz and others.
-------
-------
∂24-Jan-84 0911 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA IBM Fellowship Nominations
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Jan 84 09:10:58 PST
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 09:07:35-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: IBM Fellowship Nominations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
First, let me clarify that I am only taking nominations of CSD PHD students.
If a CSL faculty member wishes to nominate a CSD student, it can be done
either through CSL nominations or CSD nominations. However, I cannot
take nominations for a EE student.
The following students have been nominated:
Ullman: Jeff Naughton, Anna Karlin, Peter Hochschild
Cheriton: Stefan Demetrescu, Tim Mann
Schreiber: Tracy Larrabee, Jeff Naughton
Feigenbaum: Peter Karp
Oliger: David Foulser
Binford: David Chelberg
Flynn: Chad Mitchell
-------
∂24-Jan-84 1435 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on tech reports and lecture notes
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Jan 84 14:34:52 PST
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 14:36:11-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder on tech reports and lecture notes
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: almog@SRI-AI.ARPA, nissenbaum@SRI-AI.ARPA, ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA,
bratman@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear all,
One of the things I had to sluff over in my report to SDF was the
status of our tech report series, since nothing has yet appeared.
I think it will be an important part of the year 1 review to see
that our publications are beginning to appear and have an impact.
So here is a reminder, or perhaps fresh information, about our
publication plans.
We are going to have two series, a preprint series for papers that
people plan to submit for publication elsewhere, and a lecture note
series, for longer and more tentative work.
The preprint series will be pretty much what we are all used to from
tech reports and Sloan preprint series. Papers anywhere from a few
pages to reasonably long, but work we consider finished. The will
be reproduced with CSLI covers, 8 1/2 x 11, and will be available for
distribution, limited numbers free of charge.
The lecture note series will be modelled after the Springer Lecture
Notes in C.S. and math. Here are some example of ways they might be
used.
-The lecture notes from my course, with additions by the
guest speakers, might be edited at appear as a volume, if
it seems worthwhile.
-The papers that are given at a workshop might be collected
as a lecture note volume, even if they are going to be rewritten
and submitted elsewhere.
-A first draft of a book might appear in the series.
The author would receive some free copies but CSLI might sell them
in the long run. We have talked with SU press about the possibility
of their doing the repro and distribution. I imagine they would be
slightly reduced in size.
Dianne Kanerva is in charge of both series, and has a two submissions
for the preprint series. Discuss any plans you have with her. She is
an excellent resource, being an excellent editor. You should all take
advantage of her being with us.
Jon
-------
∂24-Jan-84 1459 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA IBM Fellowship Nominees
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Jan 84 14:59:38 PST
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 14:59:00-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: IBM Fellowship Nominees
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Gray@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, jf@SU-SCORE.ARPA
We have received some outstanding recommendations of students for the
IBM Fellowship. We expect more information within 6 weeks on the new
DEC fellowship. Also, the Computer Forum will begin funding 4 research
assistantships beginning 84/85.
IBM fellows are typically advanced students, who expect to graduate within
two years. I have discussed this with Prof. Ullman and we are using
passing the qual as the filter. If you have other students, who fall
into this category, please send their names. The other nominees will be
held in a file for future opportunities.
Peter Hochschild
Stefan Demetrescu
Tim Mann
David Foulser
David Chelberg
Chad Mitchell
Carolyn
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1000 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA num. th. sem. thursday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 10:00:40 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 09:56:41-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: num. th. sem. thursday
To: aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
reminder that
thursday, 1/26/84, mjh 301 2:15-3:15 p.m.
is the first (organizational and perhaps even a little substantive)
meeting of our computational number theory seminar.
joan
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1055 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rivest Lecture
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 10:55:31 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 10:54:45-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rivest Lecture
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Ron Rivest will give the second Forsythe Lecture today. There'll be a
reception immediately after the lecture at the Faculty Club.
GENE
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1124 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Journals Coming In
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 11:24:16 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 11:17:11-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: New Journals Coming In
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
We are now receiving New Generation Computing and Integration: the VLSI Journal
HL
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1232 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA [Ivan Sag <sag@Su-psych>: Dinner with Morris Halle]
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 12:32:43 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 12:28:31-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 12:24:56-PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 12:25:35-PST
From: Barbara J. Grosz <GROSZ@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: [Ivan Sag <sag@Su-psych>: Dinner with Morris Halle]
Sender: RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA
To: CSLI-friends: ;
Replies to Ivan Sag. Indirect routing courtesy of fouled-up mail
system.
Ray
---------------
Return-Path: <sag%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 10:16:05-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Wed 25 Jan 84 10:07:09-PST
Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 1984 10:06-PST
To: rperrault@sri-ai at Score
Subject: Dinner with Morris Halle
From: Ivan Sag <sag@Su-psych>
Dear friends,
I am arranging a dinner for Morris Halle this Thursday after
his colloquium. I will make a reservation at The Gypsy Cellar
[932 Middlefield Road, Redwood City] for 7 PM. It is essential
to know how many people will attend by tea time (3:45 PM) on
Thursday. Please sign up with the receptionist in Ventura by
that time. CSLI will provide a financial subsidy ($7 cash paid
on the spot) for students who wish to attend. When you sign up,
please indicate whether you are a student and also whether or
not you can offer someone a ride. This restaurant serves authentic
Hungarian food (beef or Szekely gulyas [goulash, to you non-Hungarians],
chicken paprikas, Steak Eszterhazy, palacsintas, etc.) and various
Eastern European dishes. It also features a fine Gypsy violinist.
Directions provided after the colloquium.
Cheers,
Ivan
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1422 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Advisory Panel Letters
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 14:22:50 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 14:24:36-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Advisory Panel Letters
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: wunderman@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear all,
We now have reports from all but one member of the Advisory Panel. I
don't want to make dozens of copies of these floating around, but you
are free (and encouraged) to read them. Pat Wunderman and the members
of the exec committee have copies you could read.
Jon
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1519 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 15:19:09 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 15:14:35-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 15:07:10-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 15:07:26-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Wed 25 Jan 84 15:04:40-PST
Date: 25 Jan 1984 15:04:29-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: Roy.Maxion@CMU-CS-A at score, card@parc-maxc at score, csli-friends@sri-ai at score,
dkanerva@sri-ai at score, gascon@parc at score, gsmith@sri-ai at score,
halasz@parc-maxc at score, horaud@sri-ai at score, jan, moran@parc-maxc at score,
msgs, pentland@sri-ai at score, prazdny@sri-kl at score, su-bboards@score,
witkin@sri-kl at score
Subject: Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition
Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition (Psych 279)
WHO: Professor Lynn Cooper
Learning Research and Development Center, Pittsburgh
on leave at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behaivoral Sciences
WHEN: Monday January 30, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology) room 100
WHAT: Spatial reasoning and Cognitive Skills
ABSTRACT
------------
Professor Cooper will talk about how people solve spatial reasoning
problems of varying complexity. Particular topics that will be covered
include sources of individual difference in performance, and differences
due to levels of expertise. She will talk about her own work, as well as a
variety of approaches currently being used at the Learning Research and
Development Center in Pittsburgh.
∂25-Jan-84 1715 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 17:15:05 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 17:14:52-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Ph D Admissions
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Last year, I met a young Chinese student in Philadelphia who applied to the
department. I was so impressed that I wrote a letter to his file. His English
was excellent and it turns out he had a wonderful recommendation from one of
the leading mathematical problem solvers in the US. He did NOT make it into
round two of our admissions process but he did go to Cornell where he is
considered one of their top students.
I also noticed that many of the persons who passed the comprehensive were
first year students.
The reason I bring these two points up is that I am somewhat concerned
about our admissions process. In the past we were willng to consider
applicants from any discipline but we preferred to admit persons with a
strong mathematical bent. The feeling was that those persons were most likely
to do good research in CS and we felt that undergraduates with CS degrees
had specialised too early. This, too, is basically the reason for not having
an undergraduate degree.
So perhaps our admissions policy has evolved so that we don't always take
persons with strong math backgrounds but instead admit CS "achievers".
This may be a desirable policy but I think we should discuss it.
I hope we can have a discussion at one of our Tuesday luncheons.
GENE
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1721 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 16, January 26, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 17:19:54 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 17:12:20-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 17:09:54-PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 17:07:36-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 16, January 26, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: JAR@SRI-UNIX.ARPA, LINDE@SRI-CSL.ARPA
CSLI Newsletter
January 26, 1984 * * * Number 16
SCHEDULE OF CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *THIS* THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
*VENTURA HALL* "A Philosopher Grapples with the Above"
*Conference Rm* (i.e., the previous two seminar topics)
by John Perry
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Underlying Events in the Logical Analysis
Conference Room of English," by Terence Parsons
Discussion led by Stanley Peters
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall by Jon Barwise
Rm G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "How Words Are Represented in the Mind"
Rm G-19 by Morris Halle
MIT Dept. of Linguistics and Philosophy
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
*VENTURA HALL* Topic and speaker to be announced
*Conference Rm*
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Two Theories of Syntactic Categories,"
Conference Room by Susan F. Schmerling
Discussion led by Carl Pollard
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall by Jon Barwise
Rm G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Information as an Economic Good"
Rm G-19 by Kenneth Arrow, Stanford Economics Dept.
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch will be held on each Thursday at Ventura Hall on the
Stanford University campus as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of
TINLunch papers will be at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford University in
Ventura Hall.
February 2: "Two Theories of Syntactic Categories"
by Susan F. Schmerling.
Discussion led by Carl Pollard
February 9: Geoff Pullum
-----------
SEMINAR ON SITUATION SEMANTICS
by Jon Barwise
Thursday, January 26, 2:15 p.m., Redwood G-19
ABSTRACT
In this lecture I will apply the ideas about types and conditions
from the previous lecture to give a semantic analysis of a fragment of
English that contains imperatives, questions, and declaratives and in
which context is extremely important. This fragment of English is
just rich enough to be used as a programming language in which all
computable functions of natural numbers can be specified.
-----------
CSLI COLLOQUIUM
Thursdays at 4:15 p.m., Redwood G-19
February 2: "Information as an Economic Good"
by Kenneth Arrow, Stanford Economics Dept.
February 9: "Some Problems of Historical Linguistic Classification
and Some Results"
by Joseph Greenberg, Stanford Linguistics Dept.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
LECTURES BY DAVID MCCARTY
Professor David McCarty, of the Philosophy Department at Ohio
State University, is giving a series of three lectures on his recent
research on realizability and computability. The dates, places, and
titles are:
Tuesday, January 24, 9:30-11:15 a.m.,
Ventura Hall Seminar Room (C1 Seminar):
I. "Mathematics in the Realizability Universe"
A. Five impossible (but nonetheless desirable) things
B. Classical and intuitionistic logics
C. Heyting's interpretation
D. Kleene realizability for set theory
E. Making five impossible things possible
Wednesday, January 25, 4:15-5:30 p.m.,
Mathematics Department, Faculty Lounge, 383N:
II. "Recursive Set Theory and Realizability"
A. RETs, isols, and isolic integers
B. Turning sets into realizability sets
C. An isomorphism theorem
D. Reconstructing a classical theory
E. The structure of constructive P(N)
Friday, January 27, 4:00-5:30 p.m.,
SRI Computer Science Laboratory Conference Room EL369
(visitors should plan to arrive early enough to be directed
to the conference room as guests of Meseguer and Goguen):
III. "Denotational Semantics and Realizability"
A. Intuitionistic information systems
B. A "Brower's Theorem" for information systems
C. Answer to a question of Plotkin
D. Constructive and effective denotational semantics
E. Recursivizing the "extra information"
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
On Tuesday, January 24, John Perry gave his second presentation,
going through a short discourse using the semantical notions explained
the previous time and making suggestions as to how these notions
connect up with accounts of discourse structure from Grosz and others.
NEXT WEEK: Keith Donnellan, UCLA
Tues, Jan 31
3:15, Ventura Hall
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
STANFORD LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM
WHAT: "A Sociolinguistic Study of Chicano Spanish"
WHO: Francisca Sanchez, Stanford
WHEN: Tuesday, Jan. 31, 3:15 p.m.
WHERE: 200-303 (History Corner), Stanford
February 7: "The Semantic Basis of Syntactic Categories:
English and Dyirbal Verbs"
by R. M. W. Dixon, Australia National University
-----------
ISSUES IN PERCEPTION, LANGUAGE, AND COGNITION (PSYCH 279)
WHAT: "Spatial Reasoning and Cognitive Skills"
WHO: Professor Lynn Cooper
Learning Research and Development Center, Pittsburgh
(on leave at the Center for Advanced Study
in the Behavioral Sciences)
WHEN: Monday, January 30, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology), room 100
ABSTRACT: Professor Cooper will talk about how people solve spatial
reasoning problems of varying complexity. Particular topics that will
be covered include sources of individual difference in performance and
differences due to levels of expertise. She will talk about her own
work as well as about a variety of approaches currently being used at
the Learning Research and Development Center in Pittsburgh.
-----------
SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
On Wednesday, January 25, the first meeting of the winter
quarter, Professor David McCarty of Ohio State University spoke on
"Recursive Set Theory and Realizability."
SPECIAL MEETING:
WHAT: "Introduction to Pi-1-2-Logic"
WHO: Dr. Jean-Yves Girard, CNRS Paris
WHEN: Monday, Jan. 30, 3:15-5:05 PM
WHERE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
-----------
TALKWARE SEMINAR (CS 377)
WHAT: "Languages and Data Bases"
WHO: Gio Wiederhold, Stanford
WHEN: Monday, January 30, 2:15-4:00 p.m.
WHERE: Bldg. 200, Rm. 205
-----------
! Page 5
COMPUTER SCIENCE COLLOQUIUM NOTICE WEEK OF 1/23/27 - 1/27/84
1/23/1984 Talkware Seminar
Monday Laura Gould
2:15-4:00 Programming by Rehearsal (continued, with videotape)
Bldg. 200, Rm. 205
1/23/1984 Forsythe Lectures
Monday Ron Rivest
7:30 p.m.
Skilling Auditorium Reflections on Artificial Intelligence
1/24/1984 Special Lecture
Tuesday Gerald Jay Sussman
1:15 CalTech Astrophysics and MIT AI Lab
Bldg. 360, Rm. 364 Special Lecture on Computation and the Universe: A
Digital Orrery
1/24/1984 Knowledge Representation Group Seminar
Tuesday Jean Gordon
1:30-3:30 Stanford Medical School
TC-135, Medical A Modification of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of
School Evidence for Implementation in Expert Systems
1/24/1984 Computer Science Colloquium
Tuesday Dr. Ehud Shapiro
4:30 The Weitzmann Institute of Science
Terman Aud The Bagel: A Systolic Concurrent Prolog Machine
1/25/1984 EE380/CS310 Computer Systems Lab Seminar
Wednesday B. Kumar
4:15 Elxsi Computers
Terman Auditorium Multiprocessing in the Elxsi 6400
1/25/1984 Forsythe Lectures
Wednesday Ron Rivest
7:30 p.m.
Skilling Auditorium Estimating a Probability Using Finite Memory
1/26/1984 CSLI Colloquium
Thursday Morris Halle
4:15 p.m. MIT Linguistics and Philosophy Dept.
Redwood Hall Rm. How Words Are Represented in the Mind
G-19
1/26/1984 Forsythe Lectures
Thursday Ron Rivest
4:15 p.m. `An Algorithm for Minimizing Crossovers in VLSI
Jordan 040 Designs' (for 2-pin nets only, given a global routing)
1/27/1984 Database Research Seminar
Friday Enrique Ruspini
3:15 Hewlett-Packard Labs
MJH352 ID: An Information Dictionary
-----------
! Page 6
-----------
CALL FOR PAPERS -- CHDL-85
7th International Symposium on
Computer Hardware Description Languages and Their Applications
August 29-31, 1985
International Conference Hall
Tokyo, Japan
Sponsored by the International Federation for Information Processing
(IFIP) and organized by IFIP TC-10 and IFIP WG 10.2
in cooperation with IEEE-CS and IPSJ
The theme of the symposium is: TOOL, METHOD, AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION. The Symposium focuses on the design process as a whole.
The objective is to cover the various aspects of (computer-supported)
specification, verification, modeling, evaluation, and design of
computer systems based on suitable design languages.
Topic areas are:
- From Specification to Implementation of Digital Systems
- Tool Integration
- Computer System/Hardware Description Languages
- Acceptance and Experience
This is an abridged version of the formal call for papers. For more
details, contact the Program Chairman.
Deadline for papers: December 15, 1984
Notification to authors: March 15, 1985
Deadline for Final Version: May 15, 1985
General Chairman: Program Chairman:
Professor Tohru Moto-oka Dr. Cees Jan Koomen
Department of Electrical Engineering BCS/System Engineering
University of Tokyo Philips International
Hongo, 7 chome P.O. Box 32
Bunkyo-ku 1200 JD Hilversum, The Netherlands
Tokyo, Japan telephone (31) (35) 892292
telephone (212) 2111 ext. 6652 Telex 43712
-----------
! Page 7
-----------
CALL FOR PAPERS
1984 ACM Symposium on
LISP and Functional Programming
University of Texas at Austin, August 5-8, 1984
(Sponsored by the Association for Computing Machinery)
This is the third in a series of biennial conferences on the LISP
language and issues related to applicative languages. Especially
welcome are papers addressing implementation problems and programming
environments. Areas of interest include (but are not restricted to)
systems, large implementations, programming environments and support
tools, architectures, microcode and hardware implementations,
significant language extensions, unusual applications of LISP, program
transformations, compilers for applicative languages, lazy evaluation,
functional programming, logic programming, combinators, FP, APL,
PROLOG, and other languages of a related nature.
Please send eleven (11) copies of a detailed summary (not a complete
paper) to the program chairman:
Guy L. Steele Jr.
Tartan Laboratories Incorporated
477 Melwood Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
Submissions will be considered by each member of the program committee:
Robert Cartwright, Rice William L. Scherlis, Carnegie-Mellon
Jerome Chailloux, INRIA Dana Scott, Carnegie-Mellon
Daniel P. Friedman, Indiana Guy L. Steele Jr., Tartan Laboratories
Richard P. Gabriel, Stanford David Warren, Silogic Incorporated
Martin L. Griss, Hewlett-Packard John Williams, IBM
Peter Henderson, Stirling
Summaries should explain what is new and interesting about the
work and what has actually been accomplished. It is important to
include specific findings or results and specific comparisons with
relevant previous work. The committee will consider the
appropriateness, clarity, originality, practicality, significance, and
overall quality of each summary. Time does not permit consideration
of complete papers or long summaries; a length of eight to twelve
double-spaced typed pages is strongly suggested.
February 6, 1984 is the deadline for the submission of summaries.
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by March 12, 1984.
The accepted papers must be typed on special forms and received by the
program chairman at the address above by May 14, 1984. Authors of
accepted papers will be asked to sign ACM copyright forms.
Proceedings will be distributed at the symposium and will later
be available from ACM.
(continued)
! Page 8
(ACM Symposium, continued)
Local Arrangements Chairman General Chairman
Edward A. Schneider Robert S. Boyer
Burroughs Corporation University of Texas at Austin
Austin Research Center Institute for Computing Science
12201 Technology Blvd. 2100 Main Building
Austin, Texas 78727 Austin, Texas 78712
(512) 258-2495 (512) 471-1901
CL.SCHNEIDER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA CL.BOYER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
-----------
CALL FOR PAPERS
3rd ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
Vancouver, Canada
August 27 - 29, 1984
This conference addresses fundamental issues in the theory and
practice of concurrent and distributed systems. Original research
papers describing theoretical or practical aspects of specification,
design, or implementation of such systems are sought. Topics of
interest include, but are not limited to, the following aspects of
concurrent and distributed systems: algorithms; formal models of
computations; methodologies for program development; issues in
specifications, semantics and verifications; complexity results;
languages; and fundamental results in application areas such as
distributed databases, communication protocols, distributed operating
systems, distributed transaction processing systems, and real-time
systems. Please send eleven copies of a detailed abstract (not a
complete paper) not exceeding 10 double-spaced typewritten pages, by
MARCH 8, 1984, to the Program Chairman:
Professor J. Misra
Computer Science Department
University of Texas
Austin, Texas 78712
The abstract must include a clear description of the problem being
addressed, comparisons with extant work and a section on major
original contributions of this work. The abstract must provide
sufficient detail for the program committee to make a decision.
Papers will be chosen on the basis of scientific merit, originality,
clarity, and appropriateness for this conference. Authors will be
notified of acceptance by April 30, 1984. Accepted papers, typed on
special forms, are due at the above address by June 1, 1984. Authors
of accepted papers will be asked to sign ACM Copyright forms.
The Conference Chairman is Professor Tiko Kameda (Simon Fraser U.);
Publicity Chairman, Professor Nicola Santoro (Carleton U.); and the
Local Arrangement Chairman, Professor Joseph Peters (Simon Fraser U.).
The Program Committee consists of Ed Clarke (C.M.U.), Greg
Frederickson (Purdue), Simon Lam (U. Texas, Austin), Leslie Lamport
(SRI International), Michael Malcom (U. Waterloo), J. Misra, Program
Chairman (U. Texas, Austin), Hector Molina (Princeton), Susan Owicki
(Stanford), Fred Schneider (Cornell), Ray Strong (I.B.M. San Jose),
and Howard Sturgis (Xerox Parc).
-------
∂25-Jan-84 1726 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA New Building
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 17:26:34 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 17:27:17-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: New Building
To: CSLI-researchers: ;
cc: bmacken@SRI-AI.ARPA
The architects are just finishing the "scoping phase" of the
design of the new building, and the Building Committee plans
to have an open meeting to bring you up to date early next week.
In the meantime I will send to those of you not on the Building
Committee (they already have it) the "functional description"
of the building and the latest estimates of space requirements.
The functional description combines the input I received from
all of you about the building with the Building Committee's
and my understanding of what is wanted.
Let me know your comments, and I'll tell you the time of the
open meeting as soon as it is settled.
B.
-------
∂25-Jan-84 2226 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 22:26:10 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 22:21:02-PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 22:25:03-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Ph D Admissions
To: GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Wed 25 Jan 84 17:20:45-PST
I want to qualify Gene's point that "we preferred to admit persons with a
strong mathematical bent" in the past. He should have said that "we have
in the past preferred to admit people with a 'hard science' bent, including
mathematics, but also including physics, chemistry, engineering ,etc."
Concerning Gene's desire to have the Chinese mathematician admitted:
we have always handled admissions in a way that allows for a
"point of faculty privilege" in asking for some particular student to
be admitted (a tradition, incidentally, that goes back to the founding
days of Oxford and Cambridge; students would come to the university to
work with a particular scholar). In the past, when one of us has come
forward saying "I want X and I know X to be very good", providing X did seem
to be very good from the papers, X was admitted. In any event, the
admissions committee (as Brian pointed out recently) has such a hard time
discriminating among the top 80 candidates, that a faculty member's
request is one very strong piece of evidence that helps to make the
decision. So...Gene should have said "I want X" instead of simply writing
a letter to the file, in my view.
Ed
-------
It is my impression that with the general bureaucratization of our
procedures the faculty privilege of admitting one student has been
effectively abolished. I think it should be revived, although I have
not always been pleased with the student I got when I invoked it in
the distant past.
∂25-Jan-84 2309 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 23:09:26 PST
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 23:08:02-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Ph D Admissions
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>" of Wed 25 Jan 84 22:21:15-PST
Ed is ,of course, correct concerning our bent towards the hard sciences
rather than mathematics alone. Indeed in numerical analysis it is often
desirable to have students with an engineering background.
With respect to the student I supported: he was not intersted in my research
area but nevertheless I felt he would make an excellent student in the de-
partment. I think we all have an obligation to seek out the best students
for the department, irrespective of their interests.
GENE
-------
∂25-Jan-84 2346 CLT SPECIAL SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Dr. Jean-Yves Girard, CNRS Paris
TITLE: Introduction to Pi-1-2-Logic
TIME: Monday, Jan. 30, 3:15-5:05 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
Abstract:
Pi-1-2-logic is developed in analogy with the ususal
(Sigma-0-1)-logic and w(Pi-1-1)-logic. The main concept
of Pi-1-2-logic is that of a dilator. Dilators play w.r.t.
Pi-1-2-logic the role played by ordinals in P-1-1-logic.
A dilator is an ordinal functor proserving direct limits
and pull-backs. All basic ordinal functions (sum, product,
exponential, Veblen hierarchy, ...) are dilators. Since
every ordinal is a direct llmit of integers, dilators are
determined by their restrictions to the category of integers,
and are therefore a very effective kind of object.
Pi-1-2-logic has a number of applications: in proof theory
(full cut-elimination in the theory of inductive definitions),
generalized recursion theory (recursively inaccessible and
Mahlo numbers) and descriptive set theory.
∂25-Jan-84 2348 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 25 Jan 84 23:47:42 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 25 Jan 84 23:47:32-PST
Date: 25 Jan 84 2344 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI>
To: faculty@SU-SCORE
It is my impression that with the general bureaucratization of our
procedures the faculty privilege of admitting one student has been
effectively abolished. I think it should be revived, although I have
not always been pleased with the student I got when I invoked it in
the distant past.
∂26-Jan-84 0230 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #5
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 02:29:59 PST
Date: Wednesday, January 25, 1984 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 University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #5
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 26 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Arrays & Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 84 13:00 PST
From: Deutsch.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Arrays
I like the scheme with multiple versions of arrays very much. The
semantics are exactly those of copying on every update, except that
the implementation is "rooted" at the most recent version, so you
pay only for historical references.
------------------------------
Date: 23-Jan-84 22:39:33-CST (Mon)
From: Gabriel@ANL-MCS.ARPA (John Gabriel)
Subject: Theorem about Groups.
The outcome of a friendly challenge from our resolution based theorem
proving community is appended. I am not completely satisfied with it,
for reasons that may be only that I would have liked to find a proof
more in the style of resolution without writing a mini-resolution
system in Prolog. It was originally posed in connection with the
occurs check (which looks out for attempts at
eq(X,X). /* unification */
eq(f(X),X). /* this succeeds and it is not clear to me whether this
prevents a successful resolution system in Prolog */ )
An occurs check causes the above to fail, and makes Prolog
unification more like the one the logicians prefer.
A couple of thoughts. eq(f(X),X) essentially defines f(X) recursively
but it is not recursively evaluable. Thus if f(X) is evaluated by
Prolog the evaluation will not terminate. Is this strong enough for
the "real" unification (I.e. that preferred by logicians), or do we
need more. The practical objection to the occurs check is that it
slows Prolog down a fair amount, and if Prolog is viewed not so
much as a logic system, but as an evaluator of recursive functions
with a flavour of logic thrown in, it seems unnecessary.
However, I don't pretend to know the truth about all this, and would
not be surprised by a storm of brickbats from all sides. But I'm
always willing to learn. Here is the "proof".
/* ************************************************************ */
/* A group of order 2 is commutative */
/* ************************************************************ */
/* the product X * Y * Z * ... is [X,Y,Z,.....] */
eq(X,X):- !. /* equality */
p([X,e],[X]):- !. /* the next two are identity */
p([e,X],[X]):- !.
p([X,X],[e]):- !. /* order 2 */
p([a,b],[c]). /* There exist a & b, and they have a product c */
/* the next four clauses express assocaitivity for any product,
the first two terminate the recursion of the second two */
p([X,Y,Z],[R]):- p([X,Y],[T1]),p([T1,Z],[R]).
p([X,Y,Z],[R]):- p([Y,Z],[T1]),p([X,T1],[R]).
p([X,Y|List],[R]):- p(List,[T1]),p([X,Y,T1],[R]).
p([X|List],[R]):- p(List,[T1]),p([X,T1],[R]).
equal(M1,M2):- /* An expression for identity of products */
p(M1,R),p(M2,R).
test1(R):- p([a,b,a,b],R). /* should set R=[e] */
test2(R):- p([a,b,b,a],R). /* also sets R=[e] */
/* Thus [a,b,b,a] = [a,b,a,b] */
/* but how do we define equal to discover [a,b] = [b,a] */
/* search for equality, [X|T] is list of possible multipliers */
/* this generates the tests that would be done automatically
by the set of support strategy */
search([], M1, M2):- equal(M1,M2).
search([X|T], M1, M2):-
equal(M1,M2);
search(T,[X|M1], [X|M2]).
test:- search([a,b], [a,b], [b,a]).
test:- search([b,a], [a,b], [b,a]). /* must try both orders of
multipliers */
-- John Gabriel
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 84 11:10:40 pst
From: Cohen%UCBDali@Berkeley (Shimon Cohen)
Subject: Arrays
I was impressed by Ken letter in the Digest V2 #4. For a
few months now I am trying to do a similar thing. My main
concern is the inefficient implementation of sets in Prolog.
It seems that sets as lists are simple but rather clumsy
when you access the set randomly (different element each
time). If you are honestly trying to make Prolog a useful
language then you might consider the following ideas:
"Extensions"
Instead of using the 'setof' or 'bagof' functions which
really do not return "sets" or "bags" (but a list of all
elements in the "set" / "bag") we propose to introduce a
rather familiar data-type namely a \f3set\f1. A real set
will be implemented in the most efficient way (most of the
time as an hash-table, but maybe as a list or bit array)
depending on it's characteristics. The way this new (?)
data-type is going to be used is as follows:
(1) set←of←all( E, P, S).
Which is the same as the familiar 'setof' function except
that S is a "real" set.
(2) one←of(E,S).
Read this as: " E is a member of the set S". The problem in
(2) is that we can't get hold of the rest of the set S. To
allow it we introduce:
(3) one←of(E,S,Sr).
Either S or Sr must be instantiated:
case 1 - Only S is instantiated
Then: E is an element of the set S where Sr is the new set
resulting from the deletion of E from the set S.
case 2 - S and E are instantiated
Then: if E is in S then as the above otherwise fail.
case 3 - Sr is instantiated and E is instantiated
Then: S is the result of adding E to the set Sr.
If S is a list (as in ordinary Prolog) generated for example
by 'setof' then one can easily access one element and the
rest of the elements by using list constructor: [ E | Sr ].
Sets as lists are very simple but can become very inefficient
when dealing with big sets and big set operations like:
intersection or union. If we maintain the set as an hash
-table then The Question is;
" Are we really going to copy S to Sr (excluding E) every
time we execute one←of(E,S,Sr) ?"
I had a scheme of handling this problem rather efficiently,
I also implement it in CProlog as a test program (if you are
interested I will mail it to you). The idea is simply to
attach to eac:PN~h element the "time" when this element is
"dead" or "alive". Each set has sort of internal clock which
is modified whenever we create new pointer to this set.
The overhead for new set pointer is in most cases constant.
In addition we add (as I mentioned ) the dead-or-alive info
to the element.
Example: setof(E,S,Sr).
S is a pointer to a set and E,Sr are variables. We attach to
E one of the element of S. Sr is a new pointer to the set Sr
therefor we increase the internal clock of the set and attach
' dead(Time)' to element E. Since S is a pointer with a different
"time" then E is still alive for S but dead for Sr. (If you are
confused I can send you the test program)
Lets see how we create new sets:
(4) set(S,Specs).
Read this as follows: "S is the set with the Specs specifications"
Where Specs is a list with the following possible items (non is
required):
size(N) -
approximate size of set (the actual size can be bigger) which
help to decide on the size of the hash-table.
integer(N1,N2) -
The set consists of integer numbers in the range of N1..N2.
It might help the compiler to decide whether to implement
it as a bit array.
list(L) -
L is a list of atoms that serve as the base set for the set S.
for example: [sunday,monday,tuesday,wednesday,thursday,friday,
saturday]
base(BaseS) -
BaseS is an existing set which is the base set of the set S.
Etc. Comments ?
-- Shimon
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂26-Jan-84 0301 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #5
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 03:00:55 PST
Date: Wednesday, January 25, 1984 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 University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #5
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 26 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Arrays & Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 84 13:00 PST
From: Deutsch.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Arrays
I like the scheme with multiple versions of arrays very much. The
semantics are exactly those of copying on every update, except that
the implementation is "rooted" at the most recent version, so you
pay only for historical references.
------------------------------
Date: 23-Jan-84 22:39:33-CST (Mon)
From: Gabriel@ANL-MCS.ARPA (John Gabriel)
Subject: Theorem about Groups.
The outcome of a friendly challenge from our resolution based theorem
proving community is appended. I am not completely satisfied with it,
for reasons that may be only that I would have liked to find a proof
more in the style of resolution without writing a mini-resolution
system in Prolog. It was originally posed in connection with the
occurs check (which looks out for attempts at
eq(X,X). /* unification */
eq(f(X),X). /* this succeeds and it is not clear to me whether this
prevents a successful resolution system in Prolog */ )
An occurs check causes the above to fail, and makes Prolog
unification more like the one the logicians prefer.
A couple of thoughts. eq(f(X),X) essentially defines f(X) recursively
but it is not recursively evaluable. Thus if f(X) is evaluated by
Prolog the evaluation will not terminate. Is this strong enough for
the "real" unification (I.e. that preferred by logicians), or do we
need more. The practical objection to the occurs check is that it
slows Prolog down a fair amount, and if Prolog is viewed not so
much as a logic system, but as an evaluator of recursive functions
with a flavour of logic thrown in, it seems unnecessary.
However, I don't pretend to know the truth about all this, and would
not be surprised by a storm of brickbats from all sides. But I'm
always willing to learn. Here is the "proof".
/* ************************************************************ */
/* A group of order 2 is commutative */
/* ************************************************************ */
/* the product X * Y * Z * ... is [X,Y,Z,.....] */
eq(X,X):- !. /* equality */
p([X,e],[X]):- !. /* the next two are identity */
p([e,X],[X]):- !.
p([X,X],[e]):- !. /* order 2 */
p([a,b],[c]). /* There exist a & b, and they have a product c */
/* the next four clauses express assocaitivity for any product,
the first two terminate the recursion of the second two */
p([X,Y,Z],[R]):- p([X,Y],[T1]),p([T1,Z],[R]).
p([X,Y,Z],[R]):- p([Y,Z],[T1]),p([X,T1],[R]).
p([X,Y|List],[R]):- p(List,[T1]),p([X,Y,T1],[R]).
p([X|List],[R]):- p(List,[T1]),p([X,T1],[R]).
equal(M1,M2):- /* An expression for identity of products */
p(M1,R),p(M2,R).
test1(R):- p([a,b,a,b],R). /* should set R=[e] */
test2(R):- p([a,b,b,a],R). /* also sets R=[e] */
/* Thus [a,b,b,a] = [a,b,a,b] */
/* but how do we define equal to discover [a,b] = [b,a] */
/* search for equality, [X|T] is list of possible multipliers */
/* this generates the tests that would be done automatically
by the set of support strategy */
search([], M1, M2):- equal(M1,M2).
search([X|T], M1, M2):-
equal(M1,M2);
search(T,[X|M1], [X|M2]).
test:- search([a,b], [a,b], [b,a]).
test:- search([b,a], [a,b], [b,a]). /* must try both orders of
multipliers */
-- John Gabriel
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 84 11:10:40 pst
From: Cohen%UCBDali@Berkeley (Shimon Cohen)
Subject: Arrays
I was impressed by Ken letter in the Digest V2 #4. For a
few months now I am trying to do a similar thing. My main
concern is the inefficient implementation of sets in Prolog.
It seems that sets as lists are simple but rather clumsy
when you access the set randomly (different element each
time). If you are honestly trying to make Prolog a useful
language then you might consider the following ideas:
"Extensions"
Instead of using the 'setof' or 'bagof' functions which
really do not return "sets" or "bags" (but a list of all
elements in the "set" / "bag") we propose to introduce a
rather familiar data-type namely a \f3set\f1. A real set
will be implemented in the most efficient way (most of the
time as an hash-table, but maybe as a list or bit array)
depending on it's characteristics. The way this new (?)
data-type is going to be used is as follows:
(1) set←of←all( E, P, S).
Which is the same as the familiar 'setof' function except
that S is a "real" set.
(2) one←of(E,S).
Read this as: " E is a member of the set S". The problem in
(2) is that we can't get hold of the rest of the set S. To
allow it we introduce:
(3) one←of(E,S,Sr).
Either S or Sr must be instantiated:
case 1 - Only S is instantiated
Then: E is an element of the set S where Sr is the new set
resulting from the deletion of E from the set S.
case 2 - S and E are instantiated
Then: if E is in S then as the above otherwise fail.
case 3 - Sr is instantiated and E is instantiated
Then: S is the result of adding E to the set Sr.
If S is a list (as in ordinary Prolog) generated for example
by 'setof' then one can easily access one element and the
rest of the elements by using list constructor: [ E | Sr ].
Sets as lists are very simple but can become very inefficient
when dealing with big sets and big set operations like:
intersection or union. If we maintain the set as an hash
-table then The Question is;
" Are we really going to copy S to Sr (excluding E) every
time we execute one←of(E,S,Sr) ?"
I had a scheme of handling this problem rather efficiently,
I also implement it in CProlog as a test program (if you are
interested I will mail it to you). The idea is simply to
attach to each: PN element the "time" when this element is
"dead" or "alive". Each set has sort of internal clock which
is modified whenever we create new pointer to this set.
The overhead for new set pointer is in most cases constant.
In addition we add (as I mentioned ) the dead-or-alive info
to the element.
Example: setof(E,S,Sr).
S is a pointer to a set and E,Sr are variables. We attach to
E one of the element of S. Sr is a new pointer to the set Sr
therefor we increase the internal clock of the set and attach
' dead(Time)' to element E. Since S is a pointer with a different
"time" then E is still alive for S but dead for Sr. (If you are
confused I can send you the test program)
Lets see how we create new sets:
(4) set(S,Specs).
Read this as follows: "S is the set with the Specs specifications"
Where Specs is a list with the following possible items (non is
required):
size(N) -
approximate size of set (the actual size can be bigger) which
help to decide on the size of the hash-table.
integer(N1,N2) -
The set consists of integer numbers in the range of N1..N2.
It might help the compiler to decide whether to implement
it as a bit array.
list(L) -
L is a list of atoms that serve as the base set for the set S.
for example: [sunday,monday,tuesday,wednesday,thursday,friday,
saturday]
base(BaseS) -
BaseS is an existing set which is the base set of the set S.
Etc. Comments ?
-- Shimon
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂26-Jan-84 0837 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA seminar abstract
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 08:35:32 PST
Return-Path: <JMC@SU-AI>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 03:11:24-PST
Date: 26 Jan 84 0308 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI>
Subject: seminar abstract
To: dkanerva@SRI-AI
ReSent-date: Thu 26 Jan 84 08:31:03-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
This is for Barwise's seminar next Tuesday at 9:30.
John McCarthy
Program semantics from the applied point of view.
It is a mathematical disgrace that programs are debugged (even by
mathematicians) rather than proved correct. Moreover, it's a
practical disadvantage. A computer-checked proof that a program
meets its specifications can be finally debugged, while the debugging
of a program by test cases is never completed.
Progress has been made toward systems that can be practically used
for such proofs, and much of the known theory is relevant. The
lecture will survey the theories, the practical techniques, and
the existing systems. Some unsolved problems will be identified.
∂26-Jan-84 0837 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SPECIAL SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 08:36:46 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 08:30:18-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 08:28:20-PST
Return-Path: <CLT@SU-AI>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 00:01:04-PST
Date: 25 Jan 84 2346 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI>
Subject: SPECIAL SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
ReSent-date: Thu 26 Jan 84 08:29:18-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
SPEAKER: Dr. Jean-Yves Girard, CNRS Paris
TITLE: Introduction to Pi-1-2-Logic
TIME: Monday, Jan. 30, 3:15-5:05 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
Abstract:
Pi-1-2-logic is developed in analogy with the ususal
(Sigma-0-1)-logic and w(Pi-1-1)-logic. The main concept
of Pi-1-2-logic is that of a dilator. Dilators play w.r.t.
Pi-1-2-logic the role played by ordinals in P-1-1-logic.
A dilator is an ordinal functor proserving direct limits
and pull-backs. All basic ordinal functions (sum, product,
exponential, Veblen hierarchy, ...) are dilators. Since
every ordinal is a direct llmit of integers, dilators are
determined by their restrictions to the category of integers,
and are therefore a very effective kind of object.
Pi-1-2-logic has a number of applications: in proof theory
(full cut-elimination in the theory of inductive definitions),
generalized recursion theory (recursively inaccessible and
Mahlo numbers) and descriptive set theory.
∂26-Jan-84 1156 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier Re: Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 11:56:35 PST
Received: from Glacier by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 11:52:52-PST
Date: Thursday, 26 January 1984 11:51:41-PST
To: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: Ph D Admissions
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed 25 Jan 84 17:14:52-PST.
From: Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>
Just as an operational matter w.r.t. the way the admissions committee
works, if some student does not make it into round 2 then the committee
chairman (who in some sense is responsible for implementing
departmental admissions policy) might never even be aware of that
student's existence. Only 2 members of the committee read each folder
in the round-1 readings, and in prior years if the first reader thought
that somebody was a "reject" then the folder was not even given to a
second reader.
I think the right thing for us to do this year is to make sure that
every applicant who has support from some Stanford faculty member be
guaranteed to make it to round II, but not necessarily guaranteed
admission. One he makes it to round II then the whole committee can
consider his case.
Brian
∂26-Jan-84 1523 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Lenat meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 15:23:50 PST
Date: Thu 26 Jan 84 15:24:08-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Lenat meeting
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
cc: bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I think it would be appropriate for Bill Miller to be at our next discussion
on Lenat. He cannot make it at 2:30 on Tuesday, Feb 7 but he can be present
at the lunch hour. Therefore, I am proposing that we cancel our ordinary lunch
for the whole faculty and meet at 12:15 in the MJH Youth Center conference
room. Bill would leave at about 1:15 and we could reconvene at 2:30 in
MJH 252. Let me know if you are NOT able to attend. Lunch will be provided.
GENE
-------
∂26-Jan-84 1601 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Bush@SRI-KL.ARPA seminar announcement
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 16:00:21 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 16:00:50-PST
Date: Thu 26 Jan 84 12:41:01-PST
From: Marcia Bush <Bush at SRI-KL>
Subject: seminar announcement
To: Bush at SRI-KL
cc: csli-folks at SRI-AI
Ann Marie Aull, a student of Victor Zue's at MIT, will give a
talk at Fairchild on Monday, January 30 at 3:30 p.m. in the
AI Lab's conference room. A brief abstract follows:
LEXICAL STRESS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
FOR LARGE VOCABULARY SPEECH RECOGNITION
Regions of the speech signal that are stressed remain acoustically
robust in contrast to highly variant unstressed regions.
A speech recognition system based on lexical access benefits from
these islands of acoustic reliability as well as from the
constraints on the word candidates provided by stress information.
In this discussion, the lexical properties of stress will
be covered as well as the development of an isolated word,
large vocabulary, speaker independent stress recognition system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairchild is at 4001 Miranda Ave., next to the Palo Alto V.A.
Hospital. Visitors should enter via the door at the rear of
the building and ask the security person to call ext. 4282
(Marcia Bush).
-------
-------
∂26-Jan-84 1758 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA response forms for Forum
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 17:57:57 PST
Date: Thu 26 Jan 84 17:56:12-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: response forms for Forum
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
This is a reminder that we need the response forms for the annual meeting.
I need a head (or should I say mouth) count for meals.
Thanks,
Carolyn
-------
∂26-Jan-84 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier 27-Jan-84 JMC Re: Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 22:01:53 PST
Received: from Glacier by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 22:01:51-PST
Date: Thursday, 26 January 1984 22:00:59-PST
To: faculty@Score
Subject: Re: Ph D Admissions
In-Reply-To: Various messages of Wed 25 Jan 84 22:25:03-PST.
From: Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>
While remembering that my job as admissions chairman is to implement
admissions policy and not to set that policy, I think that this idea of
giving each professor a whiteball is not the best scheme. It is
certainly in the great tradition of Stanford, though.
The admissions committee is charged with admitting a number of students
approximately equal to the number of faculty. If every professor uses his
whiteball then the committee has no work to do. If not every professor uses
his whiteball then in some sense the committee is playing the role of
contract headhunter for those professors who are too busy to read the folders.
But that is a somewhat frivolous objection. My main objections to the
whiteball scheme are these:
(a) It is not very thorough; most faculty do not have the time to sift
through the pile of applications and find the one best suited for
their whiteball. They will in general tend to use the whiteball on
people whom they know already, without doing much comparison to
the applicant pool. This is chancy.
(b) It is predicated on an apprenticeship model for the operation of
the department. My perception is that when students get here, they
very often change their area of interest, or their advisor, or
both. Perhaps your idea of an ideal student is one who comes in,
summarily joints your research project, and doesn't come up for
air until he has finished his thesis 3.8 years later. My idea of
an ideal student is one who comes in, joins the ``research
community'' that transcends individual projects, passes the
comprehensive, finds a research area that interests him, passes
the appropriate qualifier, remains an active member of our little
community, and finishes a thesis after perhaps 4.8 years.
(c) If a student and his advisor get divorced, that student becomes
in some sense a ward of the department until he can find a new
advisor. It is important that the admitted students are acceptable
to the whole department and admitted according to uniform
standards.
If there weren't frail human lives being manipulated here, I would really
love to see an experiment wherein each professor is charged with selecting
and admitting one student, and no other admissions actions were taken. Some
would forget or never get around to it, others would try to find ways to
admit 2 or 3 students, others would send their secretary to do it, or find
somebody to admit after 10 minutes of looking, others would spend many days
trying to decide without ever being able to make up their minds. It would
certainly end the annual criticisms that the admissions committee didn't do a
good job, but I would be amazed if it improved the quality of the admit pool.
Brian
jmc - I used the "whiteball" about three times in twenty years at Stanford,
and I doubt that anyone else used it more often. It is rare that a professor
has a strong desire for a particular student, but when it happens, it should
be honored. It won't dominate the process.
[JMC - Forwarded to OTHER-SU-BBOARDS from line 60]
∂26-Jan-84 2252 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Jan 84 22:52:32 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 22:52:18-PST
Date: Thu 26 Jan 84 22:56:09-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Ph D Admissions
To: reid@SU-GLACIER.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>" of Thu 26 Jan 84 22:07:20-PST
Brian has tried to be rational about admissions policies, and as usual makes
a lot of sense. But he misses what I think are important points.
a. the "whiteball" , as he refers to it, does not take the form of a
professor diving into the pile of applications, looking for a particularly
fine one, and announcing, "I want this person." The canonical form of
the event is a professor meeting a potential applicant, either through
outstanding performance by that person in some class at Stanford, or
otherwise discovering the potential of some Stanford student, or meeting
the applicant in some situation at another univerity, or in an industrial
group, and deciding on the basis of what the professor has seen/heard/
discussed "I want X at Stanford to work with me; or work with my group;
or X will greatly enrich our student community". That has happened to me
several times in the past and has always been a big win. Two examples
that come to mind are Larry Masinter and Mark Stefik.
b. what does it mean for it to be fun to work at a university (as opposed
to say PARC, SRI, IBM Yorktown, Bell Labs, etc.)? A major part of it is
working with very good students. A faculty member should (indeed in my view
MUST) be allowed to operate along that dimension by literally "choosing"
a student from time to time, as the opportunity presents itself.
c. to allow this "choosing" makes little difference to the overall
quality of the admissions process itself because 1) someone a faculty
member is considering choosing will almost certainly be excellent
and 2) it's our experience that once we're down to the last fifty or
eighty, we're essentially out of criteria to make the final selection
anyway. A faculty member's judgment is an excellent super-criterion.
Another way to view the consideration is that at the graduate level,
where the important instruction is one-on-one (I'm referring to the
Ph.D. program), the admissions committee works for us faculty members.
If we choose to do some of the work ourselves (i.e. identify an
excellent admitee), so be it and so much the better.
Ed
-------
∂27-Jan-84 0832 LB@SRI-AI.ARPA Administrative Staff Meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 08:32:20 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 08:33:22-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Administrative Staff Meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
The Administrative Staff will be meeting this morning from
8:30 a.m. to approximately 10:00 a.m. Phones will not be
answered during this time except for extension 0628. If you
do call this extension, please let it ring a while.
-------
∂27-Jan-84 0954 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA [avi%ucbernie@Berkeley (Avi Wigderson): Re: speakers]
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 09:53:54 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 09:53:28-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [avi%ucbernie@Berkeley (Avi Wigderson): Re: speakers]
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
avi has sent me a list of speakers for the february 3 bats meeting at
berkeley. so far, 9 of you (no faculty members) have said you will attend.
if anyone who plans to attend has not yet told me, please tell me
immediately because i have to tell avi about lunch. we should also arrange
car pools. the speakers are:
---------------
Return-Path: <avi%ucbernie@Berkeley>
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 26 Jan 84 19:59:05-PST
Received: from ucbernie.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.22/4.19)
id AA04494; Thu, 26 Jan 84 19:36:46 pst
Received: by ucbernie.ARPA (4.22/4.19)
id AA02223; Thu, 26 Jan 84 14:38:54 pst
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 84 14:38:54 pst
From: avi%ucbernie@Berkeley (Avi Wigderson)
Message-Id: <8401262238.AA02223@ucbernie.ARPA>
To: JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA, avi%ucbernie@Berkeley
Subject: Re: speakers
Pippenger(IBM), Bach(Berkeley), Mayr(Stanford), Vazirani(Harvard)
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1217 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Building Meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 12:17:27 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 12:18:20-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Building Meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We want to have an open building meeting to bring you up to date on
the results of the scoping study. We are planning it for next Monday
January 30 at 1:30 in the Ventura Seminar room. We are awaiting
confirmation that at least one of our architects can come, and so
will confirm the time with you later this afternoon.
B.
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1504 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Building Meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 15:04:23 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 15:04:49-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Building Meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We had to change the time of the meeting; it is now scheduled for
Tuesday January 31 at 8:30 in the Ventura Seminar room.
B.
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1532 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA Conference: Themes from David Kaplan
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 15:31:50 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 27 Jan 84 15:27:06-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 27 Jan 84 15:24:37-PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 15:24:11-PST
From: John Perry <JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Conference: Themes from David Kaplan
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
CSLI and the Philosophy department will be sponsoring a conference devoted
to themes from the philosophy of David Kaplan from Monday March 19 through
Wednesday March 21.
The schedule of events will be forthcoming next week. You might want
to reserve Monday evening, as present plans are for a symposium with
Kaplan, Saul Kripke, and W.V. Quine.
John Perry
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1630 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA courses and degrees
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 16:30:49 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 16:29:44-PST
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: courses and degrees
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-4776
Just a reminder---I need to have your course abstracts for Courses
and Degrees by Tuesday, 31 January. There is quite a lot of work
involved in producing the department section. Please submit your
revisions asap.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Kathy
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1658 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Bell Fellowship Nominations went out
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 16:56:28 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 16:56:10-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Bell Fellowship Nominations went out
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA, NAUGHTON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, MCCALL@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
HALL@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, LAMPING@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Bell Fellowship Nominations went out express mail five minutes ago (so
we will meet Bell's deadline) for Keith Hall, John Lamping, Kim McCall,
and Jeff Naughton.
On behalf of the students, we wish to express our appreciation for
those of you who participated in the Department nomination process and
for those of you who wrote letters of recommendation. When the decision
is made by Bell Labs, you will be notified.
Carolyn
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1702 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA 1984-85 Research Offsets
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 17:02:25 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 17:01:57-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: 1984-85 Research Offsets
To: CSD-Faculty: ;
It will be very helpful for budget planning if you can let me know your
best estimate of the research salary offset percentage which you expect to
have for 1984-85.
Thanks in advance,
Betty
-------
∂27-Jan-84 1736 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Research offset
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 17:36:31 PST
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 17:36:24-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Research offset
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Betty's message is, of course, of importance in our course scheduling.
If you are uncertain about your funding try to give an estimate of whether
you'll be receiving new or additional funding.
Gene
---------------
Mail-From: BSCOTT created at 27-Jan-84 17:01:57
Date: Fri 27 Jan 84 17:01:57-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: 1984-85 Research Offsets
To: CSD-Faculty: ;
It will be very helpful for budget planning if you can let me know your
best estimate of the research salary offset percentage which you expect to
have for 1984-85.
Thanks in advance,
Betty
-------
-------
∂27-Jan-84 2130 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@diablo Re: Ph D Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 21:30:17 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 27 Jan 84 21:30:36-PST
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 84 21:28 PST
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@diablo>
Subject: Re: Ph D Admissions
To: FEIGENBAUM@Sumex-Aim, faculty@SU-Score, reid@SU-GLACIER.ARPA
I would like to concur with Ed, although I also agree that we want to
avoid the scenarios that Brian has imagined. And of course, all students
still have to pass the comp. and qual. hurdles so we have some protection
if a faculty member makes a big mistake. Of course, this also points out
the tremendous responsibility of sponsoring someone - that you are sure he
or she is good enough to make the grade, something I would much prefer to
leave to the admissions committee except in amazingly exceptional circumstances.
∂27-Jan-84 2233 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Jan 84 22:33:20 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 27 Jan 84 22:33:39-PST
Date: 27 Jan 84 2232 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI>
To: faculty@SU-SCORE
jmc - I used the "whiteball" about three times in twenty years at Stanford,
and I doubt that anyone else used it more often. It is rare that a professor
has a strong desire for a particular student, but when it happens, it should
be honored. It won't dominate the process.
∂28-Jan-84 0116 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 28 Jan 84 01:16:32 PST
Date: Sat 28 Jan 84 00:52:59-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
Save this message! I'll be away for the next two weeks and you will
not get reminders.
N.B. Yoni Malachi volunteered to bring in the projector and to
introduce the speaker during my absence.
Best way to reach me during this time is to leave a meassge on my home
answering machine; I'll check it daily. The number is (415) 494-8608.
- Andrei
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
N E X T A F L B T A L K (S)
2/2/84 - Dr. Vijay Vazirani (Harvard)
"Maximum Matching without Tears : A Randomizing Algorithm"
Even though efficient algorithms have been discovered for finding
maximum matchings in general graphs - the best running time being
O(|E| sqrt (|V|)), all of the known polynomial time algorithms for
this problem tend to be conceptually involved, and difficult to
program.
We give an O(|V|**3.5) randomizing algorithm for the maximum matching
problem, based on a new approach. Whereas the conventional algorithms
find maximum matchings by finding "blossoms" and "augmenting paths",
our algorithm is based on finding the rank and the inverse of certain
matrices obtained from the adjacency matrix of the given graph.
Normally, these matrix computations result in unreasonably large
intermediate values. To prevent this, we do all our computations over
a finite field. We also give efficient randomizing algorithms for
finding the rank and inverse of matrices over a finite field. Our
algorithms are conceptually simple and easy to program.
This is joint work with M. Rabin
******** Time and place: Feb. 2, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
2/9/84 - No AFLB - Enjoy the Stanford Computer Forum
2/16/84 - Dr. Eli Upfal (U.C. Berkeley)
A probabilistic relation between desirable and feasible models
of parallel computation
We present a powerful probabilistic technique for simulating strong
models of synchronized parallel computation by weaker ones. In
particular, our technique eliminates the use of shared variables
without significant increase in the program run-time. The technique
is demonstrated by an algorithm simulating an n processors PRAM with
an arbitrary large shared memory by an n processor ULRTACOMPUTER - a
set of n processors communication through a bounded degree network.
We prove that if a program required t PRAM steps than our simulation
algorithm executes it on the ULTRACOMPUTER within O(t log**2 n )
steps with overwhelming probability.
******** Time and place: Feb. 16, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for the winter quarter have been filled
so far.
For more information about future AFLB meetings and topics you might
want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂28-Jan-84 2020 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Seminar on Wednesday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 28 Jan 84 20:20:11 PST
Date: Sat 28 Jan 84 20:20:03-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar on Wednesday
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In the O.R. seminar series, next Wednasday the speaker is a certain
Papadimitriou, on "THE 1-STEINER TREE PROBLEM".
ABSTRACT: We are given N points on the plane, and we are asked to find
an (N+1)-st such that the minimum spanning tree of the N+1 points is as
short as possible. This is a special case of the notorious (and NP-complete)
Steiner tree problem; indeed the Steiner tree problem is the version in
which we are allowed to add not one point, but as many as we please.
We give an O(N↑2) algorithm for this problem, based on some new ideas
from computational geometry and parametric spanning trees. (This is
joint work with George Georgakopoulos.)
TIME: Wednesday February 1, 4:30.
PLACE: Geology Auditorium (Quad 336?)
REFRESHMENTS: 4:15 at Terman 4th floor.
-------
∂29-Jan-84 1232 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA comp. number theory seminar
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 12:32:00 PST
Date: Sun 29 Jan 84 12:31:50-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: comp. number theory seminar
To: aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
the first meeting of our computational number theory seminar took place
yesterday and was a success. we will meet again next week and the topic of
discussion will be Miller's deterministic prime testing algorithm that runs
in polynomial time, assuming ERH. tom spencer will present the topic.
the meeting will take place in mjh 301, 2:15 p.m., thursday, 2/2/84.
more details: i have sent my copy of dana angluin's tech report on the
computational number theory she covered in a seminar at yale over to the
copy center and i should have 15 copies to distribute by next meeting.
we are trying to go slowly enough so that people with little background can
follow. we are also trying to avoid getting bogged down in proofs of
background lemmas and theorems from number theory, saving all of our bogged-
down-in-proofs time for proofs of the correctness and efficiency (or lack of
it) of actual algorithms.
there was some confusion about why it should be difficult to *verify* whether
a number is a primitive root mod p; i had read in Adleman, Manders, and Miller
'77 that there was no efficient way known to verify it. we all allowed
ourselves to be convinced that all you had to do was check whether there was
an exponent lower than p-1 for which the proposed primitive root g was 1 when
raised to that exponent and that that could obviously be done in polynomial
time (polynomial in log(p)).
well, as tom pointed out to me later, don't assume that you know the
factorization of (p-1)--then what lower powers of g do you check?
finally, it seemed to me upon reflection that in the part of the proof that
Solovay/Strassen calls a composite a prime with probability at most 1/2 that
we went over, we proved, for n with at least one square factor, that not only
can't you have a↑((n-1)/2) = jacobi(a,n) for all a relatively prime to n, but
you can't even have a↑((n-1)/2) = +-1 for all a relatively prime to n.
i think that i should make up a mailing list for the seminar, because i expect
that there will be many people who only want to attend when the algorithm or
topic under discussion is one with which they aren't very familiar, since we
will be going slowly over some pretty elementary stuff. please let me know
whether you want to be on the mailing list.
thanks,
joan
(jf@score)
-------
∂29-Jan-84 1238 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA oops
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 12:37:53 PST
Date: Sun 29 Jan 84 12:33:39-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: oops
To: aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
i didn't really mean that the first meeting took place yesterday--this is
sunday, but i started to write this message friday. sorry.
-------
∂29-Jan-84 1426 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:veatch@whitney Re: Lisp As Language Course, P.S.
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 14:26:46 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 14:22:04-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 14:19:34-PST
Received: from Whitney by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 14:20:02-PST
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 84 14:18:18 pst
To: BrianSmith.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Cc: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: Lisp As Language Course, P.S.
In-Reply-To: Your message of 15 Nov 83 13:39 PDT.
From: Tom Veatch <veatch@whitney>
I am trying to get going on learning to use Interlisp-D and CSLI's
Dandylions, and I'd like to ask for your suggestions. My background is a
footnote at the end, if it will be helpful. The problem is that the bare
machines at Ventura lack any kind of learning material, even an INTERLISP-D
manual. I know it is fruitless to work without any guidance or structure,
but I don't know how to even start. If you have suggestions, if I should
come talk to you, etc., please send mail. Thanks very much,
Sincerely,
Tom Veatch
Background: Among those that have suggested I start rooting around CSLI's
machines are Terry Winograd, Ron Kaplan, and Ivan Sag(my adviser). I am a
senior undergraduate in linguistics, with some CS, LISP and AI background:
CS106-- programming in PASCAL; CS102--LISP; CS223--Fundamentals of AI or
expert systems; CS276 Computational models of Semantics; and currently
CS275--Computational Models of Syntax with Terry Winograd. Also I spent
last summer programming in C under Tom Binford here at Margaret Jacks.
∂29-Jan-84 1427 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:jtli%ucbesvax@Berkeley Re: comp. number theory seminar
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 14:27:01 PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 14:26:26-PST
Received: from ucbesvax.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.22/4.21)
id AA05396; Sun, 29 Jan 84 14:26:39 pst
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 84 14:26:33 pst
From: jtli%ucbesvax@Berkeley (Jeong-Tyng Li)
Message-Id: <8401292226.AA17637@ucbesvax.ARPA>
Received: by ucbesvax.ARPA (4.22/3.7)
id AA17637; Sun, 29 Jan 84 14:26:33 pst
To: JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA, aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: comp. number theory seminar
Please include me in the mailing list for number theory seminar. Thanks.
jtli@ucbesvax
∂29-Jan-84 1503 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Lunch/Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 14:58:42 PST
Date: Sun 29 Jan 84 14:58:44-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Lunch/Admissions
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
There'll be a discussion of our admissions policy at our lunch on Tuesday.
GENE
-------
∂29-Jan-84 1527 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lawler%ucbernie@Berkeley Re: Seminar on Wednesday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 15:27:43 PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 15:27:20-PST
Received: from ucbernie.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.22/4.21)
id AA06551; Sun, 29 Jan 84 15:27:33 pst
Received: by ucbernie.ARPA (4.22/4.19)
id AA15342; Sun, 29 Jan 84 15:27:35 pst
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 84 15:27:35 pst
From: lawler%ucbernie@Berkeley (Eugene Lawler)
Message-Id: <8401292327.AA15342@ucbernie.ARPA>
To: PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA, aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: Seminar on Wednesday
Dear Christos
I heard from Dick that you recently became a father. I tried to call
a couple of times to give you my congratulations, but you were (understandably)
elsewhere. Anyway, congratulations!
Another matter. I have applied for a Miller Research Professorship for
the academic year 1985-86 and took the libberty of using your name as a
reference. Presumably sometime in the next month or two you will be asked
to comment on my research proposal. I am sure you understand that what I
propose to do is probably not what I will actually do. (I hope that everything
in the proposal will have been finished.) What is important is that you say
some nice things about me so that the selection committee will be impressed.
I trust I can count on you, because getting a Miller would be like a dream
for me..and would be particularly appropriate because 1985-86 will be
Complexity Year at Math Sciences Institute here, as you know.
Gene
∂29-Jan-84 1534 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: courses and degrees
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 15:34:46 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 15:32:20-PST
Date: Sun 29 Jan 84 15:36:24-PST
From: Ted Shortliffe <Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: courses and degrees
To: BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Kathy Berg <BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Fri 27 Jan 84 16:36:38-PST
Office: Room TC-117, Stanford Med Center; Phone: (415) 497-6979
Correction:
I should have said the fourth course is CS321, not CS306. I was
confused because it is the same as EE306.
Ted
-------
∂29-Jan-84 2036 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA SPECIAL REMINDER on why discourse wont go away
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 20:36:51 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 20:30:52-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 20:29:13-PST
Date: 29 Jan 1984 2028-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: SPECIAL REMINDER on why discourse wont go away
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT
SPECIAL VISITOR: KEITH DONNELLAN, UCLA
Tuesday 31-th of January, 3.15 pm, Ventura Hall
We are very pleased to have this week in the seminar Prof.
K.Donnellan from UCLA. As you surely know, Donnellan is one of the
most prominent philosophers of language. He has been the originator
of very important insights both in Semantics and in Pragmatics.
One of his most important contributions involved the proper
treatment of definite descriptions. As you know, Donnellan pointed out
a whole new type of uses of descriptions, the "referential" uses. His
cases generated a (rather hot) debate on whether their explanation
should come from Semantics or whether it ("merely") belongs to Pragmatics.
In particular, S.Kripke formulated a strong criticism of Donnellan's
views suggesting that, as far as the notion of "SEMANTIC reference" goes,
Donnellan's data is rather amorphous. If anything, a ("pragmatic") notion
of "SPEAKER reference" should be introduced to account for the Donnellenian
phenomena, or so Kripke argued (It is hard not to take sides, even in
this short presentation).
The next stage of the debate has seen Donnellan replying to Kripke.
In formulating his reply, Donnellan searched for phenomena that may support
his claim that referential uses affect purely SEMANTIC questions (in
particular, truth conditions). It seemed to him that the behavior of
certain types of pronouns in anaphoric chains involving multi-sentential
discourses is relevant to the issue.
Donnellan will be touching upon this and other questions.
More generally, he will be giving us his present perspective on the
(semantic) significance of referential uses.
Remember: 3.15 pm, Tuesday, Ventura Hall.
-------
∂29-Jan-84 2233 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Lunch/Admissions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Jan 84 22:33:49 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 29 Jan 84 22:31:59-PST
Date: Sun 29 Jan 84 22:36:06-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Lunch/Admissions
To: GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Sun 29 Jan 84 15:04:14-PST
Unfortunately I have a previously scheduled lunch with an industrial visitor.
But I've already made my views known. JMC summarized the whole thing
succinctly in his last message on the subject.
Ed
-------
∂30-Jan-84 0152 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lawler%ucbernie@Berkeley Re: Seminar on Wednesday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 01:52:50 PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 30 Jan 84 01:53:07-PST
Received: from ucbernie.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.22/4.21)
id AA14376; Mon, 30 Jan 84 01:53:24 pst
Received: by ucbernie.ARPA (4.22/4.19)
id AA22279; Mon, 30 Jan 84 01:53:26 pst
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 84 01:53:26 pst
From: lawler%ucbernie@Berkeley (Eugene Lawler)
Message-Id: <8401300953.AA22279@ucbernie.ARPA>
To: PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA, aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: Seminar on Wednesday
It's been pointed out to me that I don't know how to reply to
messages without notifying the whole world. I trust that all
of you out there will join Christos in writing nice things about
me to the Miller committee. Thanks a lot, in advance.
Gene
∂30-Jan-84 0853 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Csli bboard
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 08:53:29 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 30 Jan 84 08:45:08-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 30 Jan 84 08:40:07-PST
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 08:40:18-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Csli bboard
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
We've now set up a csli bboard on the sri computer with the most
up-to-date information on csli events. All messages sent to
csli-friends or to csli-newsletter will appear on this bboard as well
as in the mail of those on the mailing lists. Please read the first
entry for more information.
Emma Pease
-------
∂30-Jan-84 0855 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA driving to bats
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 08:55:12 PST
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 08:54:32-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: driving to bats
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
if you are willing to drive to bats at berkeley this friday (2/3/84), please
let me know and tell me how many people can fit in your car.
thanks,
joan
-------
∂30-Jan-84 1151 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA csli bboard
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 11:51:31 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 30 Jan 84 11:50:47-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 30 Jan 84 11:41:52-PST
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 11:38:42-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: csli bboard
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
For those wondering how to get the csli bboard, type bboard csli.
Emma Pease
-------
∂30-Jan-84 1432 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Forum Reception
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 14:32:14 PST
Mail-From: TAJNAI created at 30-Jan-84 11:37:50
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 11:37:50-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Forum Reception
To: SU-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
ReSent-date: Mon 30 Jan 84 14:19:59-PST
ReSent-from: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-to: secretaries@SU-SCORE.ARPA, students@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, research-associates@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The Stanford Computer Forum
Invites the Faculty, Staff and Students
of the
Computer Science Department
and the
Computer Systems Laboratory
to a
RECEPTION
Thursday, February 9
Tresidder, 281, Large Loung
4:30 to 6:00
-------
∂30-Jan-84 1603 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Birds of a Feather Sessions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 16:03:50 PST
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 16:00:18-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Birds of a Feather Sessions
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Birds of a Feather Sessions will be held on Thursday afternoon
Feb. 9, from 3:15 to 4:15 p.m., after which you are all invited to the
Reception at Tresidder.
The purpose of the Birds of a Feather Sessions (BOAF) is to provide
informal time for the industrial visitors to meet with the faculty,
research staff and students in each research area. We encourage you
to support the BOAF sessions. Following is the room assignment roster.
(maps will be included in the program).
Analysis of Algorithms: Profs. Bigelow, Floyd, Knuth, Mayr, Yao --Jacks 301
AI:
*Linguistics ∪ Prof. Winograd ∪ CERAS 309E
*Robotics ∪ Profs. Binford, Brooks ∪ Meet in reception area outside Robotics Lab., Jacks 030
Heuristic Programming Project ∪ Profs. Buchanan, Feigenbaum, Genesereth, Lenat, Shortliffe ∪ 701 Welch Road, Building C@foot(A Marguerite mini-bus will pick up at the Alvarado Road entrance to CERAS at 3:15 p.m.; transport to 701 Welch Road and return to Tresidder for the Reception.)
Mathematical Theory of Computation ∪ Profs. Floyd, Manna, McCarthy ∪ Jacks 252
Numerical Analysis ∪ Profs. Golub, Herriot, Oliger, Schreiber, Wilkinson ∪ Jacks 220
Systems:
*Databases ∪ Profs. Wiederhold, Papadimitriou ∪ Jacks 352
*Center for Reliable Computing ∪ Prof. McCluskey ∪ ERL 401
*Distributed Systems ∪ Profs. Cheriton, Lantz ∪ Jacks 146
*Emulation Laboratory ∪ Prof. Flynn, Allison ∪ ERL 442
*Computer Communications Networking ∪ Prof. Tobagi ∪ AEL 102
*Programming Languages, Compilers, VLSI ∪ Profs. Baskett, Hennessy, Katevenis, Linton, Lundstrom, Pratt, Reid, Trattnig, Ullman ∪ Durand 450
*Verification ∪ Profs. Luckham, Owicki ∪ ERL 232
-------
∂30-Jan-84 1631 SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA new BBOARD HPP-Lisp-Machines
Received: from SUMEX-AIM by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 16:31:24 PST
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 16:34:49-PST
From: Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: new BBOARD HPP-Lisp-Machines
To: HPP-Lisp-Machines@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
HPP-Lisp-Machines is now a bboard (at SUMEX) as well as a
direct-mail mailing list. If you prefer to read such mail with BBOARD
or MM BBOARD, just send me a note, and I'll remove you from the direct-mail
distribution list. --Christopher
-------
∂30-Jan-84 2209 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #10
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 30 Jan 84 22:08:55 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Thu 26 Jan 1984 14:23-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #10
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 27 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
AI Culture - IJCAI Survey,
Cognition - Parallel Processing Query,
Programming Languages - Symbolics Support & PROLOG/ZOG Request,
AI Software - KEE Knowledge Representation System,
Review - Rivest Forsythe Lecture on Learning,
Seminars - Learning with Constraints & Semantics of PROLOG,
Courses - CMU Graduate Program in Human-Computer Interaction
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 84 12:19:21 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Report on "How AI People Think..."
I received a free copy because I attended IJCAI. I have an address
here, but I don't know if it is the appropriate one for ordering this
report:
Re: the report "How AI People Think - Cultural Premises of the AI community"
Commission of the European Communities
Rue de la Loi, 200
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
(The report was compiled by Massimo Negrotti, Chair of Sociology of
Knowledge, University of Genoa, Italy)
Smadar (KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS).
------------------------------
Date: Wed 18 Jan 84 11:05:26-PST
From: Rene Bach <BACH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: brain, a parallel processor ?
What are the evidences that the brain is a parallel processor? My own
introspection seem to indicate that mine is doing time-sharing. That is
I can follow only one idea at a time, but with a lot of switching
between reasoning paths (often more non directed than controlled
switching). Have different people different processors ? Or is the brain
able to function in more than one way (parallel, serial, time-sharing) ??
Rene (bach@sumex)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 84 15:37:39 CST
From: Mike Caplinger <mike@rice>
Subject: Symbolics support for non-Lisp languages
[This is neither an AI nor a graphics question per se, but I thought
these lists had the best chance of reaching Symbolics users...]
What kind of support do the Symbolics machines provide for languages
other than Lisp? Specifically, are there interactive debugging
facilities for Fortran, Pascal, etc.? It's my understanding that the
compilers generate Lisp output. Is this true, and if so, is the
interactive nature of Lisp exploited, or are the languages just
provided as batch compilers? Finally, does anyone have anything to say
about efficiency?
Answers to me, and I'll summarize if there's any interest. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 09:38:25-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI
Subject: KEE Representation System
The Jan. issue of IEEE Computer Graphics reports the following:
Intelligenetics has introduced the Knowledge Engineering Environment
AI software development system for AI professionals, computer
scientists, and domain specialists. The database management program
development system is graphics oriented and interactive, permitting
use of a mouse, keyboard, command-option menus, display-screen
windows, and graphic symbols.
KEE is a frame-based representation system that provides support
for descriptive and procedural knowledge representation, and a
declarative, extendable formalism for controlling inheritance of
attributes and attribute values between related units of
knowledge. The system provides support for multiple inheritance
hierarchies; the use of user-extendable data types to promote
knowledge-base integrity; object-oriented programming; multiple-
inference engines/rule systems; and a modular system design through
multiple knowledge bases.
The first copy of KEE sells for $60,000; the second for $20,000.
Twenty copies cost $5000 each.
------------------------------
Date: 01/24/84 12:08:36
From: JAWS@MIT-MC
Subject: PROLOG and/or ZOG for TOPS-10
Does anyone out there know where I can get a version of prolog and/or
ZOG to that will run on a DEC-10 (7.01)? The installation is owned by the
US government, albeit beneign (DOT).
THANX JAWS@MC
------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 11:26:14-PST
From: Armar Archbold <ARCHBOLD@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Rivest Forsythe Lecture on Learning
[The following is a review of a Stanford talk, "Reflections on AI", by
Dr. Ron Rivest of MIT. I have edited the original slightly after getting
Armar's permission to pass it along. -- KIL]
Dr. Rivest's talk emphasized the interest of small-scale studies of
learning through experience (a "critter" with a few sensing and
effecting operations building up a world model of a blocks environment).
He stressed such familiar themes as
- "the evolutionary function and value of world models is predicting
the future, and consequently knowledge is composed principally of
expectations, possibilities, hypotheses - testable action-sensation
sequences, at the lowest level of sophistication",
- "the field of AI has focussed more on 'backdoor AI', where you
directly program in data structures representing high-level
knowledge, than on 'front-door' AI, which studies how knowledge is
built up from non-verbal experience, or 'side door AI', which studies
how knowledge might be gained through teaching and instruction using
language;
- such a study of simple learning systems in a simple environment -- in
which an agent with a given vocabulary but little or no initial
knowledge ("tabula rasa") investigates the world (either through
active experiementation or through changes imposed by perturbations
in the surroundings) and attempts to construct a useful body of
knowledge through recognition of identities, equivalences,
symmetries, homomorphisms, etc., and eventually metapatterns, in
action-sensation chains (represented perhaps in dynamic logic) -- is
of considerable interest.
Such concepts are not new. There have been many mathematical studies,
psychological similations, and AI explorations along the lines since the
50s. At SRI, Stan Rosenschein was playing around with a simplified learning
critter about a year ago; Peter Cheeseman shares Rivest's interest in
Jaynes' use of entropy calculations to induce safe hypotheses in an
overwhelmingly profuse space of possibilities. Even so, these concerns
were worth having reactivated by a talk. The issues raised by some of the
questions from the audience were also intesting, albeit familiar:
- The critter which starts out with a tabula rasa will only make it
through the enormous space of possible patterns induceable from
experience if it initially "knows" an awful lot about how to learn,
at whatever level of procedural abstraction and/or "primitive"
feature selection (such as that done at the level of the eye itself).
- Do we call intelligence the procedures that permit one to gain useful
knowledge (rapidly), or the knowledge thus gained, or what mixture of
both?
- In addition, there is the question of what motivational structure
best furthers the critter's education. If the critter attaches value
to minimum surprise (various statistical/entropy measures thereof),
it can sit in a corner and do nothing, in which case it may one day
suddenly be very surprised and very dead. If it attaches tremendous
value to surprise, it could just flip a coin and always be somewhat
surprised. The mix between repetition (non-surprise/confirmatory
testing) and exploration which produces the best cognitive system is
a fundamental problem. And there is the notion of "best" - "best"
given the critter's values other than curiosity, or "best" in terms
of survivability, or "best" in a kind of Occam's razor sense
vis-a-vis truth (here it was commented you could rank Carnapian world
models based on the simple primitive predicates using Kolmogorov
complexity measures, if one could only calculate the latter...)
- The success or failure of the critter to acquire useful knowledge
depends very much on the particular world it is placed in. Certain
sequences of stimuli will produce learning and others won't, with a
reasonable, simple learning procedure. In simple artificial worlds,
it is possible to form some kind of measure of the complexity of the
environment by seeing what the minimum length action-sensation chains
are which are true regularities. Here there is another traditional
but fascinating question: what are the best worlds for learning with
respect to critters of a given type - if the world is very
stochastic, nothing can be learned in time; if the world is almost
unchanging, there is little motivation to learn and precious little
data about regular covariances to learn from.
Indeed, in psychological studies, there are certain sequences which
will bolster reliance on certain conclusions to such an extent that
those conclusions become (illegitimately) protected from
disconfirmation. Could one recreate this phenomenon with a simple
learning critter with a certain motivational structure in a certain
kind of world?
Although these issues seemed familiar, the talk certainly could stimulate
the general public.
Cheers - Armar
------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 15:45:06-PST
From: Juanita Mullen <MULLEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: SIGLUNCH ANNOUNCEMENT - FRIDAY, January 27, 1984
[Reprinted from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution.]
Friday, January 27, 1984
Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
12:05
SPEAKER: Tom Dietterich, HPP
Stanford University
TOPIC: Learning with Constraints
In attempting to construct a program that can learn the semantics of
UNIX commands, several shortcomings of existing AI learning techniques
have been uncovered. Virtually all existing learning systems are
unable to (a) perform data interpretation in a principled way, (b)
form theories about systems that contain substantial amounts of state
information, (c) learn from partial data, and (d) learn in a highly
incremental fashion. This talk will describe these shortcomings and
present techniques for overcoming them. The basic approach is to
employ a vocabulary of constraints to represent partial knowledge and
to apply constraint-propagation techniques to draw inferences from
this partial knowledge. These techniques are being implemented in a
system called, EG, whose task is to learn the semantics of 13 UNIX
commands (ls, cp, mv, ln, rm, cd, pwd, chmod, umask, type, create,
mkdir, rmdir) by watching "over-the-shoulder" of a teacher.
------------------------------
Date: 01/25/84 17:07:14
From: AH
Subject: Theory of Computation Seminar
[Forwarded from MIT-MC by SASW.]
DATE: February 2nd, 1984
TIME: 3:45PM Refreshments
4:00PM Lecture
PLACE: NE43-512A
"OPERATIONAL AND DENOTATIONAL SEMANTICS FOR P R O L O G"
by
Neil D. Jones
Datalogisk Institut
Copenhagen University
Abstract
A PROLOG program can go into an infinite loop even when there exists a
refutation of its clauses by resolution theorem proving methods. Conseguently
one can not identify resolution of Horn clauses in first-order logic with
PROLOG as it is actually used, namely, as a deterministic programming
language. In this talk two "computational" semantics of PROLOG will be given.
One is operational and is expressed as an SECD-style interpreter which is
suitable for computer implementation. The other is a Scott-Strachey style
denotational semantics. Both were developed from the SLD-refutation procedure
of Kowalski and APT and van Embden, and both handle "cut".
HOST: Professor Albert R. Meyer
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 84 23:47:29 EST
From: reiser (brian reiser) @ cmu-psy-a
Reply-to: <Reiser%CMU-PSY-A@CMU-CS-PT>
Subject: Human-Computer Interaction Program at CMU
***** ANNOUNCEMENT *****
Graduate Program in Human-Computer Interaction
at Carnegie-Mellon University
The field of human-computer interaction brings to bear theories and
methodologies from cognitive psychology and computer science to the design
of computer systems, to instruction about computers, and to
computer-assisted instruction. The new Human-Computer Interaction program
at CMU is geared toward the development of cognitive models of the complex
interaction between learning, memory, and language mechanisms involved in
using computers. Students in the program apply their psychology and
computer science training to research in both academic and industry
settings.
Students in the Human-Computer Interaction program design their educational
curricula with the advice of three faculty members who serve as the
student's committee. The intent of the program is to guarantee that
students have the right combination of basic and applied research
experience and coursework so that they can do leading research in the
rapidly developing field of human-computer interaction. Students typically
take one psychology course and one computer science course each semester
for the first two years. In addition, students participate in a seminar on
human-computer interaction held during the summer of the first year in
which leading industry researchers are invited to describe their current
projects.
Students are also actively involved in research throughout their graduate
career. Research training begins with a collaborative and apprentice
relationship with a faculty member in laboratory research for the first one
or two years of the program. Such involvement allows the student several
repeated exposures to the whole sequence of research in cognitive
psychology and computer science, including conceptualization of a problem,
design and execution of experiments, analyzing data, design and
implementation of computer systems, and writing scientific reports.
In the second half of their graduate career, students participate in
seminars, teaching, and an extensive research project culminating in a
dissertation. In addition, an important component of students' training
involves an internship working on an applied project outside the academic
setting. Students and faculty in the Human-Computer Interaction program
are currently studying many different cognitive tasks involving computers,
including: construction of algorithms, design of instruction for computer
users, design of user-friendly systems, and the application of theories of
learning and problem solving to the design of systems for computer-assisted
instruction.
Carnegie-Mellon University is exceptionally well suited for a program in
human-computer interaction. It combines a strong computer science
department with a strong psychology department and has many lines of
communication between them. There are many shared seminars and research
projects. They also share in a computational community defined by a large
network of computers. In addition, CMU and IBM have committed to a major
effort to integrate personal computers into college education. By 1986,
every student on campus will have a powerful state-of-the-art personal
computer. It is anticipated that members of the Human-Computer Interaction
program will be involved in various aspects of this effort.
The following faculty from the CMU Psychology and Computer Science
departments are participating in the Human-Computer Interaction Program:
John R. Anderson, Jaime G. Carbonell, John R. Hayes, Elaine Kant, David
Klahr, Jill H. Larkin, Philip L. Miller, Alan Newell, Lynne M. Reder, and
Brian J. Reiser.
Our deadline for receiving applications, including letters of
recommendation, is March 1st. Further information about our program and
application materials may be obtained from:
John R. Anderson
Department of Psychology
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂31-Jan-84 0830 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Talkware seminar Mon Feb 6, Tom Moran (PARC)
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 31 Jan 84 08:29:50 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 31 Jan 84 08:23:09-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 31 Jan 84 08:21:15-PST
Return-Path: <TW@SU-AI>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 30 Jan 84 16:58:27-PST
Date: 30 Jan 84 1653 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI>
Subject: Talkware seminar Mon Feb 6, Tom Moran (PARC)
To: "@377.DIS[1,TW]"@SU-AI
ReSent-date: Tue 31 Jan 84 08:21:46-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Talkware Seminar (CS 377)
Date: Feb 6
Speaker: Thomas P. Moran, Xerox PARC
Topic: Command Language Systems, Conceptual Models, and Tasks
Time: 2:15-4
Place: 200-205
Abstract:
Perhaps the most imortant property for the usability of command language
systems is consistency. This notion usually refers to the internal
(self-) consistency of the language. But I would like to reorient the
notion of consistency to focus on the task domain for which the system
is designed. I will introduce a task analysis technique, called
External-Internal Task (ETIT) analysis. It is based on the idea that
tasks in the external world must be reformulated in to the internal
concepts of a computer system before the system can be used. The
analysis is in the form of a mapping between sets of external tasks and
internal tasks. The mapping can be either direct (in the form of rules)
or "mediated" by a conceptual model of how the system works. The direct
mapping shows how a user can appear to understand a system, yet have no
idea how it "really" works. Example analyses of several text editing
systems and, for contrast, copiers will be presented; and various
properties of the systems will be derived from the analysis. Further,
it is shown how this analysis can be used to assess the potential
transfer of knowledge from one system to another, i.e., how much knowing
one system helps with learning another. Exploration of this kind of
analysis is preliminary, and several issues will be raised for
discussion.
∂31-Jan-84 1201 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA reminder about thursday's seminar
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 31 Jan 84 12:01:34 PST
Date: Tue 31 Jan 84 11:58:16-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: reminder about thursday's seminar
To: aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
apologies to those of you already on the computational number theory seminar
mailing list, because you will get two copies of this message;
i thought that for the first few weeks, it would be polite
to continue to mail to all of aflb.local just in case someone who's interested
in participating has been out of town for a while.
the next seminar meeting will be
thursday, 2/2/84, margaret jacks 301, 2:15 p.m.
the topic will be
miller's prime testing algorithm, which is in P assuming ERH
i will not be around tomorrow (wednesday) to send out another reminder.
hope to see you there,
joan
(p.s., let me know if you are not on the mailing list and want to be)
-------
∂31-Jan-84 1222 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA car pools for friday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 31 Jan 84 12:21:55 PST
Date: Tue 31 Jan 84 12:13:26-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: car pools for friday
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
to those interested in going to berkeley this friday for bats:
oren patashnik and tom spencer have volunteered to drive. oren can take 3
people besides himself and tom can take 5 besides himself. at least 3
people are not relying on car pools to get there, so that should be
enough cars unless many people are going who have not responded to my
requests for a headcount. anyway, the show is supposed to begin at 10 a.m.
i suggest we meet in front of margaret jacks at 8:15 (my first instinct was
8, but i was told that if you tell people to show up that early, they just
come late anyway); what do people think? will that be enough time, taking
parking and rush hour into account?
please send me a definite message one way or the other
by thursday evening
about whether or not you plan to go up in one of the car pool cars so that
we won't leave without you.
thanks,
joan
-------
∂31-Jan-84 1610 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI Vazirani's BATS talk
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 31 Jan 84 16:10:23 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 31 Jan 84 16:09:55-PST
Date: 31 Jan 84 1606 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: Vazirani's BATS talk
To: avi@UCBERNIE
CC: aflb.su@SU-SCORE
He is going to give the same talk here in AFLB on Thursday. How about moving the
BATS talk to be the first or the last one?
-Yoni.
∂31-Jan-84 1818 YAO@SU-SCORE.ARPA Kannan's visit
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 31 Jan 84 18:18:34 PST
Date: Tue 31 Jan 84 18:18:27-PST
From: Andrew Yao <YAO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Kannan's visit
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: yao@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Professor Ravi Kannan is planning to visit Stanford around March 20. I
would like to arrange for a talk for him on that day (March 20). Since
that will be during the final exam week, I don't know how many people
will be able to attend. If you think you might come to the talk, please
send me a message, so that I can get a feeling whether people are interested
in this talk.
Kannan is now at Carnegie-Mellon. I don't know what he will speak on, but
he always has something interesting to talk about.
Andy Yao
-------
∂01-Feb-84 0003 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI Reminder: next AFLB talks
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 00:03:08 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Feb 84 00:02:19-PST
Date: 1 Feb 84 0000 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: Reminder: next AFLB talks
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE
N E X T A F L B T A L K (S)
2/2/84 - Dr. Vijay Vazirani (Harvard)
"Maximum Matching without Tears : A Randomizing Algorithm"
Even though efficient algorithms have been discovered for finding
maximum matchings in general graphs - the best running time being
O(|E| sqrt (|V|)), all of the known polynomial time algorithms for
this problem tend to be conceptually involved, and difficult to
program.
We give an O(|V|**3.5) randomizing algorithm for the maximum matching
problem, based on a new approach. Whereas the conventional algorithms
find maximum matchings by finding "blossoms" and "augmenting paths",
our algorithm is based on finding the rank and the inverse of certain
matrices obtained from the adjacency matrix of the given graph.
Normally, these matrix computations result in unreasonably large
intermediate values. To prevent this, we do all our computations over
a finite field. We also give efficient randomizing algorithms for
finding the rank and inverse of matrices over a finite field. Our
algorithms are conceptually simple and easy to program.
This is joint work with M. Rabin
******** Time and place: Feb. 2, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
2/9/84 - No AFLB - Enjoy the Stanford Computer Forum
2/16/84 - Dr. Eli Upfal (U.C. Berkeley)
A probabilistic relation between desirable and feasible models
of parallel computation
We present a powerful probabilistic technique for simulating strong
models of synchronized parallel computation by weaker ones. In
particular, our technique eliminates the use of shared variables
without significant increase in the program run-time. The technique
is demonstrated by an algorithm simulating an n processors PRAM with
an arbitrary large shared memory by an n processor ULRTACOMPUTER - a
set of n processors communication through a bounded degree network.
We prove that if a program required t PRAM steps than our simulation
algorithm executes it on the ULTRACOMPUTER within O(t log**2 n )
steps with overwhelming probability.
******** Time and place: Feb. 16, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
∂01-Feb-84 0232 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #6
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 02:32:43 PST
Date: Tuesday, January 31, 1984 5:24AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #6
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 1 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 6
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Jobs,
Implementations - Sets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 29 Jan 1984 20:56-PST
From: Goldberg@Rand-UNIX
Subject: Women, again !
/* I offer yet another program that solves the women, job,
dress problem. I find this one easier to understand than
the previous solutions presented here. Perhaps you will
also.
This program tries all possible triples (woman, job, dress).
When it is first called the sets Women, Jobs and Dresses each
contain all possibilities, and the PartialSolution is empty.
Each call to wjd tries all possible triples, chosen from the
sets Women, Jobs and Dresses. So the first call tries all
solutions, and subsequent recursive calls try all potential
triples given the partial solution already chosen.
We use a generate and test approach. The three member
clauses generate a potential triple, which is then tested.
If the triple is not impossible, as determined by test, then wjd
is called recursively with a larger partial solution and
sets of women, jobs and dresses that are one smaller.
If test or wjd fails then backtracking at member produces
all possible triples (woman, job, dress). */
/* solve the women, jobs, dresses problem. */
solve :-
wjd([alice,betty,carol,dorothy],
[pilot,lifeguard,housewife,professor],
[pink,yellow,blue,white],[]).
/* The answer has been found if the Solution contains four entries. */
wjd(←, ←, ←, Solution) :-
length(Solution,Length),
Length=4,
write(Solution), !.
wjd(Women,Jobs,Dresses,PartialSolution) :-
member(Woman, Women),
member(Job, Jobs),
member(Dress, Dresses),
test([Woman, Job, Dress]),
remove(Woman, Women, RemainingWomen),
remove(Job, Jobs, RemainingJobs),
remove(Dress, Dresses, RemainingDresses),
wjd(RemainingWomen, RemainingJobs, RemainingDresses,
[[Woman,Job,Dress]|PartialSolution]).
/* I learned a good lesson here. One would be tempted to replace the
last call to wjd with
append(PartialSolution,[[Woman,Job,Dress]],NewPartialSolution),
wjd(RemainingWomen, RemainingJobs, RemainingDresses,
NewPartialSolution]).
so that the append would obtain the NewPartialSolution.
This program would run much slower, because when wjd fails
append tries to find another match. It succeeds -
with the same NewPartialSolution - and wjd is called
with the same arguments that made it fail the previous time. */
member(Head,[Head|←]).
member(Head,[←|Tail]) :- member(Head,Tail).
/* remove(Item, List, Answer) succeeds when Item
removed from List equals Answer. It will work
with any two arguments instantiated. The cuts
prevent remove from satisfying the goal
remove(b, [a,b,c], X) more than once, since this
would cause wjd to be called repeatedly with the
same arguments. */
remove(←,[],[]).
remove(Item,[Item|Tail],Tail) :- !.
remove(Item,[NotItem|Tail],Answer) :-
remove(Item,Tail,AnswerPrime),
append([NotItem],AnswerPrime,Answer),
!.
append([],List,List).
append([Head|Tail1],List1,[Head|Tail2]) :-
append(Tail1,List1,Tail2).
/* I've interpreted much of the information given with the
puzzle as negative constraints. I like the uniformity and
semantic simplicity of these facts. */
test(Triple) :-
not(impossible(Triple)).
impossible([←,pilot,pink]).
impossible([←,pilot,blue]).
impossible([carol,pilot,←]).
impossible([carol,←,pink]).
impossible([carol,←,blue]).
impossible([betty,lifeguard,←]).
impossible([alice,professor,←]).
impossible([alice,←,blue]).
impossible([←,professor,blue]).
/* One of the clues states a truth. A proposed solution tuple
is not possible if a member of the tuple matches a member of
a truth list and a pair of members of the tuple and the truth
list are different. */
impossible(L) :-
truth(Truthlist),
match(L,Truthlist),
difference(L,Truthlist).
match([H1|←],[H2|←]) :- H1 == H2.
match([←|T1],[←|T2]) :- match(T1,T2).
difference([H1|←],[H2|←]) :- atom(H1), atom(H2), not(H1 = H2).
difference([←|T1],[←|T2]) :- difference(T1,T2).
truth([←,housewife,white]).
-- Arthur P. Goldberg
-----------------------------
Date: Thursday, 26-Jan-84 22:56:00-GMT
From: "OKeefe.R.A." <OKeefe.R.A.%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Sets in Prolog
Re: Shimon Cohen's note on sets, V2 #5 Prolog Digest.
1. He expressed concern at "the inefficient implementation of sets
in Prolog". This is like being concerned about the anti-clerical
attitude of the present King of France. There *is* none. I do
not know about LM-Prolog, but none of {DEC-10 Prolog, C-Prolog,
UNSW Prolog, MU Prolog, PopLog, Prolog-X, NIP} offers you a
Prolog data-type called "set" or, for that matter, "bag".
2. There is a very good reason for this. In various programs, I
have used the following representations of sets:
a) unordered lists (supported by <PROLOG>SETUTL.PL)
-- this may be the library file whose inefficiency is worrisome
b) ordered lists with no duplicates (supported by <PROLOG>ORDSET.PL)
-- except for membership tests, these routines are as efficient
-- as anything you can do with hash tables. Trouble is, they
-- only really work with "sufficiently instantiated" elements,
-- but then hash tables have precisely the same limitation (and
-- you need an unusually co-operative garbage collector if you
-- are not to be restricted to ground elements only)
c) ordered binary trees (I haven't submitted this to the library at
SU-SCORE yet, but <PROLOG>ASSOC.PL comes close)
-- element testing takes O(lg N) time compared with O(N) for (a)
-- or (b), all the other operations take O(N) time as in (b),(a)
-- of course takes O(N↑2) time. The union intersection ... code
-- is rather more complex than in (b)
d) vectors of var/nonvar (not submitted as I think it's hacky)
-- this applies to subsets of [1..N] (N can be up to 100 in
-- obsolete versions of C-Prolog, up to 200 in current versions,
-- up to several thousand in DEC-10 Prolog, any number in NIP
-- or PopLog), an element is in the set if arg(X,Set,A),nonvar(A)
-- or absent from it if var(A). I have used this for colouring
-- various kinds of graphs, where in the nonvar(A) case A is the
-- colour assigned.
e) bit-vectors using the /\ \/ / << and >> arithmetic operators.(If
you think I'm going to submit this you must be joking, it's
TRIVIAL, like so many things in Prolog if you look for a simple
solution, but you have to beware of different word-lengths)
-- this again applies to subsets of [1..N], but for much larger
-- N. An integer is 18 bits in DEC-10 Prolog, 24 bits in
Prolog-X
-- and NIP, 30 bits in PopLog(?) and TIP. Note that I am talking
-- about a *vector* of integers, not a list. Lists can be used
-- too, but I've never had occasion to work with sets of
integers
-- where I didn't know N before I wanted to construct the set.
f) a base set, represented as a table of elements (either vector
form or binary tree, see <PROLOG>TREES.PL), and sets of integers
representing subsets of the base set in (d) or (e) form
I have also used (a), nested (b), (d), and (f)/(d) for graphs.
In various programs, I have used the following representations of
bags:
A) unordered lists (there is no library file to support this)
B) ordered sequences of <element>-<count> pairs (<PROLOG>BAGUTL.PL)
C) binary trees of <element>-<count> pairs (no library file for
this but it would be trivial to adapt <PROLOG>ASSOC.PL)
D) for bags of 1..N, vectors of counts
-- adding an element requires copying the vector, but see
-- <PROLOG>ARRAYS.PL for constant-time updatable arrays in
Prolog
-- so adding an element to a bag takes constant time
E) a base set and a bag of integers in (A) (B) (C) or (D) form.
**** Not *ONE* of these representations is best for all purposes.
3. Hash tables are not best for all purposes either. If you spend
a lot of time working on entire sets, or if you are interested
in enumerating elements rather than testing for a single element,
ordered lists (use compare/3, {@<,@>=,@>,@=<,==,\==}/2) are hard
to beat. They do need the elements to be sufficiently instantiated
for you to tell them apart (basically, when making a set from a
list or other structure, you need (X = Y) => (X == Y)). But so
do hash tables. There are at least two ways of calculating hash
functions. You can use the print form (numbering variables from
left to right in the style of numbervars) or you can use the
internal addresses of variables, atoms, and functors, and the
values of integers. The former is slow, the latter means that
the garbage collector not only has to be prepared to rehash all
your sets, it has to FIND all your sets. (PopLog has hash
tables, but they are pop11 data structures, not Prolog data
structures [Prolog can't do anything to them except call Pop
functions], and the garbage collector CAN find the tables, and
DOES rehash them. Even so, ordered lists in C-Prolog are
competetive with hash-tables in PopLog.) It must be admitted
that DEC-10 Prolog and C-Prolog do look at the source form of
atoms to compare them, however the cost of atom comparison can
easily be reduced to the cost of integer comparison in a new
Prolog implementation at the cost of 3 pointers and 1 integer
extra per atom, and at the cost of making the creation of a
new atom O(lg|atoms|) instead of O(1).
4. It follows that "If you are honestly trying to make Prolog a
useful language", then by all means provide a "hash←on←name
(+Term,?Hash)" primitive so that people can build hash tables
(using vectors to hold the buckets, buckets being represented
perhaps as lists with unbound tails), but instead of forcing
the use of hash tables in every place, make them *JUST ONE* of
*SEVERAL* implementations of the same abstract data type.
5. A great deal depends on the needs of the particular programmer
for the program he is actually writing. Most of the time when
I call setof/3, I either want to perform some operation on the
whole set as it stands, in which case I exploit the fact that
in DEC-10 Prolog, C-Prolog, Prolog-X, and NIP the answer is an
ORDERED list, and <PROLOG>ORDSET.PL provides efficient operations
on ordered lists,or else I want to map down the entire set
transforming the elements in some way. It is precisely these
tasks to which hash tables are least well suited. I cannot think
of any occasion on which I have calculated a setof and followed
it by a membership test (as opposed to an enumeration using
member). This is NOT, and is not intended as, an argument
against having hash tables around, nor indeed against having
hashed←setof/3 around. What it IS an argument FOR is for having
setof/3 in its present form (see <PROLOG>SETOF.PL) and the
ordered set library [as well].
6. If you want to do a lot of membership tests, using binary trees
is nearly as efficient as using hash tables. For the next
couple of years on VAXen and M68000s (or on the DEC-10 with its
tiny address space), the difference between O(lgN) and O(1) is
likely to be swallowed up by the overheads of hashing. In the
longer term, the fact that (provided you accept comparison as a
primitive operation, and if you don't like comparing variables,
you can imitate MU-Prolog and delay until the terms are
sufficiently instantiated) binary trees can be accessed and
UPDATED in pure Prolog is likely to make binary trees the
method of choice in massively parallel systems. This fact
already provides binary trees with an important advantage
over hash tables when doing elementwise insertion and deletion.
See next paragraph.
7. The scheme Cohen describes for maintaining multiple versions
of a hash table has some problems. He says "Each set has sort
of internal clock which is modified whenever we create new
pointer to this set." I presume this doesn't actually mean
that after doing "X = Set" we have to increment the counter,
because he says he has implemented his ideas in C-Prolog, and
having an extensive knowledge of the internals of C-Prolog (the
speed of old versions was 800 LIPS on a VAX 750. The speed of
version 1.4b.edai is 1100 LIPS, and we are now up to version
1..4c.edai.) I am quite sure that there is no way of detecting
when we "create a new pointer to" anything at all without
substantial changes to main.c and unify.c and a MASSIVE overhead.
So I surmise that he means that the clock is modifed whenever a
new VERSION of a set is created, that is that the "insert" and
"delete" operations update the clock, and nothing else. Now we
have the question: what values does the clock take? If the
answer is "numbers", then the scheme has a serious deficiency.
% element(Element, SetWithIt, SetWithoutIt)
% is the assumed primitive, insert/delete depending on the
% instantiation state of the variables, just 'insert' here.
... :-
...
element(x, Set1, Set0),
element(y, Set2, Set1),
element(z, Set3, Set2),
...
works just fine, and operations on Set0..Set2 which just LOOK at
their elements work just fine as well. BUT
... :-
...
element(x, Setx, Set0),
element(y, Sety, Set0),
element(w, Setw, Setx),
element(v, Setv, Sety),
...
will almost certainly NOT work, because Setx and Sety will get
the SAME clock value, and Setw and Setv will also get the same
(but different from Setx and Sety) clock value. There is a cure
for this, which involves using structured clocks. I won't go
into the details, because it turns out that by the time you have
something that resets itself when you backtrack and permits
multiple versions AND lets the version space branch you would be
MUCH better off with binary trees.
8. The updatable array implementation in <PROLOG>ARRAYS.PL does not
provide multiple versions. About a week before I sent it to
SU-SCORE I had this obvious idea about timestamping changes to
the array and started coding it. Then the deficiency struck me,
and I spent a couple of days trying to figure out an efficient
way of sharing as much structure as possible with a branching
version space. That's when I came up with <PROLOG>TREES.PL.
Actual timing tests showed that the (compiled Prolog) binary
tree implementation of arrays was always much faster than the
(compiled Prolog) updatable vector implementation, and it was
purer Prolog and could be generalised to non-numeric indices.
Updatable hash tables which support branching versions spaces
can easily be built from <PROLOG>TREES.PL given the
hash←on←name/2 operation (which is not available in any Prolog
available to me except Poplog, where I wrote the Prolog-term
hash function -- the Pop hash function hashes on addresses).
If Shimon Cohen or Ken Forbus has actually invented a technique
for handling a branching version space in updatable structures
at LESS cost than O(lgN) space and O(lgN) time, I shall propose
his or their election to the pantheon and ask for a signed
photograph.
9. I would very much like to see Shimon Cohen's code. Thank you,
sir, for offering to mail it. If this means physically posting
it to me, fine, but it might be better if you posted it to SCORE
where anyone who is interested can FTP it without bothering you.
(Actually, I have an ulterior motive. I want your stuff to sink
into the total oblivion that <PROLOG>ARRAYS.PL and <PROLOG>
ORDSET.PL seem to have sunk into. (:-}) I would also like to
see Ken Forbus's code. As implementing constant-time updatable
arrays in Prolog is basically trivial (have a look at <PROLOG>
ARRAYS.PL if you don't believe me) I would expect that the
ZetaLisp code would be similarly trivial. If anyone is really
interested in having multiple versions of arrays and can put
with with a purely sequential version space, I could send my
code for that to SU-SCORE as well.
[ Shimons code is available from {SU-SCORE} as:
SCORE:<Prolog>Cohen←Sets.Txt ! note for using the PL code
Cohen←Sets.PL ! the PL code - ed ]
10. It just occurred to me that some people who haven't thought about
data structures in Prolog or read the manual or the Clocksin &
Mellish book with any degree of attention may wonder what I mean
by "vectors". I refer to the use of the functor/3 and arg/3
primitives which support 1-dimensional origin-1 vectors very
efficiently in any usable Prolog. I didn't call them "arrays"
because once you have bound an argument of a term you can't
change it.
11. PS: there are versions of many of the {SU-SCORE}<PROLOG>*.PL
files for C-Prolog. If enough people are interested I could
post them to net.sources now that our VAX is on the air again.
It is not possible for me to post them to ARPANet.
-- Richard A. O'Keefe
(Te Tohunga Prolog)
-----------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂01-Feb-84 1042 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA staff relations
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 10:42:20 PST
Date: Wed 1 Feb 84 10:27:27-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: staff relations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: CSD-Secretaries: ;
Our department is very fortunate in having an excellent staff. They are
dedicated and hard-working; many of them put in extra long hours.
The staff, however, is not getting the kind of co-operation from us that
they deserve. There are often deadlines which need to be met and they
are held responsible for meeting these deadlines. An example of this is
the Bell Fellowship. Bell (or whatever they are now called) required
us to get applications in by a certain date and there were to be no
exceptions. It really required yeoman effort and a lot of aggravation
to get all the nominations in on time.
So as the YEAR of the RAT begins, let's all resolve to put in
more effort into working in a more helpful way with our staff. I think by
doing this, we'll find that our staff will do even more for us than they
usually do.
GENE
-------
∂01-Feb-84 1127 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 11:26:55 PST
Date: Wed 1 Feb 84 11:05:13-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
There will not be a general faculty lunch on Tuesday, Feb 7.
GENE
-------
∂01-Feb-84 1134 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting on Tuesday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 11:34:06 PST
Date: Wed 1 Feb 84 11:09:15-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Meeting on Tuesday
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
cc: bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
There'll be a senior faculty meeting on Tuesday, Feb 7 beginning at
12:15 in MJH 252. Lunch will be provided. The main agenda item will
be the Lenat case. There are other items to discuss, however.
The meeting will break at 1:15 and re-convene if necessary at 2:30.
GENE
-------
∂01-Feb-84 1141 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Foundations seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 11:41:41 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Feb 84 11:38:51-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Feb 84 11:09:59-PST
Date: 1 Feb 1984 1009-PST
From: Stan
Subject: Foundations seminar
To: dkanerva
cc: bmoore, jrp, stan, nilsson
ReSent-date: Wed 1 Feb 84 11:08:48-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Foundations Seminar
Thursday, Feb. 2, 1984
Nils Nilsson will present a rational reconstruction of the STRIPS
robot planning and problem-solving system. The reading is chapter 7
of his book, Principles of AI (Basic Plan-Generating Systems). Copies
of the chapter will be available in Ventura Wednesday afternoon.
-------
∂01-Feb-84 1730 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA newsletter no. 17, February 2, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 17:29:59 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Feb 84 17:26:38-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 1 Feb 84 17:12:53-PST
Date: Wed 1 Feb 84 17:12:33-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: newsletter no. 17, February 2, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
CSLI Newsletter
February 2, 1984 * * * Number 17
A weekly publication of
The Center for the Study of Language and Information
Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
-----------
SCHEDULE OF CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *THIS* THURSDAY, February 2, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall "The STRIPS Robot Planning and
Conference Room Problem-solving System"
by Nils Nilsson
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Two Theories of Syntactic Categories"
Conference Room by Susan F. Schmerling
Discussion led by Carl Pollard
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall by Jon Barwise
Room G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Information as an Economic Good"
Room G-19 by Kenneth Arrow, Stanford Economics Dept.
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Topic and speaker to be announced.
Conference Room
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Introduction to Parsing Volume"
Conference Room by Arnold Zwicky
Discussion led by Jane Robinson
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall by Jon Barwise
Room G-19
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Some Problems of Historical Linguistic
Room G-19 Classification and Some Results"
by Joseph Greenberg, Stanford Linguistics
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
SEMINAR ON FOUNDATIONS OF SITUATED LANGUAGE
10 a.m., Thursday, February 2, 1984
Ventura Hall Conference Room
Nils Nilsson will present a rational reconstruction of the STRIPS
robot planning and problem-solving system. The reading is chapter 7
of his book, Principles of AI (Basic Plan-Generating Systems). Copies
of the chapter are available in Ventura Hall on Wednesday afternoon.
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday at Ventura Hall on the Stanford
University campus as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of TINLunch
papers are available at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford University in
Ventura Hall.
NEXT WEEK: INTRODUCTION TO PARSING VOLUME by Arnold Zwicky
Discussion leaders: February 9 Jane Robinson
February 16 Stan Rosenschein
February 23 Ivan Sag
-----------
CSLI COLLOQUIUM
On Thursday, February 9, Joseph Greenberg of the Stanford
Linguistics Department will speak on "Some Problems of Historical
Linguistic Classification and Some Results." The Colloquium will be
held, as usual, at 4:15 p.m. in Room G-19 of Redwood Hall.
-----------
RECEIVING THE CSLI NEWSLETTER
Because of the costs involved in mailing the CSLI Newsletter by
U.S. mail, we prefer to send it through computer networks whenever
possible. If you are currently receiving the Newsletter by mail but
have a net address, please send that net address to CSLI-REQUESTS so
that we can send the Newsletter to you electronically.
-----------
NEW MAIL BOXES IN CASITA HALL
Mail boxes have been set up and labeled for people with offices
in Casita Hall, behind Ventura Hall. A list of the people whose boxes
have been moved to Casita is posted by the Ventura mail boxes. If you
need to leave something for someone whose office is in Casita, please
put it in his or her box in that building.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
KEN CHURCH OF BELL LABS TO VISIT CSLI
Ken Church of Bell Laboratories will be visiting CSLI February 6
through February 10, when he will be working on projects relating to
natural language parsing and phonological and morphological
processing. A more detailed schedule for Ken's visit will go out
later. People interested in meeting with Ken Churh outside planned
activities can send a message to HALVORSEN@PARC (494-4324).
-----------
TALKWARE SEMINAR (CS 377)
Date: Monday, February 6
Speaker: Thomas P. Moran, Xerox PARC
Topic: Command Language Systems, Conceptual Models, and Tasks
Time: 2:15-4:00
Place: Bldg. 200, rm. 205
Abstract:
Perhaps the most important property for the usability of command
language systems is consistency. This notion usually refers to the
internal (self-) consistency of the language. But I would like to
reorient the notion of consistency to focus on the task domain for
which the system is designed. I will introduce a task analysis
technique, called External-Internal Task (ETIT) analysis. It is based
on the idea that tasks in the external world must be reformulated into
the internal concepts of a computer system before the system can be
used. The analysis is in the form of a mapping between sets of
external tasks and internal tasks. The mapping can be either direct
(in the form of rules) or "mediated" by a conceptual model of how the
system works. The direct mapping shows how a user can appear to
understand a system, yet have no idea how it "really" works. Sample
analyses of several text editing systems and, for contrast, copiers
will be presented and various properties of the systems will be
derived from the analysis. Further, it is shown how this analysis can
be used to assess the potential transfer of knowledge from one system
to another, that is, how much knowing one system helps with learning
another. Exploration of this kind of analysis is preliminary, and
several issues will be raised for discussion.
-----------
STANFORD LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM
Date: 3:15 p.m., Tuesday, February 7
Speaker: R. M. W. DIXON, Australian National University/UC Santa Cruz
Topic: The Semantic Basis of Synntactic Categories:
English and Dyirbal Verbs
Place: Bldg. 200, rm. 303 (History Corner), Stanford
Refreshments will be served following the talk at the Linguistics
Department Reading Room, Bldg. 100 on the Inner Quad.
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
SPECIAL SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Date: 4:15-5:30 p.m., Wednesday, February 8
Speaker: Vladimir Lifschitz, Universtiy of El Paso
Topic: Facts and Exceptions
Place: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
ABSTRACT: In some applications of logic to AI, the language of
predicate calculus is used to represent general facts that may admit
exceptions. (A classical example: "Birds can fly.") It can be
difficult to list explicitly all exceptions in the formal statement of
the fact ("except for dead birds, ostriches, ..."). A few mechanisms
for handling this problem have been proposed based on the theory of
nonmonotonic reasoning, including Reiter's default case reasoning and
McCarthy's circumscription. The talk will discuss a new method that
combines some ideas of the approaches mentioned above. General facts
that admit excpetions are expressed with the aid of special predicate
symbols for being "exceptional," or "abnormal." The extent of each of
these special predicates is determined as follows: As few objects as
possible are assumed exceptional, under the condition that the set of
available facts remains consistent.
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
On Tuesday, January 31, we were very pleased to have in the
seminar Professor Keith Donnellan from UCLA. Donnellan is one of the
most prominent philosophers of language, having been the originator of
very important insights both in semantics and in pragmatics. One of
his most important contributions involved the proper treatment of
definite descriptions. Donnellan pointed out a whole new type of uses
of descriptions, the "referential" uses. His cases generated a
(rather hot) debate on whether their explanation should come from
semantics or whether it ("merely") belongs to pragmatics.
In particular, Saul Kripke formulated a strong criticism of
Donnellan's views suggesting that, as far as the notion of "SEMANTIC
reference" goes, Donnellan's data are rather amorphous. If anything,
a ("pragmatic") notion of "SPEAKER reference" should be introduced to
account for the Donnellenian phenomena, or so Kripke argued (it is
hard not to take sides, even in this short presentation). The next
stage of the debate has seen Donnellan replying to Kripke. In
formulating his reply, Donnellan searched for phenomena that may
support his claim that referential uses affect purely SEMANTIC
questions (in particular, truth conditions). It seemed to him that the
behavior of certain types of pronouns in anaphoric chains involving
multisentential discourses is relevant to the issue.
Donnellan touched upon this and other questions. More generally,
he gave us his present perspective on the (semantic) significance of
referential uses.
- Joseph Almog
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
TALK BY TOM BROWN OF KESTREL INSTITUTE
Tom Brown, of the Kestrel Institute, gave a talk at SRI Inter-
national on Wednesday, February 1. The talk had two parts: (a) a
completeness result for conditional rewrites, with forward and
backward chaining controlled by interpretations (normally into finite
structures, called exemplars), using abstract properties of the unit
(simplification-oriented equation) rewrite component, and (b) a com-
pleteness argument for the unit rewrite component. This will give more
continuity with Jounnand's last talk.
-----------
COMPUTER SCIENCE COLLOQUIUM NOTICE WEEK OF 1/30/84-2/3/84
1/30/1984 Talkware Seminar CS377
Monday Gio Wiederhold
2:15-4:00 Stanford Univ.
Bldg. 200, Rm. 205 Languages and Data Bases
1/30/1984 NA Seminar
Monday Mark Coffey
4:15 IBM Scientific Center
Math 380C The Cell Discretization Algorithm Applied to a Circle
in the Square Geometry.
1/30/1984 Robotics Seminar
Monday Prof. Rod Brooks
4:15 Computer Science Dept. Stanford Univ.
MJH252 Finding Collision-free Paths for Pick and Place
Operations with a PUMA (a videotape will be shown)
1/31/1984 Medical Computing Journal Club
Tuesday Martin Kernberg
1:30 - 2:30 MD-PhD Student, Stanford
M-108 Medical 3-D Reconstruction and Coordinate Systems of Cardiac
Center Kinematics
1/31/1984 Knowledge Representation Seminar
Tuesday Larry Fagan
2:30-3:30 Stanford HPP
M-108, Medical Using Strategic Knowledge to Plan Medical Therapy
School
1/31/1984 Numerical Analysis Special Seminar
Tuesday Keng Fang
3:15 Chinese Academy of Sciences
MJH252 Asymptotic Radiation Conditions for the Wave Equation
1/31/1984 Computer Science Colloquim
Tuesday Prof. Thomas Lengauer
4:30 Univ. of the Saarland, Saarbrucken, West Germany
Terman Aud The HILL System: A Design Environment for the
Hierarchical Specification, Compaction, and Simulation
of Integrated Circuit Layouts
(continued)
! Page 6
(CS COLLOQUIUM ANNOUNCEMENTS, continued)
2/01/1984 Computer Science Education Lunch
Wednesday organized by Stuart Reges
12:00 - 1:00
MJH 252 An informal lunch group interested in issues of
Computer Science Education
2/01/1984 Computer Systems Lab Seminar EE380/CS310
Wednesday
4:15 Apple Computer
Terman Auditorium
2/02/1984 AFLB
Thursday Dr. Vijay Vazirani
12:30 Harvard University
MJH352 TBA
2/02/1984 CSLI Colloquium
Thursday Kenneth Arrow
4:15 Stanford Dept. of Economics
Redwood Hall, Rm. Information as an Economic Good
G-19
2/02/1984 Supercomputer Seminar CS440
Thursday Andy Freeman
4:15 Stanford Univ. Computer Science Dept.
MJH352 Programming a High-flux Computer - How to Hide Wires
Without Sorting
2/03/1984 ME Design Division Colloquium
Friday Walter J. Doherty
3:15 IBM Research, Yorktown Heights, New York
556 Terman Effective Interactive Computing and Work Stations
2/03/1984 Database Research Seminar
Friday Herb Spencer
3:15 Western Management Consultants, Vancouver
MJH352 A Semantic Meta Schema and Its Application to the
Entity-Relationship Data Model
-----------
-------
∂01-Feb-84 1735 YAO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re Kannan's visit
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Feb 84 17:35:03 PST
Date: Wed 1 Feb 84 17:27:15-PST
From: Andrew Yao <YAO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re Kannan's visit
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
It seems that there is a definite interest in hearing Kannan on March 20.
So I will proceed to arrange for it. Thanks to everybody who has responded.
Andy Yao
-------
∂02-Feb-84 0115 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #10
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 01:15:11 PST
Date: Thu 26 Jan 1984 14:23-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #10
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 27 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
AI Culture - IJCAI Survey,
Cognition - Parallel Processing Query,
Programming Languages - Symbolics Support & PROLOG/ZOG Request,
AI Software - KEE Knowledge Representation System,
Review - Rivest Forsythe Lecture on Learning,
Seminars - Learning with Constraints & Semantics of PROLOG,
Courses - CMU Graduate Program in Human-Computer Interaction
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Jan 84 12:19:21 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Report on "How AI People Think..."
I received a free copy because I attended IJCAI. I have an address
here, but I don't know if it is the appropriate one for ordering this
report:
Re: the report "How AI People Think - Cultural Premises of the AI community"
Commission of the European Communities
Rue de la Loi, 200
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
(The report was compiled by Massimo Negrotti, Chair of Sociology of
Knowledge, University of Genoa, Italy)
Smadar (KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS).
------------------------------
Date: Wed 18 Jan 84 11:05:26-PST
From: Rene Bach <BACH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: brain, a parallel processor ?
What are the evidences that the brain is a parallel processor? My own
introspection seem to indicate that mine is doing time-sharing. That is
I can follow only one idea at a time, but with a lot of switching
between reasoning paths (often more non directed than controlled
switching). Have different people different processors ? Or is the brain
able to function in more than one way (parallel, serial, time-sharing) ??
Rene (bach@sumex)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 84 15:37:39 CST
From: Mike Caplinger <mike@rice>
Subject: Symbolics support for non-Lisp languages
[This is neither an AI nor a graphics question per se, but I thought
these lists had the best chance of reaching Symbolics users...]
What kind of support do the Symbolics machines provide for languages
other than Lisp? Specifically, are there interactive debugging
facilities for Fortran, Pascal, etc.? It's my understanding that the
compilers generate Lisp output. Is this true, and if so, is the
interactive nature of Lisp exploited, or are the languages just
provided as batch compilers? Finally, does anyone have anything to say
about efficiency?
Answers to me, and I'll summarize if there's any interest. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 25 Jan 84 09:38:25-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI
Subject: KEE Representation System
The Jan. issue of IEEE Computer Graphics reports the following:
Intelligenetics has introduced the Knowledge Engineering Environment
AI software development system for AI professionals, computer
scientists, and domain specialists. The database management program
development system is graphics oriented and interactive, permitting
use of a mouse, keyboard, command-option menus, display-screen
windows, and graphic symbols.
KEE is a frame-based representation system that provides support
for descriptive and procedural knowledge representation, and a
declarative, extendable formalism for controlling inheritance of
attributes and attribute values between related units of
knowledge. The system provides support for multiple inheritance
hierarchies; the use of user-extendable data types to promote
knowledge-base integrity; object-oriented programming; multiple-
inference engines/rule systems; and a modular system design through
multiple knowledge bases.
The first copy of KEE sells for $60,000; the second for $20,000.
Twenty copies cost $5000 each.
------------------------------
Date: 01/24/84 12:08:36
From: JAWS@MIT-MC
Subject: PROLOG and/or ZOG for TOPS-10
Does anyone out there know where I can get a version of prolog and/or
ZOG to that will run on a DEC-10 (7.01)? The installation is owned by the
US government, albeit beneign (DOT).
THANX JAWS@MC
------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 11:26:14-PST
From: Armar Archbold <ARCHBOLD@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Rivest Forsythe Lecture on Learning
[The following is a review of a Stanford talk, "Reflections on AI", by
Dr. Ron Rivest of MIT. I have edited the original slightly after getting
Armar's permission to pass it along. -- KIL]
Dr. Rivest's talk emphasized the interest of small-scale studies of
learning through experience (a "critter" with a few sensing and
effecting operations building up a world model of a blocks environment).
He stressed such familiar themes as
- "the evolutionary function and value of world models is predicting
the future, and consequently knowledge is composed principally of
expectations, possibilities, hypotheses - testable action-sensation
sequences, at the lowest level of sophistication",
- "the field of AI has focussed more on 'backdoor AI', where you
directly program in data structures representing high-level
knowledge, than on 'front-door' AI, which studies how knowledge is
built up from non-verbal experience, or 'side door AI', which studies
how knowledge might be gained through teaching and instruction using
language;
- such a study of simple learning systems in a simple environment -- in
which an agent with a given vocabulary but little or no initial
knowledge ("tabula rasa") investigates the world (either through
active experiementation or through changes imposed by perturbations
in the surroundings) and attempts to construct a useful body of
knowledge through recognition of identities, equivalences,
symmetries, homomorphisms, etc., and eventually metapatterns, in
action-sensation chains (represented perhaps in dynamic logic) -- is
of considerable interest.
Such concepts are not new. There have been many mathematical studies,
psychological similations, and AI explorations along the lines since the
50s. At SRI, Stan Rosenschein was playing around with a simplified learning
critter about a year ago; Peter Cheeseman shares Rivest's interest in
Jaynes' use of entropy calculations to induce safe hypotheses in an
overwhelmingly profuse space of possibilities. Even so, these concerns
were worth having reactivated by a talk. The issues raised by some of the
questions from the audience were also intesting, albeit familiar:
- The critter which starts out with a tabula rasa will only make it
through the enormous space of possible patterns induceable from
experience if it initially "knows" an awful lot about how to learn,
at whatever level of procedural abstraction and/or "primitive"
feature selection (such as that done at the level of the eye itself).
- Do we call intelligence the procedures that permit one to gain useful
knowledge (rapidly), or the knowledge thus gained, or what mixture of
both?
- In addition, there is the question of what motivational structure
best furthers the critter's education. If the critter attaches value
to minimum surprise (various statistical/entropy measures thereof),
it can sit in a corner and do nothing, in which case it may one day
suddenly be very surprised and very dead. If it attaches tremendous
value to surprise, it could just flip a coin and always be somewhat
surprised. The mix between repetition (non-surprise/confirmatory
testing) and exploration which produces the best cognitive system is
a fundamental problem. And there is the notion of "best" - "best"
given the critter's values other than curiosity, or "best" in terms
of survivability, or "best" in a kind of Occam's razor sense
vis-a-vis truth (here it was commented you could rank Carnapian world
models based on the simple primitive predicates using Kolmogorov
complexity measures, if one could only calculate the latter...)
- The success or failure of the critter to acquire useful knowledge
depends very much on the particular world it is placed in. Certain
sequences of stimuli will produce learning and others won't, with a
reasonable, simple learning procedure. In simple artificial worlds,
it is possible to form some kind of measure of the complexity of the
environment by seeing what the minimum length action-sensation chains
are which are true regularities. Here there is another traditional
but fascinating question: what are the best worlds for learning with
respect to critters of a given type - if the world is very
stochastic, nothing can be learned in time; if the world is almost
unchanging, there is little motivation to learn and precious little
data about regular covariances to learn from.
Indeed, in psychological studies, there are certain sequences which
will bolster reliance on certain conclusions to such an extent that
those conclusions become (illegitimately) protected from
disconfirmation. Could one recreate this phenomenon with a simple
learning critter with a certain motivational structure in a certain
kind of world?
Although these issues seemed familiar, the talk certainly could stimulate
the general public.
Cheers - Armar
------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Jan 84 15:45:06-PST
From: Juanita Mullen <MULLEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: SIGLUNCH ANNOUNCEMENT - FRIDAY, January 27, 1984
[Reprinted from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution.]
Friday, January 27, 1984
Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
12:05
SPEAKER: Tom Dietterich, HPP
Stanford University
TOPIC: Learning with Constraints
In attempting to construct a program that can learn the semantics of
UNIX commands, several shortcomings of existing AI learning techniques
have been uncovered. Virtually all existing learning systems are
unable to (a) perform data interpretation in a principled way, (b)
form theories about systems that contain substantial amounts of state
information, (c) learn from partial data, and (d) learn in a highly
incremental fashion. This talk will describe these shortcomings and
present techniques for overcoming them. The basic approach is to
employ a vocabulary of constraints to represent partial knowledge and
to apply constraint-propagation techniques to draw inferences from
this partial knowledge. These techniques are being implemented in a
system called, EG, whose task is to learn the semantics of 13 UNIX
commands (ls, cp, mv, ln, rm, cd, pwd, chmod, umask, type, create,
mkdir, rmdir) by watching "over-the-shoulder" of a teacher.
------------------------------
Date: 01/25/84 17:07:14
From: AH
Subject: Theory of Computation Seminar
[Forwarded from MIT-MC by SASW.]
DATE: February 2nd, 1984
TIME: 3:45PM Refreshments
4:00PM Lecture
PLACE: NE43-512A
"OPERATIONAL AND DENOTATIONAL SEMANTICS FOR P R O L O G"
by
Neil D. Jones
Datalogisk Institut
Copenhagen University
Abstract
A PROLOG program can go into an infinite loop even when there exists a
refutation of its clauses by resolution theorem proving methods. Conseguently
one can not identify resolution of Horn clauses in first-order logic with
PROLOG as it is actually used, namely, as a deterministic programming
language. In this talk two "computational" semantics of PROLOG will be given.
One is operational and is expressed as an SECD-style interpreter which is
suitable for computer implementation. The other is a Scott-Strachey style
denotational semantics. Both were developed from the SLD-refutation procedure
of Kowalski and APT and van Embden, and both handle "cut".
HOST: Professor Albert R. Meyer
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 25 Jan 84 23:47:29 EST
From: reiser (brian reiser) @ cmu-psy-a
Reply-to: <Reiser%CMU-PSY-A@CMU-CS-PT>
Subject: Human-Computer Interaction Program at CMU
***** ANNOUNCEMENT *****
Graduate Program in Human-Computer Interaction
at Carnegie-Mellon University
The field of human-computer interaction brings to bear theories and
methodologies from cognitive psychology and computer science to the design
of computer systems, to instruction about computers, and to
computer-assisted instruction. The new Human-Computer Interaction program
at CMU is geared toward the development of cognitive models of the complex
interaction between learning, memory, and language mechanisms involved in
using computers. Students in the program apply their psychology and
computer science training to research in both academic and industry
settings.
Students in the Human-Computer Interaction program design their educational
curricula with the advice of three faculty members who serve as the
student's committee. The intent of the program is to guarantee that
students have the right combination of basic and applied research
experience and coursework so that they can do leading research in the
rapidly developing field of human-computer interaction. Students typically
take one psychology course and one computer science course each semester
for the first two years. In addition, students participate in a seminar on
human-computer interaction held during the summer of the first year in
which leading industry researchers are invited to describe their current
projects.
Students are also actively involved in research throughout their graduate
career. Research training begins with a collaborative and apprentice
relationship with a faculty member in laboratory research for the first one
or two years of the program. Such involvement allows the student several
repeated exposures to the whole sequence of research in cognitive
psychology and computer science, including conceptualization of a problem,
design and execution of experiments, analyzing data, design and
implementation of computer systems, and writing scientific reports.
In the second half of their graduate career, students participate in
seminars, teaching, and an extensive research project culminating in a
dissertation. In addition, an important component of students' training
involves an internship working on an applied project outside the academic
setting. Students and faculty in the Human-Computer Interaction program
are currently studying many different cognitive tasks involving computers,
including: construction of algorithms, design of instruction for computer
users, design of user-friendly systems, and the application of theories of
learning and problem solving to the design of systems for computer-assisted
instruction.
Carnegie-Mellon University is exceptionally well suited for a program in
human-computer interaction. It combines a strong computer science
department with a strong psychology department and has many lines of
communication between them. There are many shared seminars and research
projects. They also share in a computational community defined by a large
network of computers. In addition, CMU and IBM have committed to a major
effort to integrate personal computers into college education. By 1986,
every student on campus will have a powerful state-of-the-art personal
computer. It is anticipated that members of the Human-Computer Interaction
program will be involved in various aspects of this effort.
The following faculty from the CMU Psychology and Computer Science
departments are participating in the Human-Computer Interaction Program:
John R. Anderson, Jaime G. Carbonell, John R. Hayes, Elaine Kant, David
Klahr, Jill H. Larkin, Philip L. Miller, Alan Newell, Lynne M. Reder, and
Brian J. Reiser.
Our deadline for receiving applications, including letters of
recommendation, is March 1st. Further information about our program and
application materials may be obtained from:
John R. Anderson
Department of Psychology
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂02-Feb-84 0229 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #11
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 02:28:51 PST
Date: Tue 31 Jan 1984 10:05-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #11
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 31 Jan 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Techniques - Beam Search Request,
Expert Systems - Expert Debuggers,
Mathematics - Arnold Arnold Story,
Courses - PSU Spring AI Mailing Lists,
Awards - Fredkin Prize for Computer Math Discovery,
Brain Theory - Parallel Processing,
Intelligence - Psychological Definition,
Seminars - Self-Organizing Knowledge Base, Learning, Task Models
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 1984 21:44:11-EST
From: Peng.Si.Ow@CMU-RI-ISL1
Subject: Beam Search
I would be most grateful for any information/references to studies and/or
applications of Beam Search, the search procedure used in HARPY.
Peng Si Ow
pso@CMU-RI-ISL1
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 84 7:51:06-PST (Wed)
From: harpo!eagle!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!erh @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Expert debuggers
Article-I.D.: uvacs.1148
See also "Sniffer: a system that understands bugs", Daniel G. Shapiro,
MIT AI Lab Memo AIM-638, June 1981
(The debugging knowledge of Sniffer is organized as a bunch of tiny
experts, each understanding a specific type of error. The program has an in-
depth understanding of a (very) limited class of errors. It consists of
a cliche-finder and a "time rover". Master's thesis.)
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 26-Jan-84 19:11:37-GMT
From: BILL (on ERCC DEC-10) <Clocksin%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Reply-to: Clocksin <Clocksin%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: AIList entry
In reference to a previous AIList correspondent wishing to know more about
Arnold Arnold's "proof" of Fermat's Last Theorem, last week's issue of
New Scientist explains all. The "proof" is faulty, as expected.
Mr Arnold is a self-styled "cybernetician" who has a history of grabbing
headlines with announcements of revolutionary results which are later
proven faulty on trivial grounds. I suppose A.I. has to put up with
its share of circle squarers and angle trisecters.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 84 18:23:09-PST (Sat)
From: ihnp4!houxm!hocda!hou3c!burl!clyde!akgua!sb1!sb6!bpa!burdvax!psu
vax!bobgian@Ucb-Vax
Subject: PSU Spring AI mailing lists
Article-I.D.: psuvax.433
I will be using net.ai for occasionally reporting "interesting" items
relating to the PSU Spring AI course.
If anybody would also like "administrivia" mailings (which could get
humorous at times!), please let me know.
Also, if you want to be included on the "free-for-all" discussion list,
which will include flames and other assorted idiocies, let me know that
too. Otherwise you'll get only "important" items.
The "official Netwide course" (ie, net.ai.cse) will start up in a month
or so. Meanwhile, you are welcome to join the fun via mail!
Bob
Bob Giansiracusa (Dept of Computer Science, Penn State Univ, 814-865-9507)
UUCP: bobgian@psuvax.UUCP -or- allegra!psuvax!bobgian
Arpa: bobgian@PSUVAX1 -or- bobgian%psuvax1.bitnet@Berkeley
Bitnet: bobgian@PSUVAX1.BITNET CSnet: bobgian@penn-state.csnet
USnail: 333 Whitmore Lab, Penn State Univ, University Park, PA 16802
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 84 19:39:53 EST
From: AMAREL@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Fredkin Prize for Computer Math Discovery
[Reprinted from the RUTGERS bboard.]
Fredkin Prize to be Awarded for Computer Math Discovery
LOUISVILLE, Ky.--The Fredkin Foundation will award a $100,000 prize for the
first computer to make a major mathematical discovery, it was announced today
(Jan. 26).
Carnegie-Mellon University has been named trustee of the "Fredkin Prize for
Computer Discovery in Mathematics", according to Raj Reddy, director of the
university's Robotics Institute, and a trustee of IJCAI (International Joint
Council on Artificial Intelligence) responsible for AI prizes. Reddy said the
prize will be awarded "for a mathematical work of distinction in which some of
the pivotal ideas have been found automatically by a computer program in which
they were not initially implicit."
"The criteria for awarding this prize will be widely publicized and reviewed by
the artificial intelligence and mathematics communities to determine their
adequacy," Reddy said.
Dr. Woody Bledsoe of the University of Texas at Austin will head a committee of
experts who will define the rules of the competition. Bledsoe is
president-elect of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
"It is hoped," said Bledsoe, "that this prize will stimulate the use of
computers in mathematical research and have a good long-range effect on all of
science."
The committee of mathematicians and computer scientists which will define the
rules of the competition includes: William Eaton of the University of Texas at
Austin, Daniel Gorenstein of Rutgers University, Paul Halmos of Indiana
University, Ken Kunen of the University of Wisconsin, Dan Mauldin of North
Texas State University and John McCarthy of Stanford University.
Also, Hugh Montgomery of the University of Michigan, Jack Schwartz of New York
University, Michael Starbird of the University of Texas at Austin, Ken
Stolarsky of the University of Illinois and Francois Treves of Rutgers
University.
The Fredkin Foundation has a similar prize for a world champion computer chess
system. Recently, $5,000 was awarded to Ken Thompson and Joseph Condon, Bell
Laboratories researchers who developed the first computer system to achieve a
Master rating in tournament chess.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 84 15:34:50 PST (Thu)
From: Mike Brzustowicz <mab@aids-unix>
Subject: Re: Rene Bach's query on parallel processing in the brain
What happens when something is "on the tip of your tounge" but is beyond
recall. Often (for me at least) if the effort to recall is displaced
by some other cognitive activity, the searched-for information "pops-up"
at a later time. To me, this suggests at least one background process.
-Mike (mab@AIDS-UNIX)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 84 17:19:30 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: How my brain works
I find that most of what my brain does is pattern interpretation. I receive
various sensory input in the form of various kinds of vibrations (i.e.
eletromagnetic and acoustic) and my brain perceives patterns in this muck.
Then it attaches meanings to the patterns. Within limits, I can attach these
meanings at will. The process of logical deduction a la Socrates takes up
a negligible time-slice in the CPU.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 84 15:35:21 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Re: How my brain works
I see what you mean about the question as to whether the brain is a parallel
processor in consious reasoning or not. I also feel like a little daemon that
sits and pays attention to different lines of thought at different times.
An interesting counterexample is the aha! phenomenon. The mathematician
Henri Poincare, among others, has written an essay about his experience of
being interrupted from his conscious attention somehow and becoming instantly
aware of the solution to a problem he had "given up" on some days before.
It was as though some part of his brain had been working on the problem all
along even though he had not been aware of it. When it had gotten the solution
an interrupt occurred and his conscious mind was triggered into the awareness
of the solution.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Mon 30 Jan 84 09:47:49-EST
From: Alexander Sen Yeh <AY@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: Request for Information
I am getting started on a project which combines symbolic artificial
intelligence and image enhancement techniques. Any leads on past and
present attempts at doing this (or at combining symbolic a.i. with
signal processing or even numerical methods in general) would be
greatly appreciated. I will send a summary of replies to AILIST and
VISION LIST in the future. Thanks.
--Alex Yeh
--electronic mail: AY@MIT-XX.ARPA
--US mail: Rm. 222, 545 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA 02139
------------------------------
Date: 30 January 1984 1554-est
From: RTaylor.5581i27TK @ RADC-MULTICS
Subject: RE: brain, a parallel processor ?
I agree that based on my own observations, my brain appears to be
working more like a time-sharing unit...complete with slow downs,
crashes, etc., due to overloading the inputs by fatigue, poor maintenance,
and numerous inputs coming too fast to be covered by the
time-sharing/switching mechanism!
Roz
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 30 Jan 84 14:33:07 EST
From: shrager (jeff shrager) @ cmu-psy-a
Subject: Psychological Definition of (human) Intelligence
Recommended reading for persons interested in a psychological view of
(human) intelligence:
Sternberg, R.J. (1983) "What should intelligence tests test? Implications
of a triarchic theory of intelligence for intelligence testing." in
Educational Researcher, Jan 1984. Vol. 13 #1.
This easily read article (written for educational researchers) reviews
Sternberg's current view of what makes intelligent persons intelligent:
"The triarchic theory accounts for why IQ tests work as well as they do
and suggests ways in which they might be improved...."
Although the readership of this list are probably not interested in IQ tests
per se, Sternberg is the foremost cognitive psychologist concerned directly
with intelligence so his view of "What is intelligence?" will be of interest.
This is reviewed quite nicely in the cited paper:
"The triachric theory of human intelligence comprises three subtheories. The
first relates intelligence to the internal world of the individual,
specifying the mental mechanisms that lead to more and less intelligent
behavior. This subtheory specifies three kinds of information processing
components that are instrumental in (a) learning how to do things, (b)
planning what to do and how to do them, and in (c) actually doing them. ...
The second subtheory specifies those points along the continuum of one's
experience with tasks or situations that most critically involve the use of
intelligence. In particular, the account emphasizes the roles of novelty
(...) and of automatization (...) in intelligence. The third subtheory
relates intelligence to the external world of the individual, specifying
three classes of acts -- environmental adaptation, selection, and shaping --
that characterize intelligent behavior in the everyday world."
There is more detail in the cited article.
(Robert J. Sternberg is professor of Psychology at Yale University. See
also, his paper in Behavior and Flame Sciences (1980, 3, 573-584): "Sketch of
a componential subtheory of human intelligence." and his book (in press with
Cambridge Univ. Press): "Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human
intelligence.")
------------------------------
Date: Thu 26 Jan 84 14:11:55-CST
From: CS.BUCKLEY@UTEXAS-20.ARPA
Subject: Database Seminar
[Reprinted from the UTEXAS-20 bboard.]
4-5 Wed afternoon in Pai 5.60 [...]
Mail-From: CS.LEVINSON created at 23-Jan-84 15:47:25
I am developing a system which will serve as a self-organizing
knowledge base for an expert system. The knowledge base is currently
being developed to store and retrieve Organic Chemical reactions. As
the fundamental structures of the system are merely graphs and sets,
I am interested in finding other domains is which the system could be used.
Expert systems require a large amount of knowledge in order to perform
their tasks successfully. In order for knowledge to be useful for the
expert task it must be characterized accurately. Data characterization
is usually the responsibility of the system designer and the
consulting experts. It is my belief that the computer itself can be
used to help characterize and classify its knowledge. The system's
design is based on the assumption that the key to knowledge
characterization is pattern recognition.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 84 21:25:17 EST
From: MSIMS@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Machine Learning Seminar Talk by R. Banerji
[Reprinted from the RUTGERS bboard.]
MACHINE LEARNING SEMINAR
Speaker: Ranan Banerji
St. Joseph's University, Philadelphia, Pa. 19130
Subject: An explanation of 'The Induction of Theories from
Facts' and its relation to LEX and MARVIN
In Ehud Shapiro's Yale thesis work he presented a framework for
inductive inference in logic, called the incremental inductive
inference algorithm. His Model Inference System was able to infer
axiomatizations of concrete models from a small number of facts in a
practical amount of time. Dr. Banerji will relate Shapiro's work to
the kind of inductive work going on with the LEX project using the
version space concept of Tom Mitchell, and the positive focusing work
represented by Claude Sammut's MARVIN.
Date: Monday, January 30, 1984
Time: 2:00-3:30
Place: Hill 7th floor lounge (alcove)
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 84 1653 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI>
Subject: Talkware seminar Mon Feb 6, Tom Moran (PARC)
[Reprinted from the SU-SCORE bboard.]
Talkware Seminar (CS 377)
Date: Feb 6
Speaker: Thomas P. Moran, Xerox PARC
Topic: Command Language Systems, Conceptual Models, and Tasks
Time: 2:15-4
Place: 200-205
Perhaps the most important property for the usability of command language
systems is consistency. This notion usually refers to the internal
(self-) consistency of the language. But I would like to reorient the
notion of consistency to focus on the task domain for which the system
is designed. I will introduce a task analysis technique, called
External-Internal Task (ETIT) analysis. It is based on the idea that
tasks in the external world must be reformulated in to the internal
concepts of a computer system before the system can be used. The
analysis is in the form of a mapping between sets of external tasks and
internal tasks. The mapping can be either direct (in the form of rules)
or "mediated" by a conceptual model of how the system works. The direct
mapping shows how a user can appear to understand a system, yet have no
idea how it "really" works. Example analyses of several text editing
systems and, for contrast, copiers will be presented; and various
properties of the systems will be derived from the analysis. Further,
it is shown how this analysis can be used to assess the potential
transfer of knowledge from one system to another, i.e., how much knowing
one system helps with learning another. Exploration of this kind of
analysis is preliminary, and several issues will be raised for
discussion.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂02-Feb-84 0252 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Talk today at SRI by Tom Brown of Kestrel Institute
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 02:52:23 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 02:52:31-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 02:50:23-PST
Date: Wed 1 Feb 84 08:53:34-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Talk today at SRI by Tom Brown of Kestrel Institute
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Tom Brown, of Kestrel Institute, will give a talk at SRI, room
EL381, at 3 p.m. today (Wednesday, Feb. 1). The abstract of his talk
is given below.
The talk has two parts: (a) a completeness result for conditional
rewrites, with forward and backward chaining controlled by interpre-
tations (normally into finite structures, called exemplars), using
abstract properties of the unit (simplification-oriented equation)
rewrite component; and (b) a completeness argument for the unit
rewrite component. This will give more continuity with Jounnand's
last talk.
-------
∂02-Feb-84 1030 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Dietary Restrictions
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 10:27:51 PST
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 10:13:06-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Dietary Restrictions
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I forgot to put on your reply form
"are there any dietary restrictions or problems?"
please send info on-line.
Carolyn
-------
∂02-Feb-84 1252 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 12:51:53 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 12:50:17-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 12:39:32-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 12:40:25-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Thu 2 Feb 84 12:37:37-PST
Date: 2 Feb 1984 12:37:24-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: Roy.Maxion@CMU-CS-A at score, bboard@kestrel, card@parc-maxc at score, csli-friends@sri-ai at score,
dkanerva@sri-ai at score, farrell@parc-maxc at score, gascon@parc at score,
gsmith@sri-ai at score, halasz@parc-maxc at score, horaud@sri-ai at score,
jan, menlo70!ames-lm!al@Berkeley, menlo70!ames-lm!beau@Berkeley,
menlo70!ames-lm!ken@Berkeley, moran@parc-maxc at score, msgs, pentland@sri-ai at score,
pierre@sri-ai at score, prazdny@sri-kl at score, su-bboards@score, witkin@sri-kl at score
Subject: Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition
Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition (Psych 279)
WHO: Professor Amos Tversky
Psychology Department, Stanford University
WHEN: Monday February 6, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology) room 100
WHAT: Transparent and Opaque comparisons in judgment and choice
ABSTRACT
------------
Studies of judgment and choice reveal a set of phenomena that may be
described as cognitive illusions. These effects shed some light on the
heuristic principles that govern decision and inference, and challenge
traditional conceptions of rationality and coherenece.
-------
Our speakers for the next few weeks will be
Roger Shepard (February 13)
Hershel Liebowitz (February 20)
Richard Thompson (Feburary 27)
Announcements and abstracts will be posted.
∂02-Feb-84 1411 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA Philosophy Colloquium
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 14:10:51 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 14:01:47-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 13:59:03-PST
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 13:59:38-PST
From: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Philosophy Colloquium
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
The philosophy department colloquium next Friday, February 10,
may be of special interest to some of you. The speaker will be
Warren Goldfarb of Harvard; the title of the talk is "Russell's
Reason for Ramification."
The colloquium will be a 3:15 in the philosophy building, room
92Q. There'll be a small reception after the talk, and we may
go to dinner somewhere after the reception.
--John Etchemendy
-------
∂02-Feb-84 1606 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats friday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 16:06:24 PST
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 15:53:12-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: bats friday
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
i heard back from
Anderson
Patashnik
Malachi
Hershberger
Spencer
Feigenbaum
that they are going to bats in car pools. if anyone else wants a ride to
berkeley, please let me know by tonight so that we can wait at least one
car until everyone who's told me shows up.
meet at 8:15 a.m. in front of margaret jacks, friday 2/3.
joan
-------
∂02-Feb-84 2040 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Vladimir Lifschitz
University of Texas at El Paso
TITLE: Facts and Exceptions
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 8, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
Abstract:
In some applications of logic to AI, the language of predicate
calculus is used to represent general facts that may admit
exceptions. (A classical example: "Birds can fly"). It can
be difficult to list explicitily all exceptions in the formal
statement of the fact ("except for dead birds, ostriches, ...").
A few mechanisms for handling this problem have been proposed
based on the theory of nonmonotonic reasoning, including
Reiter's default case reasoning and McCarthy's circumscription.
The talk will discuss a new method which combines some ideas
of the approaches mentioned above. General facts that admit
excpetions are expressed with the aid of special predicate
symbols for being "exceptional", or "abnormal". The extent
of each of these special predicates is determined as follows:
As few objects as possible are assumed exceptional, under the
condition that the set of available facts remains consistent.
∂02-Feb-84 2051 @SRI-AI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Feb 84 20:51:19 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 20:51:09-PST
Date: 02 Feb 84 2040 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Vladimir Lifschitz
University of Texas at El Paso
TITLE: Facts and Exceptions
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 8, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
Abstract:
In some applications of logic to AI, the language of predicate
calculus is used to represent general facts that may admit
exceptions. (A classical example: "Birds can fly"). It can
be difficult to list explicitily all exceptions in the formal
statement of the fact ("except for dead birds, ostriches, ...").
A few mechanisms for handling this problem have been proposed
based on the theory of nonmonotonic reasoning, including
Reiter's default case reasoning and McCarthy's circumscription.
The talk will discuss a new method which combines some ideas
of the approaches mentioned above. General facts that admit
excpetions are expressed with the aid of special predicate
symbols for being "exceptional", or "abnormal". The extent
of each of these special predicates is determined as follows:
As few objects as possible are assumed exceptional, under the
condition that the set of available facts remains consistent.
∂03-Feb-84 0231 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #7
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 02:31:08 PST
Date: Thursday, February 2, 1984 10:56AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #7
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 3 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 7
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Arrays & Sets & Hashing,
& Searching,
LP Library - Addition
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 26-Jan-84 18:55:41-GMT
From: Bill (on ERCC DEC-10) <Clocksin%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Arrays
Readers of the Prolog Digest interested by Ken's announcement of
efficient array implementations in Prolog may care to inspect
Richard O'Keefe's similar implementation which has resided in
SCORE's Prolog Library for some considerable time.
Readers of Ken's announcement may have been misled into thinking
that only LM-Prolog offers strings implemented as packed byte
arrays. I can think of two others off hand, namely POPLOG (from
Sussex), and Prolog-X (from Cambridge (England)).
-- W F Clocksin
------------------------------
Date: Tue 31 Jan 84 18:02:08-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE>
Subject: LP Library
{SU-SCORE}SCORE:<Prolog>Expand.PL has been added to the Library.
Purpose: This utility performs simple macro expansion for Prolog.
Thanks to Richard O'Keefe.
-- ed
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 27-Jan-84 21:48:52-GMT
From: Prolog FHL (on ERCC DEC-10) <140000144%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Ken Forbus's Arrays
I've read his article a couple of times. If I understand it
correctly, when you think you've got an array, what you have is
a pointer to one of two sorts of things:
- a real Lisp-machine array
- a pair (list of changes, pointer to an "array")
where when you use the second sort of thing, you check if the
index is in the list of changes, and only look at the "base"
array if it's not there. That's a neat idea, which is almost
the exact opposite of the scheme used in the Prolog arrays
library package. In that, the old version is the base version,
and you have more overhead for updates, until a critical point
is reached and the whole array is copied. His approach, I think,
can only coded in the host language, as the change which has to
be undone by the trail entry is not just a variable binding.
ARRAYS.PL was constrained by the fact that the only reversible
change it could use was Prolog variable binding.
It looks as though you should be able to make several copies of
the same version of an array, and change them independently.
The trouble is that ONE of them wins and gets to use a "real"
array, while the others are reduced to using association lists.
So it isn't just ancestor references which are penalised by
updated, it is cousin references as well. So using his method,
one version of an array is cheap and all other versions are
dear, while using pure Prolog binary trees, every version is a
wee bit dearer than using arrays, but no version gets very dear.
And of course there is no reason why a binary tree can't be used
to implement multi dimensional arrays.
He says that using this representation of arrays, you can represent
strings "at least 8 times more densely than by using lists". The
only exception of course is DEC-10 Prolog, where a list cell *can*
cost you just one molecule, around 5 bytes. In most Prologs, a
list cell is around three pointers, say 12 bytes, so he is being
too kind. Using Lisp-Machine character arrays in LM-Prolog makes
a great deal of sense, as there are ever so many handy functions
lying around for doing interesting and useful things to these
objects. But this has nothing to do with mutability. Poplog
makes "strings" available to its Prolog component as primitive
objects, and Prolog-X and NIP have "boxes", one form of which
is a "string", again a linear sequence of 8-bit characters. There
is no reason why ANY Prolog compiler or interpreter can't suuport
strings as primitive values like integers, and there are excellent
reasons why strings should be immutable.. I would have thought
that strings would have been available as primitive (to Prolog)
values in LM-Prolog since the first version was shown to the second
person. I would also have expected that LM-Prolog would use Lisp
Machine lists to represent lists, so that a list cell there should
cost an average of 5 bytes, or does the way Prolog handles lists
remove the payoff from CDR-coding entirely ?
Anyway, here is a suggestion. The good thing about using lists to
represent strings in Prolog is that you can do pattern matching
using grammar rules. Now the grammar rule pre-processor in DEC-10
Prolog and C-Prolog turns e.g.
p --> [a].
into e.g.
p(S0, S) :- 'C'(S0, a, S).
where
'C'([H|T], H, T).
I may have the arguments of 'C' the wrong way around, but no
matter. If we add a second clause to 'C',
'C'(Index@String, C, Jndex@String) :-
succ(Index, Jndex), % 0 <= Index = -1+Jndex
1 =< Index, Index =< sizeof(String),
char←of(String, Index, C).
then we can write our grammar rules the same way irrespective of
whether they are to be used on lists or character arrays. Indeed,
in LM-Prolog, there should be a third clause for 'C' so that a
character position can be a position in a ZMACS buffer, and then
we could use Prolog grammar rules to define patterns for ZMACS
to search for or move over. How about it?
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 28-Jan-84 19:18:12-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe.R.A.%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: More on Sets and Hashing
MoRe: Sets and Hashing.
1. I forgot to mention two VERY important representations of
sets I use all the time.
(f) the union of two other sets
(g) the difference of two other sets
The two other sets can be represented any old how, and need not
have the same representation. It is not uncommon to design an
algorithm with 3 set variables: EveryThing, StillToDo, AlreadyDone.
What we want to do is transfer elements from StillToDo to AlreadyDone
*fast*, and to test *fast* whether StillToDo is empty. A useful
approach is to make StillToDo a list (perhaps an ordered list, what
setof returns is *ideal* for this sort of work), and to make
AlreadyDone some sort of binary tree. Then EveryThing is StillToDo
U AlreadyDone. This technique of designing a program using lots of
variables with exactly what you want in them, and then finding a
representation in terms of another set of variables where many
operations of interest are vacuous is one I got from some of
Dijkstra's papers.
2. I pointed out that comparison can be made cheap. I should also
have admitted that hashing can be made similarly cheap, at a cost of
one word per functor, holding the hash code of the functor. Of
course IF the garbage collector promises not to move functor blocks
then you can use the address, but that's a stupid thing for a garbage
collector to promise. (DEC-10 Prolog is the only Prolog system known
to me which currently has its own garbage collector, though Prolog-X
is getting one and NIP will have one before it is released. Poplog
and LM-Prolog have garbage collectors, but they inherit them from
their implementation languages. Though PopLog's garbage collector
has come to know a fair bit about Prolog.) You can use the address
in C-Prolog, because it hasn't got a garbage collector. Having an
extra word per functor would let the garbage collector collect
*everything*, and it would also give us some choice about what the
hash code for a functor was. We could let the hash code of the Nth
functor to be created be N, as in the AI package PEARL. We could
calculate it from the name of the symbol of the functor and the
arity of the functor, using any hashing function that takes our
fancy. (C-Prolog just adds up all the characters in the
name. I thought this was dreadful, and tested it and several other
string hashing functions on the entire C-Prolog system, and just
plain adding up the characters was the best method. Sigh.) Or
we could take the Nth element of a pseudorandom sequence as the
code of the Nth functor. Calculating the hash code from the name
might make it easier for the garbage collector to rebuild the symbol
table, and even change its size.
3. We can get around the necessity for terms to be ground before
they can reliably be hashed by specifying a level below which the
hasher is not to look. So the built-in hash function should look
like
term←hash(Term, Depth, NBuckets, HashCode)
returning a HashCode between 1 and NBuckets (since Prolog vectors
are indexed from 1). It should be an instantiation error if the
term has a variable at or above the given depth. Depth 0 would
just use the value of a number or the hash code associated with
a term's principal functor. The question which remains is "what
is a good way of calculating a hash code for a compound term
given the hash code of its principal functor and the sequence of
hash codes of its arguments"? I'm inclined to suggest
combined-hash([F,A1,...,An]) = F + A1/2 + ... + An/2↑n
which is pretty easy to calculate, but I haven't tried it yet.
The reason for making NBuckets a parameter of the hashing
function is to let the implementation use full-precision machine
arithmetic internally.
Does this seem worth having? If enough people say yes, it'll be
provided in C-Prolog v1.4d.EDAI.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 27-Jan-84 21:39:10-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe.R.A.%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Graph searching in Prolog (written for teaching)
Here is a set of three graph-searching programs written for
teaching purposes, and the 8-puzzle set up as an example for them to
solve. They really belong in some sort of directory, they are
[400,421,teach,search]puzzle
[400,421,teach,search]depth
[400,421,teach,search]breadt
[400,421,teach,search]guess on the DEC-10, and in
/usr/lib/prolog/search on the VAX here. Beware: they've only been
tested on the 8-puzzle, but they do work on that. Depth-first was
astonishingly difficult, I had a go, Peter Ross pointed out that the
result wasn't truly depth-first and came up with a modified version,
and I pointed out that *that* wasn't dpeth-first either, and came up
with the current version. It's so hard to be stupid!
Divide the body of this message at the @@@@@ lines
@@@@@@@@ PUZZLE @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ %
File : /usr/lib/prolog/search/eight←puzzle % Author : R.A.O'Keefe %
Updated: 12 December 1983 % Purpose: illustrate the searching methods
/* The illustration I have chosen is the well known 8-puzzle.
The state of the game is represented by a tuple of 9 labels,
1 to 8 representing the movable tiles and x representing an
empty square, together with an integer between 1 and 9 which
says where the empty square is. The operations are moving
the empty square u(p), d(own), l(left), or r(right). */
solution(5/b(
1,2,3,
8,x,4,
7,6,5) ).
starting←position(9/b(
1,2,3,
7,8,4,
6,5,x) ).
equivalent(X, X).
operator←applies(Operator, OldX/OldB, NewX/NewB) :-
operator←ok(Operator, OldX, NewX),
new←board(OldX, OldB, NewX, NewB).
operator←ok(u, OldX, NewX) :- OldX > 3, NewX is OldX-3.
operator←ok(d, OldX, NewX) :- OldX < 7, NewX is OldX+3.
operator←ok(l, OldX, NewX) :- OldX mod 3 =\= 1, NewX is OldX-1.
operator←ok(r, OldX, NewX) :- OldX mod 3 =\= 0, NewX is OldX+1.
% new←board(OldX, OldB, NewX, NewB) % creates a New Board which is
essentially the same as the Old Board, % except that the labels at the
Old and New X positions have been % swapped.
new←board(OldX, OldB, NewX, NewB) :-
functor(OldB, F, N),
functor(NewB, F, N),
arg(OldX, OldB, x),
arg(NewX, OldB, L), % L is a label 1..8
arg(OldX, NewB, L),
arg(NewX, NewB, x),
new←board(N, OldB, NewB).
new←board(0, ←, ←) :- !. new←board(N, OldB, NewB) :-
arg(N, NewB, Lab),
var(Lab),
!,
arg(N, OldB, Lab),
M is N-1,
new←board(M, OldB, NewB). new←board(N, OldB, NewB) :-
M is N-1,
new←board(M, OldB, NewB).
distance(X1/Board1, Distance) :-
solution(X2/Board2),
distance(9, Board1, Board2, 0, Distance).
distance(0, ←, ←, Distance, Distance) :- !. distance(N, Board1,
Board2, SoFar, Distance) :-
arg(N, Board1, Piece),
arg(N, Board2, Piece),
!,
M is N-1,
distance(M, Board1, Board2, SoFar, Distance). distance(N,
Board1, Board2, SoFar, Distance) :-
M is N-1,
Accum is SoFar+1,
distance(M, Board1, Board2, Accum, Distance).
@@@@@@@@ DEPTH @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ %
File : /usr/lib/prolog/search/depth←first % Author : R.A.O'Keefe %
Updated: 21 December 1983 % Purpose: define a schema for depth first
search
% This schema has four parameters: % starting←position(Start) % binds
Start to the first position to try % solution(Position) % tests
whether a Position is a solution or not % operator←applies(Operator,
OldPosition, NewPosition) % enumerates all the operators which apply
to the % OldPosition, and also gives the NewPosition which % results
from that operator application. % equivalent(Pos1, Pos2) % tests
whether the two positions are essentially % the same. The idea is
that we will only look at % a position once.
% depth←first←search(DepthBound, Position, OperatorList) % returns the
first solution it can find, and the list of % Operators which produced
it: [O1,...,On] means that % applying O1 to the start position, then
O2, then ... and % finally On produces Position. The number of
operators n % will not exceed DepthBound. You may omit DepthBound, in
% which case it is taken to be 10000 (chosen for portability). % The
eight-puzzle problem has a solution at depth 4, so 4 % is a good depth
to try. I have tried depths up to 8 and % got an answer in a
reasonable time.
depth←first←search(Position, History) :-
depth←first←search(10000, Position, History).
depth←first←search(DepthBound, Position, History) :-
starting←position(Start),
depth←first←search([d(DepthBound,Start,[])], [], Position,
History).
depth←first←search([d(←,Position,OpList)|←], ←, Position, OpList) :-
solution(Position),
!. % assuming you want only one
depth←first←search([d(←,Position,←)|Rest], Seen, Answer, History) :-
member(OldPos, Seen),
equivalent(OldPos, Position),
!,
depth←first←search(Rest, Seen, Answer, History).
depth←first←search([d(0,←,←)|Rest], Seen, Answer, History) :- !,
depth←first←search(Rest, Seen, Answer, History).
depth←first←search([d(Bound,Position,OpList)|Rest], Seen, Answer,
History) :-
findall(Op, NP↑operator←applies(Op, Position, NP), Ops),
% we can't use setof, because that fails when there is no such
Op
NewBound is Bound-1,
fill←out(Ops, NewBound, Position, OpList, Descendants),
append(Descendants, Rest, NewRest),
NewSeen = [Position|Seen],
!,
depth←first←search(NewRest, NewSeen, Answer, History).
fill←out([], ←, ←, ←, []) :- !. fill←out([Op|Ops], Bound, Position,
OpList, [d(Bound,NewPos,[Op|OpList])|Rest]) :-
operator←applies(Op, Position, NewPos), !,
fill←out(Ops, Bound, Position, OpList, Rest).
@@@@@@@@ BREADT @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ %
File : /usr/lib/prolog/search/breadth←first % Author : R.A.O'Keefe %
Updated: 21 December 1983 % Purpose: define a schema for breadth first
search
% This schema has four parameters: % starting←position(Start) % binds
Start to the first position to try % solution(Position) % tests
whether a Position is a solution or not % operator←applies(Operator,
OldPosition, NewPosition) % enumerates all the operators which apply
to the % OldPosition, and also gives the NewPosition which % results
from that operator application. % equivalent(Pos1, Pos2) % tests
whether the two positions are essentially % the same. The idea is
that we will only look at % a position once.
% breadth←first←search(Position, OperatorList) % returns the first
solution it can find, and the list of % Operators which produced it:
[O1,...,On] means that % applying O1 to the start position, then O2,
then ... and % finally On produces Position. There can be no shorter
% solution than this, though there may be other solutions % of the
same length.
breadth←first←search(Position, History) :-
starting←position(Start),
breadth←first←search([Start-[]], [Start], Position, History).
breadth←first←search([Position-OpList|Rest], Seen, Position, OpList)
:-
solution(Position),
!. % assuming you want only one
breadth←first←search([Position-OpList|Rest], Seen, Answer, History) :-
findall(Operator, new←position(Operator, Position, Seen),
Ops),
% we can't use setof, because that fails when there is no such
Op
fill←out(Ops, Position, OpList, Seen, NewSeen, Descendants),
append(Rest, Descendants, NewRest), !,
breadth←first←search(NewRest, NewSeen, Answer, History).
new←position(Operator, Position, Seen) :-
operator←applies(Operator, Position, NewPos),
\+ (
member(OldPos, Seen),
equivalent(OldPos, NewPos)
).
fill←out([], ←, ←, Seen, Seen, []) :- !. fill←out([Op|Ops], Position,
OpList, Seen, NewSeen, [NewPos-[Op|OpList]|New]) :-
operator←applies(Op, Position, NewPos), !,
fill←out(Ops, Position, OpList, [NewPos|Seen], NewSeen, New).
@@@@@@@@ GUESS @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ %
File : /usr/lib/prolog/search/guess←first % Author : R.A.O'Keefe %
Updated: 21 December 1983 % Purpose: define a schema for guess first
search
% This schema has five parameters: % starting←position(Start) % binds
Start to the first position to try % solution(Position) % tests
whether a Position is a solution or not % operator←applies(Operator,
OldPosition, NewPosition) % enumerates all the operators which apply
to the % OldPosition, and also gives the NewPosition which % results
from that operator application. % equivalent(Pos1, Pos2) % tests
whether the two positions are essentially % the same. The idea is
that we will only look at % a position once. % distance(Position,
Distance) % returns an estimate of how far the Position is % from a
solution. This is only used to rank the % descendants of a node, so
the actual values of % the estimate don't matter too much. See BEST %
for a method where the values *do* matter.
% guess←first←search(Position, OperatorList) % returns the first
solution it can find, and the list of % Operators which produced it:
[O1,...,On] means that % applying O1 to the start position, then O2,
then ... and % finally On produces Position.
guess←first←search(Position, History) :-
starting←position(Start),
guess←first←search([Start-[]], [Start], Position, History).
guess←first←search([Position-OpList|←], ←, Position, OpList) :-
solution(Position),
!. % assuming you want only one
guess←first←search([Position-OpList|Rest], Seen, Answer, History) :-
findall(Operator, new←position(Operator, Position, Seen),
Ops),
% we can't use setof, because that fails when there is no such
Op
fill←out(Ops, Position, OpList, Seen, NewSeen, Descendants),
rank(Descendants, ByOrderOfGuess),
append(ByOrderOfGuess, Rest, NewRest),
!,
guess←first←search(NewRest, NewSeen, Answer, History).
new←position(Operator, Position, Seen) :-
operator←applies(Operator, Position, NewPos),
\+ (
member(OldPos, Seen),
equivalent(OldPos, NewPos)
).
fill←out([], ←, ←, Seen, Seen, []) :- !. fill←out([Op|Ops], Position,
OpList, Seen, NewSeen,
[Distance-(NewPos-[Op|OpList])|New]) :-
operator←applies(Op, Position, NewPos),
distance(NewPos, Distance), !,
fill←out(Ops, Position, OpList, [NewPos|Seen], NewSeen, New).
rank(Keyed, Ranked) :-
keysort(Keyed, Sorted),
strip(Sorted, Ranked).
strip([], []) :- !. strip([←-H|T], [H|R]) :-
strip(T, R).
@@@@@@@@ -END- @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂03-Feb-84 0822 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 08:21:53 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 3 Feb 84 08:14:49-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 3 Feb 84 08:12:40-PST
Return-Path: <CLT@SU-AI>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Feb 84 20:51:09-PST
Date: 02 Feb 84 2040 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
ReSent-date: Fri 3 Feb 84 08:13:48-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
SPEAKER: Vladimir Lifschitz
University of Texas at El Paso
TITLE: Facts and Exceptions
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 8, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Faculty Lounge (383-N)
Abstract:
In some applications of logic to AI, the language of predicate
calculus is used to represent general facts that may admit
exceptions. (A classical example: "Birds can fly"). It can
be difficult to list explicitily all exceptions in the formal
statement of the fact ("except for dead birds, ostriches, ...").
A few mechanisms for handling this problem have been proposed
based on the theory of nonmonotonic reasoning, including
Reiter's default case reasoning and McCarthy's circumscription.
The talk will discuss a new method which combines some ideas
of the approaches mentioned above. General facts that admit
excpetions are expressed with the aid of special predicate
symbols for being "exceptional", or "abnormal". The extent
of each of these special predicates is determined as follows:
As few objects as possible are assumed exceptional, under the
condition that the set of available facts remains consistent.
∂03-Feb-84 0823 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Friday staff meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 08:23:23 PST
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 08:23:28-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Friday staff meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
As usual, the staff will be holding its meeting this morning from 8:30
to 10:00. If you need to get hold of us call 497-0628 and let it ring.
Emma Pease
-------
∂03-Feb-84 0830 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Dec 20
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 08:30:42 PST
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 08:30:37-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Dec 20
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
I have just verified that our own Dec 20 is up and running by
actually logging in! Of course it does not know much yet, but
it is learning fast. Congratulations to Eric and his staff!
Jon
-------
∂03-Feb-84 1141 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA McCarthy Lectures on the Formalization of Commonsense Knowledge
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 11:39:44 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 3 Feb 84 11:27:12-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 3 Feb 84 11:24:17-PST
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 11:23:57-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: McCarthy Lectures on the Formalization of Commonsense Knowledge
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
John McCarthy will give the remaining three lectures of his
series on the formalization of commonsense knowledge on the dates
given below. These lectures will be held at 3:00 p.m. on each
of those Fridays at the Ventura Hall Conference Room, Stanford
campus.
February 17 "The Circumscription Mode of Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
Applications of circumscription to formalizing commonsense facts.
Applicatio to the frame problem, the qualification problem, and
to the STRIPS assumption.
March 2 "Formalization of Knowledge and Belief"
Modal and first-order formalisms. Formalisms in which possible
worlds are explicit objects. Concepts and propositions as
objects in theories.
March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
-------
∂03-Feb-84 2358 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #12
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 23:57:46 PST
Date: Fri 3 Feb 1984 22:50-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #12
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 4 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Hardware - Lisp Machine Benchmark Request,
Machine Translation - Request,
Mathematics - Fermat's Last Theorem & Four Color Request,
Alert - AI Handbooks & Constraint Theory Book,
Expert Systems - Software Debugging Correction,
Course - PSU's Netwide AI Course,
Conferences - LISP Conference Deadline & Cybernetics Congress
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 84 16:37:00 cst
From: dyer@wisc-ai (Chuck Dyer)
Subject: Lisp Machines
Does anyone have any reliable benchmarks comparing Lisp
machines, including Symbolics, Dandelion, Dolphin, Dorado,
LMI, VAX 780, etc?
Other features for comparison are also of interest. In particular,
what capabilities are available for integrating a color display
(at least 8 bits/pixel)?
------------------------------
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 01:54:07-EST
From: Andrew Y. Chu <AYCHU@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: language translator
[Forwarded by SASW@MIT-ML.]
Hi, I am looking for some information on language translation
(No, not fortran->pascal, like english->french).
Does anyone in MIT works on this field? If not, anyone in other
schools? Someone from industry ? Commercial product ?
Pointer to articles, magazines, journals etc. will be greatly appreciated.
Please reply to aychu@mit-xx. I want this message to reach as
many people as possible, are there other bboards I can send to?
Thanx.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 84 09:48:48 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Fermat's Last Theorem
Fortunately (or unfortunately) puzzles like Fermat's Last Theorem, Goldbach's
conjecture, the 4-color theorem, and others are not in the same class as
the geometric trisection of an angle or the squaring of a circle. The former
class may be undecidable propositions (a la Goedel) and the latter are merely
impossible. Since one of the annoying things about undecidable propositions
is that it cannot be decided whether or not they are decidable, (Where are
you, Doug Hofstader, now that we need you?) people seriously interested in
these candidates for undecidablilty should not dismiss so-called theorem
provers like A. Arnold without looking at their work.
I have heard that the ugly computer proof(?) of the 4-color theorem that
appeared in Scientific American is incorrect, i.e. not a proof. I also
have heard that one G. Spencer-Brown has proved the 4-color theorem. I
do not know whether either of these things is true and it's bugging me!
Is the 4-color theorem undecidable or not?
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 84 19:48:36-PST (Mon)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!keller @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: AI Handbooks only .95
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5251
Several people here have joined "The Library of Computer and
Information Sciences Book Club" because they have an offer of the complete
AI Handbook set (3 vols) for $3.95 instead of the normal $100.00. I got mine
and they are the same production as non book club versions. You must buy
three more books during the comming year and it will probably be easy to
find ones that you want. Here's the details:
Send to: The Library of Computer and Information Sciences
Riverside NJ 08075
Copy of Ad:
Please accept my application for trial membership in the Library of Computer
and Information Sciences and send me the 3-volume HANDBOOK OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE (10079) billing me only $3.95. I agree to purchase at least
three additional Selections or Alternates over the next 12 months. Savings
may range up to 30% and occasionally even more. My membership is cancelable
any time after I buy these three books. A shipping and handling charge is
added to all shipments.
No-Risk Guarantee: If you are not satisfied--for any reason--you may return
the HANDBOOK OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE within 10 days and your membership
will be canceled and you will owe nothing.
Name ←←←←←←←←
Name of Firm ←←←← (if you want subscription to your office)
Address ←←←←←←←←←←←←←
City ←←←←←←←←
State ←←←←←←← Zip ←←←←←←
(Offer good in Continental U.S. and Canada only. Prices slightly higher in
Canada.)
Scientific American 8/83 7-BV8
-Shaun ...uiucdcs!uicsl!keller
[I have been a member for several years, and have found this club's
service satisfactory (and improving). The selection leans towards
data processing and networking, but there have been a fair number
of books on AI, graphics and vision, robotics, etc. After buying
several books you get enough bonus points for a very substantial
discount on a selection of books that you passed up when they were
first offered. I do get tired, though, of the monthly brochures that
use the phrase "For every computer professional, ..." in the blurb for
nearly every book. If you aren't interested in the AI Handbook,
find a current club member for a list of other books you can get
when you enroll. The current member will also get a book for signing
you up. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 84 19:55:24-PST (Tue)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!lipp @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Constraint Theory - (nf)
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5285
*********************BOOK ANNOUNCEMENT*******************************
CONSTRAINT THEORY
An Approach to Policy-Level
Modelling
by
Laurence D. Richards
The cybernetic concepts of variety, constraint, circularity, and
process provide the foundations for a theoretical framework for the
design of policy support systems. The theoretical framework consists
of a modelling language and a modelling mathematics. An approach to
building models for policy support sys- tems is detailed; two case
studies that demonstrate the approach are described. The modelling
approach focuses on the structure of mental models and the subjec-
tivity of knowledge. Consideration is given to ideas immanent in
second-order cybernetics, including paradox, self-reference, and
autonomy. Central themes of the book are "complexity", "negative
reasoning", and "robust" or "value-rich" policy.
424 pages; 23 tables; 56 illustrations
Hardback: ISBN 0-8191-3512-7 $28.75
Paperback:ISBN 0-8191-3513-5 $16.75
order from:
University Press of America
4720 Boston Way
Lanham, Maryland 20706 USA
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 84 0:25:20-PST (Sat)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!renner @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Expert systems for software debugging
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5217
Ehud Shapiro's error diagnosis system is not an expert system. It doesn't
depend on a heuristic approach at all. Shapiro tries to find the faulty part
of a bad program by executing part of the program, then asking an "oracle" to
decide if that part worked correctly. I am very impressed with Shapiro's
work, but it doesn't have anything to do with "expert knowledge."
Scott Renner
{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!renner
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 84 12:25:56-PST (Sat)
From: ihnp4!houxm!hocda!hou3c!burl!clyde!akgua!sb1!sb6!bpa!burdvax!psuvax!bobgian @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: PSU's Netwide AI course
Article-I.D.: psuvax.432
The PSU ("in person") component of the course has started up, but things
are a bit slow and confused regarding the "netwide" component.
For one thing, I am too busy finishing a thesis and teaching full-time to
handle the administrative duties, and we don't (yet, at least) have the
resources to hire others to do it.
For another, my plans presupposed a level of intellectual maturity and
drive that is VERY rare in Penn State students. I believe the BEST that
PSU can offer are in my course right now, but only 30 percent of them are
ready for what I wanted to do (and most of THEM are FACULTY!!).
I'm forced to backtrack and run a slightly more traditional "mini" course
to build a common foundation. That course essentially will read STRUCTURE
AND INTERPRETATION OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS by Hal Abelson and Gerry Sussman.
[This book was developed for the freshman CS course (6.001) at MIT and will
be published in April. It is now available as an MIT LCS tech report by
writing Abelson at 545 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA 02139.]
The "netwide" version of the course WILL continue in SOME (albeit perhaps
delayed) form. My "mini" course should take about 6 weeks. After that
the "AI and Mysticism" course can be restarted.
For now, I won't create net.ai.cse but rather will use net.ai for
occasional announcements. I'll also keep addresses of all who wrote
expressing interest (and lack of a USENET connection). Course
distributions will go (low volume) to that list and to net.ai until
things start to pick up. When it becomes necessary we will "fork off"
into a net.ai subgroup.
So keep the faith, all you excited people! This course is yet to be!!
Bob
Bob Giansiracusa (Dept of Computer Science, Penn State Univ, 814-865-9507)
UUCP: bobgian@psuvax.UUCP -or- allegra!psuvax!bobgian
Arpa: bobgian@PSUVAX1 -or- bobgian%psuvax1.bitnet@Berkeley
Bitnet: bobgian@PSUVAX1.BITNET CSnet: bobgian@penn-state.csnet
USnail: 333 Whitmore Lab, Penn State Univ, University Park, PA 16802
------------------------------
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 00:24:28-EST
From: STEELE%TARTAN@CMU-CS-C.ARPA
Subject: 1984 LISP Conference submissions deadline moved back
Because of delays that occurred in getting out the call for papers,
the deadline for submissions to the 1984 ACM Symposium on LISP and
Functional Programming (to be held August 5-8, 1984) has been moved
back from February 6 to February 15. The date for notification of
acceptance or rejection of papers is now March 20 (was March 12).
The date for return of camera-ready copy is now May 20 (was May 15).
Please forward this message to anyone who may find it of interest.
--Thanks,
Guy L. Steele Jr.
Program Chairman, 1984 ACM S. on L. and F.P.
Tartan Laboratories Incorporated
477 Melwood Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
(412)621-2210
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 84 19:54:56-PST (Tue)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!lipp @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Cybernetics Congress - (nf)
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5284
6th International Congress of the World Organisation
of General Systems and Cybernetics
10--14 September 1984
Paris, France
This transdisciplinary congress will present the contemporary aspects
of cybernetics and of systems, and examine their different currents.
The proposed topics include both methods and domains of cybernetics
and systems:
1) foundations, epistemology, analogy, modelisation, general methods
of systems, history of cybernetics and systems science ideas.
2) information, organisation, morphogenesis, self-reference, autonomy.
3) dynamic systems, complex systems, fuzzy systems.
4) physico-chemical systems.
5) technical systems: automatics, simulation, robotics, artificial
intelligence, learning.
6) biological systems: ontogenesis, physiology, systemic therapy,
neurocybernetics, ethology, ecology.
7) human and social systems: economics, development, anthropology,
management, education, planification.
For further information:
WOGSC
Comite de lecture
AFCET
156, Bld. Pereire
F 75017 Paris, France
Those who want to attend the congress are urged to register by writing
to AFCET, at the above address, as soon as possible.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂04-Feb-84 1034 YM Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
To: "@MTC.DIS[1,YM]"@SU-AI
∂03-Feb-84 1656 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 16:56:01 PST
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 16:54:35-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
To: su-bboards@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, "@<treitel>reason.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ym@SU-AI.ARPA, jk@SU-AI.ARPA, fwh@SU-AI.ARPA,
avg@SU-HNV.ARPA
This is a proposal to start up an informal seminar dedicated to computer-
assisted reasoning in the CS community at Stanford. By "reasoning" I mean to
include theorem-proving, proof checking, logic programming (up to a point) and
possibly various other AI-related activity such as knowledge base work -- the
scope of the seminar will be partly defined by the interest of the community.
Subject matter could include surveys of past work, reports on currently
implemented systems, descriptions of work in progress, suggestions of work to
be done, or out-and-out polemics (leading to general discussion sessions).
Please tell me whether you would be interested in such a seminar, and if so,
what kind of times would [not] be suitable, and whether you expect to want to
speak. Listeners, especially "younger" students, are of course also welcome.
I don't intend to duplicate Allen Van Gelder's Prolog class, or anything else
now being offered at Stanford. The idea is merely to encourage interchange of
ideas among [some of] the people here who have a stake in automated reasoning.
If anyone thinks there is a risk of duplication or overlap, please tell me.
Initially I would expect to schedule the seminar every two weeks, unless we are
very well off for speakers!
- Richard Treitel
TREITEL@SUMEX
-------
∂04-Feb-84 1318 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA Foundations Seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 4 Feb 84 13:14:56 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 4 Feb 84 13:04:43-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 4 Feb 84 13:02:27-PST
Date: Sat 4 Feb 84 13:02:46-PST
From: John Perry <JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Foundations Seminar
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA, bratman@SRI-AI.ARPA, etchemendy@SRI-AI.ARPA,
jrp@SRI-AI.ARPA, bmoore@SRI-AI.ARPA
Here is the plan for the Foundation Seminar for the next couple of
weeks.
The seminar meets Thursday at 10 at Ventura.
Thursday the 9th. Shakey film
Discussion of STRIPS and its relations to philosophical
issues led by Perry.
Distribute for future discussion:
Moore, "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action"
Bratman, "Taking Plans Seriously"
Thursday the 16th Bob Moore discusses "A Formal Theory..."
Thursday the 23rd Discussion of Moore's paper and presentation led
by John Etchemendy.
Thursday March 1 Discussion of Bratman's paper led by Stan Rosenschein.
-------
∂05-Feb-84 0007 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #13
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 5 Feb 84 00:07:15 PST
Date: Sat 4 Feb 1984 23:06-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #13
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 5 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 13
Today's Topics:
Brain Theory - Parallelism,
Seminars - Neural Networks & Automatic Programming
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 84 09:15:02 EST (Tue)
From: Dana S. Nau <dsn%umcp-cs@CSNet-Relay>
Subject: parallel processing in the brain
From: Rene Bach <BACH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
What are the evidences that the brain is a parallel processor? My own
introspection seem to indicate that mine is doing time-sharing. That is
I can follow only one idea at a time, but with a lot of switching
between reasoning paths (often more non directed than controlled
switching).
Does that mean you hold your breath and stop thinking while you're
walking, and stop walking in order to breathe or think?
More pointedly, I think it's incorrect to consider only
consciously-controlled processes when we talk about whether or not
the brain is doing parallel processing. Perhaps the conscious part
of your mind can keep track of only one thing at a time, but most
(probably >90%) of the processing done by the brain is subconscious.
For example, most of us have to think a LOT about what we're doing
when we're first learning to drive. But after a while, it becomes
largely automatic, and the conscious part of our mind is freed to
think about other things while we're driving.
As another example, have you ever had the experience of trying
unsuccessfully to remember something, and later remembering
whatever-it-was while you were thinking about something else?
SOME kind of processing was going on in the interim, or you
wouldn't have remembered whatever-it-was.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 84 20:18:33-PST (Mon)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!parsec!ctvax!uokvax!andree @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: intelligence and genius - (nf)
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5259
Sorry, js@psuvax, but I DO know something about what I spoke, even if I do
have trouble typing.
I am aware that theorom-proving machines are impossible. It's also fairly
obvious that they would use lots of time and space.
However, I didn't even MENTION them. I talked about two flavors of machine.
One generated well-formed strings, and the other said whether they were
true or not. I didn't say either machine proved them. My point was that the
second of these machines is also impossible, and is closely related to
Jerry's genius finding machines. [I assume that any statement containing
genius is true.]
Down with replying without reading!
<mike
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 84 13:54:21 PST
From: Richard Foy <foy@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Brain Processing
The Feb Scientific American has an article entitled "The
Skill of Typing" which can help one to form insights into
mechanisms of the brains processing.
richard
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 84 08:24:35 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #10
Re: Parallel Processing in the Brain
There are several instances of people experiencing what can most easily
be explained as "tasking" in the brain. (an essay by Henri Poincare in "The
World of Mathematics", "The Seamless Web" by Stanley Burnshaw) It appears
that the conscious mind is rather clumsy at creative work and in large measure
assigns tasks (in parallel) to the subconscious mind which operates in the
background. When the background task is finished, an interrupt is generated
and the conscious mind becomes aware of the solution without knowing how the
problem was solved.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 10:17:08-PST
From: Kenji Sugiyama <SUGIYAMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Parallel brain?
I had a strange experience when I had practiced abacus in Japan.
An abacus is used for adding, subtracting, multipling, and dividing
numbers. The practice consisted of a set of calculations in a definite
amount of time, say, 15 minutes. During that time, I began to think
of something other than the problem at hand. Then I noticed that
fact ("Aha, I thought of this and that!"), and grinned at myself in
my mind. In spite of these detours, I continued my calculations without
an interruption. This kind of experience repeated several times.
It seems to me that my brain might be parallel, at least, in simple tasks.
------------------------------
Date: 2 Feb 1984 8:16-PST
From: fc%USC-CSE@ECLA.ECLnet
Subject: Re: AIList Digest V2 #10
parallelism in the brain:
Can you walk and chew gum at the same time?
Fred
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 84 15:06:09 PST
From: Philip Kahn <kahn@UCLA-CS>
Subject: The brain is parallel, yet data flow can be serial...
In response to Rene Bach's question whether "the brain is a parallel
processor." There is no other response other than an emphatic YES! The
brain is comprised of about 10E9 neurons. Each one of those neurons is
making locally autonomous calculations; it's hard to get more parallel than
that! The lower brain functions (e.g., sensory preprocessing, lower motor
control, etc.) are highly distributed and locally autonomous processors (i.e.,
pure parallel data flow). At the higher thought processing levels, however,
it has been shown (can't cite anything, but I can get sources if someone
wants me to dig them out) that logic tends to run in a serial fashion.
That is, the brain is parallel (a hardware structure), yet higher logic
processes apply the timing of thought in a serial nature (a "software"
structure).
It is generally agreed that the brain is an associational
machine; it processes based upon the timing of diffuse stimuli and the
resulting changes in the "action potential" of its member neurons.
"Context" helps to define the strength and structure of those associational
links. Higher thinking is generally a cognitive process where the context
of situations is manipulated. Changing context (and some associational
links) will often result in a "conclusion" significantly different than
previously arrived upon. Higher thought may be thought as a three process
cycle: decision (evaluation of an associational network), reasonability
testing (i.e., is the present decision using a new "context" no different
from the decision arrived upon utilizing the previous "context"?), and
context alteration (i.e., "if my 'decision' is not 'reasonable' what
'contextual association' may be omitted or in error?"). This cycle is
continued until the second step -- 'reasonability testing' -- has concluded
that the result of this 'thinking' process is at least plausible. Although the
implementation (assuming the trichotomy is correct) in the brain is
via parallel neural structures, the movement of information through those
structures is serial in nature. An interesting note on the above trichotomy;
note what occurs when the input to the associational network is changed.
If the new input is not consistent with the previously existing 'context'
then the 'reasonability tester' will cause an automatic readjustment of
the 'context'.
Needless to say, this is not a rigorously proven theory of mine,
but I feel it is quite plausible and that there are profuse psychophysical
and phychological studies that reinforce the above model. As of now, I
use it as a general guiding light in my work with vision systems, but it
seems equally appplicable to general AI.
Philip Kahn
KAHN@UCLA-CS.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 02/01/84 16:09:21
From: STORY at MIT-MC
Re: Neural networks
[Forwarded by SASW@MIT-ML.]
DATE: Friday, February 3, 1984
TITLE: "NEURAL NETWORKS: A DISCUSSION OF VARIOUS MATHEMATICAL MODELS"
SPEAKER: Margaret Lepley, MIT
Neural networks are of interest to researchers in artificial intelligence,
neurobiology, and even statistical mechanics. Because of their random parallel
structure it is difficult to study the transient behavior of the networks. We
will discuss various mathematical models for neural networks and show how the
behaviors of these models differ. In particular we will investigate
asynchronous vs. synchronous models with undirected vs. directed edges of
various weights.
HOST: Professor Silvio Micali
------------------------------
Date: 01 Feb 84 1832 PST
From: Rod Brooks <ROD@SU-AI>
Subject: Feb 7th CSD Colloquium - Stanford
[Reprinted from the SU-SCORE bboard.]
A Perspective on Automatic Programming
David R. Barstow
Schlumberger-Doll Research
4:30pm, Terman Aud., Tues Feb 7th
Most work in automatic programming has focused primarily on the roles of
deduction and programming knowledge. However, the role played by knowledge
of the task domain seems to be at least as important, both for the usability
of an automatic programming system and for the feasibility of building one
which works on non-trivial problems. This perspective has evolved during
the course of a variety of studies over the last several years, including
detailed examination of existing software for a particular domain
(quantitaive interpretation of oil well logs) and the implementation
of an experimental automatic programming system for that domain. The
importance of domain knowledge has two importatnt implications: a primary goal
of automatic programming research should be to characterize the programming
process for specific domains; and a crucial issue to be addressed
in these characterizations is the interaction of domain and programming
knowledge during program synthesis.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂05-Feb-84 0959 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Foundations planning meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 5 Feb 84 09:59:02 PST
Date: Sun 5 Feb 84 09:59:29-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Foundations planning meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: wunderman@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear area D (or F) folks:
We need to have a meeting soon to plan our budget and
activities, both for the remainder of this year, but
even more so for next year. I would like to do this
Friday afternoon. IN preparation, would those of you
who consider yourselves at least 50% in Foundations
let me know any time that you absolutely cannot come.
Would all of you who expect to be supported in part
from Foundations funds let me know the amount and fraction.
Would you also send me any ideas you have for visitors,
workshops, meetings, etc., in advance, so that I can
compile them and send them around for thought. One of
the things we must think about is the trade-off between
senior visitors and postdocs. The postdoc applications
are due Feb 15, and we should be ready to move. The postdoc
committee will do a preliminary screening, but it will be
up to us to make the final selection, taking into account
everything else we are doing.
Jon
-------
∂06-Feb-84 0217 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #8
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 02:17:35 PST
Date: Sunday, February 5, 1984 2:17AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #8
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 6 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 8
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Natural Language and Logic Programming,
& 1984 LISP Conference
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 20:35:47-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: Natural Language and Logic Programming
Call for Papers
International Workshop On
Natural Lanugage Understanding
and Logic Programming
Rennes, France - September 18-20, 1984
The workshop will consider fundamental principles and important
innovations in the design, definition, uses and extensions of logic
programming for natural language understanding and, conversely, the
adequacy of logic programming to express natural language grammar
formalisms. The topics of interest are:
* Formal representations of natural language
* Logic grammar formalisms
* Linguistic aspects (anaphora, coordination,...)
* Analysis methods
* Natural language generation
* Uses of techniques for logic grammars (unification)
in other grammar formalisms
* Compilers and interpreters for grammar formalisms
* Text comprehension
* Applications: natural-language front ends (database
interrogation, dialogues with expert systems...)
Conference Chairperson
Veronica Dahl Simon Fraser University,
Burnaby B.C. V5A 1S6
Canada
Program Committee
H. Abrahamson (UBC, Canada) F. Pereira (SRI, USA)
A. Colmerauer (GIA, France) L. Pereira (UNL, Portugal)
V. Dahl (Simon Fraser U., Canada) P. Sabatier (CNRS, France)
P. Deransart (INRIA, France) P. Saint-Dizier (IRISA, France)
M. Gross (LADL, France) C. Sedogbo (Bull, France)
M. McCord (IBM, USA)
Sponsored by: IRISA, Groupe BULL, INRIA
Deadlines:
April 15: Submission of papers in final form
June 10: Notification of acceptance to authors
July 10: Registration in the Workshop
Submission of papers:
Papers should contain the following items: abstract and title of
paper, author name, country, affiliation, mailing address and
phone (or telex) number, one program area and the following
signed statement: ``The paper will be presented at the Workshop
by one of the authors''.
Summaries should explain what is new or interesting abount
the work and what has been accomplished. Papers must report
recent and not yet published work.
Please send 7 copies of a 5 to 10 page single spaced manuscript,
including a 150 to 200 word abstract to:
-- Patrick Saint-Dizier
Local Organizing Committee
IRISA - Campus de Beaulieu
F-35042 Rennes CEDEX - France
Tel: (99)362000 Telex: 950473 F
------------------------------
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 00:24:28-EST
From: Steele%Tartan@CMU-CS-C
Subject: 1984 LISP Conference submissions deadline moved back
Because of delays that occurred in getting out the call for papers,
the deadline for submissions to the 1984 ACM Symposium on LISP and
Functional Programming (to be held August 5-8, 1984) has been moved
back from February 6 to February 15. The date for notification of
acceptance or rejection of papers is now March 20 (was March 12).
The date for return of camera-ready copy is now May 20 (was May 15).
Please forward this message to anyone who may find it of interest.
Thanks,
-- Guy L. Steele Jr.
Program Chairman, 1984 ACM S. on L. and F.P.
Tartan Laboratories Incorporated
477 Melwood Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
(412) 621-2210
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂06-Feb-84 0852 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 08:51:59 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 08:42:26-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 08:40:16-PST
Return-Path: <YM@SU-AI>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 4 Feb 84 10:39:19-PST
Date: 04 Feb 84 1034 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
To: "@MTC.DIS[1,YM]"@SU-AI
ReSent-date: Mon 6 Feb 84 08:41:03-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
∂03-Feb-84 1656 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 3 Feb 84 16:56:01 PST
Date: Fri 3 Feb 84 16:54:35-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic reasoning: proposed seminar
To: su-bboards@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, "@<treitel>reason.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ym@SU-AI.ARPA, jk@SU-AI.ARPA, fwh@SU-AI.ARPA,
avg@SU-HNV.ARPA
This is a proposal to start up an informal seminar dedicated to computer-
assisted reasoning in the CS community at Stanford. By "reasoning" I mean to
include theorem-proving, proof checking, logic programming (up to a point) and
possibly various other AI-related activity such as knowledge base work -- the
scope of the seminar will be partly defined by the interest of the community.
Subject matter could include surveys of past work, reports on currently
implemented systems, descriptions of work in progress, suggestions of work to
be done, or out-and-out polemics (leading to general discussion sessions).
Please tell me whether you would be interested in such a seminar, and if so,
what kind of times would [not] be suitable, and whether you expect to want to
speak. Listeners, especially "younger" students, are of course also welcome.
I don't intend to duplicate Allen Van Gelder's Prolog class, or anything else
now being offered at Stanford. The idea is merely to encourage interchange of
ideas among [some of] the people here who have a stake in automated reasoning.
If anyone thinks there is a risk of duplication or overlap, please tell me.
Initially I would expect to schedule the seminar every two weeks, unless we are
very well off for speakers!
- Richard Treitel
TREITEL@SUMEX
-------
∂06-Feb-84 1122 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA agenda
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 11:22:08 PST
Date: Mon 6 Feb 84 11:21:06-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: agenda
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
Please let me know if you have any agenda items for Tuesday.
We meet at 12:15 for lunch in MJH 252, adjourn at 1:15 and reconvene
at 2:30. See you then. GENE
-------
∂06-Feb-84 1128 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA No lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 11:28:48 PST
Date: Mon 6 Feb 84 11:23:27-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: No lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
There'll be no general faculty lunch on Tuesday, Feb 7.
GENE
-------
∂06-Feb-84 1454 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Provost's lecture series
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 14:52:40 PST
Date: Mon 6 Feb 84 14:51:49-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Provost's lecture series
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
John Perry will be speaking today (Feb. 6) at Jordan Hall (in the
main Quad) on the Center for the Study of Language and Information.
time: 4:00
place: Jordan Hall (Bldg. 420)
All welcome.
-------
∂06-Feb-84 1551 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:LAURI@SRI-AI.ARPA Talk by Ken Church
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 15:51:41 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 15:41:56-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 15:39:52-PST
Date: Mon 6 Feb 84 15:40:09-PST
From: Lauri Karttunen <Lauri@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Talk by Ken Church
To: CSLI-FRIENDS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dr. Kenneth W. Church from Bell Labs will talk on "An Assortment of
Applications of Finite State Methods in Computational Phonology"
The topics discussed include the following:
- coping with contextual constraints in speech recognition,
- grep-like searching of large lexicons for crucial cases,
- abstracting the syntax of Kimmo Koskenniemi's morphology
machine.
Place: the seminar room in Ventura Hall
Time: 1:00 pm, Wednesday, Feb. 8
-------
∂06-Feb-84 1716 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 17:16:38 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 17:09:04-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 17:07:05-PST
Date: 6 Feb 1984 1707-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
cc: grosz, almog
Tomorrow, Tuesday, at 3.15 pm, our speaker is Pat Suppes.
Next week and the week after, Scott Soames, visiting from Princeton,
will be giving two sessions on presuppositions & discourse.
I tach Suppes' abstract.
Pat Suppes
DISCOURSE WITH THE COMPUTER: TWO EXAMPLES
The interactive character of good computer discourse is exemplified
in two case studies. One concerns recent work on natural language
instructable robots. This work is very much at an experimental stage.
The second case study is of the interactive theorem prover that has been used
in teaching axiomatic set theory for a number of years. Various strengths
and weaknesses of these examples will be discussed.
-------
-------
-------
∂06-Feb-84 2051 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ullman@diablo oops.
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 20:51:23 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Feb 84 20:46:44-PST
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 84 20:46 PST
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: oops.
To: super@score
I wasn't reading my own schedule too carefully, and I find that
I never founda speaker for Feb. 23. Anybody out there volunteer
or have any suggestions?
∂06-Feb-84 2056 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA next meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 6 Feb 84 20:56:05 PST
Date: Mon 6 Feb 84 20:52:13-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: next meeting
To: CS440: ;
This Thursday, the speaker is Les Goldschlager speaking on parallel
algorithms.
Because of the forum reception, we are going to meet at 4PM, instead
of 4:15, and we are also meeting in a different room: 200-34 (History corner).
-------
∂07-Feb-84 0805 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA letter re software royalty policy
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 7 Feb 84 08:05:43 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 08:04:44-PST
Date: Tue 7 Feb 84 08:05:34-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: letter re software royalty policy
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
To: Patricia L. Devaney, Associate Dean for Research and Grad. Studies
From Edward A. Feigenbaum, Professor of Computer Science
Subject: Policy on Royalties from Software
Dear Pat,
In the New York Times of Febuary 7,1984, the following appears
(p.22):
"In September, Stanford abandoned its policy of requiring assignment
of copyrights to the university if it put any significant resources
into its creation. 'We now recognize that computers are part of the
academic environment,' said Patricia Devaney, associate dean of
graduate studies and research.'"
I understand how easily reporters get things wrong. We in the
Computer Science Department, who tend to be software producers and
hence have a particular interest in this policy, would appreciate
clarification of the statement in the Times and a statement of
current policy.
Sincerely,
Ed
-------
∂07-Feb-84 0830 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Re: No lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 7 Feb 84 08:30:43 PST
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 08:29:43-PST
Date: Tue 7 Feb 84 08:29:31-PST
From: Gail Stein <OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: No lunch
To: GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Mon 6 Feb 84 11:30:06-PST
I am trying to get GBD to attend. However he has a class from 10:30 - 12:30, a seminar from 1:15 - 3:00 and an O.R. search committee meeting at 3:00. I will try to get him to attend the meeting.
Gail
-------
∂07-Feb-84 0937 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Stanford Linguistics Colloquium on 7 Feb.
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 7 Feb 84 09:37:36 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 09:28:10-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 09:25:27-PST
Date: Tue 31 Jan 84 14:53:04-PST
From: Bill Croft <CROFT@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Stanford Linguistics Colloquium on 7 Feb.
To: dkanerva
cc: croft
ReSent-date: Tue 7 Feb 84 09:27:04-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
STANFORD LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM
R. M. W. DIXON
Australian National University/UC Santa Cruz
The Semantic Basis of Synntactic Categories:
English and Dyirbal Verbs
Tuesday, Feb. 7, 3:15 p.m.
200-303 (History Corner), Stanford
Refreshments will be served after the talk at the Linguistics
Department Reading Room, Bldg. 100 on the Inner Quad.
-------
∂07-Feb-84 1549 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Issues in Perception, Cognition, and Language. February 13
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 7 Feb 84 15:49:36 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 15:41:58-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 15:35:50-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 15:36:55-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Tue 7 Feb 84 15:32:25-PST
Date: 7 Feb 1984 15:31:39-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: Roy.Maxion@CMU-CS-A at score, bboard@kestrel, card@parc-maxc at score, csli-friends@sri-ai at score,
dkanerva@sri-ai at score, farrell@parc-maxc at score, gascon@parc at score,
gsmith@sri-ai at score, halasz@parc-maxc at score, horaud@sri-ai at score,
jan, menlo70!ames-lm!al@Berkeley, menlo70!ames-lm!beau@Berkeley,
menlo70!ames-lm!ken@Berkeley, moran@parc-maxc at score, msgs, pentland@sri-ai at score,
pierre@sri-ai at score, prazdny@sri-kl at score, su-bboards@score, witkin@sri-kl at score
Subject: Issues in Perception, Cognition, and Language. February 13
Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition (Psych 279)
WHO: Professor Roger Shepard
Psychology Department, Stanford University
WHEN: Monday February 13, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology) room 100
WHAT: Intimations of a Mental Mechanics
ABSTRACT
------------
I plan briefly to sketch out the ideas (i) that there may after all be
general laws governing mental function, and (ii) that these have evolved as
internal reflections of general laws governing the external world. As a
concrete illustration, I will then attempt to show how phenomena of
apparent motion, which we have been investigating in the laboratory, are
reflections of the simplest motions of objects in three-dimensional space.
-------
The next few speakers will be
Hershel Liebowitz (February 20)
Richard Thompson (Feburary 27)
Phil Cohen (March 5)
John Barwise (March 12)
Further announcements and abstracts will be posted.
∂07-Feb-84 1736 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 7 Feb 84 17:36:18 PST
Date: Tue 7 Feb 84 17:34:39-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next meeting
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
cc: Bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The next senior faculty meeting will be on Thursday, Feb 23 at noon #.
Note this is not the date we originally discussed. GENE
-------
∂07-Feb-84 1739 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI Reminder: next AFLB talks (and no talks)
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 7 Feb 84 17:39:38 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 7 Feb 84 17:35:18-PST
Date: 07 Feb 84 1735 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: Reminder: next AFLB talks (and no talks)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE
N E X T A F L B T A L K
Forum talks of possible interest on WEDNESDAY 8-Feb in CERAS Rm. 112:
9:35am
Prof. Manolis Katevenis:
Balancing Complexity and Simplicity in VLSI Design
10:45am
Richard Anderson:
Parallel Computation
11:15am
Ken Clarkson:
Fast Algorithms for the All Nearest Neighbors Problem
2/9/84 - No AFLB - Enjoy the Stanford Computer Forum
2/16/84 - Dr. Eli Upfal (U.C. Berkeley)
A probabilistic relation between desirable and feasible models
of parallel computation
We present a powerful probabilistic technique for simulating strong
models of synchronized parallel computation by weaker ones. In
particular, our technique eliminates the use of shared variables
without significant increase in the program run-time. The technique
is demonstrated by an algorithm simulating an n processors PRAM with
an arbitrary large shared memory by an n processor ULRTACOMPUTER - a
set of n processors communication through a bounded degree network.
We prove that if a program required t PRAM steps than our simulation
algorithm executes it on the ULTRACOMPUTER within O(t log**2 n )
steps with overwhelming probability.
******** Time and place: Feb. 16, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
∂08-Feb-84 1331 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Edinburgh
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 8 Feb 84 13:31:10 PST
Date: Wed 8 Feb 84 10:10:35-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Edinburgh
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
Brian Smith and I will be going to Edinbugh for 10 days, starting
February 16, to build up connections with the C.S. group there, as
well as with the School of Epsitemics. Let meknow if you would like
to send any (light) messages to people there.
Jon
-------
∂08-Feb-84 2243 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 18, February 9, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 8 Feb 84 22:42:48 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 8 Feb 84 22:40:15-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 8 Feb 84 17:28:38-PST
Date: Wed 8 Feb 84 17:28:07-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 18, February 9, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
CSLI Newsletter
February 9, 1984 * * * Number 18
A weekly publication of
The Center for the Study of Language and Information
Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
-----------
SCHEDULE OF CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *THIS* THURSDAY, February 9, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Shakey film.
Conference Room Discussion of STRIPS and its relations
to philosophical issues, led by John Perry.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Introduction to Parsing Volume"
Conference Room by Arnold Zwicky.
Discussion led by Jane Robinson.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Lecture on topics from Situations in
Room G-19 Discourse (SID), by Jon Barwise.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Some Problems of Historical Linguistic
Room G-19 Classification and Some Results"
by Joseph Greenberg, Stanford Linguistics.
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Bob Moore, SRI, discusses his paper,
Conference Room "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action."
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Syntactic Structure and Social Function
Conference Room of Codeswitching," by Shana Poplack.
Discussion led by John Rickford.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Robin Cooper, U. Wisconsin, speaking on
Room G-19 ELIUSS (English Language Illustration
of Unification Situation Semantics)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
*JORDAN HALL* "Mixups and Misreadings"
*Room 040* by Hugh Kenner, Johns Hopkins University
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
SEMINAR ON FOUNDATIONS OF SITUATED LANGUAGE
Bob Moore, John Perry, Stan Rosenschein
Thursdays, 10:00 a.m., Ventura Hall Seminar Room
February 9 Shakey film
Discussion of STRIPS and its relations to philosophical
issues led by Perry.
Distribute for future discussion:
Moore, "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action"
Bratman, "Taking Plans Seriously"
February 16 Bob Moore discusses "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action."
February 23 Discussion of Moore's paper and presentation
led by John Etchemendy.
March 1 Discussion of Bratman's paper led by Stan Rosenschein.
-----------
SEMINAR ON SEMANTICS OF NATURAL LANGUAGE
Jon Barwise
Thursdays, 2:15 p.m., Redwood Hall, Room G-19
February 9 Jon Barwise, Topics from Situations in Discourse (SID)
(Not in S&A but develops ideas in Chapter 11)
Then will follow five lectures discussing the interaction of
situation semantics and other topics, as follows:
February 16 Robin Cooper on ELIUSS (English Language Illustration of
Unification Situation Semantics)
February 23 Per-Kristian Halvorsen, topic to be announced
March 1 Stanley Peters, topic to be announced
March 8 Richard Larsen, topic to be announced
March 15 Elisabet Engdahl, topic to be announced
March 22 Barbara Grosz, Topics in discourse and Situation Semantics
References:
[S&A] Situations and Attitudes, by Barwise and Perry, MIT Press, 1983
Some reprints and lecture notes will also be distributed, the
latter usually after the fact. It is planned that guest speakers will
distribute notes in advance of the fact.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday at Ventura Hall, on the Stanford
University campus, as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of TINLunch
papers are available at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
NEXT WEEK: "Syntactic Structure and Social Function of Codeswitching"
by Shana Poplack
February 9 Jane Robinson
February 16 John Rickford (Guest of Stan Rosenschein)
February 23 Ivan Sag
March 1 Stuart Shieber
March 8 Brian Smith
March 15 Mark Stickel
March 22 Susan Stucky
March 29 Patrick Suppes
-----------
CSLI COLLOQUIUM
WHEN: 4:15 p.m., Thursday, February 16
WHERE: *JORDAN HALL, Room 040*
SPEAKER: Hugh Kenner, Johns Hopkins University
TITLE: "Mixups and Misreadings"
Well known in the fields of English and comparative literature,
Hugh Kenner is the Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities at
Johns Hopkins University. To the book "The State of the Language" he
contributed an article entitled "Machinespeak" about the mutual
influence among computers, language, and society. His books include
"The Pound Era" (1971), "The Stoic Comedians" (1975), "Geodesic Math
and How to Use It" (1976), and "Joyce's Voices" (1978).
-----------
OSAMU FUJIMURA TO VISIT
Osamu Fujimura will be in Palo Alto at the beginning of the week
of February 13 and will give a lecture entitled "Transparency of the
Phonetic Component in Linguistic Description: Implications of
Articulatory Studies" on Monday, February 13, or early on Tuesday,
February 14th. The exact time and place will be announced later.
- Stanley Peters
-----------
PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT COLLOQUIUM
WHEN: 3:15 p.m., Friday, February 10
WHERE: Philosophy Department, Room 92Q
SPEAKER: Warren Goldfarb, Harvard University
TITLE: "Russell's Reason for Ramification"
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
MCCARTHY LECTURES ON THE FORMALIZATION OF COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE
John McCarthy will give the remaining three lectures of his
series on the formalization of commonsense knowledge on the dates
given below. These lectures will be held at 3:00 p.m. on each of
those Fridays at the Ventura Hall Conference Room, Stanford campus.
Friday, Feb. 17 "The Circumscription Mode of Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
Applications of circumscription to formalizing commonsense facts.
Applicatio to the frame problem, the qualification problem, and
to the STRIPS assumption.
Friday, March 2 "Formalization of Knowledge and Belief"
Modal and first-order formalisms. Formalisms in which possible
worlds are explicit objects. Concepts and propositions as
objects in theories.
Friday, March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
-----------
ISSUES IN PERCEPTION, LANGUAGE, AND COGNITION (PSYCH 279)
WHO: Professor Roger Shepard
Psychology Department, Stanford University
WHAT: Intimations of a Mental Mechanics
WHEN: Monday, February 13, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology), room 100
ABSTRACT:
I plan briefly to sketch out the ideas (i) that there may after all be
general laws governing mental function and (ii) that these have
evolved as internal reflections of general laws governing the external
world. As a concrete illustration, I will then attempt to show how
phenomena of apparent motion, which we have been investigating in the
laboratory, are reflections of the simplest motions of objects in
three-dimensional space.
The next few speakers will be
Hershel Liebowitz (February 20)
Richard Thompson (February 27)
Phil Cohen (March 5)
John Barwise (March 12)
Further announcements and abstracts will be posted.
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
WHO: Scott Soames, Princeton
WHAT: Presuppositions and Discourse
WHEN: Tuesday, February 14, 3:15 p.m., *AND*
Tuesday, February 21, 3:15 p.m.
WHERE: Ventura Hall Seminar Room
On Tuesday, February 7, Patrick Suppes spoke. His abstract is
given below:
DISCOURSE WITH THE COMPUTER: TWO EXAMPLES
Patrick Suppes
The interactive character of good computer discourse is
exemplified in two case studies. One concerns recent work on
natural-language-instructable robots. This work is very much at an
experimental stage. The second case study is of the interactive
theorem prover that has been used in teaching axiomatic set theory for
a number of years. Various strengths and weaknesses of these examples
will be discussed.
-----------
SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
On Wednesday, February 8, in the Stanford Mathematics Department,
Vladimir Lifschitz of the University of Texas at El Paso spoke on
"Facts and Exceptions." The abstract of his talk is given below.
FACTS AND EXCEPTIONS
Vladimir Lifschitz
In some applications of logic to AI, the language of predicate
calculus is used to represent general facts that may admit exceptions
(a classical example: "Birds can fly"). It can be difficult to list
explicitily all exceptions in the formal statement of the fact
("except for dead birds, ostriches, ..."). A few mechanisms for
handling this problem have been proposed based on the theory of
nonmonotonic reasoning, including Reiter's default case reasoning and
McCarthy's circumscription. The talk discusses a new method that
combines some ideas of the approaches mentioned above. General facts
that admit excpetions are expressed with the aid of special predicate
symbols for being "exceptional," or "abnormal." The extent of each of
these special predicates is determined as follows: As few objects as
possible are assumed exceptional, under the condition that the set of
available facts remains consistent.
-----------
TALK BY KENNETH CHURCH
On Wednesday, February 8, in Ventura Hall, Dr. Kenneth W. Church
from Bell Labs spoke on "An Assortment of Applications of Finite State
Methods in Computational Phonology."
-----------
S! Page 6
-----------
COMPUTER SCIENCE COLLOQUIUM NOTICE WEEK OF 2/6/84-2/10/84
2/06/1984 Talkware Seminar
Monday Thomas P. Moran
2:15-4:00 Xerox PARC
200-205 Command Language Systems, Conceptual Models, and Tasks
2/06/1984 Robotics Seminar
Monday George Sperling
4:15 New York Univ. and Bell Labs, Murray Hill
MJH252 How Humans Detect Visual Motion
2/06/1984 NA Seminar
Monday Randall J. LeVeque
4:15 University of California, Los Angeles
math 380C numerical solution of a cochlea model using fourier
transform techniques
2/07/1984 Medical Computing Journal Club
Tuesday Stuart Speedie
1:30-2:30 visiting Stanford from Univ. of Maryland
M-108 (Medical Approaches to Improving Physician Prescribing Behavior
School)
2/07/1984 Computer Science Colloquium
Tuesday Dr. David R. Barstow
4:30 Schlumberger-Doll Research
Terman Aud. A Perspective on Automatic Programming
2/08/1984 Computer Science Education Lunch
Wednesday organized by Stuart Reges
12:00 - 1:00
MJH 252 an informal group interested in issues of computer
science education
2/09/1984 CSLI Colloquium
Thursday Joseph Greenberg
4:15 Stanford Linguistics Dept.
Redwood Hall, Rm. Some Problems of Historical Linguistic Classification
G-19 and Some Results
2/09/1984 Supercomputer Seminar CS440
Thursday Les Goldschlager
4:15
Rm. 34 History To be announced
Corner
2/10/1984 Database Research Seminar
Friday To be announced
3:15
MJH352 To be announced
-----------
! Page 7
LISP CONFERENCE DEADLINE CHANGES
Because of delays in getting out the call for papers, the
deadline for submissions to the 1984 ACM Symposium on LISP and
Functional Programming (to be held August 5-8, 1984) has been moved
back from February 6 to February 15. The date for notification of
acceptance or rejection of papers is now March 20 (was March 12). The
date for return of camera-ready copy is now May 20 (was May 15).
Guy L. Steele Jr.
Program Chairman, 1984 ACM S. on L. and F.P.
Tartan Laboratories Incorporated
477 Melwood Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
(412)621-2210
-----------
CALL FOR PAPERS
INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON
NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING AND LOGIC PROGRAMMING
RENNES, FRANCE - SEPTEMBER 18-20, 1984
The workshop will consider fundamental principles and important
innovations in the design, definition, uses and extensions of logic
programming for natural language understanding and, conversely, the
adequacy of logic programming to express natural language grammar
formalisms. The topics of interest are:
* Formal representations of natural language
* Logic grammar formalisms
* Linguistic aspects (anaphora, coordination,...)
* Analysis methods
* Natural language generation
* Uses of techniques for logic grammars (unification) in other
grammar formalisms
* Compilers and interpreters for grammar formalisms
* Text comprehension
* Applications: natural-language front ends (database interrogation,
dialogues with expert systems...)
Deadlines: April 15 - Submission of papers in final form
June 10 - Notification of acceptance to authors
July 10 - Registration in the Workshop
Papers should contain the following items: abstract and title of
paper, author name, country, affiliation, mailing address and phone
(or telex) number, one program area, and the following signed
statement: ``The paper will be presented at the Workshop by one of the
authors.'' Please send 7 copies of a 5 to 10 page single spaced
manuscript, including a 150 to 200 word abstract to:
Patrick Saint-Dizier
Local Organizing Committee
IRISA - Campus de Beaulieu
F-35042 Rennes CEDEX - France
Tel: (99)362000 Telex: 950473 F
-------
∂09-Feb-84 2147 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Lou van den Dries, Stanford University
TITLE: Some model theory for linearly ordered structures.
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 15, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-P
∂10-Feb-84 0928 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Engdahl and Cooper visit
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 10 Feb 84 09:27:54 PST
Date: Fri 10 Feb 84 09:26:54-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Engdahl and Cooper visit
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Elizabet Engdahl and Robin Cooper will be visiting next week. They will
be around CSLI, SRI and PARC. They will use my office at PARC as
headquarters, and will be staying with Lauri. Robin will be talking in
the seminar on Thursday p.m. A large handout for his talk was distributed
yesterday. If you missed getting one, you can get one from Pat Wunderman.
-------
∂10-Feb-84 1546 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA Linguistics Colloquium
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 10 Feb 84 15:45:41 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Feb 84 15:43:17-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Feb 84 15:29:08-PST
Date: Fri 10 Feb 84 15:28:34-PST
From: Stanley Peters <PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Linguistics Colloquium
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA
STANFORD LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM
OSAMU FUJIMURA
Head, Department of Linguistics and Speech Analysis Research
AT&T, Bell Laboratories
The Transparency of the Phonetic Component in Linguistic Description:
Implications of Articulatory Studies
Monday, Feb. 13, 3:15 p.m.
200-107 (History Corner), Stanford
Refreshments will be served after the talk at the Linguistics
Department Reading Room, Bldg. 100 on the Inner Quad.
-------
∂11-Feb-84 0005 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #14
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 11 Feb 84 00:03:42 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Fri 10 Feb 1984 22:16-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #14
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 11 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 14
Today's Topics:
Requests - SHRDLU & Spencer-Brown & Programming Tests & UNITS,
Replys - R1/XCON & AI Text & Lisp Machine Comparisons,
Seminars - Symbolic Supercomputer & Expert Systems & Multiagent Planning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 84 16:30:36 PST
From: Rutenberg.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Reply-to: Rutenberg.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: does anyone have SHRDLU?
I'm looking for a copy of SHRDLU, ideally in
machine readable form although a listing
would also be fine.
If you have a copy or know of somebody
who does, please send me a message!
Thanks,
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 84 14:48:37 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Re: AIList Digest V2 #12
I would dearly like to get in contact with G. Spencer-Brown. Can anyone
give me any kind of lead? I have tried his publisher, Bantam, and got
no results.
Thanks.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 84 19:26:38 CST
From: Stan Barber <sob@rice>
Subject: Testing Programming Aptitude or Compentence
I am interested in information on the following tests that have been or are
currently administered to determine Programming Aptitude or Compentence.
1. Aptitude Assessment Battery:Programming (AABP) created by Jack M. Wolfe
and made available to employers only from Programming Specialists, Inc.
Brooklyn NY.
2. Programmer Aptitude/Compentence Test System sold by Haverly Systems,
Inc. (Introduced in 1970)
3. Computer Programmer Aptitude Battery by SRA (Science Research Associates),
Inc. (Examined in by F.L. Schmidt et.al. in Journal of Applied Psychology,
Volume 65 [1980] p 643-661)
4. CLEP Exam on Computers and Data Processing. The College Board and the
Educational Testing Service.
5. Graudate Record Exam Advanced Test in Computer Science by the Education
Testing Service.
Please send the answers to the following questions if you have taken or
had experience with any of these tests:
1. How many scores and what titles did they used for the version of the
exam that you took?
2. Did you feel the test actually measured your ability to learn to
program or your current programming competence (that is, did you feel it
asked relevant questions)?
3. What are your general impressions about testing and more specifically
about testing special abilities or skills (like programming, writing, etc.)
I will package up the results and send them to Human-nets.
My thanks.
Stan Barber
Department of Psychology
Rice University
Houston TX 77251
sob@rice (arapnet,csnet)
sob.rice@rand-relay (broken arpa mailers)
...!{parsec,lbl-csam}!rice!sob (uucp)
(713) 660-9252 (bulletin board)
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 84 8:10:41-PST (Mon)
From: decvax!linus!vaxine!chb @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: UNITS request: Second Posting
Article-I.D.: vaxine.182
Good morning!
I am looking for a pointer to someone (or something) who is knowledgeable
about the features and the workings of the UNITS package, developed at
Stanford HPP. If you know something, or someone, and could drop me a note
(through mail) I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks in advance.
Charlie Berg
...allegra!linus!vaxine!chb
------------------------------
Date: 5 Feb 84 20:28:09-PST (Sun)
From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd70!decwrl!daemon @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: DEC's expert system for configuring VAXen
Article-I.D.: decwrl.5447
[This is in response to an unpublished request about R1. -- KIL]
Just for the record - we changed the name from "R1" to "XCON" about a year
ago I think. It's a very useful system and is part of a family of expert
systems which assist us in the operation of various corporate divisions
(sales, service, manufacturing, installation).
Mark Palmer
Digital
(UUCP) {decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!rhea!nacho!mpalmer
(ARPA) decwrl!rhea!nacho!mpalmer@Berkeley
decwrl!rhea!nacho!mpalmer@SU-Shasta
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 84 7:15:33-PST (Mon)
From: harpo!utah-cs!hansen @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: AI made easy??
Article-I.D.: utah-cs.2473
I'd try Artificial Intelligence by Elaine Rich (McGraw-Hill). It's easy
reading, not too technical but gives a good overview to the novice.
Chuck Hansen {...!utah-cs}
------------------------------
Date: 5 Feb 84 8:48:26-PST (Sun)
From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!darrelj @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Lisp Machines
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.813
There really no such things as reasonable benchmarks for systems as different
as various Lisp machines and VAXen are. Each machine has different strengths
and weaknesses. Here is a rough ranking of machines:
VAX 780 running Fortran/C standalone
Dorado (5 to 10X dolphin)
LMI Lambda, Symbolics 3600, KL-10 Maclisp (2 to 3X dolphin)
Dolphin, dandelion, 780 VAX Interlisp, KL-10 Interlisp
Relative speeds are very rough, and dependent on application.
Notes: Dandelion and Dolphin have 16-bit ALUs, as a result most arithmetic
is pretty slow (and things like trancendental functions are even worse
because there's no way to floating arithmetic without boxing each
intermediate result). There is quite a wide range of I/O bandwidth among
these machines -- up to 530 Mbits/sec on a Dorado, 130M on a dolphin).
Strong points of various systems:
Xerox: a family of machines fully compatible at the core-image level,
spanning a wide range of price and performance (as low as $26k for a minumum
dandelion, to $150k for a heavily expanded Dorado). Further, with the
exception of some of the networking and all the graphics, it is very highly
compatible with both Interlisp-10 and Interlisp-VAX (it's reasonable to have
a single set of sources with just a bit of conditional compilation).
Because of the use of a relatively old dialect, they have a large and well
debugged manual as well.
LMI and Symbolics (these are really fairly similar as both are licensed from
the MIT lisp machine work, and the principals are rival factions of the MIT
group that developed it) these have fairly large microcode stores, and as
a result more things are fast (e.g. much of graphics primitives are
microcoded, so these are probably the machines for moby amounts of image
processing and graphics. There are also tools for compiling directly to
microcode for extra speed. These machines also contain a secondary bus such
as Unibus or Multibus, so there is considerable flexibility in attaching
exotic hardware.
Weak points: Xerox machines have a proprietary bus, so there are very few
options (philosphy is hook it to something else on the Ethernet). MIT
machines speak a new dialect of lisp with only partial compatible with
MACLISP (though this did allow adding many nice features), and their cost is
too high to give everyone a machine.
The news item to which this is a response also asked about color displays.
Dolphin: 480x640x4 bits. The 4 bits go thru a color map to 24 bits.
Dorado: 480x640x(4 or 8 or 24 bits). The 4 or 8 bits go thru a color map to
24 bits. Lisp software does not currently support the 24 bit mode.
3600: they have one or two (the LM-2 had 512x512x?) around 1Kx1Kx(8 or 16
or 24) with a color map to 30 bits.
Dandelion: probably too little I/O bandwidth
Lambda: current brochure makes passing mention of optional standard and
high-res color displays.
Disclaimer: I probably have some bias toward Xerox, as SDC has several of
their machines (in part because we already had an application in Interlisp.
Darrel J. Van Buer, PhD
System Development Corp.
2500 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90406
(213)820-4111 x5449
...{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,sdccsu3,trw-unix}!sdcrdcf!darrelj
VANBUER@USC-ECL.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 84 16:40 PDT
From: Kandt.pasa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Lisp Machines
I have seen several benchmarks as a former Symbolics and current Xerox
employee. These benchmarks have typically compared the LM-2 with the
1100; they have even included actual or estimated(?) 3600, 1108, or 1132
performances. These benchmarks, however, have seldom been very
informative because the actual test code is not provided or a detailed
discussion of the implementation. For example, is the test on the
Symbolics machine coded in Zetalisp or with the Interlisp compatibility
package? Or, in Interlisp, were fast functions used (FRPLACA vs.
RPLACA)? (Zetalisp's RPLACA is equivalent to Interlisp's FRPLACA so
that if this transformation was not performed the benchmark would favor
the Symbolics machine.) What about efficiency issues such as block
compiling, compiler optimizers, or explicitily declaring variables?
There are also many other issues such as what happens when the data set
gets very large in a real application instead of a toy benchmark or, in
Zetalisp, should you turn the garbage collector on (its not normally on)
and when you do what impact does it have on performance. In summary, be
cautious about claims without thorough supportive evidence. Also
realize that each machine has its own strengths and weaknesses; there is
no definitive answer. Caveat emptor!
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 84 19:24 EST
From: Thomas Knight <tk@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Concurrent Symbolic Supercomputer
[Forwarded by SASW@MIT-MC]
FAIM-1
Fairchild AI Machine #1
An Ultra-Concurrent Symbolic Supercomputer
by
Dr. A. L. Davis
Fairchild Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence Research
Friday, February 10, 1984
Presently AI researchers are being hampered in the development of large scale
symbolic applications such as expert systems, by the lack of sufficient machine
horsepower to execute the application programs at a sufficiently rapid rate to
make the application viable. The intent of the FAIM-1 machine is to provide
a machine capable of 3 or 4 orders of magnitude performance improvement over
that currently available on today's large main-frame machines. The
main source of performance increase is in the exploitation of concurrency at
the program, system, and architectural levels.
In addition to the normal ancillary support activities, the work is being
carried on in 3 areas:
1. Language Design - a frame based, object oriented language is being
designed which allows the programmer to express highly concurrent
symbolic algorithms. The mechanism permits both logical and
procedural programming styles in a unified message based semantics
fashion. In addition, the programmer may provide strategic
information which aids the system in managing the concurrency
structure on the physical resource components of the machine.
2. Machine Architecture - the machine derives its power from the
homogeneous replication of a medium grain processor element.
The element consists of a processor, message delivery subsystem,
and a parallel pattern based memory subsystem known as the CxAM
(Context Adressable Memory). 2 variants of a CxAM design are
being done at this time and are targeted for fabrication on a
sub 2 micron CMOS line. The connection topology for the
replicated elements is a 3 axis, single twist, Hex plane which
has the advantages of planar wiring, easy extensibility, variable
off surface bandwidth, and permits a variety of fault tolerant
designs. The Hex plane topology also permits nice hierarchical
process growth without creating excess communication congestion
which would cause false synchronization in otherwise concurrent
activities. In addition the machine is being designed in hopes
of an eventual wafer-scale integrated implementation.
3. Resource Allocation - with any concurrent system which does not
require machine dependent programming styles, there is a generic
problem in mapping the concurrent activities extant in the program
efficiently onto the multi-resource ensemble. The strategy
employed in the FAIM-1 system is to analyze the static structure of
the source program, transform it into a graph, and then via a
series of function preserving graph transforms produce a loadable
version of the program which attempts to minimize communication
cost while preserving the inherent concurrency structure.
A certain level of dynamic compensation is guided by programmer
supplied strategy information.
The talk will present an overview of the work we have done in these areas.
Host: Prof. Thomas Knight
------------------------------
Date: 8 Feb 84 15:59:49 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: III Seminar on Expert Systems this coming Tuesday...
[Reprinted from the Rutgers bboard.]
I I I SEMINAR
Title: Automation of Modeling, Simulation and Experimental
Design - An Expert System in Enzyme Kinetics
Speaker: Von-Wun Soo
Date: Tuesday, February 14,1983, 1:30-2:30 PM
Location: Hill Center, Seventh floor lounge
Von-Wun Soo, a Ph.D. student in our department, will give an informal talk on
the thesis research he is proposing. This is his abstract:
We are proposing to develop a general knowledge engineering tool to
aid biomedical researchers in developing biological models and running
simulation experiments. Without such powerful tools, these tasks can be
tedious and costly. Our aim is to integrate these techniques used in
modeling, simulation, optimization, and experimental design by using an
expert system approach. In addition we propose to carry out experiments
on the processes of theory formation used by the scientists.
Enzyme kinetics is the domain where we are concentrating our efforts.
However, our research goal is not restricted to this particular domain.
We will attempt to demonstrate with this special case, how several new
ideas in expert problem solving including automation of theory
formation, scientific discovery, experimental design, and knowledge
acquisition can be further developed.
Four modules have been designed in parallel: PROKINAL, EPX, CED, DISC.
PROKINAL is a model generator which simulates the qualitative reasoning
of the kineticists who conceptualize and postulate a reaction mechanism
for a set of experimental data. By using a general procedure known as
the King-Altman procedure to convert a mechanism topology into a rate
law function, and symbolic manipulation techniques to factor rate
constant terms to kinetic constant term, PROKINAL yields a
corresponding FORTRAN function which computes the reaction rate.
EPX is a model simulation aid which is designed by combining EXPERT and
PENNZYME. It is supposed to guide the novice user in using simulation
tools and interpreting the results. It will take the data and the
candidate model that has been generated from PROKINAL and estimate the
parameters by a nonlinear least square fit.
CED is a experimental design consultant which uses EXPERT to guide the
computation of experimental conditions. Knowledge of optimal design
from the statistical analysis has been taken into consideration by
EXPERT in order to give advice on the appropriate measurements and
reduce the cost of experimentation.
DISC is a discovery module which is now at the stage of theoretical
development. We wish to explore and simulate the behavior of scientific
discovery in enzyme kinetics research and use the results in automating
theory formation tasks.
------------------------------
Date: 09 Feb 84 2146 PST
From: Rod Brooks <ROD@SU-AI>
Subject: CSD Colloquium
[Reprinted from the Stanford bboard.]
CSD Colloquium
Tuesday 14th, 4:30pm Terman Aud
Michael P. Georgeff, SRI International
"Synthesizing Plans for Co-operating Agents"
Intelligent agents need to be able to plan their activities so that
they can assist one another with some tasks and avoid harmful
interactions on others. In most cases, this is best achieved by
communication between agents at execution time. This talk will discuss
a method for synthesizing a synchronized multi-agent plan to achieve
such cooperation between agents. The idea is first to form
independent plans for each individual agent, and then to insert
communication acts into these plans to synchronize the activities of
the agents. Conditions for freedom from interference and cooperative
behaviour are established. An efficient method of interaction and
safety analysis is then developed and used to identify critical
regions and points of synchronization in the plans. Finally,
communication primitives are inserted into the plans and a supervisor
process created to handle synchronization.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Feb-84 0121 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #15
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 11 Feb 84 01:21:08 PST
Date: Fri 10 Feb 1984 22:49-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #15
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 11 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 15
Today's Topics:
Proofs - Fermat's Theorem & 4-Color Theorem,
Brain Theory - Parallelism
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 04 Feb 84 0927 PST
From: Jussi Ketonen <JK@SU-AI>
Subject: Fermat and decidability
From the logical point of view, Fermat's last theorem is a Pi-1
statement. It follows that it is decidable. Whether it is valid
or not is another matter.
------------------------------
Date: Sat 4 Feb 84 13:13:14-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Spencer-Brown's Proof
I don't know anything about the current status of the computer proof of the
4-colour theorem, though the last I heard (five years ago) was that it was
"probably OK". That's why I use the word "theorem". However, I can shed
some light on Spencer-Brown's alleged proof -- I was present at a lecture in
Cambridge where he supposedly gave the outline of the proof, and I applauded
politely, but was later fairly authoritatively informed that it disintegrated
under closer scrutiny. This doesn't *necessarily* mean that the man is a
total flake, since other such proofs by highly reputable mathematicians have
done the same (we are told that one proof was believed for twelve whole years,
late in the 19th century, before its flaw was discovered).
- Richard
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 84 14:46:43 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Scientific Method
Isn't it interesting that most of what we think about proofs is belief!
I guess until one actually retraces the steps of a proof and their
justifications one can only express his belief in its truth or falsness.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 3 Feb 84 8:48:01-PST (Fri)
From: harpo!eagle!allegra!alan @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: brain, a parallel processor ?
Article-I.D.: allegra.2254
I've been reading things like:
My own introspection seem to indicate that ...
I find, upon introspection, that ...
I find that most of what my brain does is ...
I also feel like ...
I agree that based on my own observations, my brain appears to
be ...
Is this what passes for scientific method in AI these days?
Alan S. Driscoll
AT&T Bell Laboratories
------------------------------
Date: 2 Feb 84 14:40:23-PST (Thu)
From: decvax!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!cmcl2!rocky2!cucard!
aecom!alex @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: brain, a parallel processor ?
Article-I.D.: aecom.358
If the brain was a serial processor, the limiting processing speed
would be the speed that neurons conduct signals. Humans, however, do
very complex processing in real time! The other possibility is that the
data structures of the brain are HIGHLY optimized.
Alex S. Fuss
{philabs, esquire, cucard}!aecom!alex
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 84 13:09:25 PST
From: Adolfo Di-Mare <v.dimare@UCLA-LOCUS>
Subject: I can think in parale||,
but most of time I'm ---sequential. For example, a lot of * I can
talk with (:-{) and at the same time I can be thinking on s.m.t.i.g
else. I also do this when ai-list gets too boring: I keep browsing
until I find something intere sting, and then I do read, with a better
level of under-standing. In the u-time, I can daydream...
However, If I really want to get s.m.t.i.g done, then I cannot think
on anything else! In this cases, I just have one main-stream idea in
my mind. When I'm looking for a solution, I seldom use depth first,
or bread first search. Most of the time I use a convynatium of all
these tricks I know to search, until one 'works'.
To + up, I think we @|-< can do lots of things in lots of ways. And
until we furnish computers with all this tools, they won't be able to
be as intelligent as us. Just parale|| is not the ?↑-1.
Adolfo
///
------------------------------
Date: 7 Feb 1984 1433-PST
From: EISELT%UCI-20A@Rand-Relay
Subject: More on Philip Kahn's reply to Rene Bach
I recently asked Philip Kahn (via personal net mail) to elaborate on his three
cycle model of thought, which he described briefly in his reply to Rene Bach's
question. Here is my request, and his reply:
-------------------------
In your recent submission to AIList, you describe a three-process cycle
model of higher-level brain function. Your model has some similarities to
a model of text understanding we are working on here at UC Irvine. You say,
though, that there are "profuse psychophysical and psychological studies that
reinforce the ... model." I haven't seen any of these studies and would
be very interested in reading them. Could you possibly send me references
to these studies? Thank you very much.
Kurt Eiselt
eiselt@uci-20a
------------------------
Kurt,
I said "profuse" because I have come across many psychological
and physiological studies that have reinforced my belief. Unfortunately,
I have very few specific references on this, but I'll tell you as much as
I can....
I claim there are three stages: associational, reasonability, and
context. I'll tell you what I've found to support each. Associational
nets, also called "computational" or "parameter" nets, have been getting
a lot of attention lately. Especially interesting are the papers coming out
of Rochester (in New York state). I suggest the paper by Feldman called
"Parameter Nets." Also, McCullough in "Embodiments of Mind" introduced a
logical calculus that he proposes neural mechanisms use to form assocational
networks. Since then, a considerable amount of work has been done on
logical calculus, and these works are directly applicable to the analysis
of associational networks. One definitive "associational network" found
in nature that has been exhaustively defined by Ratliff is the lateral
inhibition that occurs in the linear image sensor of the Limulus crab.
Each element of the network inhibits its neighbors based upon its value,
and the result is the second spatial derivative of the image brightness.
Most of the works you will find to support associational nets are directly
culled from neurophysiological studies. Yet, classical conditioning
psychology defines the effects of association in its studies on forward and
backward conditioning. Personally, I feel the biological proof of
associational nets is more concrete.
The support for a "reasonability" level of processing has more
psychological support, because it is generally a cognitive process.
For example, learning is facilitated by subject matter that is most
consistent with past knowledge; that is, knowledge is most facilitated by
a subject that is most "reasonable" in light of past knowledge.
Some studies have shown, though I can't cite them, that the less
"reasonable" a learning task, the lesser is the learned performance.
I remember having seen at least a paper (I believe it was by a natural
language processing researcher) that claimed that the facility of language
is a metaphorical process. By definition, a metaphor is the comparison
of alike traits in dissimilar things; it seems to me this is a very good
way to look at the question of reasonability. Again, though, no specific
references. In neurophysiology there are found "feedback loops" that
may be considered "reasonability" testers in so far that they take action
only when certain conditions are not met. You might want to look at work
done on the cerebellum to document this.
"Context" has been getting a lot of attention lately. Again,
psychology is the major source of supporting evidence, yet neurophysiology
has its examples also. Hormones are a prime example of "contextual"
determinants. Their presence or absence affects the processing that
occurs in the neurons that are exposed to them. But on a more AI level,
the importance of context has been repeatedly demonstrated by psychologists.
I believe that context is a learned phenomena. Children have no construct
of context, and thus, they are often able to make conclusions that may be
associationally feasible, yet clearly contrary to the context of presentation.
Context in developmental psychology has been approached from a more
motivational point of view. Maslowe's hierarchies and the extensive work
into "values" are all defining different levels of context. Whereas an
associational network may (at least in my book) involve excitatory
nodal influences, context involves inhibitory control over the nodes in
the associational network. In my view, associational networks only know
(always associated), (often associated), and (weak association).
(Never associated) dictates that no association exists by default. A
contextual network knows only that the following states can occur between
concepts: (never can occur) and (rarely occurs). These can be defined using
logical calculus and learning theory. The associational links are solely
determined by event pairing and is a more dynamic event. Contextual
networks are more stable and can be the result of learning as well as
by introspective analysis of the associational links.
As you can see, I have few specific references on "context," and rely
upon my own theory of context. I hope I've been of some help, and I would
like to be kept apprised of your work. I suggest that if you want research
evidence of some of the above, that you examine indices on the subjects I
mentioned. Again,
Good luck,
Philip Kahn
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 84 7:18:25-PST (Mon)
From: harpo!ulysses!mhuxl!eagle!hou5h!hou5a!hou5d!mat @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: brain, a parallel processor ?
Article-I.D.: hou5d.809
See the Feb. Scientific American for an article on typists and speed. There
is indeed evidence for a high degree of parallelism even in SIMILAR tasks.
Mark Terribile
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 84 18:19:09 CST
From: Doug Monk <bro@rice>
Subject: Re: AIList Digest V2 #11
Subject : Mike Brzustowicz's 'tip of the tongue' as parallel process
Rather than being an example of parallel processing, the 'tip of the
tongue' phenomenon is probably more an example of context switch, where
the attempt to recall the information displaces it temporarily, due to
too much pressure being brought to bear. ( Perhaps a form of performance
anxiety ? ) Later, when the pressure is off, and the processor has a spare
moment, a smaller recall routine can be used without displacing the
information. This model assumes that concentrating on the problem causes
more of the physical brain to be involved in the effort, thus perhaps
'overlaying' the data desired. Once a smaller recall routine is used,
the recall can actually be performed.
Doug Monk ( bro.rice@RAND-RELAY )
------------------------------
Date: 6 Feb 84 19:58:33-PST (Mon)
From: ihnp4!ihopa!dap @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: parallel processing in the brain
Article-I.D.: ihopa.153
If you consider pattern recognition in humans when constrained to strictly
sequential processing, I think we are MUCH slower than computers.
In other words, how long do you think it would take a person to recognize
a letter if he could only inquire as to the grayness levels in different
pixels? Of course, he would not be allowed to "fill in" a grid and then
recognize the letter on the grid. Only a strictly algorithmic process
would be allowed.
The difference here, as I see it, is that the human mind DOES work in
parallel. If we were forced to think sequentially about each pixel in our
field of vision, we would become hopelessly bogged down. It seems to me
that the most likely way to simulate such a process is to have a HUGE
number of VERY dumb processors in a heirarchy of "meshes" such that some
small number of processors in common localities in a low level mesh would
report their findings to a single processor in the next higher level mesh.
This processor would do some very quick, very simple calculations and pass
its findings on the the next higher level mesh. At the top level, the
accumulated information would serve to recognize the pattern. I'm really
speaking off the top of my head since I'm no AI expert. Does anybody know if
such a thing exists or am I way off?
Darrell Plank
BTL-IH
ihopa!dap
[Researchers at the University of Maryland and at the University of
Massachusetts, among others, have done considerable work on "pyramid"
and "processing cone" vision models. The multilayer approach was
also common in perceptron-based pattern recognition, although very
little could be proven about multilayer networks. -- KIL]
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Feb-84 0215 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #16
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 11 Feb 84 02:14:33 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Fri 10 Feb 1984 23:05-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #16
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 11 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 16
Today's Topics:
Lab Description - New UCLA AI Lab,
Report - National Computing Environment for Academic Research,
AI Journal - New Developments in the Assoc. for Computational Linguistics,
Course - Organization Design,
Conference - Natural Language and Logic Programming & Systems Science
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 84 22:57:55 PST
From: Michael Dyer <dyer@UCLA-CS>
Subject: New UCLA AI Lab
Announcing the creation of a new Lab for
Artificial Intelligence Research at UCLA.
Just recently, the UCLA CS department received a private foundation
grant of $450,000 with $250,000 matching funds from the School of
Engineering and Applied Sciences to create a Laboratory for Artificial
Intelligence Research. The departmental chairman as well as the dean
strongly support this effort and are both committed to the growth of AI
at UCLA.
In addition, UCLA has been chosen as the site of the next International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-85) in August, 1985.
UCLA is second in the nation among public research universities and in
the top six overall in quality of faculty, according to a new national
survey of 5,000 faculty and 228 universities. In a two year study
(conducted by the Conference Board of the Associated Research Councils,
consisting of the American Council of Learned Societies, the American
Council on Education, the National Research Council and the Social
Science Research Council) the UCLA Computer Science Dept. tied for
sixth place with U. of Ill., after Stanford, MIT, CMU, UC Berkeley, and
Cornell.
The UCLA CS department is the recipient (in 1982) of a $3.6 million
five-year NSF Coordinated Experimental Research grant, augmented by a
$1.5 million award from DARPA.
Right now the AI lab includes a dozen Apollo DN300 workstations on an
Apollo Domain ring network. This ring is attached via an ethernet gate
to the CS department LOCUS network of 20 Vax 750s and a 780. UCLA is on
the Arpanet and CSNet. Languages include Prolog and T (a Scheme-based
dialect of lisp). A number of DN320s, DN460s and a color Apollo (DN660)
are on order and will be housed in a new area being reserved for
graduate AI research. One Vax 750 on the LOCUS net and 10 Apollos will
be reserved for graduate AI instruction. Robotics and vision equipment
is also being acquired. The CS dept is seeking an assist. prof.
(tenure track) in the area of AI, with preference for vision, robotics,
problem-solving, expert systems, learning, and simulation of cognitive
processes. The new AI faculty member will be able to direct expenditure
of a portion of available funds. (Interested AI PhDs, reply to Michael
Dyer, CS dept, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024. Arpanet: dyer@ucla-cs).
Our AI effort is new, but growing, and includes the following faculty:
Michael Dyer: natural language processing, cognitive modeling.
Margot Flowers: reasoning, argumentation, belief systems.
Judea Pearl: theory of heuristics, search, expert systems.
Alan Klinger: signal processing, pattern recognition, vision.
Michel Melkanoff: CAD/CAM, robotics.
Stott Parker: logic programming, databases.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 84 14:22:30-EDT (Thu)
From: Kent Curtis <curtis%nsf-cs@CSNet-Relay>
Subject: A National Computing Environment for Academic Research
The National Science Foundation has released a report entitled "A National
Computing Environment for Academic Research" prepared by an NSF Working Group
on Computers for Research, Kent Curtis, Chairman. The table of contents is:
Executive Summary
I. The Role of Modern Computing in Scientific and Engineering Research
with Special Concern for Large Scale Computation
Background
A. Summary of Current Uses and Support of Large Scale Computing for
Research
B. Critique of Current Facilities and Support Programs
C. Unfilled Needs for Computer Support of Research
II. The Role and Responsibilities of NSF with Respect to Modern Scientific
Computing
III. A Plan of Action for the NSF: Recommendations
IV. A Plan of Action for the NSF: Funding Implications
Bibliography
Appendix
Large-scale Computing Facilities
If you are interested in receiving a copy of this report contact
Kent Curtis, (202) 357-9747; curtis.nsf-cs@csnet-relay;
or write Kent K. Curtis
Div. of Computer Research
NSF
Washington, D.C. 20550
------------------------------
Date: 10 Feb 84 09:35:51 EST (Fri)
From: Journal Duties <acl@Rochester.ARPA>
Subject: ~New Developments in the Assoc. for Computational Linguistics
The AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS -- Some New Developments
The AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS is the major
international journal devoted entirely to computational approaches to
natural language research. With the 1984 volume, its name is being changed
to COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS to reflect its growing international coverage.
There is now a European chapter of the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTATIONAL
LINGUISTICS and a growing interest in forming one in Asia.
The journal also has many new people on its Editorial Staff. James Allen,
of the University of Rochester, has taken over as Editor. The FINITE STRING
Editor is now Ralph Weischedel of the University of Delaware. Lyn Bates of
Bolt Beranek and Newman is the Book Review Editor. Michael McCord, now at
IBM, remains as Associate Editor.
With these major changes in editorial staffing, the journal has fallen
behind schedule. In order to catch up this year, we will be publishing
close to double the regular number of issues. The first issue for 1983,
which was just mailed out, contains papers on "Paraphrasing Questions Using
Given and New Information" by Kathleen McKeown and "Denotational Semantics
for 'Natural' Language Question-Answering Programs" by Michael Main and
David Benson. There is a lengthy review of Winograd's new book by Sergei
Nirenburg and a comprehensive description of the new Center for the Study
of Language and Information at Stanford University.
Highlights of the forthcoming 1983 AJCL issues:
- Volume 9, No. 2 (expected March '84) will contain, in addition
to papers on "Natural Language Access to Databases: Interpreting Update
Requests" by Jim Davidson and Jerry Kaplan and "Treating Coordination
in Logic Grammars" by Veronica Dahl and Michael McCord, will be accompanied
by a supplement: a Directory of Graduate Programs in Computational Linguistics.
The directory is the result of two years of surveys, and provides a fairly
complete listing of programs available internationally.
- Volume 9, Nos. 3 and 4 (expected June '84) will be a special double
issue on Ill-Formed Input. The issue will cover many aspects of processing
ill-formed sentences from syntactic ungrammaticality to dealing with inaccurate
reference. It will contain papers from many of the research groups that
are working on such problems.
We will begin publishing Volume 10 later in the summer. In addition
to the regular contributions, we are planning a special issue on the
mathematical properties of grammatical formalisms. Ray Perrault (now at
SRI) will be guest editor for the issue, which will contain papers addressing
most of the recent developments in grammatical formalisms (e.g., GPSG,
Lexical-Function Grammars, etc). Also in the planning stage is a special
issue on Machine Translation that Jonathan Slocum is guest editing.
With its increased publication activity in 1984, COMPUTATIONAL
LINGUISTICS can provide authors with an unusual opportunity to have their
results published in the international community with very little delay.
A paper submitted now (early spring '84) could actually be in print by the
end of the year, provided that major revisions need not be made. Five
copies of submissions should be sent to:
James Allen, CL Editor
Dept. of Computer Science
The University of Rochester
Rochester, NY 14627, USA
Subscriptions to COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS come with membership in the
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS, which still is only $15 per year.
As a special bonus to new members, those who join the ACL for 1984 before
August will receive the special issue on Ill-Formed Input, even though it is
formally part of the volume for 1983.
To become a member, simply send your name, address and a check made out to
the Association for Computational Linguistics to:
Don Walker, ACL membership
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA
People in Europe or with Swiss accounts can pay an equivalent value in Swiss
francs, by personal check in their own currency, or by a banker's draft that
credits account number 141.880.LAV at the Union Bank of Switzerland, 8 rue
de Rhone, CH-1211 Geneva 11, SWITZERLAND; send the statement with payment or
with a copy of the bank draft to:
Mike Rosner, ACL
ISSCO
54, route des Acacias
CH-1227 Geneva, SWITZERLAND
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 8 February 1984, 14:28-EST
From: Gerald R. Barber <JERRYB at MIT-OZ>
Subject: Course Announcement: Organization Design
[Forwarded by SASW@MIT-MC.]
The following is an announcement for a course that Tom Malone and I are
organizing for this spring term. Anyone who is interested can come to
the course or contact:
Tom Malone
Malone@XX
E53-307, x6843,
or
Jerry Barber
Jerryb@OZ
NE43-809, x5871
Course Announcement
15.963 Oranization Design
Wednesdays, 2:30 - 5:30 p.m, E51-016
Prof. Thomas Malone
In this graduate seminar we will review research from a number of
fields, identifying general principles of organization design that apply
to many kinds of information processing systems, including human
organizations and computer systems. This novel approach will integrate
examples and theories from computer science, artificial intelligence,
organization theory and economics. The seminar will also include
discussion of several special issues that arise when these general
principles are applied to designing organizations that include both
people and computers.
A partial list of topics includes:
I. Introduction
A. What is an organization?
Scott, March & Simon, Etzioni, etc
B. What is design?
Simon: Science of Design
II. Alternative Organizational Designs
A. Markets
Computer Systems: Contract Nets, Enterprise
Organizational Theories: Simon, Arrow, Hurwicz
B. Hierachies
Computer Systems: Structured programming, inheritance
hierarchies
Organizational Theories: Simon, March, Cyert, Galbraith,
Williamson
C. Cooperating experts (or teams)
Computer Systems: Hearsay, Ether, Actors, Smalltalk, Omega
Organizational Theories: Marschak & Radner, Minsky & Papert
III. Integrating Computer Systems and Human Organizations
A. Techniques for analyzing organizational needs
Office Analysis Methodology, Critical Success Factors,
Information Control Networks, Sociotechnical systems
B. Possible technologies for supporting organizational problem-solving
Computer conferencing, Knowledge-based systems
------------------------------
Date: Thu 2 Feb 84 20:35:47-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: Natural Language and Logic Programming
Call for Papers
International Workshop On
Natural Lanugage Understanding
and Logic Programming
Rennes, France - September 18-20, 1984
The workshop will consider fundamental principles and important
innovations in the design, definition, uses and extensions of logic
programming for natural language understanding and, conversely, the
adequacy of logic programming to express natural language grammar
formalisms. The topics of interest are:
* Formal representations of natural language
* Logic grammar formalisms
* Linguistic aspects (anaphora, coordination,...)
* Analysis methods
* Natural language generation
* Uses of techniques for logic grammars (unification)
in other grammar formalisms
* Compilers and interpreters for grammar formalisms
* Text comprehension
* Applications: natural-language front ends (database
interrogation, dialogues with expert systems...)
Conference Chairperson
Veronica Dahl Simon Fraser University,
Burnaby B.C. V5A 1S6
Canada
Program Committee
H. Abrahamson (UBC, Canada) F. Pereira (SRI, USA)
A. Colmerauer (GIA, France) L. Pereira (UNL, Portugal)
V. Dahl (Simon Fraser U., Canada) P. Sabatier (CNRS, France)
P. Deransart (INRIA, France) P. Saint-Dizier (IRISA, France)
M. Gross (LADL, France) C. Sedogbo (Bull, France)
M. McCord (IBM, USA)
Sponsored by: IRISA, Groupe BULL, INRIA
Deadlines:
April 15: Submission of papers in final form
June 10: Notification of acceptance to authors
July 10: Registration in the Workshop
Submission of papers:
Papers should contain the following items: abstract and title of
paper, author name, country, affiliation, mailing address and
phone (or telex) number, one program area and the following
signed statement: ``The paper will be presented at the Workshop
by one of the authors''.
Summaries should explain what is new or interesting abount
the work and what has been accomplished. Papers must report
recent and not yet published work.
Please send 7 copies of a 5 to 10 page single spaced manuscript,
including a 150 to 200 word abstract to:
-- Patrick Saint-Dizier
Local Organizing Committee
IRISA - Campus de Beaulieu
F-35042 Rennes CEDEX - France
Tel: (99)362000 Telex: 950473 F
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 84 10:18 cst
From: Bruce Shriver <ShriverBD.usl@Rand-Relay>
Subject: call for papers announcement
Eighteenth Annual
HAWAII INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON
SYSTEM SCIENCES
JANUARY 2-4, 1985 / HONOLULU, HAWAII
This is the eighteenth in a series of conferences devoted to advances in
information and system sciences. The conference will encompass developments
in theory or practice in the areas of COMPUTER HARDWARE and SOFTWARE, and
advanced computer systems applications in selected areas. Special emphasis
will be devoted to MEDICAL INFORMATION PROCESSING, computer-based DECISION
SUPPORT SYSTEMS for upper-level managers in organizations, and KNOWLEDGE-BASED
SYSTEMS.
CALL FOR PAPERS
Papers are invited in the preceeding and related areas and may be theoretical,
conceptual, tutorial or descriptive in nature. The papers submitted will be
refereed and those selected for conference presentation will be printed in the
CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS; therefore, papers submitted for presentation must not
have been previously presented or published. Authors of selected papers are
expected to attend the conference to present and discuss the papers with
attendees.
Relevant topics include:
Deadlines
HARDWARE * Abstracts may be submitted to track
* Distributed Processing chairpersons for guidance and indication
* Mini-Micro Systems of appropriate content by MAY 1, 1984.
* Interactive Systems (Abstract is required for Medical
* Personal Computing Information Processing Track.)
* Data Communication * Full papers must be mailed to appropriate
* Graphics track chairperson by JULY 6, 1984.
* User-Interface Technologies * Notification of Accepted papers will be
mailed to the author on or before
SOFTWARE SEPTEMBER 7, 1984.
* Software Design Tools & * Final papers in camera-ready form will
Techniques be due by OCTOBER 19, 1984.
* Specification Techniques
* Testing and Validation
* Performance Measurement & Instructions for Submitting Papers
Modeling 1. Submit three copies of the full paper,
* Formal Verification not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages,
* Management of Software including diagrams, directly to the
Development appropriate track chairperson listed
below, or if in doubt, to the conference
APPLICATIONS co-chairpersons.
* Medical Information 2. Each paper should have a title page
Processing Systems which includes the title of the paper,
* Computer-Based Decision full name of its author(s), affiliat-
Support Systems ation(s), complete address(es), and
* Management Information Systems telephone number(s).
* Data-Base Systems for 3. The first page should include the
Decision Support title and a 200-word abstract of the
* Knowledge-Based Systems paper.
SPONSORS
The Eighteenth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Science is
sponsored by the University of Hawaii and the University of Southwestern
Louisiana, in cooperation with the ACM and the IEEE Computer Society.
HARDWARE All Other Papers
Edmond L. Gallizzi Papers not clearly within one of the
HICSS-18 Track Chairperson aforementioned tracks should be mailed
Eckerd College to:
St. Petersberg, FL 33733 Ralph H. Sprague, Jr.
(813) 867-1166 HICSS-18 Conference Co-chairperson
College of Business Administration
SOFTWARE University of Hawaii
Bruce D. Shriver 2404 Maile Way, E-303
HICSS-18 Track Chairperson Honolulu, HI 96822
Computer Science Dept. (808)948-7430
U. of Southwestern Louisiana
P. O. Box 44330
Lafayette, LA 70504 Conference Co-Chairpersons
(318) 231-6284 RALPH H. SPRAGUE, JR.
BRUCE D. SHRIVER
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM &
KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS Contributing Sponsor Coordinator
Joyce Elam RALPH R. GRAMS
HICSS-18 Track Chairperson College of Medicine
Dept. of General Business Department of Pathology
BEB 600 University of Florida
U. of Texas at Austin Box J-275
Austin, TX 78712 Gainesville, FL 32610
(512) 471-3322 (904) 392-4571
MEDICAL INFORMATION PROCESSING FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Terry M. Walker Concerning Conference Logistics
HICSS-18 Track Chairperson NEM B. LAU
Computer Science Dept. HICSS-18 Conference Coordinator
U. of Southwestern Louisiana Center for Executive Development
P. O. Box 44330 College of Business Administration
Lafayette, LA 70504 University of Hawaii
(318) 231-6284 2404 Maile Way, C-202
Honolulu, HI 96822
(808) 948-7396
Telex: RCA 8216 UHCED Cable: UNIHAW
The HICSS conference is a non-profit activity organized to provide a forum for
the interchange of ideas, techniques, and applications among practitioners of
the system sciences. It maintains objectivity to the systems sciences without
obligation to any commercial enterprise. All attendees and speakers are
expected to have their respective companies, organizations or universities
bear the costs of their expenses and registration fees.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Feb-84 1747 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Graduate students at CSLI
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 11 Feb 84 17:47:44 PST
Date: Sat 11 Feb 84 17:47:15-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Graduate students at CSLI
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
This is mainly addressed to those of you who have been appointed
consulting profs in varous departments:
Now that the consulting professorships have been approved, this might
be a good time for us to think about getting involved with graduate
students, especially as this is the time that departments are planning
courses for next year. I am not planning to do anything offical, on
behalf of CSLI, but I think it would be good if some of you would
offer to teach (individually or otherwise, maybe jointly with others
in the department) a seminar or course in your new departments next
year. I doubt that the respective chairpeople will ask you to do this
unless you offer.
There are at least two reasons for doing this. One is just building
ties with the departments. More important, though, if for you to get
to know the graduate students, and them you. I am convinced that the
real breakthroughs of the future will come from students who get
involved with CSLI.
Thanks,
Jon
-------
∂11-Feb-84 2236 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #17
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 11 Feb 84 22:34:28 PST
Date: Sat 11 Feb 1984 20:58-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #17
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 12 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 17
Today's Topics:
Jargon - Glossary of NASA Terminology,
Humor - Programming Languages
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Jan 84 7:41:17-PST (Mon)
From: hplabs!hao!seismo!flinn @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Glossary of NASA Terminology
[Reprinted from the Space Digest by permission of the author.
This strikes me as an interesting example of a "natural sublanguage."
It does not reflect the growth and change of NASA jargon, however:
subsequent discussion on the Space Digest indicates that many of the
terms date back eight years and many newer terms are missing. The
author and others are continuing to add to the list. -- KIL]
I've been collecting examples of the jargon in common use by
people at NASA Headquarters. Here is the collection so far:
I have not made any of these up. I'd be glad to hear of worthy
additions to the collection.
The 'standard NASA noun modifiers' are nouns used as
adjectives in phrases like 'science community' or 'planetary area.'
Definitions have been omitted for entries whose meaning ought to be
clear.
-- Ted Flinn
Action Item
Actors in the Program
Ancillary
Ankle: 'Get your ankles bitten' = running into unexpected trouble.
Ant: 'Which ant is steering this log?' = which office is in charge
of a project.
Appendice (pronounced ap-pen-di-see): some people, never having
seen a document with only one appendix, think that this
is the singular of 'appendices.'
Area: Always as 'X Area,' where X is one of the standard NASA
noun modifiers.
Asterick: pronounced this way more often than not.
Back Burner
Bag It: 'It's in the bag' = it's finished.
Ball of Wax
Baseline: verb or noun.
Basis: Always as 'X Basis,' where X is one of the standard NASA
noun modifiers.
Bean Counters: financial management people.
Bed: 'Completely out of bed' = said of people whose opinions
are probably incorrect.
Belly Buttons: employees.
Bench Scientists
Bend Metal: verb, to construct hardware.
Bending Your Pick: unrewarding activity.
Bent Out of Shape: disturbed or upset, of a person.
Big Picture
Big-Picture Purposes
Bite the Bullet
Big-Ticket Item: one of the expensive parts.
Black-belt Bureaucrat: an experienced and knowledgable government
employee.
Bless: verb, to approve at a high level of management.
Blow One's Skirts Up: usually negative: 'that didn't blow
their skirts up' = that didn't upset them.
Blow Smoke: verb, to obfuscate.
Blown Out of the Water
Bottom Line
Bounce Off: to discuss an idea with someone else.
Brassboard (see Breadboard).
Breadboard (see Brassboard).
Bullet: one of the paragraphs or lines on a viewgraph, which are
*never* numbered, but always labelled with a bullet.
Bulletize: to make an outline suitable for a viewgraph.
Bureaucratic Hurdles
Burn: verb, to score points off a competitor.
Burning Factor: one of the critical elements.
Calibrate: verb, to judge the capabilities of people or
organizations.
Camel's Nose in the Tent
Can of Worms
Canned: finished, as 'it's in the can.'
Can't Get There From Here.
Capture a Mission: verb, to construct a launch vehicle for
a space flight.
Carve Up the Turkey
Caveat: usually a noun.
Centers: 'on N-week centers' = at N-week intervals.
Choir, Preaching to the
Clock is Ticking = time is getting short.
Code: Every section at NASA centers or Headquarters has a label
consisting of one or more letters or numbers, and in
conversations or less formal memos, sections are always
referred to by the code rather than the name:
Code LI, Code 931, Code EE, etc.
Commonality
Community: 'X Community,' where X is one of the standard NASA
noun modifiers.
Concept: 'X Concept,' where X is one of the standard NASA
noun modifiers.
Concur: verb, to agree.
Configure: verb.
Constant Dollars: cost without taking inflation into account
(see Real-Year Dollars).
Contract Out
Core X: The more important parts of X, where X is one of the
nouns used as modifiers.
Correlative
Cost-Benefit Tradeoff
Cross-Cut: verb, to look at something a different way.
Crump: transitive verb, to cause to collapse.
Crutch: flimsy argument.
Cut Orders: to fill out a travel order form; left over from the
days when this was done with mimeograph stencils.
Cutting Edge
Data Base
Data Dump: a report made to others, usually one's own group.
Data Point: an item of information.
Debrief: transitive verb, to report to one's own staff after
an outside meeting.
Deep Yoghurt: bad trouble.
Definitize: verb, to make precise or definite.
De-integrate: verb, to take apart (not dis-).
De-lid: verb, to take the top off an instrument.
Delta: an increment to cost or content.
Descope: verb, to redesign a project as a result of budget
cuts (not the opposite of scope, q.v.).
Development Concept
Dialog: transitive verb.
Disadvantage: transitive verb.
Disgruntee: non-NASA person unhappy with program decisions.
Dog's Breakfast
Dollar-Limited
Driver: an item making up a significant part of cost or
schedule: 'X is the cost driver.'
Drop-Dead Date: the real deadline; see 'hard deadline.'
Ducks in a Row
Egg on One's Face
End Item: product.
End-Run the System
End to End
Extent to Which
Extramural
Facilitize: verb, to make a facility out of something.
Factor in: verb.
Feedback: reaction of another section or organization to
a proposition.
Fill This Square
Finalize
Finesse The System
First Cut: preliminary estimate.
Fiscal Constraints
Flag: verb, to make note of something for future reference.
Flagship Program
Flex the Parameters
Flux and Change
What Will Fly: 'see it if will fly.'
Folded In: taken into account.
Forest: miss the f. for the trees.
Forgiving, unforgiving: of a physical system.
Front Office
Full-Up: at peak level.
Future: promise or potential, as, 'a lot of potential future.'
Futuristic
Gangbusters
Glitch
Grease the Skids
Green Door: 'behind the green door' = in the Administrator's offices.
Go to Bat For
Goal: contrasted to 'objective,' q.v.
Grabber
Gross Outline: approximation.
Ground Floor
Group Shoot = brainstorming session.
Guidelines: always desirable to have.
Guy: an inanimate object such as a data point.
Hack: 'get a hack on X' = make some kind of estimate.
Hard Copy: paper, as contrasted to viewgraphs.
Hard Deadline: supposed deadline; never met.
Hard Over: intransigent.
Head Counters: personnel office staff.
Hit X Hard: concentrate on X.
Hoop: a step in realizing a program: 'yet to go through this hoop.'
Humanoid
Hypergolic: of a person: intransigent or upset in general.
Impact: verb.
Implement: verb.
In-House
Initialize
Innovative
Intensive: always as X-intensive.
Intercompare: always used instead of 'compare.'
Issue: always used instead of 'problem.'
Key: adj., of issues: 'key issue; not particularly key'.
Knickers: 'get into their knickers' = to interfere with them.
Laicize: verb, to describe in terms comprehensible to lay people.
Lashup = rackup.
Lay Track: to make an impression on management ('we laid a lot
of track with the Administrator').
Learning Curve
Liaise: verb.
Limited: always as X-limited.
Line Item
Link Calculation
Liberate Resources: to divert funds from something else.
Looked At: 'the X area is being looked at' = being studied.
Loop: to be in the loop = to be informed.
Love It! exclamation of approval.
Low-Cost
Machine = spacecraft.
Man-Attended Experiment
Marching Orders
Matrix
Micromanagement = a tendency to get involved in management of
affairs two or more levels down from
one's own area of responsibility.
Milestone
Mission Definition
Mode: 'in an X mode.'
Model-Dependent
Muscle: 'get all the muscle into X'
Music: 'let's all read from the same sheet of music.'
Necessitate
Nominal: according to expectation.
Nominative: adj., meaning unknown.
Nonconcur: verb, to disagree.
Numb Nut: unskilled or incapable person.
Objective: as contrasted with 'goal' (q.v.)
Overarching Objective
Oblectation
Off-Load: verb.
On Board: 'Y is on board' = the participation of Y is assured.
On-Boards: employees or participants.
On Leave: on vacation.
On the Part Of
On Travel: out of town.
Open Loop
Out-of-House
Over Guidelines
Ox: 'depends on whose ox is gored.'
Package
Paradigm
Parking Orbit: temporary assignment or employment.
Pathfinder Studies
Pedigree: history of accumulation of non-NASA support for a mission.
Peg to Hang X On
Pie: 'another slice through this same pie is...'
Piece of the Action
Ping On: verb, to remind someone of something they were
supposed to do.
Pitch: a presentation to management.
Placekeeper
Planning Exercise
Pony in This Pile of Manure Somewhere = some part of this mess
may be salvageable.
Posture
Pre-Posthumous
Prioritize
Priority Listing
Problem Being Worked: 'we're working that problem.'
Problem Areas
Product = end item.
Programmatic
Pucker Factor: degree of apprehension.
Pull One's Tongue Through One's Nose: give someone a hard time.
Pulse: verb, as, 'pulse the system.'
Quick Look
Rackup = lashup.
Rainmaker: an employee able to get approval for budget increases
or new missions.
Rapee: a person on the receiving end of an unfavorable decision.
Rattle the Cage: 'that will rattle their cage.'
Real-Year Dollars: cost taking inflation into account, as
contrasted with 'constant dollars.'
Reclama
Refugee: a person transferred from another program.
Report Out: verb, used for 'report.'
Resources = money.
Resource-Intensive = expensive.
ROM: 'rough order of magnitude,' of estimates.
Rubric
Runout
Sales Pitch
Scenario
Scope: verb, to attempt to understand something.
Scoped Out: pp., understood.
Secular = non-scientific or non-technological.
Self-Serving
Sense: noun, used instead of 'consensus.'
Shopping List
Show Stopper
Sign Off On something = approve.
Space Cadets: NASA employees.
Space Winnies or Wieners: ditto, but even more derogatory.
X-Specific
Speak to X: to comment on X, where X is a subject, not a person.
Specificity
Speed, Up To
Spinning One's Wheels
Spooks: DOD of similar people from other agencies.
Staff: verb.
Standpoint: 'from an X standpoint'
Statussed: adj., as, 'that has been statussed.'
Strap On: verb, to try out: 'strap on this idea...'
Strawman
String to One's Bow
Street, On The: distributed outside one's own office.
Stroking
Structure: verb.
Subsume
Success-Oriented: no provision for possible trouble.
Surface: verb, to bring up a problem.
Surveille: verb.
Suspense Date: the mildest form of imaginary deadline.
Tail: to have one's tail in a crack = to be upset or in trouble.
Tall Pole in the Tent: data anomaly.
Tar With the Same Brush
On Target
Task Force
Team All Set Up
Tickler = reminder.
Tiger Team
Time-Critical: something likely to cause schedule trouble.
Time Frame
Torque the System
Total X, where X is one of the standard NASA noun modifiers.
Total X Picture
Truth Model
Unique
Update: noun or verb.
Up-Front: adj.
Upscale
Upper Management
Vector: verb.
Vector a Program: to direct it toward some objective.
Ventilate the Issues: to discuss problems.
Versatilify: verb, to make something more versatile.
Viable: adj., something that might work or might be acceptable.
Viewgraph: always mandatory in any presentation.
Viz-a-Viz
WAG = wild-assed guess.
Wall to Wall: adj., pervasive.
Watch: 'didn't happen on my watch...'
Water Off a Duck's Back
Waterfall Chart: one way of present costs vs. time.
I'm Not Waving, I'm Drowning
Wedge; Planning Wedge: available future-year money.
Been to the Well
Where Coming From
Whole Nine Yards
X-Wide
X-wise
Workaround: way to overcome a problem.
Wrapped Around the Axle: disturbed or upset.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 8 Feb 84 07:14:34-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: The Best Languages in Town!!! (forwarded from USENET)
[Reprinted from the UTexas-20 bboard.]
From: bradley!brad Feb 6 16:56:00 1984
Laidback with (a) Fifth
By John Unger Zussman
From Info World, Oct 4, 1982
Basic, Fortran, Cobol... These programming Languages are well
known and (more or less) well loved throughout the computer in-
dustry. There are numerous other languages, however, that are
less well known yet still have ardent devotees. In fact, these
little-known languages generally have the most fanatic admirers.
For those who wish to know more about these obscure languages -
and why they are obscure - I present the following catalog.
SIMPLE ... SIMPLE is an acronym for Sheer Idiot's Mono Pur-
pose Programming Lingusitic Environment. This language,
developed at the Hanover College for Technological Misfits, was
designed to make it impossible to write code with errors in it.
The statements are, therefore confined to BEGIN, END, and STOP.
No matter how you arrange the statements, you can't make a syntax
error.
Programs written in SIMPLE do nothing useful. Thus they
achieve the results of programs written in other languages
without the tedious, frustrating process of testing and debug-
ging.
SLOBOL ... SLOBOL is best known for the speed, or lack of it,
of its compiler. Although many compilers allow you to take a
coffee break while they compile, SLOBOL compilers allow you to
take a trip to Bolivia to pick up the coffee. Forty-three pro-
grammers are known to have died of boredom sitting at their ter-
minals while waiting for a SLOBOL program to compile. Weary SLO-
BOL programmers often turn to a related (but infinitely faster)
language, COCAINE.
VALGOL ... (With special thanks to Dan and Betsy "Moon Unit"
Pfau) - From its modest beginnings in southern California's San
Fernando Valley, VALGOL is enjoying a dramatic surge of populari-
ty across the industry.
VALGOL commands include REALLY, LIKE, WELL and Y$KNOW. Vari-
ables are assigned with the =LIKE and =TOTALLY operators. Other
operators include the "CALIFORNIA BOOLEANS", FERSURE, and NOWAY.
Repetitions of code are handled in FOR-SURE loops. Here is a sam-
ple VALGOL program:
14 LIKE, Y$KNOW (I MEAN) START
%% IF
PI A =LIKE BITCHEN AND
01 B =LIKE TUBULAR AND
9 C =LIKE GRODY**MAX
4K (FERSURE)**2
18 THEN
4I FOR I=LIKE 1 TO OH MAYBE 100
86 DO WAH + (DITTY**2)
9 BARF(I) =TOTALLY GROSS(OUT)
-17 SURE
1F LIKE BAG THIS PROGRAM
? REALLY
$$ LIKE TOTALLY (Y*KNOW)
VALGOL is characterized by its unfriendly error messages.
For example, when the user makes a syntax error, the interpreter
displays the message, GAG ME WITH A SPOON!
LAIDBACK ... Historically, VALGOL is a derivative of LAID-
BACK, which was developed at the (now defunct) Marin County
Center for T'ai Chi, Mellowness, and Computer Programming, as an
alternative uo the more intense atmosphere in nearby silicon val-
ley.
The center was ideal for programmers who liked to soak in hot
tubs while they worked. Unfortunately, few programmers could
survive there for long, since the center outlawed pizza and RC
Cola in favor of bean curd and Perrier.
Many mourn the demise of LAIDBACK because of its reputation
as a gentle and nonthreatening language. For Example, LAIDBACK
responded to syntax errors with the message, SORRY MAN, I CAN'T
DEAL WITH THAT.
SARTRE ... Named after the late existential philosopher.
SARTRE is an extremely unstructured language. Statements in SAR-
TRE have no purpose; they just are there. Thus, SARTRE programs
are left to define their own functions. SARTRE programmers tend
to be boring and depressed and are no fun at parties.
FIFTH ... FIFTH is a precision mathematical language in which
the data types refer to quantity. The data types range from CC,
OUNCE, SHOT, and JIGGER to FIFTH (hence the name of the
language), LITER, MAGNUM, and BLOTTO. Commands refer to in-
gredients such as CHABLIS, CHARDONNAY, CABERNET, GIN, VERMOUTH,
VODKA, SCOTCH and WHATEVERSAROUND.
The many versions of the FIFTH language reflect the sophisti-
cation and financial status of its users. Commands in the ELITE
dialect include VSOP and LAFITE, while commands in the GUTTER di-
alect include HOOTCH and RIPPLE. The latter is a favorite of
frustrated FORTH programmers who end up using the language.
C- ... This language was named for the grade received by its
creator when he submitted it as a class project in a graduate
programming class. C- is best described as a "Low-Level" pro-
gramming language. In fact, the language generally requires more
C- statements than machine-code statements to execute a given
task. In this respect, it is very similar to COBOL.
LITHP ... This otherwise unremarkable labuage is dis-
tinguished by the absence of an "s" in its character set. pro-
grammers and users must substitute "TH". LITHP is said to useful
in prothething lithtth.
DOGO ... Developed at the Massachussettes Institute of Obedi-
ence Training. DOGO heralds a new era of computer-literate pets.
DOGO commands include SIT, STAY, HEEL and ROLL OVER. An innova-
tive feature of DOGO is "PUPPY GRAPHICS", in which a small cocker
spaniel occasionally leaves a deposit as he travels across the
screen.
Submitted By Ian and Tony Goldsmith
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂11-Feb-84 2320 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #18
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 11 Feb 84 23:19:50 PST
Date: Sat 11 Feb 1984 21:32-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #18
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Sunday, 12 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 18
Today's Topics:
AI and Meteorology - Summary of Responses
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Jan 84 16:07:00-PST (Wed)
From: ihnp4!fortune!rpw3 @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: AI and Weather Forecasting - (nf)
Article-I.D.: fortune.2249
As far as the desirability to use AI on the weather, it seems a bit
out of place, when there is rumoured to be a fairly straightforward
(if INCREDIBLY cpu-hungry) thermodynamic relaxation calculation that
gives very good results for 24 hr prediction. It uses as input the
various temperature, wind, and pressure readings from all of the U.S.
weather stations, including the ones cleverly hidden away aboard most
domestic DC-10's and L-1011's. Starting with those values as boundary
conditions, an iterative relaxation is done to fill in the cells of
the continental atmospheric model.
The joke is of course (no joke!), it takes 26 hrs to run on a Illiac IV
(somebody from Ames or NOAS or somewhere correct me, please). The accuracy
goes up as the cell size in the model goes down, but the runtime goes up as
the cube! So you can look out the window, wait 2 hours, and say, "Yup,
the model was right."
My cynical prediction is that either (1) by the time we develop an
AI system that does as well, the deterministic systems will have
obsoleted it, or more likely (2) by the time we get an AI model with
the same accuracy, it will take 72 hours to run a 24 hour forecast!
Rob Warnock
UUCP: {sri-unix,amd70,hpda,harpo,ihnp4,allegra}!fortune!rpw3
DDD: (415)595-8444
USPS: Fortune Systems Corp, 101 Twin Dolphins Drive, Redwood City, CA 94065
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jan 84 21:52:42-EST (Thu)
From: ucbtopaz!finnca1 @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: "You cant go home again"
Article-I.D.: ucbtopaz.370
It seems to me (a phrase that is always a copout for the ill-informed;
nonetheless, I proceed) that the real payoff in expert systems for weather
forecasting would be to capture the knowledge of those pre-computer experts who,
with limited data and even fewer dollars, managed to develop their
pattern-recognition facilities to the point that they could FEEL what was
happening and forecast accordingly.
I was privileged to take some meteorology courses from such an oldster many
years ago, and it was, alas, my short-sightedness about the computer revolution
in meteorology that prevented me from capturing some of his expertise, to
buzz a word or two.
Surely not ALL of these veterans have retired yet...what a service to science
someone would perform if only this experise could be captured before it dies
off.
...ucbvax!lbl-csam!ra!daven or
whatever is on the header THIS time.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jan 84 5:06:29-PST (Sun)
From: hplabs!zehntel!tektronix!ucbcad!ucbesvax.turner @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Re: You cant go home again - (nf)
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.1315
Re: finnca1@topaz's comments on weather forecasting
Replacing expertise with raw computer power has its shortcomings--the
"joke" of predicting the weather 24 hours from now in 26 hours of cpu
time is a case in point. Less accurate but more timely forecasts used
to be made by people with slide-rules--and where are these people now?
It wouldn't surprise me if the 20th century had its share of "lost arts".
Archaelogists still dig up things that we don't know quite how to make,
and the technological historians of the next century might well be faced
with the same sorts of puzzles when reading about how people got by
without computers.
Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)
------------------------------
Date: Wed 8 Feb 84 15:29:01-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Summary of Responses
The following is a summary of the responses to my AIList request for
information on AI and meteorology, spatial and temporal reasoning, and
related matters. I have tried to summarize the net messages accurately,
but I may have made some unwarranted inferences about affiliations,
gender, or other matters that were not explicit in the messages.
The citations below should certainly not be considered comprehensive,
either for the scientific literature as a whole or for the AI literature.
There has been relevant work in pattern recognition and image understanding
(e.g., the work at SRI on tracking clouds in satellite images), mapping,
database systems, etc. I have not had time to scan even my own collection
of literature (PRIP, CVPR, PR, PAMI, IJCAI, AAAI, etc.) for relevant
articles, and I have not sought out bibliographies or done online searches
in the traditional meteorological literature. Still, I hope these
comments will be of use.
------------------
Bob Giansiracusa (Dept of Computer Science, Penn State Univ, 814-865-9507)
reports that he and Alistair Frazer (Penn State Meteo Dept.) are advising
two meteorology/CS students who want to do senior/masters theses in AI.
They have submitted a proposal and expect to hear from NSF in a few months.
Capt. Roslyn (Roz) J. Taylor, Applied AI Project Officer, USAF, @RADC,
has read two of the Gaffney/Racer papers entitled "A Learning Interpretive
Decision Algorithm for Severe Storm Forecasting." She found the algorithm
to be a "fuzzy math"-based fine-tuning algorithm in much the same spirit
as a Kalman filter. The algorithm might be useful as the numerical
predictor in an expert system.
Jay Glicksman of the Texas Instruments Computer Science Lab suggests
that we check out
Kawaguchi, E. et al. (1979)
An Understanding System of Natural Language and Pictorial Pattern in
the World of Weather Reports
IJCAI-6 Tokyo, pp. 469-474
It does not provide many details and he has not seen a follow up, but
the paper may give some leads. This paper is evidently related to the
Taniguchi et al. paper in the 6th Pat. Rec. proceedings that I mentioned
in my query.
Dr. John Tsotsos and his students at the Univ. of Toronto Laboratory for
Computational Medicine have been working for several years on the ALVEN
system to interpret heart images in X-ray films. Dr. Tsotsos feels that the
spatial and temporal reasoning capabilities of the system would be of use in
meteorology. The temporal reasoning includes intervals, points,
hierarchies, and temporal sampling considerations. He has sent me the
following reports:
R. Gershon, Y. Ali, and M. Jenkin, An Explanation System for Frame-based
Knowledge Organized Along Multiple Dimensions, LCM-TR83-2, Dec. 1983.
J.K. Tsotsos, Knowledge Organization: Its Role in Representation,
Decision-making and Explanation Schemes for Expert Systems, LCM-TR83-3,
Dec. 1983.
J.K. Tsotsos, Representational Axes and Temporal Cooperative Processes,
Preliminary Draft.
I regret that I have found time for only a cursory examination of these papers,
and so cannot say whether they will be useful in themselves for meteorology
or only as a source of further references in spatial and temporal reasoning.
Someone else in my group is now taking a look at them. Others papers from
Dr. Tsotsos group may be found in: IJACI77-79-81, PRIP81, ICPR82, PAMI Nov.80,
and IEEE Computer Oct. 83.
Stuart C. Shapiro at the Univ. of Buffalo (SUNY) CS Dept. added the
following reference on temporal reasoning:
Almeida, M. J., and Shapiro, S. C., Reasoning about the temporal
structure of narrative texts. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting
of the Cognitive Science Society, Rochester, NY, 1983.
Fanya S. Montalvo at MIT echoed my interest in
* knowledge representations for spatial/temporal reasoning;
* inference methods for estimating meteorological variables
from (spatially and temporally) sparse data;
* methods of interfacing symbolic knowledge and heuristic
reasoning with numerical simulation models;
* a bibliography or guide to relevant literature.
She reports that good research along these lines is very scarce, but
suggests the following:
As far as interfacing symbolic knowlege with heuristic reasoning with
numerical simulation, Weyhrauch's FOL system is the best formalism I've
seen/worked-with to do that. Unfortunately there are few references to it.
One is Filman, Lamping, & Montalvo in IJCAI'83. Unfortunately it was too
short. There's a reference to Weyhrauch's Prolegomena paper in there. Also
there is Wood's, Greenfeld's, and Zdybel's work at BBN with KLONE and a ship
location database; they're no longer there. There's also Mark Friedell's
Thesis from Case Western Reserve; see his SIGGRAPH'83 article, also
references to Greenfeld & Yonke there. Oh, yes, there's also Reid Simmons,
here at MIT, on a system connecting diagrams in geologic histories with
symbolic descriptions, AAAI'83. The work is really in bits and pieces and
hasn't really been put together as a whole working formalism yet. The
issues are hard.
Jim Hendler at Brown reports that Drew McDermott has recently written
several papers about temporal and spatial reasoning. The best one on
temporal reasoning was published in Cognitive Science about a year ago.
Also, one of Drew's students at Yale recently did a thesis on spatial
reasoning.
David M. Axler, MSCF Applications Manager at Univ. of Pennsylvania, suggests:
A great deal of info about weather already exists in a densely-encoded form,
namely proverbs and traditional maxims. Is there a way that this system can
be converted to an expert system, if for no other reason than potential
comparison between the analysis it provides with that gained from more
formal meteorological approaches?
If this is of interest, I can provide leads to collections of weather lore,
proverbs, and the like. If you're actually based at SRI, you're near
several of the major folklore libraries and should have relatively easy
access (California is the only state in the union with two grad programs in
the field, one at Berkeley (under the anthro dept.), and one at UCLA) to the
material, as both schools have decent collections.
I replied:
The use of folklore maxims is a good idea, and one fairly easy to build
into an expert system for prediction of weather at a single site. (The
user would have to enter observations such as "red sky at night" since
pattern recognition couldn't be used. Given that, I suspect that a
Prospector-style inference net could be built that would simultaneously
evaluate hypotheses of "rain", "fog", etc., for multiple time windows.)
Construction of the system and evaluation of the individual rules would
make an excellent thesis project.
Unfortunately, I doubt that the National Weather Service or other such
organization would be interested in having SRI build such a "toy"
system. They would be more interested in methods for tracking storm
fronts and either automating or improving on the map products they
currently produce.
As a compromise, one project we have been considering is to automate
a book of weather forecasting rules for professional forecasters.
Such rule books do exist, but the pressures of daily forecasting are
such that the books are rarely consulted. Perhaps some pattern
recognition combined with some man-machine dialog could trigger the
expert system rules that would remind the user of relevant passages.
Dave liked the project, and suggested that there may be additional unofficial
rule sources such as those used by the Farmer's Almanac publishers.
Philip Kahn at UCLA is interested in pattern recognition, and recommends
the book
REMOTE SENSING: Optics and Optical Systems by Philip N. Slater
Addison-Wesley Publ. Co., Reading, MA, 1980
for information on atmospherics, optics, films, testing/reliability, etc.
Alex Pang at UCLA is doing some non-AI image processing to aid weather
prediction. He is interested in hearing about AI and meteorology.
Bill Havens at the University of British Columbia expressed interest,
particularly in methods that could be implemented on a personal computer.
Mike Uschold at Edinburgh and Noel Kropf at Columbia University (Seismology
Lab?) have also expressed interest.
------------------
My thanks to all who replied.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂13-Feb-84 1422 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Faculty lunch]
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 13 Feb 84 14:22:18 PST
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 14:18:57-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Faculty lunch]
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I hope we can discuss this tomorrow.
GENE
---------------
Mail-From: MAYR created at 13-Feb-84 12:19:56
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 12:19:55-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty lunch
To: golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Gene,
in case there is a general faculty lunch tomorrow, I'd have a topic to
talk a few words about. It is some ideas how to restructure the
requirements and electives for computer science courses for the
Math Sciences program.
-Ernst
-------
-------
∂13-Feb-84 1736 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 13 Feb 84 17:36:19 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Feb 84 17:24:53-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Feb 84 17:22:06-PST
Date: 13 Feb 1984 1721-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: Reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
cc: peters
I have the pleasure of informing you that in the next two weeks, Scott
Soames, who is visiting from Princeton University, will be giving us two
sessions on presupposition, discourse, and context change.
Spatio-temporal location: 3.15pm, Tuesday, Ventura Halli
PRESUPPOSITION, ACCOMMODATION, AND CONTEXT CHANGE
Scott Soames, Princeton University
I will sketch the shape of a theory of presupposition and attempt
to integrate it with a theory of how semantical information is encoded
by sentences in a context, and a pragmatical theory of how information
is exchanged on the basis of utterances.
In the first lecture, I will bring together what seems to me to be
the most plausible foundational account of what presupposition is with
the most accurate descriptive treatments that have been produced in recent
years. This is significant since the foundational and descriptive accounts
were developed independently, and modifications in each are needed to unite
them.
The most pressing remaining question concerns the possibe semantic
basis for pragmatic presuppositional requirements of sentences. In the first
lecture, I consider and reject the strategy of deriving these requirements
from a non bivalent semantics. In the second lecture, I will explore the
possibility of deriving them from the mechanisms provided by the contextual-
change semantics of Irene Heim.
-------
∂13-Feb-84 2021 MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA complexity theory primer
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 13 Feb 84 20:20:57 PST
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 20:18:56-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: complexity theory primer
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
For the next three or so Wednesday lunch meetings, we plan to give a
primer on complexity theory. Topics covered are to include:
-- Machine models: (non)deterministic Turing machines,
alternating Turing machines,
(monotone) circuits, Boolean networks;
-- Complexity measures: time, space, size, depth;
-- Complexity classes: separation, hierarchies;
-- Reductions: 1-1, m-1, Turing, btt
log-space, polynomial time
-- Complete problems
-- Examples: ranging from DLOG-SPACE to PSPACE (about).
-- Relationships between models of computation and complexity classes:
-- deterministic space vs. nondet. space
-- space and time
-- sequential and parallel computation
-- TM's, RAM's, and circuits.
.... Maybe next year, we then start with relativized complexity classes,
SMM's, HMM's, and all these other wonderful things!
In any case, I intend to start at the top of the above list at our
established Wednesday lunch meeting this week (i.e., on the 15th at noon)
in MJH301. Next week, it will probably be Jeff Ullman to take over for the
second part in this series.
-Ernst
-------
∂13-Feb-84 2150 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA tuesday am c1 seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 13 Feb 84 21:49:14 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Feb 84 21:33:15-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Feb 84 21:31:07-PST
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 21:32:10-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: tuesday am c1 seminar
To: csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
C1 Seminar, Tuesday 13 February 1984
Having last week motivated the notion of omega-complete posets (i.e.,
omega-cpo's) and omega-continuous functions for programming language
semantics, we will, after a brief review, discuss basic constructions
on omega-cpo's, including products, sums and function spaces.
-------
∂14-Feb-84 0126 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 14 Feb 84 01:26:27 PST
Date: Tue 14 Feb 84 01:22:30-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
All the regular slots in the winter quarter are filled up. Visitors
from far away will be scheduled at special times. Locals: please let
me know if you want to talk during the spring quarter!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
N E X T A F L B T A L K (S)
2/16/84 - Dr. Eli Upfal (U.C. Berkeley)
A probabilistic relation between desirable and feasible models
of parallel computation
We present a powerful probabilistic technique for simulating strong
models of synchronized parallel computation by weaker ones. In
particular, our technique eliminates the use of shared variables
without significant increase in the program run-time. The technique
is demonstrated by an algorithm simulating an n processors PRAM with
an arbitrary large shared memory by an n processor ULRTACOMPUTER - a
set of n processors communication through a bounded degree network.
We prove that if a program required t PRAM steps than our simulation
algorithm executes it on the ULTRACOMPUTER within O(t log**2 n )
steps with overwhelming probability.
******** Time and place: Feb. 16, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
2/23/84 - Dr. Jacques Desarmenien (Stanford)
"An Algorithm for the Rota Straightening formula"
The letter-place algebra is a convenient algebraic encoding of the
placement of not necessarily distinct objects into boxes. It was first
studied by Rota in the context of invariant theory, but revealed to be
a fundamental concept for the theory of the representation of the
symmetric and linear groups.
Rota's main result is the "straightening formula", giving the
characterization of a remarkable basis for this algebra. Determining
the representation of any element as a linear combination of basis
elements involves simple combinatorial constructions and a moderately
well-known sorting result.
The talk will be self-contained and elementary.
******** Time and place: Feb. 23, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year have been filled
so far.
For more information about future AFLB meetings and topics you might
want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂14-Feb-84 0828 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI DEC 2060 ACCOUNTS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 14 Feb 84 08:27:55 PST
Date: Tue 14 Feb 84 08:27:20-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI DEC 2060 ACCOUNTS
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA, bboard@SRI-AI.ARPA
******************************************************************************
CSLI DEC-2060 ACCOUNTS
Applications for accounts on the CSLI DEC will be available Wednesday from
Frances Igoni, receptionist for CSLI.
Please complete the entire application and return to Frances immediately.
We will contact you at your present net address with further details when the
account has been set up.
If you have questions, please call Michele at 497-2607.
******************************************************************************
-------
∂14-Feb-84 1418 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA two things
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 14 Feb 84 14:18:44 PST
Date: Tue 14 Feb 84 14:18:56-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: two things
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear all,
Before I leave on Thursday, I want to mention two ideas.
1) Our publications by July (preprints, etc) are going to be very
important for our year one review. Also important is going to be the
evidence of interaction those publications give. It will not be very
positive if all the papers are by the pairs that were working together
in the first place. This is not to create artificial papers, but to
encourage any new developing interactions to blossom into print as
soon as the work is mature.
2) I have heard from several sources that the main impact of our New
Year one report came from two paragraphs I wrote about how the
interaction here had changed things in my own thinking on a couple of
points. I am sure many of you have had similar experiences. I think
at some point we will want everyone to write a couple of paragraphs
along those lines. It might be good to have it for the advisory
panels visit in early April. Anyway, think about this.
Jon
-------
∂14-Feb-84 1719 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA semantics of programming languages seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 14 Feb 84 17:19:15 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Feb 84 17:05:27-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Feb 84 17:03:12-PST
Date: Tue 14 Feb 84 17:02:51-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: semantics of programming languages seminar
To: csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-newsletter@SRI-AI.ARPA, dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA
SEMANTICS OF PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES SEMINAR (C1)
Tuesday, 21 February, 9:30 am, Ventura Hall
Having covered products, sums and function spaces of cpo's, we will next
discuss strict products, sums and function spaces, and the omega-completion
of a poset. The latter will be related to Scott's notion of an information
system.
-------
∂14-Feb-84 1740 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA February 20th: Issues in Perception, Cognition, and Language
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 14 Feb 84 17:39:33 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Feb 84 17:30:03-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Feb 84 17:26:15-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Feb 84 17:26:16-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Tue 14 Feb 84 17:24:19-PST
Date: 14 Feb 1984 17:23:28-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: Roy.Maxion@CMU-CS-A at score, ames-lm!ahumada@riacs, ames-lm!beau@riacs,
ames-lm!ken@riacs, bboard@kestrel, card@parc-maxc at score, csli-friends@sri-ai at score,
dkanerva@sri-ai at score, farrell@parc-maxc at score, gascon@parc at score,
gsmith@sri-ai at score, halasz@parc-maxc at score, horaud@sri-ai at score,
jan, moran@parc-maxc at score, msgs, pentland@sri-ai at score, pierre@sri-ai at score,
prazdny@sri-kl at score, su-bboards@score, witkin@sri-kl at score
Subject: February 20th: Issues in Perception, Cognition, and Language
Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition (Psych 279)
WHO: Professor Hershel Liebowitz
Pennsylvania State University and The Center for Advanced Study
WHEN: Monday February 20, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology) room 100
WHAT: The two modes of processing concept: some implications
ABSTRACT
------------
The history and present status of the "two modes of processing" concept
will be reviewed. Differences between the system subserving object
recognition and the multi-loop control of spatial orientation will be
outlined. The relevance of this framework for our understanding of night-
time driving accidents, spatial disorientation/motion sickness, narrowing
of the visual field, and motion perception will be discussed.
-------
The next few speakers will be
Richard Thompson (Feburary 27)
Phil Cohen (Fairchild Artificial Intelligence Lab)
John Barwise (CSLI, Stanford Philosophy)
Announcements and abstracts will be posted.
∂15-Feb-84 0002 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI Reminder: next AFLB talk
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 00:02:46 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 15 Feb 84 00:01:15-PST
Date: 15 Feb 84 0000 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: Reminder: next AFLB talk
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE
N E X T A F L B T A L K
2/16/84 - Dr. Eli Upfal (U.C. Berkeley)
A probabilistic relation between desirable and feasible models
of parallel computation
We present a powerful probabilistic technique for simulating strong
models of synchronized parallel computation by weaker ones. In
particular, our technique eliminates the use of shared variables
without significant increase in the program run-time. The technique
is demonstrated by an algorithm simulating an n processors PRAM with
an arbitrary large shared memory by an n processor ULRTACOMPUTER - a
set of n processors communication through a bounded degree network.
We prove that if a program required t PRAM steps than our simulation
algorithm executes it on the ULTRACOMPUTER within O(t log**2 n )
steps with overwhelming probability.
******** Time and place: Feb. 16, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
∂15-Feb-84 0943 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA new building
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 09:43:32 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 09:42:28-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: new building
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Late yesterday afternoon our architects presented the results
results of the scoping study and some of the most recent drawings
to the UCLBD (University Committee for Land and Building Development).
This is a committee made up of faculty, staff, and students who must
give approval for all building projects on Stanford land. Next
month we will seek approval for our building, and so we needed
to go this month to present a report. All the committee members
indicated that they liked our plans very much. Several said
it was a brilliant design to satisfy the constraints, one said
it was the most unusual design they'd seen for a Stanford building
(he meant it in a positive way), and one said it was the first
building he'd ever seen that he felt he would like to work in.
These people have seen LOTS of plans and lots of buildings, so
their opinions made me feel very good about the decisions we have
made so far. Thanks again for all your suggestions and ideas; the
design reflects them.
B.
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1100 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA House for sale
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 11:00:24 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 10:58:43-PST
From: Elyse Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: House for sale
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-9746
Dean Wessells has sent the following memo.
Gene.
Colleagues:
I am selling an Eichler on campus for what I believe will be a very reasonable
price. I want very much that an H&S faculty member, especially a young one,
should have the home. If any of your young (or new?) faculty are on the
market for housing, please have them call me (7-9784, 852-9395). To avoid
any conflict of interest or direct negotiations between me, as Dean, and one
of our faculty, Robin Hamill will handle financial negotiations on the house.
Thanks.
Norm
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1224 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI DEC 2060
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 12:24:36 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 12:23:38-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI DEC 2060
To: kjb@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
******************************************************************************
The current dial-in line for the CSLI DEC is 324-3923. This will connect you
to our present eight rotary hunt lines.
The DEC is very unstable at present, and we have had some trouble with our
front-end floppies being trashed -- there is no auto-bauding at present.
All this means is: if at first you don't succeed, dial, dial again!
******************************************************************************
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1429 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Kent Curtis <curtis%nsf-cs@CSNet-Relay>: recruiting]
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 14:29:08 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 14:20:40-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Kent Curtis <curtis%nsf-cs@CSNet-Relay>: recruiting]
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
If you have any recommendations, please let me know. GENE
---------------
Return-Path: <Curtis%NSF-CS%NSF-CS@CSNet-Relay>
Received: from csnet-cic.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 15 Feb 84 13:43:44-PST
Date: 15 Feb 84 15:04:52-EDT (Wed)
From: Kent Curtis <curtis%nsf-cs@CSNet-Relay>
Return-Path: <Curtis%NSF-CS%NSF-CS@CSNet-Relay>
Subject: recruiting
To: adv-comm%Nsf-Cs@CSNet-Relay
Cc: curtis%Nsf-Cs@CSNet-Relay
Via: NSF-CS; 15 Feb 84 15:07-EST
We need help! There are two vacancies in the computer research division which
need to be filled, one as program director for theoretical computer science
and one as program director for intelligent systems. Please give us your
assistance in filling these positions by helping to publicize these
opportunities among colleagues who might be suitable. Word of mouth
recruiting has always been most effective for us but your assistance
is urgently needed.
Regards,
Kent
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1531 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting on Feb 23
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 15:30:58 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 15:18:26-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Meeting on Feb 23
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
If for some reason you are unable to be at the senior faculty meeting
on Feb 23, please give me a letter with your vote. If you want to make an
explanation that would be fine. GENE
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1603 HOBBS@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Hugh Kenner
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 16:03:29 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 16:02:36-PST
From: HOBBS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Dinner with Hugh Kenner
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
There will be dinner with Hugh Kenner Thursday evening after the colloquium,
at 7:00 at Shogun Restaurant. Please sign up at the front desk of Ventura
Hall before the colloquium so we can have an accurate count for the
restaurant. Shogun is at 4390 El Camino in Los Altos, on the logical west
side of the street, somewhere between Page Mill and San Antonio.
-- Jerry Hobbs
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1719 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 19, February 16, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 17:19:33 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 15 Feb 84 17:08:57-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 15 Feb 84 17:05:58-PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 17:05:47-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 19, February 16, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
! CSLI Newsletter
February 16, 1984 * * * Number 19
A weekly publication of
The Center for the Study of Language and Information
Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
-----------
SCHEDULE OF CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR *THIS* THURSDAY, February 16, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Bob Moore, SRI, discusses his paper,
Conference Room "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action."
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Syntactic Structure and Social Function
Conference Room of Codeswitching," by Shana Poplack.
Discussion led by John Rickford.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Robin Cooper, U. Wisconsin, speaking on
Room G-19 ELIUSS (English Language Illustration
of Unification Situation Semantics)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
*JORDAN HALL* "Mixups and Misreadings"
*Room 040* by Hugh Kenner, Johns Hopkins University
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Discussion of Moore's paper and presentation
Conference Room led by John Etchemendy.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "On Recent Treatments of the Semantics of
Conference Room `Control': Solutions in Search of a Problem?"
by David Dowty.
Discussion led by Ivan Sag.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Discussion led by Per-Kristian Halvorsen.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Putnam's Paradox"
Room G-19 by David Lewis, Philosophy Dept., Princeton
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
SEMINAR ON FOUNDATIONS OF SITUATED LANGUAGE
Bob Moore, John Perry, Stan Rosenschein
Thursdays, 10:00 a.m., Ventura Hall Seminar Room
February 16 Bob Moore discusses "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action."
February 23 Discussion of Moore's paper and presentation
led by John Etchemendy.
March 1 Discussion of Bratman's paper, "Taking Plans Seriously,"
led by Stan Rosenschein.
-----------
SEMINAR ON SEMANTICS OF NATURAL LANGUAGE
Jon Barwise
Thursdays, 2:15 p.m., Redwood Hall, Room G-19
February 16 Robin Cooper on ELIUSS (English Language Illustration of
Unification Situation Semantics)
February 23 Per-Kristian Halvorsen, topic to be announced
March 1 Stanley Peters, topic to be announced
March 8 Richard Larsen, topic to be announced
March 15 Elisabet Engdahl, topic to be announced
March 22 Barbara Grosz, Topics in discourse and Situation Semantics
References: [S&A] Situations and Attitudes, by Barwise and Perry,
MIT Press, 1983
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday at Ventura Hall, on the Stanford
University campus, as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of TINLunch
papers are available at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
February 16 John Rickford (Guest of Stan Rosenschein)
February 23 Ivan Sag
March 1 Stuart Shieber
March 8 Brian Smith
March 15 Mark Stickel
March 22 Susan Stucky
March 29 Patrick Suppes
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
SEMANTICS OF PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES SEMINAR (C1)
Tuesday, February 21, 9:30 a.m., Ventura Hall
Having covered products, sums and function spaces of cpo's, we
will next discuss strict products, sums and function spaces, and the
omega-completion of a poset. The latter will be related to Scott's
notion of an information system.
-----------
ISSUES IN PERCEPTION, LANGUAGE, AND COGNITION (PSYCH 279)
WHO: Professor Hershel Liebowitz
Pennsylvania State University and
The Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
WHAT: The Two Modes of Processing Concept: Some Implications
WHEN: Monday, February 20, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology), room 100
ABSTRACT:
The history and present status of the "two modes of processing"
concept will be reviewed. Differences between the system subserving
object recognition and the multiloop control of spatial orientation
will be outlined. The relevance of this framework for our under-
standing of nighttime driving accidents, spatial disorientation/motion
sickness, narrowing of the visual field, and motion perception will be
discussed.
February 27 Richard Thompson
March 5 Phil Cohen (Fairchild Artificial Intelligence Lab)
March 12 Jon Barwise (CSLI, Stanford Philosophy)
-----------
TALKWARE SEMINAR (CS 377)
WHO: Jim Mitchell, Acorn Systems (formerly of PARC)
WHAT: Interscript: A Language for Representing Documents
WHEN: Monday, February 27, 2:15-4:00 p.m.
WHERE: Bldg. 200, Room 205
ABSTRACT:
Interscript defines a digital representation of editable docu-
ments for interchange among editing systems. A script is the repre-
sentation of a document in the Interscript format; it can be
transmitted from one editor to another over a network or be stored for
later editing. A script is not limited to any particular editor: If
a script contains editable information some of which is not under-
standable by a particular editor, it is still possible to edit the
parts of the document understood by that editor without losing or
invalidating the parts it does not understand. Interscript is built
on a description language that is tiny but capable of extension by
definition. The semantics of this base language are expressed in a
denotational framework. The seminar will concentrate on the
Interscript language and how it is used to model various aspects of
document structure, especially layout.
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
MCCARTHY LECTURES ON THE FORMALIZATION OF COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE
John McCarthy will present the remaining three lectures of his
series (the first of the four was held January 20) at 3:00 p.m. in the
Ventura Hall Seminar Room on the dates shown below.
Friday, Feb. 17 "The Circumscription Mode of Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
Applications of circumscription to formalizing commonsense
facts. Application to the frame problem, the qualification
problem, and to the STRIPS assumption.
Friday, March 2 "Formalization of Knowledge and Belief"
Modal and first-order formalisms. Formalisms in which possible
worlds are explicit objects. Concepts and propositions as
objects in theories.
Friday, March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
-----------
SEMINAR ON WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
WHO: Scott Soames, Princeton University
WHAT: Presupposition, Accommodation, and Context Change
WHEN: Tuesday, February 14, 3:15 p.m., *AND*
Tuesday, February 21, 3:15 p.m.
WHERE: Ventura Hall Seminar Room
ABSTRACT:
I will sketch the shape of a theory of presupposition and
attempt to integrate it with a theory of how semantical information is
encoded by sentences in a context and with a pragmatical theory of how
information is exchanged on the basis of utterances. In the first
lecture, I will bring together what seems to me to be the most
plausible foundational account of what presupposition is with the most
accurate descriptive treatments that have been produced in recent
years. This is significant, since the foundational and descriptive
accounts were developed independently and modifications in each are
needed to unite them. The most pressing remaining question concerns
the possible semantic basis for pragmatic presuppositional require-
ments of sentences.
In the first lecture, I consider and reject the strategy of
deriving these requirements from a non bivalent semantics. In the
second lecture, I will explore the possibility of deriving them from
the mechanisms provided by the contextual-change semantics of Irene
Heim.
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
STANFORD LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM
On Monday, February 13, Osamu Fujimura, who heads the Department
of Linguistics and Speech Analysis Research, AT&T, Bell Laboratories,
spoke on "The Transparency of the Phonetic Component in Linguistic
Description: Implications of Articulatory Studies."
-----------
SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
On Wednesday, February 15, Lou van den Dries of Stanford Univer-
sity spoke on "Some model theory for linearly ordered structures."
The Seminar in Logic and Foundations of Mathematics meets each
Wednesday from 4:15 to 5:30 p.m. in the Stanford Mathematics
Department, Room 383-P.
-----------
NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS
The AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS is the major
international journal devoted entirely to computational approaches to
natural language research. With the 1984 volume, its name is being
changed to COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS to reflect its growing inter-
national coverage. There is now a European chapter of the ASSOCIATION
FOR COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS and a growing interest in forming one in
Asia.
The journal also has many new people on its Editorial Staff.
James Allen, of the University of Rochester, has taken over as Editor.
The FINITE STRING Editor is now Ralph Weischedel of the University of
Delaware. Lyn Bates of Bolt Beranek and Newman is the Book Review
Editor. Michael McCord, now at IBM, remains as Associate Editor.
With these major changes in editorial staffing, the journal has
fallen behind schedule. In order to catch up this year, we will be
publishing close to double the regular number of issues. The first
issue for 1983, which was just mailed out, contains papers on
"Paraphrasing Questions Using Given and New Information" by Kathleen
McKeown and "Denotational Semantics for `Natural' Language Question-
Answering Programs" by Michael Main and David Benson. There is a
lengthy review of Winograd's new book by Sergei Nirenburg and a
comprehensive description of the new Center for the Study of Language
and Information at Stanford University.
James Allen, CL Editor
Dept. of Computer Science
The University of Rochester
Rochester, NY 14627
-----------
-------
∂15-Feb-84 1928 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grey Tuesday Reminder
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 19:28:39 PST
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 19:27:53-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Grey Tuesday Reminder
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
Remember that next Tuesday at 2:30 we will have our Grey Tuesday meeting in
Jacks 252. We will be discussing the progress of all the PhD students at that
time. For those of you who are going to be out of town, please get any comments
you might have to me before you leave and I will bring them to the meeting. If
you can't make the meeting, I would be most interested in a few words about
your advisees.
Thanks!
Stuart
-------
∂15-Feb-84 2052 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #19
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 15 Feb 84 20:52:24 PST
Date: Tue 14 Feb 1984 17:27-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #19
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 15 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 19
Today's Topics:
Requests - OPS5 & IBM LISP,
LISP - Timings,
Bindings - G. Spencer-Brown,
Knowledge Acquisition - Regrets,
Alert - 4-Color Problem,
Brain Theory - Definition,
Seminars - Analogy & Causal Reasoning & Tutorial Discourse
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 10:06:53-PST
From: Ted Markowitz <G.TJM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: OPS5 query
I'd like to find out some information on acquiring a copy of
the OPS5 system. Is there a purchase price, is it free-of-charge,
etc. Please send replies to
G.TJM@SU-SCORE
Thanks.
--ted
------------------------------
Date: 1 Feb 1984 15:14:48 EST
From: Robert M. Simmons <simmons@EDN-UNIX>
Subject: lisp on ibm
Can anyone give me pointers to LISP systems that run on
IBM 370's under MVS? Direct and indirect pointers are
welcome.
Bob Simmons
simmons@edn-unix
------------------------------
Date: 11 Feb 84 17:54:24 EST
From: John <Roach@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Timings of LISPs and Machines
I dug up these timings, they are a little bit out of date but seem a little
more informative. They were done by Dick Gabriel at SU-AI in 1982 and passed
along by Chuck Hedrick at Rutgers. Some of the times have been updated to
reflect current machines by myself. These have been marked with the
date of 1984. All machines were measured using the function -
an almost Takeuchi function as defined by John McCarthy
(defun tak (x y z)
(cond ((not (< y x))
z)
(t (tak (tak (1- x) y z)
(tak (1- y) z x)
(tak (1- z) x y)))))
------------------------------------------
(tak 18. 12. 6.)
On 11/750 in Franz ordinary arith 19.9 seconds compiled
On 11/780 in Franz with (nfc)(TAKF) 15.8 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On Rutgers-20 in Interlisp/1984 13.8 seconds compiled
On 11/780 in Franz (nfc) 8.4 seconds compiled (KIM time)
On 11/780 in Franz (nfc) 8.35 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On 11/780 in Franz with (ffc)(TAKF) 7.5 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On 11/750 in PSL, generic arith 7.1 seconds compiled
On MC (KL) in MacLisp (TAKF) 5.9 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On Dolphin in InterLisp/1984 4.81 seconds compiled
On Vax 11/780 in InterLisp (load = 0) 4.24 seconds compiled
On Foonly F2 in MacLisp 4.1 seconds compiled
On Apollo (MC68000) PASCAL 3.8 seconds (extra waits?)
On 11/750 in Franz, Fixnum arith 3.6 seconds compiled
On MIT CADR in ZetaLisp 3.16 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On MIT CADR in ZetaLisp 3.1 seconds compiled (ROD time)
On MIT CADR in ZetaLisp (TAKF) 3.1 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On Apollo (MC68000) PSL SYSLISP 2.93 seconds compiled
On 11/780 in NIL (TAKF) 2.8 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On 11/780 in NIL 2.7 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On 11/750 in C 2.4 seconds
On Rutgers-20 in Interlisp/Block/84 2.225 seconds compiled
On 11/780 in Franz (ffc) 2.13 seconds compiled (KIM time)
On 11/780 (Diablo) in Franz (ffc) 2.1 seconds compiled (VRP time)
On 11/780 in Franz (ffc) 2.1 seconds compiled (GJC time)
On 68000 in C 1.9 seconds
On Utah-20 in PSL Generic arith 1.672 seconds compiled
On Dandelion in Interlisp/1984 1.65 seconds compiled
On 11/750 in PSL INUM arith 1.4 seconds compiled
On 11/780 (Diablo) in C 1.35 seconds
On 11/780 in Franz (lfc) 1.13 seconds compiled (KIM time)
On UTAH-20 in Lisp 1.6 1.1 seconds compiled
On UTAH-20 in PSL Inum arith 1.077 seconds compiled
On Rutgers-20 in Elisp 1.063 seconds compiled
On Rutgers-20 in R/UCI lisp .969 seconds compiled
On SAIL (KL) in MacLisp .832 seconds compiled
On SAIL in bummed MacLisp .795 seconds compiled
On MC (KL) in MacLisp (TAKF,dcl) .789 seconds compiled
On 68000 in machine language .7 seconds
On MC (KL) in MacLisp (dcl) .677 seconds compiled
On SAIL in bummed MacLisp (dcl) .616 seconds compiled
On SAIL (KL) in MacLisp (dcl) .564 seconds compiled
On Dorado in InterLisp Jan 1982 (tr) .53 seconds compiled
On UTAH-20 in SYSLISP arith .526 seconds compiled
On SAIL in machine language .255 seconds (wholine)
On SAIL in machine language .184 seconds (ebox-doesn't include mem)
On SCORE (2060) in machine language .162 seconds (ebox)
On S-1 Mark I in machine language .114 seconds (ebox & ibox)
I would be interested if people who had these machines/languages available
could update some of the timings. There also isn't any timings for Symbolics
or LMI.
John.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1984 01:14 EST
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #14
In regard to G Spencer Brown, if you are referring to author of
the Laws of Form, if that's what it was called: I believe he was
a friend of Bertrand Russell and that he logged out
quite a number of years ago.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 84 14:18:04 EST
From: Brint <abc@brl-bmd>
Subject: Re: "You cant go home again"
I couldn't agree more (with your feelings of regret at not
capturing the expertise of the "oldster" in meterological
lore).
My dad was one of the best automotive diagnosticians in
Baltimore until his death six years ago. His uncanny
ability to pinpoint a problem's cause from external
symptoms was locally legendary. Had I known then what I'm
beginning to learn now about the promise of expert systems,
I'd have spent many happy hours "picking his brain" with
the (unfilled) promise of making us both rich!
------------------------------
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 22:15:08-EST
From: Jonathan Intner <INTNER@COLUMBIA-20.ARPA>
Subject: The 4-Color Problem
To Whom It May Concern:
The computer proof of the 4 - color problem can be found in
Appel, K. and W. Haken ,"Every planar map is 4-colorable-1 :
Discharging", "Every planar map is 4-colorable-2: Reducibility",
Illinois Journal of Mathematics, 21, 429-567 (1977). I haven't looked
at this myself, but I understand from Mike Townsend (a Prof here at
Columbia) that the proof is a real mess and involves thousands of
special cases.
Jonathan Intner
INTNER@COLUMBIA-20.ARPA
------------------------------
Date: 11 Feb 1984 13:50-PST
From: Andy Cromarty <andy@AIDS-Unix>
Subject: Re: Brain, a parallel processor?
What are the evidences that the brain is a parallel processor?
My own introspection seem to indicate that mine is doing time-sharing.
-- Rene Bach <BACH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
You are confusing "brain" with "mind".
------------------------------
Date: 10 Feb 1984 15:23 EST (Fri)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Revolving Seminar
[Forwarded by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Wednesday, February 15, 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy
Dedre Gentner
The structure-mapping theory of analogy describes a set of
principles by which the interpretation of an analogy is derived
from the meanings of its terms. These principles are
characterized as implicit rules for mapping knowledge about a
base domain into a target domain. Two important features of the
theory are (1) the rules depend only on syntactic properties of
the knowledge representation, and not on the specific content of
the domains; and (2) the theoretical framework allows analogies
to be distinguished cleanly from literal similarity statements,
applications of general laws, and other kinds of comparisons.
Two mapping principles are described: (1) Relations between
objects, rather than attributes of objects, are mapped from base
to target; and (2) The particular relations mapped are determined
by @u(systematicity), as defined by the existence of higher-order
relations. Psychological experiments supporting the theory are
described, and implications for theories of learning are
discussed.
COMING SOON: Tomas Lozano-Perez, Jerry Barber, Dan Carnese, Bob Berwick, ...
------------------------------
Date: Mon 13 Feb 84 09:15:36-PST
From: Juanita Mullen <MULLEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: SIGLUNCH ANNOUNCEMENT - FEBRUARY 24, 1984
[Reprinted from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution.]
Friday, February 24, 1984
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry
12:05
SPEAKER: Ben Kuipers, Department of Mathematics
Tufts University
TOPIC: Studying Experts to Learn About Qualitative
Causal Reasoning
By analyzing a verbatim protocol of an expert's explanation we can
derive constraints on the conceptual framework used by human experts
for causal reasoning in medicine. We use these constraints, along
with textbook descriptions of physiological mechanisms and the
computational requirements of successful performance, to propose a
model of qualitative causal reasoning. One important design decision
in the model is the selection of the "envisionment" version of causal
reasoning rather than a version based on "causal links." The
envisionment process performs a qualitative simulation, starting with
a description of the structure of a mechanism and predicting its
behavior. The qualitative causal reasoning algorithm is a step toward
second-generation medical diagnosis programs that understand how the
mechanisms of the body work. The protocol analysis method is a
knowledge acquisition technique for determining the conceptual
framework of new types of knowledge in an expert system, prior to
acquiring large amounts of domain-specific knowledge. The qualitative
causal reasoning algorithm has been implemented and tested on medical
and non-medical examples. It will be the core of RENAL, a new expert
system for diagnosis in nephrology, that we are now developing.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Feb 84 0943 EST (Sunday)
From: Alan.Lesgold@CMU-CS-A (N981AL60)
Subject: colloquium announcement
[Forwarded from the CMU-C bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
THE INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM GROUP
LEARNING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
AN ARCHITECTURE FOR
TUTORIAL DISCOURSE
BEVERLY P. WOOLF
COMPUTER AND INFORMATION SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15,
2:00 - 3:00, LRDC AUDITORIUM (SECOND FLOOR)
Human discourse is quite complex compared to the present ability of
machines to handle communication. Sophisticated research into discourse
is needed before we can construct intelligent interactive systems. This
talk presents recent research in the areas of discourse generation, with
emphasis on teaching and tutoring dialogues.
This talk describes MENO, a system where hand tailored rules have
been used to generate flexible responses in the face of student
failures. The system demonstrates the effectiveness of separating
tutoring knowledge and tutoring decisions from domain and student
knowledge. The design of the system suggests a machine theory of
tutoring and uncovers some of the conventions and intuitions of tutoring
discourse. This research is applicable to any intelligent interface
which must reason about the users knowledge.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
ailist%sri-ai
Serial or parallel
It seems to me that introspection can tell us that the brain
does many things serially. For example, a student with 5 problems
on an examination cannot set 5 processes working on them. Indeed
I can't see that introspection indicates that anything is done
in parallel, although it does indicate that many things are done
subconsciously. This is non-trivial, because one could imagine
a mind that could set several processes going subconsciously and
then look at them from time to time to see what progress they
were making.
On the other hand, anatomy suggests and physiological
experiments confirm that the brain does many things in parallel.
These things include low level vision processing and probably
also low level auditory processing and also reflexes. For example,
the blink reflex seems to proceed without thought, although it
can be observed and in parallel with whatever else is going on.
Indeed one might regard the blink reflex and some well learned
habits as counter-examples to my assertion that one can't set
parallel processes going and then observe them.
All else seems to be conjecture. I'll conjecture that
a division of neural activity into serial and parallel activities
developed very early in evolution. For example, a bee's eye is
a parallel device, but the bee carries out long chains of serial
activities in foraging. My more adventurous conjecture is that
primate level intelligence involves applying parallel pattern
recognition processes evolve in connection with vision to records
of the serial activities of the organism. The parallel processes
of recognition are themselves subconscious, but the results have
to take part in the serial activity. Finally, seriality seems
to be required for coherence. An animal that seeks food by
locomotion works properly only if it can go in one direction
at a time, whereas a sea anemone can wave all its tentacles at
once and needs only very primitive seriality that can spread
in a wave of activity.
Perhaps someone who knows more physiology can offer more
information about the division of animal activity into serial
and parallel kinds.
∂16-Feb-84 1043 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 16 Feb 84 10:42:16 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 16 Feb 84 08:47:07-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 16 Feb 84 08:44:58-PST
Date: Thu 16 Feb 84 08:45:54-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
SPEAKER: Prof. Rolando Chuaqui, University of Chile
TITLE: Well-ordering types in theories of classes.
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 22, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
-------
∂16-Feb-84 1657 PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA Last pass on fixing a meeting time
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 16 Feb 84 16:56:52 PST
Date: Thu 16 Feb 84 16:57:40-PST
From: Stanley Peters <PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Last pass on fixing a meeting time
To: csli-b1@SRI-AI.ARPA
Can everyone who cares about the difference tell me whether
they would prefer Mondays at 3:15 or Thursdays at 10:00 as
the time for B1 and D4 to meet.
-------
∂16-Feb-84 2032 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Conference on Computer Algebra
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 16 Feb 84 20:32:22 PST
Date: Thu 16 Feb 84 20:30:25-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Conference on Computer Algebra
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
There will be a conference on computer algbraic systems as a tool for
research in mathematics and physics, at NYU, on April 5 and 6. The
conference consists of 12 invited talks. There will be demos of
Macsyma, Maple, muMATH, and everything else.
I posted the official announcement on the AA physical bulletin board.
If there is enough interest, I'll also distribute it electronically.
- Andrei
-------
∂16-Feb-84 2217 @SRI-AI.ARPA:halvorsen.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Re: Last pass on fixing a meeting time
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 16 Feb 84 22:17:45 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 16 Feb 84 22:19:09-PST
Date: 16 Feb 84 22:11 PST
From: halvorsen.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Re: Last pass on fixing a meeting time
In-reply-to: Stanley Peters <PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA>'s message of Thu, 16
Feb 84 16:57:40 PST
To: PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-b1@SRI-AI.ARPA
I would like Mondays at 3:15 rather than Thursday at 10. The latter
will conflict with other Thursday activities.
Kris
∂17-Feb-84 0901 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA sabbatical leave
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Feb 84 09:00:45 PST
Date: Fri 17 Feb 84 08:49:22-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: sabbatical leave
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Please let me know if you are planning sabbatical leave next year.
Let me know how long and which quarters.
GENE
-------
∂17-Feb-84 1354 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:golub@navajo Missing black book
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Feb 84 13:54:18 PST
Received: from Navajo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 17 Feb 84 13:53:21-PST
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 84 13:53:13 pst
To: faculty@Score
Subject: Missing black book
From: Gene Golub <golub@navajo>
------- Forwarded Message
-------
I am missing my date book - black and 5x7 and a folder.
Please return it to me as soon as possible if you find it.
GENE
------- End of Forwarded Message
∂17-Feb-84 2105 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 17 Feb 84 21:04:10 PST
Date: Fri 17 Feb 84 21:03:19-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
Again I'll be out of town for the next two weeks. Yoni Malachi has
agreed to continue to help run the AFLB during my trip. If you need
to reach me, please leave a msg on my home answering machine: (415)
494-8608. I'll check it daily. - Andrei
!!!!! Note special day, time, and room for David Johnson's talk !!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2/23/84 - Dr. Jacques Desarmenien (Stanford)
"An Algorithm for the Rota Straightening formula"
The letter-place algebra is a convenient algebraic encoding of the
placement of not necessarily distinct objects into boxes. It was first
studied by Rota in the context of invariant theory, but revealed to be
a fundamental concept for the theory of the representation of the
symmetric and linear groups.
Rota's main result is the "straightening formula", giving the
characterization of a remarkable basis for this algebra. Determining
the representation of any element as a linear combination of basis
elements involves simple combinatorial constructions and a moderately
well-known sorting result.
The talk will be self-contained and elementary.
******** Time and place: Feb. 23, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
3/1/84 - Dr. Avi Wigderson (Berkeley)
"How dicreet is the discrete log?"
Blum and Micali showed how to "hide" one bit in the Discrete Logarithm
function. We show how to hide k bits, for all k=O(log log P), where P
is the modulus. This cuts the trade-off time vs. secure bits by a
factor of k for coin flipping and pseudo-random number generation.
******** Time and place: March 1, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
Special AFLB (Note date, time and room!)
3/2/84 - Dr. D. S. Johnson (ATT Bell Labs)
"Some Unexpected Expected Behavior Results for Bin Packing"
This will be an informal presentation of recent work on the
probabilistic analysis of simple heuristics for bin packing. We have
two main results. For the first-fit heuristic, we show that, if the
items are evenly distributed between 0 and 1, then the expected error
grows as the 4/5 power of the optimum. It was widely believed that
the error is linear. Our second result states that, if the items are
spread between 0 and 1/2, then the expected error of the first-fit
decreasing heuristic is constant. We prove these average-case results
by doing essentially worst-case analysis on certain dense subsets of
the inputs.
This is joint work with Bentley, Leighton, C.C.McGeoch, and L. McGeoch.
******** Time and place: March 2, 2:15 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) *******
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year have been filled
so far.
For more information about future AFLB meetings and topics you might
want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂18-Feb-84 0122 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kaplan.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Visit by George Miller
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Feb 84 01:22:34 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 18 Feb 84 01:22:29-PST
Date: 17 Feb 84 09:42 PST
From: Kaplan.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Visit by George Miller
To: CSLI-Folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
George Miller, a member of the CSLI Advisory Panel, will be visiting
from February 27 through February 29. The purpose of his visit is to
help us understand how to develop a stronger connection between the
abstract theoretical activities that most of us are engaged in and the
more empirical constraints on language and information that
psychological research might provide.
George will be talking to members of the psychology department, and we
encourage all CSLIers with interests or thoughts on these matters to
arrange a time to talk to him. His schedule will be coordinated by
Leslie Batema (LB@SRI-AI, 497-0939).
George will also give a special colloquium, co-sponsored by CSLI and the
Psychology Department, at 4pm on Monday, February 27. The topic is
"Some Thoughts about Lexicons, Objective and Subjective", place to be
announced.
This visit is one step towards planning a larger psychological component
to CSLI research, with closer ties to other research in the Psychology
Department.
∂18-Feb-84 0224 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA furniture for trailors
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Feb 84 02:24:28 PST
Date: Fri 17 Feb 84 11:05:38-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: furniture for trailors
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We need to order the furniture for the trailors on Tuesday of next
week. We decided that we couldn't plan at this point what furniture
would be good in the new building, and we don't have a very large
furniture budget for the trailors. We want to order what you will
need to work comfortably for a year an a half, but we don't want
to order more than will be used. We had planned a desk, desk chair,
side chair, and bookshelffor everyone, aandrminal table for every offi
office. We have the following two options for desks: (1)mtal desk
with a fake wood top with a file drawer, 4 side drawers, a center
drawer and a pull-out surface, (2) 2 small file cabinets with a board
across to form the surface; the board would be rounded, and made with
overhangs to keep it from sliding; one of the file cabinets could
have two small drawers and one file drawer.
Option 2 is more expensive than option 1, but we could probably use
the file cabinets in the new building. Some people prefer the look of
Option 2. If people need a 2 drawer file in addition to option 1, but
wouldn't need it with option 2, option 1 would become the more
expensive.
So we need to know what you will need. If you do not already have an
office in Ventura would you please send the answers to the following questions
to JOYCE@sri-ai. (Joyce has investigated many options to find ones
that were within the budget, not bad looking, and comfortable.)
(a)Do you prefer Option 1 or Option 2?
(b)Would you need a 2 drawer file in addition to either option?
(c)How many shelves do you need the bookshelf to have? The shelf
we are considering is 32 ches wide; it can have 2, 3, 4, 5
or 6 shelves,.
3
We can get price breaks by buying in quantity, so we would like to
settle on one kind of desk and bookshelf. If you feel very strongly about your
choice let us know.
Please let Joyce know by noon on Tuesday Feb 21, so we can make our
decisions and get the order in by Tuesday afternoon.
Thanks.
B.
PS
The trailors are still scheduled to be delivered March 13 and ready
for occupancy on March 20.
-------
∂18-Feb-84 0316 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Monday (Feb 20) meeting of the class
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Feb 84 03:16:12 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 18 Feb 84 03:03:22-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 18 Feb 84 03:01:23-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 18 Feb 84 03:02:06-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Fri 17 Feb 84 18:09:52-PST
Date: 17 Feb 1984 18:09:03-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: Roy.Maxion@CMU-CS-A at score, ames-lm!ahumada@riacs, ames-lm!beau@riacs,
ames-lm!ken@riacs, bboard@kestrel, card@parc-maxc at score, csli-friends@sri-ai at score,
dkanerva@sri-ai at score, farrell@parc-maxc at score, gascon@parc at score,
gsmith@sri-ai at score, halasz@parc-maxc at score, horaud@sri-ai at score,
jan, moran@parc-maxc at score, msgs, pentland@sri-ai at score, pierre@sri-ai at score,
prazdny@sri-kl at score, su-bboards@score, witkin@sri-kl at score
Subject: Monday (Feb 20) meeting of the class
This note is just to confirm that we will, indeed, be meeting this
Monday despite the fact that it is All Presidents' Day. Room 100
in the Psychology Bldg. at noon. Come by for a pleasant break on
a quiet day.
brian
∂18-Feb-84 0913 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grey Tuesday
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Feb 84 09:13:19 PST
Date: Sat 18 Feb 84 09:12:45-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Grey Tuesday
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The Gray Tuesday meeting will take place on Tuesday (!) Feb 21 at 2:30.
There are a few departmental things to discuss so even if you did not
plan on being there for the whole meeting, please come to the beginning.
It's always interesting to hear of the progress of our students so please
do come even if you are not involved with many students. These meeting should
help in giving us a sense of community.
GENE
-------
∂18-Feb-84 1058 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kay.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Re: furniture for trailors
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 18 Feb 84 10:58:06 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 18 Feb 84 10:57:59-PST
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 84 10:55 PST
From: Kay.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Re: furniture for trailors
In-reply-to: "BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA's message of Fri, 17 Feb 84 11:05:38
PST"
To: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
I prefer option 2 and perfer more rather than less shelves in the
bookcase, but am not particular as to the exact number.
BUT LOOK--
Have you considered that most if not all of these offices will have
Xerox 1100's in them and indeed that these are likely to become one of
there more salient features? A terminal table of the usual design does
not work for them and it is the judgement of many that a standard desk
is about three inches too high to make working with them comfortable.
On the other hand, a lower desk or table seems OK for ordinary purposes.
--Martin.
∂19-Feb-84 1700 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA S/C plan
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 19 Feb 84 17:00:24 PST
Date: Sun 19 Feb 84 14:32:00-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: S/C plan
To: super@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I have a copy of the DARPA S/C plan. Anybody want to take a look?
-------
∂19-Feb-84 2022 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Tuesday's meeting of the discourse seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 19 Feb 84 20:21:54 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 19 Feb 84 20:14:24-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 19 Feb 84 20:12:26-PST
Date: 19 Feb 1984 2011-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: Tuesday's meeting of the discourse seminar
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
This coming Tuesday, S.Soames was supposed to give his second talk. Many
people are going to be away and so we postpone the meeting till next week.
Thus, we will NOT meet on 2.21.84. See you on 2.28.84.
-------
∂20-Feb-84 0934 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Prof. Rolando Chuaqui, University of Chile
TITLE: Well-ordering types in theories of classes.
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 22, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
∂20-Feb-84 0943 @SRI-AI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Feb 84 09:43:32 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 20 Feb 84 09:43:17-PST
Date: 20 Feb 84 0934 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Prof. Rolando Chuaqui, University of Chile
TITLE: Well-ordering types in theories of classes.
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 22, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
∂20-Feb-84 1738 ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Lewis
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Feb 84 17:38:31 PST
Date: Mon 20 Feb 84 17:38:37-PST
From: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Dinner with Lewis
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
After the CSLI colloquium this Thursday (David Lewis, "Putnam's
Paradox", usual time and place), there will be a dinner at La Fiesta in
Mountain View. If you think you might be interested in going to dinner
with Lewis, let me know by about noon on Thursday.
--John Etchemendy
-------
∂20-Feb-84 1950 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #20
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Feb 84 19:50:31 PST
Date: Fri 17 Feb 1984 09:22-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #20
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 17 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 20
Today's Topics:
Lisp - Timing Data Caveat,
Bindings - G. Spencer Brown,
Logic - Nature of Undecidability,
Brain Theory - Parallelism,
Expert Systems - Need for Perception,
AI Culture - Work in Progress,
Seminars - Learning & Automatic Deduction & Commonsense Reasoning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 Feb 1984 1417-PST
From: VANBUER at USC-ECL.ARPA
Subject: Timing Data Caveat
A warning on the TAK performance testing: this code only exercises
function calling and small integer arithmetic, and none of things
most heavily used in "real" lisp programming: CONSing, garbage collection,
paging (ai stuff is big after all).
Darrel J. Van Buer
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 84 11:15:21 EST
From: John McLean <mclean@NRL-CSS>
Subject: G. Spencer-Brown and undecidable propositions
G. Spencer-Brown is very much alive. He spent several months at NRL a couple
of years ago and presented lectures on his purported proof of the four color
theorem. Having heard him lecture on several topics previously, I did not feel
motivated to attend his lectures on the four color theorem so I can't comment
on them first hand. Those who knew him better than I believe that he is
currently at Oxford or Cambridge. By the way, he was not a friend of Russell's
as far as I know. Russell merely said something somewhat positive about LAWS
OF FORM.
With respect to undecidability, I can't figure out what Charlie Crummer means
by "undecidable proposition". The definition I have always seen is that a
proposition is undecidable with respect to a set of axioms if it is
independent, i.e,. neither the proposition nor its negation is provable.
(An undecidable theory is a different kettle of fish altogether.) Examples are
Euclid's 5th postulate with respect to the other 4, Goedel's sentence with
respect to first order number theory, the continuum hypothesis with respect to
set theory, etc. I can't figure out the claim that one can't decide whether
an undecidable proposition is decidable or not. Euclid's 5th postulate,
Goedel's sentence, and the continuum hypothesis have been proven to be
undecidable. For simple theories, such as sentential logic (i.e., no
quantifiers), there are even algorithms for detecting undecidability.
John McLean
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 84 11:18:43 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: G. Spencer-Brown and undecidable propositions
Thanks for the lead to G. S-B. I think I understand what he is driving at with
THE LAWS OF FORM so I would like to see his alledged 4-color proof.
Re: undecidability... Is it true that all propositions can be proved decidable
or not with respect to a particular axiomatic system from WITHIN that system?
My understanding is that this is not generally possible. Example (Not a proof
of my understanding): Is the value of the statement "This statement is false."
decidable from within Boolean logic? It seems to me that from within Boolean
logic, i.e. 2-valued logic, all that would be seen is that no matter how long
I crank I never seem to be able to settle down to a unique value. If this
proposition is fed to a 2-valued logic program (written in PROLOG, LISP, or
whatever language one desires) the program just won't halt. From OUTSIDE the
machine, a human programmer can easily detect the problem but from WITHIN
the Boolean system it's not possible. This seems to be an example of the
halting problem.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 16 Feb 1984 12:22 EST (Thu)
From: "Steven C. Bagley" <BAGLEY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Quite more than you want to know about George Spencer Brown
Yes, Spencer Brown was associated with Russell, but since Lord Russell
died recently (1970), I think it safe to assume that not ALL of his
associates are dead, yet, at least.
There was a brief piece about Spencer Brown in "New Scientist" several
years ago (vol. 73, no. 1033, January 6, 1977, page 6). Here are two
interesting quotes:
"What sets him apart from the many others who have claimed a proof of
the [four-color] theorem are his technique, and his personal style.
Spencer Brown's technique rests on a book he wrote in 1964 called
`Laws of Form.' George Allen and Unwin published it in 1969, on the
recommendation of Bertrand Russell. In the book he develops a new
algebra of logic -- from which the normal Boolean algebra (a means of
representing propositions and arguments with symbols) can be derived.
The book has had a mixed reputation, from `a work of genius' to
`pretentious triviality.' It is certainly unorthodox, and mixes
metaphysics and mathematics. Russell himself was taken with the work,
and mentions it in his autobiography....
The style of the man is extravagant -- he stays at the Savoy -- and
all-embracing. He was in the Royal Navy in the Second World War; has
degrees in philosophy and psychology (but not mathematics); was a
lecturer in logic at Christ Church College, Oxford; wrote a treatise
on probability; a volume of poetry, and a novel; was a chief logic
designer with Mullard Equipment Ltd where his patented design of a
transistorised elevator logic circuit led to `Laws of Form'; has two
world records for gliding; and presently lectures part-time in the
mathematics department at the University of Cambridge while also
managing his publishing business."
I know of two reviews of "Laws of Form": one by Stafford Beer, the
British cyberneticist, which appeared in "Nature," vol. 223, Sept 27,
1969, and the other by Lancelot Law Whyte, which was published in the
British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, vol 23, 1972, pages
291-292.
Spencer Brown's probability work was published in a book called
"Probability and Scientific Inference", in the late 1950's, if my
memory serves me correctly. There is also an early article in
"Nature" called "Statistical Significance in Psychical Research", vol.
172, July 25, 1953, pp. 154-156. A comment by Soal, Stratton, and
Trouless on this article appeared in "Nature" vol 172, Sept 26, 1953,
page 594, and a reply by Spencer Brown immediately follows. The first
sentence of the initial article reads as follows: "It is proposed to
show that the logical form of the data derived from experiments in
psychical research which depend upon statistical tests is such as to
provide little evidence for telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition,
psychokinesis, etc., but to give some grounds for questioning the
practical validity of the test of significance used." Careful Spencer
Brown watchers will be interested to note that this article lists his
affliation as the Department of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy,
Oxford; he really gets around.
His works have had a rather widespread, if unorthodox, impact.
Spencer Brown and "Laws of Form" are mentioned in Adam Smith's Powers
of Mind, a survey of techniques for mind expansion, contraction,
adjustment, etc., e.g., EST, various flavors of hallucinogens, are
briefly noted in Aurthur Koestler's The Roots of Coincidence, which
is, quite naturally enough, about probability, coincidence, and
synchronicity, and are mentioned, again, in "The Dyadic Cyclone," by
Dr. John C. Lilly, dolphin aficionado, and consciousness expander,
extraordinaire.
If this isn't an eclectic enough collection of trivia about Spencer
Brown, keep reading. Here is quote from his book "Only Two Can Play
This Game", written under the pseudonym of James Keys. "To put it
bluntly, it looks as if the male is so afraid of the fundamentally
different order of being of the female, so terrified of her huge
magical feminine power of destruction and regeneration, that he
doesn't look at her as she really is, he is afraid to accept the
difference, and so has repressed into his unconscious the whole idea
of her as ANOTHER ORDER OF BEING, from whom he might learn what he
could not know of himself alone, and replaced her with the idea of a
sort of second-class replica of himself who, because she plays the
part of a man so much worse than a man, he can feel safe with because
he can despise her."
There are some notes at the end of this book (which isn't really a
novel, but his reflections, written in the heat of the moment, about
the breakup a love affair) which resemble parts of "Laws of Form":
"Space is a construct. In reality there is no space. Time is also a
construct. In reality there is no time. In eternity there is space
but no time. In the deepest order of eternity there is no space....In
a qualityless order, to make any distinction at all is at once to
construct all things in embryo...."
And last, I have no idea of his present-day whereabouts. Perhaps try
writing to him c/o Cambridge University.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 84 13:58:28 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Quite more than you want to know about George Spencer Brown
Thank you for the copious information on G. S-B. If I can't get in touch
with him now, it will be because he does not want to be found.
After the first reading of the first page of "The Laws of Form" I almost
threw the book away. I am glad, however, that I didn't. I have read it
several times and thought carefully about it and I think that there is much
substance to it.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 15 Feb 84 2302 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI>
Subject: Serial or parallel
It seems to me that introspection can tell us that the brain
does many things serially. For example, a student with 5 problems
on an examination cannot set 5 processes working on them. Indeed
I can't see that introspection indicates that anything is done
in parallel, although it does indicate that many things are done
subconsciously. This is non-trivial, because one could imagine
a mind that could set several processes going subconsciously and
then look at them from time to time to see what progress they
were making.
On the other hand, anatomy suggests and physiological
experiments confirm that the brain does many things in parallel.
These things include low level vision processing and probably
also low level auditory processing and also reflexes. For example,
the blink reflex seems to proceed without thought, although it
can be observed and in parallel with whatever else is going on.
Indeed one might regard the blink reflex and some well learned
habits as counter-examples to my assertion that one can't set
parallel processes going and then observe them.
All else seems to be conjecture. I'll conjecture that
a division of neural activity into serial and parallel activities
developed very early in evolution. For example, a bee's eye is
a parallel device, but the bee carries out long chains of serial
activities in foraging. My more adventurous conjecture is that
primate level intelligence involves applying parallel pattern
recognition processes evolve in connection with vision to records
of the serial activities of the organism. The parallel processes
of recognition are themselves subconscious, but the results have
to take part in the serial activity. Finally, seriality seems
to be required for coherence. An animal that seeks food by
locomotion works properly only if it can go in one direction
at a time, whereas a sea anemone can wave all its tentacles at
once and needs only very primitive seriality that can spread
in a wave of activity.
Perhaps someone who knows more physiology can offer more
information about the division of animal activity into serial
and parallel kinds.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 84 22:40:48 pst
From: finnca1%ucbtopaz.CC@Berkeley
Subject: Re: "You cant go home again"
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 84 14:18:04 EST
From: Brint <abc@brl-bmd>
I couldn't agree more (with your feelings of regret at not
capturing the expertise of the "oldster" in meterological
lore).
My dad was one of the best automotive diagnosticians in
Baltimore [...]
Ah yes, the scarcest of experts these days: a truly competent auto
mechanic! But don't you still need an expert to PERCEIVE the subtle
auditory cues and translate them into symbolic form?
Living in the world is a full time job, it seems.
Dave N. (...ucbvax!ucbtopaz!finnca1)
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1984 18:37:35-PST
From: decwrl!rhea!glivet!zurko@Shasta
Subject: Re: The "world" of CS
[Forwarded from the Human-Nets digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The best place for you to start would be with Sheri Turkle, a
professor at MIT's STS department. She's been studying both the
official and unofficial members of the computer science world as a
culture/society for a few years now. In fact, she's supposed to be
putting a book out on her findings, "The Intimate Machine". Anyone
heard what's up with it? I thought it was supposed to be out last
Sept, but I haven't been able to find it.
Mez
------------------------------
Date: 14 Feb 84 21:50:52 EST
From: Michael Sims <MSIMS@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Learning Seminar
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
MACHINE LEARNING BROWN BAG SEMINAR
Title: When to Learn
Speaker: Michael Sims
Date: Wednesday, Feb. 15, 1984 - 12:00-1:30
Location: Hill Center, Room 254 (note new location)
In this informal talk I will describe issues which I have broadly
labeled 'when to learn'. Most AI learning investigations have
concentrated on the mechanisms of learning. In part this is a
reasonable consequence of AI's close relationship with the 'general
process tradition' of psychology [1]. The influences of ecological and
ethological (i.e., animal behavior) investigations have recently
challenged this research methodology in psychology, and I believe this
has important ramifications for investigations of machine learning. In
particular, this influence would suggest that learning is something
which takes place when an appropriate environment and an appropriate
learning mechanism are present, and that it is inappropriate to
describe learning by describing a learning mechanism without describing
the environment in which it operates. The most cogent new issues which
arise are the description of the environment, and the confronting of
the issue of 'when to learn in a rich environment'. By a learning
system in a 'rich environment' I mean a learning system which must
extract the items to be learned from sensory input which is too rich to
be exhaustively stored. Most present learning systems operate in such
a restrictive environment that there is no question of what or when to
learn. I will also present a general architecture for such a learning
system in a rich environment, called a Pattern Directed Learning Model,
which was motivated by biological learning systems.
References
[1] Johnston, T. D.
Contrasting approaches to a theory of learning.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4:125-173, 1981.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 13:16:07-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: "Automatic deduction" and other stuff
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A reminder that the seminar on automatic reasoning / theorem proving /logic
programming / mumble mumble mumble which I advertised earlier is going to
begin shortly, under one title or another. It will tentatively be on
Wednesdays at 1:30 in MJH301. If you wish to be on the mailing list for this,
please mail to me or Yoni Malachi (YM@SAIL). But if you are already on
Carolyn Talcott's mailing list for the MTC seminars, you will probably be
included on the new list unless you ask not to be.
For those interested specifically in the MRS system, we plan to continue MRS
meetings, also on Weds., at 10:30, starting shortly. I expect to announce
such meetings on the MRSusers distribution list. To get on this, mail to me
or Milt Grinberg (GRINBERG@SUMEX). Note that MRSusers will contain other
announcements related to MRS as well.
- Richard
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84
Subject: McCarthy Lectures on Commonsense Knowledge
[Forwarded from the Stanford CSLI newsletter by Laws@SRI.]
MCCARTHY LECTURES ON THE FORMALIZATION OF COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE
John McCarthy will present the remaining three lectures of his
series (the first of the four was held January 20) at 3:00 p.m. in the
Ventura Hall Seminar Room on the dates shown below.
Friday, Feb. 17 "The Circumscription Mode of Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
Applications of circumscription to formalizing commonsense
facts. Application to the frame problem, the qualification
problem, and to the STRIPS assumption.
Friday, March 2 "Formalization of Knowledge and Belief"
Modal and first-order formalisms. Formalisms in which possible
worlds are explicit objects. Concepts and propositions as
objects in theories.
Friday, March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂20-Feb-84 2255 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Science Education Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 20 Feb 84 22:54:55 PST
Date: Mon 20 Feb 84 22:53:49-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Science Education Lunch
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: bboard%LOTS-A@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
We are an informal group that meets every Wednesday for lunch in Jacks 252 from
noon to 1. We discuss various issues about computer science education such as:
o programming languages that are best suited for education
o how to teach difficult topics like recursion
o how to best introduce novices to computers
o what pre-college computer education should/can be
This is just a sampling of topics. All are invited to attend; bring your own
lunch.
This week I will be discussing what happened last week at the annual conference
for the ACM's Special Interest Group for Computer Science Education (SIG-CSE).
I met the author of Brown's BALSA system (60 Appolo workstations in a classroom
with high-speed graphics showing "movies" of program execution, such as binary
tree building). I also chatted with Mary Shaw from Carnegie Mellon and
discussed with her their effort to develop an undergraduate curriculum.
-------
∂21-Feb-84 0220 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #9
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 02:20:33 PST
Date: Monday, February 20, 1984 9:26PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #9
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 21 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 9
Today's Topics:
Query - Availability,
Implementations - Arrays & Operators,
Puzzle - Marcel's Dilemma,
LP Library - Apology & Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Feb 84 7:48:17-EST (Sat)
From: Ken Bowen <KABowen%SYR.CSNet@CSNet-Relay>
Subject: Available Prologs ?
Commercial Prolog Implementations
I'm trying to compile a complete list of available Prologs,
both commercial and academic. I have a list of the latter
prepared by Bruce Smith. I do know of a number of commercial
sources, but I don't think my list is complete. Would anyone
who knows of a commercially available Prolog please send me
information about it? Desireable is: Machine & OpSystem,
Interpreter/Compiler, Cost, Contact Address, and any remarks
about its performance, etc. I'll post the complete list
here when it's assembled
-- Ken Bowen.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 84 10:35:20 EST
From: Yoav Shoham <Shoham@YALE>
Subject: LP on Apollos
We've just ported the University of New Hampshire Prolog to the
Apollos here at Yale. The UNH Prolog is written in C for VAX/UNIX,
and the porting was surprisingly smooth. One feature (unique to
UNH Prolog) poses a non-trivial porting problem, and that is the
incorporation of C code in Prolog; we haven't yet solved this. The
C code relies on the external variable NLIST, not recognized on
the Apollos (I'm not a systems person myself, but I'm told that
EXTERNAL←SYMBOL←ADDRESS performs a similar function on the Apollo).
Beside that there were minor type coersion and interrupt recognition
bugs. The code is up and running, and it should be interesting to
compare performances on the two machines.
I'm interested in hearing about other efforts in porting Prolog to
the Apollos. I'd be particuarly interested in reports on porting
CProlog, since I estimate its interpreter to be at least four times
as fast as the UNH version.
-- Yoav Shoham.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 84 20:58:13 pst
From: Cohen%UCBDali@Berkeley (Shimon Cohen)
Subject: More about Multi Version Arrays
I congradulate Mr. O'Keefe [V2 #6-7] for his detailed response
to Ken and myself. Here is my response to Mr. O'Keefe:
1. In my proposal I am talking about "Multi version" sets
bags or arrays. "Multi version" means that the same internal
structure is used to maintain several different sets. However,
the differences among these sets are small.
I looked carefully into your files (SETUTL.PL, TREES.PL) and
none of them have this property. I agree that you can implement
such a set as a binary tree BUT it will cost you O(log N) of
space and time per update. (Remember: update is either copying
a set with additional element OR: copying a set with one less
element)
2. It seems that you equate O(1) with O( log N ), I guess some
theoretical guys will love to use your METHOD to "prove" that
P=NP ... Now seriously: I think you are right in most everyday
cases BUT the best you can do with a tree is O( log n ) pointer
accesses and the same amount of label comparisons. If N is in
the millions then the ratio can be one order of magnitude in
favor of "Hashing"...
3. You proposed several ways to implement 'sets'; Can we
make this "internal representation" problem hidden from
the user. Namely: Instead of doing it the hard way (Selecting
proper impl.) do it the easy way (Use detailed specifications).
4. In my scheme: For a "single version" Updateable array
(or set) the overhead to access (membership) or modify is as
follows:
* Each access (to the most new set or array) has the overhead
of 1 (one) comparison and it does not depend on the number of
changes to the array OR to this particular element.
* Each Update/Insert requires one additional history token (6-8
bytes)
* The "clock" of the array (set) is updated (+1) ONLY when
modified. NOT when the array (set) is accessed (membership).
* For older versions of the same array (set): The overhead of
access per element is the maximum between:
O( number of changes to this element )
O( log of the number of changes to the entire array)
NOTE: This is the worst case ! It seems that in Ken's method
it is
O( number of changes to the entire array )
* In my scheme it also possible to take an old "version" of the
array and to modify it. Thus we get a tree structure of array
versions.
5. Those of you who were naive enough to try my code, I must
admit that it is in the early stage of experiment. I have no
doubt that the only way to implement it efficiently is in the
"machine" languages. Make sure you have the "help" file
before you try it.
-- Shimon
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 8-Feb-84 23:27:16-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: "yfy" Operators.
I was looking at the manual for a new Prolog interpreter today,
and found therein announced with pathetic pride that one of its
features (a feature, moreover [trumpet trumpet] lacking in Clocksin
& Mellish Prolog [sic]) was "yfy" operators. Now this is not the
first Prolog I have seen to offer such operators, as if they were
somehow useful. It is possible [p<0.1e-6] that David Warren, Fernando
Pereira, Luis Pereira, Lawrence Byrd, Bill Clocksin, Chris Mellish,
all the French crowd (who have the same three kinds of infix operator
named a different way), the Hungarians, and even I have all missed
something, and there is a genuine use for yfy operators, which is why
I am writing this message. Do you know why anyone would provide yfy
operators and what they would mean? [I have agreed with Steve Hardy
in an earlier message that more general access to the operator
precedence parser underneath, allowing the difference between
the operator priority and its argument priorities to be greater
than one -- such as wfy, would be useful. That is another
matter.]
In the notation which this Prolog system saw fit to adopt, "f"
stands for the operator, "x" for an argument of *lower*
priority, and "y" for an argument of the *same* priority. Thus
if $ is xfy a $ b $ c must mean $(a, $(b, c))
if $ is yfx a $ b $ c must mean $($(a, b), c)
if $ is xfx a $ b $ c is rejected.
But yfy would leave a $ b $ c ambiguous between the two readings.
It might be argued that yfy could be used to indicate that all
the arguments should be at the same level, so that a $ b $ c =>
$(a, b, c). However, agglutination of this form is best made
independent of priority (I suggest using xgy and ygx, together
with xg yg gx gy) as it leaves the question of how a $ b @ c is
to be parsed when $ and @ are both yfy operators of the same
priority entirely open.
I repeat, this Prolog (implemented in Cambridge Lisp, what courage,
what toil, what a pity) is not the only one I have seen offering
yfy as a feature. Is it the pointless error of whelming pride, or
have I missed something ?
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 84 13:14:13-PST (Mon)
From: decvax!mulga!Munnari!lee @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Marcel's Dilemma
I'm sure everyone is as tired of this problem as I am, but I
won't be able to sleep until the REAL solution is given.
Remember the axioms were
(1) a is on or b is on
(2) if a is on then b is off
(3) a and b are both on or off
The mistake has been to formalize this in terms of a predicate
on(X), as Michael Condict (and others) did:
(1) on(a) or on(b)
(2) on(a) implies not on(b)
(3) for all x, on(x) or not on(x)
There are two solution to these axioms: {on(a)} and {on(b)}.
These are two different predicates, not two solutions to the
same predicate ({on(a), on(b)}. Therefore we cant use first
order logic for this statement of the problem.
Later in Michael's follow up, he stated that there is one
relation which satisfies the axioms:
"the relation R such that xRy iff x is the logical negation
of y."
Note that this relation has two arguments, each having the
domain {on, off}. This is the right way to do it. My original
solution (in MU-Prolog) follows:
% Here's my first (logical, rather than efficient) switches
% program. To find the valid configurations, use the goal
% ?- config(A, B). The logic should be quite clear - the only
% possibly confusing bit is the if construct. This is available
% in MU-PROLOG, and is implemented soundly. The DEC-10 counterpart
% ->, would work if cond2 was executed last (the evaluation of
% MU-PROLOG's if is delayed until the condition is ground, but
% this does not occur in DEC-10).
%
% -- Lee Naish
% (decvax!mulga!lee)
config(A, B) :-
cond1(A, B),
cond2(A, B),
cond3(A, B).
cond1(on, ←).
cond1(←, on).
cond2(A, B) :-
if A = on then
B = off.
cond3(A, B) :-
on←or←off(A),
on←or←off(B).
on←or←off(on).
on←or←off(off).
------------------------------
Date: Mon 20 Feb 84 13:45:45-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE>
Subject: Apology, LP Library Update
"The message sent over Richard O'Keefe's name containing
some extremely garbled code is not in the form he sent
it and was not intended for broadcast, but for inclusion
in <Prolog> in it's ungarbled form." [See V2 #7]
My apologies, to all that were offended by this act.
Ehud Shapiro's Concurrent Prolog system is available on
the subdirectory
{SU-SCORE}SCORE:<Prolog.CP>
The following routines have been contributed to the LP Library,
and are available under the SCORE:<Prolog> directory.
ARRAY←FORBUS.PL ! Ken Forbus's code for LM-Prolog
! implementation of arrays.
LISTUT.PL ! Updated by R. A. O'Keefe
RANDOM←GENERATOR.PL ! Contributed by Allen Van Gelder
RANDOM←GENERATOR.TEST ! " "
LIB.PL ! Contributed by R. A. O'Keefe
LIB2.PL ! Bottoms-10 version of the VAX
! `lib' predicate.
! LIB.PL and LIB2.PL is a two part module
If you have something that might be useful, send it in !
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂21-Feb-84 0800 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA SYSTEM SHUTDOWN
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 08:00:19 PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 08:00:18-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: SYSTEM SHUTDOWN
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
******************************************************************************
SYSTEM SHUTDOWN
Due to a scheduled shutdown of the Stanford chilled water system, the DEC will
be even less accessible between 8am and 5pm, Saturday, March 3. This should
result in better controls over the system, so I guess we should be grateful!
We are still experiencing modem difficulties, so bear with us. With luck, we
will soon have a working system.
-- Computer Facility
CSLI
******************************************************************************
-------
∂21-Feb-84 0927 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 09:27:03 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Feb 84 09:16:13-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Feb 84 09:14:03-PST
Return-Path: <CLT@SU-AI>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 20 Feb 84 09:43:17-PST
Date: 20 Feb 84 0934 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
ReSent-date: Tue 21 Feb 84 09:14:12-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
SPEAKER: Prof. Rolando Chuaqui, University of Chile
TITLE: Well-ordering types in theories of classes.
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 22, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
∂21-Feb-84 0932 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Cheriton re-appointment
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 09:32:29 PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 09:31:25-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Cheriton re-appointment
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
The Senior Faculty voted to recommend a four year re-appointment for
Cheriton with a decision on tenure after three years. If you were
not present and wish to vote, please send your vote to me. All those
present were in favor.
If I do not hear from you by Thursday, Feb 23, I assume you assent.
GENE
-------
∂21-Feb-84 0936 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Todats Events
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 09:36:46 PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 09:33:20-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Todats Events
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Noon Faculty lunch
2:30 Grey Tuesday
Hope to see you, GENE
-------
∂21-Feb-84 1036 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Re: sabbatical leave
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 10:36:07 PST
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Feb 84 10:34:30-PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 10:34:25-PST
From: Gail Stein <OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: sabbatical leave
To: GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: OR.STEIN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Fri 17 Feb 84 13:27:07-PST
Professor Dantzig is planning sabbatical leave for Fall Quarter only of next year. Gail
-------
∂21-Feb-84 1351 @MIT-MC:AUGUST@JPL-VLSI ADDITION TO MAILING LIST
Received: from MIT-MC by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 13:50:59 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 21 Feb 84 16:11-EST
Date: 21 Feb 1984 1208 PST
From: Richard B. August <AUGUST@JPL-VLSI>
Subject: ADDITION TO MAILING LIST
To: PHILOSOPHY-OF-SCIENCE@MIT-MC
Reply-To: AUGUST@JPL-VLSI
PLEASE ADD MY NAME/ADDRESS TO THE PHILOSOPHY-OF-SCIENCE MAILING LIST
REGARDS RAUGUST (FORMERLY RBA@MIT-AI RBA@MIT-DMCG)
------
∂21-Feb-84 1440 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA next meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 14:40:11 PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 14:28:18-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: next meeting
To: CS440: ;
The speaker is Ernst Mayr:
"Parallel Computation--does complexity theory help?"
We meet in MJH 352 4:15PM, Thursday, as usual.
-------
∂21-Feb-84 1836 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA c1 seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 18:35:59 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Feb 84 18:28:37-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Feb 84 18:25:20-PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 18:22:49-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: c1 seminar
To: dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: goguen@SRI-AI.ARPA
C1 Seminar: Semantics of Programming Languages
Tuesday 28 February 1984, 9:30 am, Ventura Hall Seminar Room
Having considered the basic constructions on domains, including product,
coproduct, and function space, we will turn to the solution of domain
equations in the category of cpo's. The approach will indicate the
relationship to initial algebra semantics.
-------
∂21-Feb-84 2111 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA salaries
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 21:11:35 PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 21:10:48-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: salaries
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I had dinner with the Dean this evening and several associate deans.
Wessells mentioned that the salary structure in H&S will be much more
similiar to that of Engineering ( see recent Campus Reports).
That means a steep increase in the curve for
assistant professors and a flattening out of the curve for full professors.
More details will be forthcomming next week.
GENE
-------
∂21-Feb-84 2201 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Darpa Proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 21 Feb 84 22:01:19 PST
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 22:00:26-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Darpa Proposal
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: elyse
DARPA is seeking qualified sources to perform research and development
in multiprocessor computer system architecture for the new Strategic Computing
Program. The text of the announcement is in my office. Let me know if you
would like a copy. GENE
-------
∂22-Feb-84 0001 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI AFLB talks for this week and the next one:
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 00:01:45 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 00:00:44-PST
Date: 22 Feb 84 0000 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: AFLB talks for this week and the next one:
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE
2/23/84 - Dr. Jacques Desarmenien (Stanford)
"An Algorithm for the Rota Straightening formula"
The letter-place algebra is a convenient algebraic encoding of the placement of
not necessarily distinct objects into boxes. It was first studied by Rota in the
context of invariant theory, but revealed to be a fundamental concept for the
theory of the representation of the symmetric and linear groups.
Rota's main result is the "straightening formula", giving the characterization
of a remarkable basis for this algebra. Determining the representation of any
element as a linear combination of basis elements involves simple combinatorial
constructions and a moderately well-known sorting result.
The talk will be self-contained and elementary.
******** Time and place: Feb. 23, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
3/1/84 - Dr. Avi Wigderson (Berkeley)
"How discreet is the discrete log?"
Blum and Micali showed how to "hide" one bit in the Discrete Logarithm
function. We show how to hide k bits, for all k=O(log log P), where P
is the modulus. This cuts the trade-off time vs. secure bits by a
factor of k for coin flipping and pseudo-random number generation.
******** Time and place: March 1, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
Special AFLB (Note date, time and room!)
3/2/84 - Dr. D. S. Johnson (ATT Bell Labs)
"Some Unexpected Expected Behavior Results for Bin Packing"
This will be an informal presentation of recent work on the probabilistic
analysis of simple heuristics for bin packing. We have two main results. For
the first-fit heuristic, we show that, if the items are evenly distributed
between 0 and 1, then the expected error grows as the 4/5 power of the optimum.
It was widely believed that the error is linear. Our second result states that,
if the items are spread between 0 and 1/2, then the expected error of the
first-fit decreasing heuristic is constant. We prove these average-case results
by doing essentially worst-case analysis on certain dense subsets of the inputs.
This is joint work with Bentley, Leighton, C.C.McGeoch, and L. McGeoch.
******** Time and place: FRIDAY, March 2, 2:15 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) *******
∂22-Feb-84 1033 JUTTA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Presentation by Steve Chen
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 10:33:04 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 10:26:25-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Presentation by Steve Chen
To: super@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-0572
Steve Chen, Vice President of Product Development for Cray Research, will
give a presentation on R and D at Cray Research to the CLaSSiC Project
on Wednesday, March 7, in Room 203, Building 200 (History Corner).
The SUPER group is invited to attend.
Chen has interests in simulation, device physics, architecture, high-speed
VLSI and bipolar devices. He will be at Stanford from 1:00 p.m. on the
7th and is interested in talking with people here with similar interests.
Contact Jutta McCormick at 497-0572 or jutta@SU-Navajo or jutta@SU-Score
to arrange appointments.
--Joe Oliger
------
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1115 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 11:14:45 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 11:03:47-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA
First of all, let me thank those who came and sat through the long Grey
Tuesday meeting yesterday. It's beneficial to all of us to hear of the
progress of our students.
I'm sorry the particular information on our advanced students was not
as accurate as it should have been. We should have sent you the material
in advance of the meeting. I hope to correct this in the future.
As was noted some students did not have any active members of the faculty
as their advisor or even on their reading committee. I think this is not
satisfactory and should be correcte. In the future, I will question any
green forms that come down in this way.
I feel rather strongly that we should try to encourage students to
complete their degrees in seven years. I know it is often beneficial
to have students available for a long period but it is detrimental
to their career to remain here indefinitely. Our basic product
is our students and having students here for long durations clogs
up the pipeline. It's possible to be a late bloomer ( I can sympathize)
but if a student doesn't learn to do research by his fifth year, I
don't believe he will have a sudden revelation.
Here is some other information. In the physics department there are
136 students. The average length is 5-6 years for completion of degree
and there are but 6 students who have been there over 7 years.
Let me hear your comments regarding these matters.
GENE
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1137 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #20
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 11:36:51 PST
Date: Fri 17 Feb 1984 09:22-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #20
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Friday, 17 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 20
Today's Topics:
Lisp - Timing Data Caveat,
Bindings - G. Spencer Brown,
Logic - Nature of Undecidability,
Brain Theory - Parallelism,
Expert Systems - Need for Perception,
AI Culture - Work in Progress,
Seminars - Learning & Automatic Deduction & Commonsense Reasoning
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 Feb 1984 1417-PST
From: VANBUER at USC-ECL.ARPA
Subject: Timing Data Caveat
A warning on the TAK performance testing: this code only exercises
function calling and small integer arithmetic, and none of things
most heavily used in "real" lisp programming: CONSing, garbage collection,
paging (ai stuff is big after all).
Darrel J. Van Buer
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 84 11:15:21 EST
From: John McLean <mclean@NRL-CSS>
Subject: G. Spencer-Brown and undecidable propositions
G. Spencer-Brown is very much alive. He spent several months at NRL a couple
of years ago and presented lectures on his purported proof of the four color
theorem. Having heard him lecture on several topics previously, I did not feel
motivated to attend his lectures on the four color theorem so I can't comment
on them first hand. Those who knew him better than I believe that he is
currently at Oxford or Cambridge. By the way, he was not a friend of Russell's
as far as I know. Russell merely said something somewhat positive about LAWS
OF FORM.
With respect to undecidability, I can't figure out what Charlie Crummer means
by "undecidable proposition". The definition I have always seen is that a
proposition is undecidable with respect to a set of axioms if it is
independent, i.e,. neither the proposition nor its negation is provable.
(An undecidable theory is a different kettle of fish altogether.) Examples are
Euclid's 5th postulate with respect to the other 4, Goedel's sentence with
respect to first order number theory, the continuum hypothesis with respect to
set theory, etc. I can't figure out the claim that one can't decide whether
an undecidable proposition is decidable or not. Euclid's 5th postulate,
Goedel's sentence, and the continuum hypothesis have been proven to be
undecidable. For simple theories, such as sentential logic (i.e., no
quantifiers), there are even algorithms for detecting undecidability.
John McLean
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 84 11:18:43 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: G. Spencer-Brown and undecidable propositions
Thanks for the lead to G. S-B. I think I understand what he is driving at with
THE LAWS OF FORM so I would like to see his alledged 4-color proof.
Re: undecidability... Is it true that all propositions can be proved decidable
or not with respect to a particular axiomatic system from WITHIN that system?
My understanding is that this is not generally possible. Example (Not a proof
of my understanding): Is the value of the statement "This statement is false."
decidable from within Boolean logic? It seems to me that from within Boolean
logic, i.e. 2-valued logic, all that would be seen is that no matter how long
I crank I never seem to be able to settle down to a unique value. If this
proposition is fed to a 2-valued logic program (written in PROLOG, LISP, or
whatever language one desires) the program just won't halt. From OUTSIDE the
machine, a human programmer can easily detect the problem but from WITHIN
the Boolean system it's not possible. This seems to be an example of the
halting problem.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 16 Feb 1984 12:22 EST (Thu)
From: "Steven C. Bagley" <BAGLEY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Quite more than you want to know about George Spencer Brown
Yes, Spencer Brown was associated with Russell, but since Lord Russell
died recently (1970), I think it safe to assume that not ALL of his
associates are dead, yet, at least.
There was a brief piece about Spencer Brown in "New Scientist" several
years ago (vol. 73, no. 1033, January 6, 1977, page 6). Here are two
interesting quotes:
"What sets him apart from the many others who have claimed a proof of
the [four-color] theorem are his technique, and his personal style.
Spencer Brown's technique rests on a book he wrote in 1964 called
`Laws of Form.' George Allen and Unwin published it in 1969, on the
recommendation of Bertrand Russell. In the book he develops a new
algebra of logic -- from which the normal Boolean algebra (a means of
representing propositions and arguments with symbols) can be derived.
The book has had a mixed reputation, from `a work of genius' to
`pretentious triviality.' It is certainly unorthodox, and mixes
metaphysics and mathematics. Russell himself was taken with the work,
and mentions it in his autobiography....
The style of the man is extravagant -- he stays at the Savoy -- and
all-embracing. He was in the Royal Navy in the Second World War; has
degrees in philosophy and psychology (but not mathematics); was a
lecturer in logic at Christ Church College, Oxford; wrote a treatise
on probability; a volume of poetry, and a novel; was a chief logic
designer with Mullard Equipment Ltd where his patented design of a
transistorised elevator logic circuit led to `Laws of Form'; has two
world records for gliding; and presently lectures part-time in the
mathematics department at the University of Cambridge while also
managing his publishing business."
I know of two reviews of "Laws of Form": one by Stafford Beer, the
British cyberneticist, which appeared in "Nature," vol. 223, Sept 27,
1969, and the other by Lancelot Law Whyte, which was published in the
British Journal of the Philosophy of Science, vol 23, 1972, pages
291-292.
Spencer Brown's probability work was published in a book called
"Probability and Scientific Inference", in the late 1950's, if my
memory serves me correctly. There is also an early article in
"Nature" called "Statistical Significance in Psychical Research", vol.
172, July 25, 1953, pp. 154-156. A comment by Soal, Stratton, and
Trouless on this article appeared in "Nature" vol 172, Sept 26, 1953,
page 594, and a reply by Spencer Brown immediately follows. The first
sentence of the initial article reads as follows: "It is proposed to
show that the logical form of the data derived from experiments in
psychical research which depend upon statistical tests is such as to
provide little evidence for telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition,
psychokinesis, etc., but to give some grounds for questioning the
practical validity of the test of significance used." Careful Spencer
Brown watchers will be interested to note that this article lists his
affliation as the Department of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy,
Oxford; he really gets around.
His works have had a rather widespread, if unorthodox, impact.
Spencer Brown and "Laws of Form" are mentioned in Adam Smith's Powers
of Mind, a survey of techniques for mind expansion, contraction,
adjustment, etc., e.g., EST, various flavors of hallucinogens, are
briefly noted in Aurthur Koestler's The Roots of Coincidence, which
is, quite naturally enough, about probability, coincidence, and
synchronicity, and are mentioned, again, in "The Dyadic Cyclone," by
Dr. John C. Lilly, dolphin aficionado, and consciousness expander,
extraordinaire.
If this isn't an eclectic enough collection of trivia about Spencer
Brown, keep reading. Here is quote from his book "Only Two Can Play
This Game", written under the pseudonym of James Keys. "To put it
bluntly, it looks as if the male is so afraid of the fundamentally
different order of being of the female, so terrified of her huge
magical feminine power of destruction and regeneration, that he
doesn't look at her as she really is, he is afraid to accept the
difference, and so has repressed into his unconscious the whole idea
of her as ANOTHER ORDER OF BEING, from whom he might learn what he
could not know of himself alone, and replaced her with the idea of a
sort of second-class replica of himself who, because she plays the
part of a man so much worse than a man, he can feel safe with because
he can despise her."
There are some notes at the end of this book (which isn't really a
novel, but his reflections, written in the heat of the moment, about
the breakup a love affair) which resemble parts of "Laws of Form":
"Space is a construct. In reality there is no space. Time is also a
construct. In reality there is no time. In eternity there is space
but no time. In the deepest order of eternity there is no space....In
a qualityless order, to make any distinction at all is at once to
construct all things in embryo...."
And last, I have no idea of his present-day whereabouts. Perhaps try
writing to him c/o Cambridge University.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 84 13:58:28 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Quite more than you want to know about George Spencer Brown
Thank you for the copious information on G. S-B. If I can't get in touch
with him now, it will be because he does not want to be found.
After the first reading of the first page of "The Laws of Form" I almost
threw the book away. I am glad, however, that I didn't. I have read it
several times and thought carefully about it and I think that there is much
substance to it.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: 15 Feb 84 2302 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI>
Subject: Serial or parallel
It seems to me that introspection can tell us that the brain
does many things serially. For example, a student with 5 problems
on an examination cannot set 5 processes working on them. Indeed
I can't see that introspection indicates that anything is done
in parallel, although it does indicate that many things are done
subconsciously. This is non-trivial, because one could imagine
a mind that could set several processes going subconsciously and
then look at them from time to time to see what progress they
were making.
On the other hand, anatomy suggests and physiological
experiments confirm that the brain does many things in parallel.
These things include low level vision processing and probably
also low level auditory processing and also reflexes. For example,
the blink reflex seems to proceed without thought, although it
can be observed and in parallel with whatever else is going on.
Indeed one might regard the blink reflex and some well learned
habits as counter-examples to my assertion that one can't set
parallel processes going and then observe them.
All else seems to be conjecture. I'll conjecture that
a division of neural activity into serial and parallel activities
developed very early in evolution. For example, a bee's eye is
a parallel device, but the bee carries out long chains of serial
activities in foraging. My more adventurous conjecture is that
primate level intelligence involves applying parallel pattern
recognition processes evolve in connection with vision to records
of the serial activities of the organism. The parallel processes
of recognition are themselves subconscious, but the results have
to take part in the serial activity. Finally, seriality seems
to be required for coherence. An animal that seeks food by
locomotion works properly only if it can go in one direction
at a time, whereas a sea anemone can wave all its tentacles at
once and needs only very primitive seriality that can spread
in a wave of activity.
Perhaps someone who knows more physiology can offer more
information about the division of animal activity into serial
and parallel kinds.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 84 22:40:48 pst
From: finnca1%ucbtopaz.CC@Berkeley
Subject: Re: "You cant go home again"
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 84 14:18:04 EST
From: Brint <abc@brl-bmd>
I couldn't agree more (with your feelings of regret at not
capturing the expertise of the "oldster" in meterological
lore).
My dad was one of the best automotive diagnosticians in
Baltimore [...]
Ah yes, the scarcest of experts these days: a truly competent auto
mechanic! But don't you still need an expert to PERCEIVE the subtle
auditory cues and translate them into symbolic form?
Living in the world is a full time job, it seems.
Dave N. (...ucbvax!ucbtopaz!finnca1)
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 13 Feb 1984 18:37:35-PST
From: decwrl!rhea!glivet!zurko@Shasta
Subject: Re: The "world" of CS
[Forwarded from the Human-Nets digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The best place for you to start would be with Sheri Turkle, a
professor at MIT's STS department. She's been studying both the
official and unofficial members of the computer science world as a
culture/society for a few years now. In fact, she's supposed to be
putting a book out on her findings, "The Intimate Machine". Anyone
heard what's up with it? I thought it was supposed to be out last
Sept, but I haven't been able to find it.
Mez
------------------------------
Date: 14 Feb 84 21:50:52 EST
From: Michael Sims <MSIMS@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Learning Seminar
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
MACHINE LEARNING BROWN BAG SEMINAR
Title: When to Learn
Speaker: Michael Sims
Date: Wednesday, Feb. 15, 1984 - 12:00-1:30
Location: Hill Center, Room 254 (note new location)
In this informal talk I will describe issues which I have broadly
labeled 'when to learn'. Most AI learning investigations have
concentrated on the mechanisms of learning. In part this is a
reasonable consequence of AI's close relationship with the 'general
process tradition' of psychology [1]. The influences of ecological and
ethological (i.e., animal behavior) investigations have recently
challenged this research methodology in psychology, and I believe this
has important ramifications for investigations of machine learning. In
particular, this influence would suggest that learning is something
which takes place when an appropriate environment and an appropriate
learning mechanism are present, and that it is inappropriate to
describe learning by describing a learning mechanism without describing
the environment in which it operates. The most cogent new issues which
arise are the description of the environment, and the confronting of
the issue of 'when to learn in a rich environment'. By a learning
system in a 'rich environment' I mean a learning system which must
extract the items to be learned from sensory input which is too rich to
be exhaustively stored. Most present learning systems operate in such
a restrictive environment that there is no question of what or when to
learn. I will also present a general architecture for such a learning
system in a rich environment, called a Pattern Directed Learning Model,
which was motivated by biological learning systems.
References
[1] Johnston, T. D.
Contrasting approaches to a theory of learning.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4:125-173, 1981.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84 13:16:07-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: "Automatic deduction" and other stuff
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A reminder that the seminar on automatic reasoning / theorem proving /logic
programming / mumble mumble mumble which I advertised earlier is going to
begin shortly, under one title or another. It will tentatively be on
Wednesdays at 1:30 in MJH301. If you wish to be on the mailing list for this,
please mail to me or Yoni Malachi (YM@SAIL). But if you are already on
Carolyn Talcott's mailing list for the MTC seminars, you will probably be
included on the new list unless you ask not to be.
For those interested specifically in the MRS system, we plan to continue MRS
meetings, also on Weds., at 10:30, starting shortly. I expect to announce
such meetings on the MRSusers distribution list. To get on this, mail to me
or Milt Grinberg (GRINBERG@SUMEX). Note that MRSusers will contain other
announcements related to MRS as well.
- Richard
------------------------------
Date: Wed 15 Feb 84
Subject: McCarthy Lectures on Commonsense Knowledge
[Forwarded from the Stanford CSLI newsletter by Laws@SRI.]
MCCARTHY LECTURES ON THE FORMALIZATION OF COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE
John McCarthy will present the remaining three lectures of his
series (the first of the four was held January 20) at 3:00 p.m. in the
Ventura Hall Seminar Room on the dates shown below.
Friday, Feb. 17 "The Circumscription Mode of Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
Applications of circumscription to formalizing commonsense
facts. Application to the frame problem, the qualification
problem, and to the STRIPS assumption.
Friday, March 2 "Formalization of Knowledge and Belief"
Modal and first-order formalisms. Formalisms in which possible
worlds are explicit objects. Concepts and propositions as
objects in theories.
Friday, March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂22-Feb-84 1154 JUTTA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Steve Chen's presentation on 7 March
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 11:54:36 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 11:49:24-PST
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Steve Chen's presentation on 7 March
To: super@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-0572
Steve Chen's presentation will be at 3:15 p.m. in Room 203, Bldg. 200.
The time was inadvertently left out of the previous message. My apologies.
--Jutta McCormick
----
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1222 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA QUME QVT103 TERMINAL DEMO
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 12:22:08 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 12:21:26-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: QUME QVT103 TERMINAL DEMO
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: a.sandy%gsb-why@SU-SCORE.ARPA, s.strickland%gsb-why@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
tom@SU-SCORE.ARPA
******************************************************************************
QUME QVT 103 TERMINAL DEMO
WHERE: Ventura Hall, Room 54.
WHEN: Thursday, 2/23; 11:00.
WHOM: Mike Viola
KIERULUFF Field Service
The QUME QVT103 emulates the VT52 and VT100.
Display format: 24x80 lines
Displayed character set: 96 ASCII characters + control keys
Baud rates: 50-19.2K
Screen: Tilt/swivel, 12" diagonal, non-glare amber
Detached keyboard
------------------------------------------------------------
If you are interested in previewing this terminal which may be purchased for
CSLI use, please come by tomorrow morning!
Michele Leiser
497-2607
******************************************************************************
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1322 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Student Applicant Interview Trips
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 13:22:32 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 13:21:15-PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 13:21:36-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Student Applicant Interview Trips
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
I want to pass on some experience the Dept. of Genetics has had with
interviewing new PhD applicants. Note that Genetics is a highly competitive
area for good students like CS. They have routinely interviewed "finalist"
applicants before sending acceptance offers. This has produced good results
but has had the predictable effects of the cost and being a substantial
extra load on faculty time. Last year they tried to cut down the burden
on faculty by interviewing only the marginal applicants and simply admitting
the obvious ones without a trip. The result was that they lost more of the
top students to other schools (I don't have the actual counts handy) and
have now gone back to interviewing all potential candidates.
So, this would argue for interview trips, both to encourage the good
students to come and to discriminate among the marginal ones.
Tom R.
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1435 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Visitor from Ireland
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 14:34:05 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 14:31:57-PST
From: Elyse Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Visitor from Ireland
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-9746
The Office of International Visitors called this morning and asked if any
of our faculty could speak with Edward Cunningham, Deputy Director of the
Agricultural Institute of Ireland, about computer applications to animal
breeding and agricultural research. If any of you is involved with this
and would like to speak with this man please call Mrs. Alexander of the
Office of International Visitors at x7-1984.
Elyse.
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1439 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA grammar
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 14:39:37 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 14:36:09-PST
From: Elyse Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: grammar
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-9746
Please amend the above message to read, "If any of you are involved."
I must have had a lapse in consciousness. Thanks, Elyse.
-------
∂22-Feb-84 1758 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #21
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 22 Feb 84 17:56:38 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 1984 16:28-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #21
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 23 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 21
Today's Topics:
Waveform Analysis - EEG/EKG Request,
Laws of Form - Comment,
Review - Commercial NL Review in High Technology,
Humor - The Adventures of Joe Lisp,
Seminars - Computational Discovery & Robotic Planning & Physiological
Reasoning & Logic Programming & Mathematical Expert System
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 84 22:29:05 EST
From: G B Reilly <reilly@udel-relay.arpa>
Subject: EEG/EKG Scoring
Has anyone done any work on automatic scoring and interpretation of EEG or
EKG outputs?
Brendan Reilly
[There has been a great deal of work in these areas. Good sources are
the IEEE pattern recognition or pattern recognition and image processing
conferences, IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
IEEE Trans. on Computers, and the Pattern Recognition journal. There
have also been some conferences on medical pattern recognition. Can
anyone suggest a bibliography, special issue, or book on these subjects?
Have there been any AI (as opposed to PR) approaches to waveform diagnosis?
-- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 19-Feb-84 02:14 PST
From: Kirk Kelley <KIRK.TYM@OFFICE-2>
Subject: G. Spencer-Brown and the Laws of Form
I know of someone who talked with G. on the telephone about six years
ago somewhere in Northern California. My friend developed a quantum
logic for expressing paradoxes, and some forms of schyzophrenia, among
other things. Puts fuzzy set theory to shame. Anyway, he wanted to
get together with G. to discuss his own work and what he perceived in
the Laws of Form as very fundamental problems in generality due to
over-simplicity. G. refused to meet without being paid fifty or so
dollars per hour.
Others say that the LoF's misleading notation masks the absence of any
significant proofs. They observe that the notation uses whitespace as
an implicit operator, something that becomes obvious in an attempt to
parse it when represented as character strings in a computer.
I became interested in the Laws of Form when it first came out as it
promised to be quite an elegant solution to the most obscure proofs of
Whitehead and Russell's Principia Mathematica. The LoF carried to
perfection a very similar simplification I attempted while studying
the same logical foundations of mathematics. One does not get too far
into the proofs before getting the distinct feeling that there has GOT
to be a better way.
It would be interesting to see an attempt to express the essence of
Go:del's sentence in the LoF notation.
-- kirk
------------------------------
Date: Fri 17 Feb 84 10:57:18-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Commercial NL Review in High Technology
The February issue of High Technology has a short article on
natural language interfaces (to databases, mainly). The article
and business outlook section mention four NL systems currently
on the market, led by AIC's Intellect ($70,000, IBM mainframes),
Frey Associate's Themis ($24,000, DEC VAX-11), and Cognitive
System's interface. (The fourth is not named, but some OEMs and
licensees of the first two are given.) The article says that
four more systems are expected out this year, and discusses
Symantec's system ($400-$600, IBM PC with 256 Kbytes and hard disk)
and Cal Tech's ASK (HP9836 micro, licensed to HP and DEC).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 84 11:21:09 EST
From: Kris Hammond <Hammond@YALE>
Subject: *AI-LUNCH*
[Forwarded from a Yale bboard by Shrager@CMU-PSY-A.]
THE ADVENTURES OF JOE LISP, T MAN
Brought to you by: *AI-LUNCH*, its hot, its cold, its more than
a lunch...
This week's episode:
The Case of the Bogus Expert
Part I
It was late on a Tuesday and I was dead in my seat from nearly an
hour of grueling mail reading and idle chit-chat with random passers
by. The only light in my office was the soft glow from my CRT,
the only sound was the pain wracked rattle of an over-heated disk.
It was raining out, but the steady staccato rhythm that beat its
way into the skulls of others was held back by the cold concrete
slabs of my windowless walls. I like not having windows, but that's
another story.
I didn't hear her come in, but when the scent of her perfume hit
me, my head swung faster than a Winchester. She was wearing My-Sin,
a perfume with the smell of an expert, but that wasn't what impressed
me. What hit me was her contours. She had a body with all the
right variables. She wore a dress with a single closure that barely
hid the dynamic scoping of what was underneath. Sure I saw her
as an object, but I guess I'm just object oriented. It's the kind
of operator I am.
After she sat down and began to tell her story I realized that her
sophisticated look was just cover. She was a green kid, still wet
behind the ears. In fact she was wet all over. As I said, it was
raining outside. It's an easy inference.
It seems the kid's step-father had disappeared. He had been a
medical specialist, diagnosis and prescription, but one day he
started making wild claims about knowledge and planning and then
he vanished. I had heard of this kind before. Some were
specialists. Some in medicine, some in geology, but all were the
same kind of guy. I looked the girl in the eye and asked the one
question she didn't want to hear, "He's rule-based, isn't he?".
She turned her head away and that was all the answer I needed. His
kind were cold, unfeeling, unchanging, but she still loved him and
wanted him back again.
Once I got a full picture of the guy I was sure that I knew where
to find him, California. It was the haven for his way of thinking
and acting. I was sure that he had been swept up by the EXPERTS.
They were a cult that had grown up in the past few years, promising
fast and easy enlightenment. What they didn't tell you was that
the price was your ability to understand itself. He was there,
as sure as I was a T Man.
I knew of at least one operative in California who could be trusted,
and I knew that I had to talk to him before I could do any further
planning. I reached for the phone and gave him a call.
The conversation was short and sweet. He had resource conflicts
and couldn't give me a hand right now. I assumed that it had to
be more complex than that and almost said that resource conflicts
aren't that easy to identify, but I had no time to waste on in
fighting while the real enemy was still at large. Before he hung
up, he suggested that I pick up a radar detector if I was planning
on driving out and asked if I could grab a half-gallon of milk for
him on the way. I agreed to the favor, thanked him for his advice
and wished him luck on his tan...
That's all for now kids. Tune in next week for the part two of:
The Case of the Bogus Expert
Starring
JOE LISP, T MAN
And remember kids, Wednesdays are *AI-LUNCH* days and 11:45 is the
*AI-LUNCH* time. And kids, if you send in 3 box tops from *AI-LUNCH*
you can get a JOE LISP magic decoder ring. This is the same ring
that saved JOE LISP only two episodes ago and is capable of parsing
from surface to deep structure in less than 15 transformations.
Its part plastic, part metal and all bogus, so order now.
------------------------------
Date: 17 February 1984 11:55 EST
From: Kenneth Byrd Story <STORY @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Computational Discovery of Mathamatical Laws
[Forwarded from the MIT-MC bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
TITLE: "The Computational Discovery of Mathematical Laws: Experiments in Bin
Packing"
SPEAKER: Dr. Jon Bentley, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
DATE: Wednesday, February 22, 1984
TIME: 3:30pm Refreshments
4:15pm Lecture
PLACE: Bldg. 2-338
Bin packing is a typical NP-complete problem that arises in many applications.
This talk describes experiments on two simple bin packing heuristics (First Fit
and First Fit Decreasing) which show that they perform extremely well on
randomly generated data. On some natural classes of inputs, for instance, the
First Fit Decreasing heuristic finds an optimal solution more often than not.
The data leads to several startling conjectures; some have been proved, while
others remain open problems. Although the details concern the particular
problem of bin packing, the theme of this talk is more general: how should
computer scientists use simulation programs to discover mathematical laws?
(This work was performed jointly with D.S. Johnson, F.T. Leighton and C.A.
McGeoch. Tom Leighton will give a talk on March 12 describing proofs of some
of the conjectures spawned by this work.)
HOST: Professor Tom Leighton
THIS SEMINAR IS JOINTLY SPONSORED BY THE COMBINATORICS SEMINAR & THE THEORY OF
COMPUTATION SEMINAR
------------------------------
Date: 17 Feb 1984 15:14 EST (Fri)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Revolving Seminar
[Forwarded from the MIT-OZ bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
[I am uncertain as to the interest of AIList readers in robotics,
VLSI and CAD/CAM design, graphics, and other CS-related topics. My
current policy is to pass along material relating to planning and
high-level reasoning. Readers with strong opinions for or against
such topics should write to AIList-Request@SRI-AI. -- KIL]
AUTOMATIC SYNTHESIS OF FINE-MOTION STRATEGIES FOR ROBOTS
Tomas Lozano Perez
The use of force-based compliant motions enables robots to carry out
tasks in the presence of significant sensing and control errors. It
is quite difficult, however, to discover a strategy of such motions to
achieve a task. Furthermore, the choice of motions is quite sensitive
to details of geometry and to error characteristics. As a result,
each new task presents a brand new and difficult problem. These
factors motivate the need for automatic synthesis for compliant
motions. In this talk I will describe a formal approach to the
synthesis of compliant motion strategies from geometric description of
assembly operations.
(This is joint work [no pun intended -- KIL] with Matt Mason of CMU
and Russ Taylor of IBM)
------------------------------
Date: Fri 17 Feb 84 09:02:29-PST
From: Sharon Bergman <SHARON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Ph.D. Oral
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
PH.D. ORAL
USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
AND SIMPLE MATHEMATICS
TO ANALYZE A PHYSIOLOGICAL MODEL
JOHN C. KUNZ, STANFORD/INTELLIGENETICS
23 FEBRUARY 1984
MARGARET JACKS HALL, RM. 146, 2:30-3:30 PM
The objective of this research is to demonstrate a methodology for design
and use of a physiological model in a computer program that suggests medical
decisions. This methodology uses a physiological model based on first
principles and facts of physiology and anatomy. The model includes inference
rules for analysis of causal relations between physiological events. The model
is used to analyze physiological behavior, identify the effects of
abnormalities, identify appropriate therapies, and predict the results of
therapy. This methodology integrates heuristic knowledge traditionally used in
artificial intelligence programs with mathematical knowledge traditionally used
in mathematical modeling programs. A vocabulary for representing a
physiological model is proposed.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 10:47:50-PST
From: Juanita Mullen <MULLEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Thursday, February 23, 1984
Professor Kenneth Kahn
Upssala University
will give a talk:
"Logic Programming and Partial Evaluation as Steps Toward
Efficient Generic Programming"
at: Bldg. 200, (History Building), Room 107, 12 NOON
PROLOG and extensions to it embedded in LM PROLOG will be presented as
a means of describing programs that can be used in many ways. Partial
evaluation is a process that automatically produces efficient,
specialized versions of programs. Two partial evaluators, one for
LISP and one for PROLOG, will be presented as a means for winning back
efficiency that was sacrificed for generality. Partial evaluation
will also be presented as a means of generating compilers.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Feb 84 15:27:53 EST
From: DSMITH@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Rutger's University Computer Science Colloquium
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
COLLOQUIUM
Department of Computer Science
SPEAKER: John Cannon
Dept. of Math
University of Sydney
Syndey, AUSTRIA
TITLE: "DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A PROGRAMMING
LANGUAGE/EXPERT SYSTEMS FOR MODERN ALGEBRA"
Abstract
Over the past 25 years a substantial body of algorithms has been
devised for computing structural information about graphs. In order
to make these techniques more generally available, I have undertaken
the development of a system for group theory and related areas of
algebra. The system consists of a high-level language (having a
Pascal-like syntax) supported by an extensive library. In that the
system attempts to plan, at a high level, the most economical solution
to a problem, it has some of the attributes of an expert system. This
talk will concentrate on (a) the problems of designing appropriate
syntax for algebra and, (b) the implementation of a language professor
which attempts to construct a model of the mathematical microworld
with which it is dealing.
DATE: Friday, February 24, 1984
TIME: 2:50 p.m.
PLACE: Hill Center - Room 705
* Coffee served at 2:30 p.m. *
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂23-Feb-84 0854 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI Newsletter No. 20, February 23, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 08:53:54 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 08:52:37-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 15:45:22-PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 15:45:24-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: CSLI Newsletter No. 20, February 23, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
! CSLI Newsletter
February 23, 1984 * * * Number 20
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, February 23, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Bob Moore will continue to discuss his paper
Conference Room "A Formal Theory of Knowledge and Action."
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "On Recent Treatments of the Semantics of
Conference Room `Control': Solutions in Search of a Problem?"
by David Dowty.
Discussion led by Ivan Sag.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Discussion led by Per-Kristian Halvorsen.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Putnam's Paradox"
Room G-19 by David Lewis, Philosophy Dept., Princeton
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Discussion of Bob Moore's paper ("A Formal Theory
Conference Room of Knowledge and Action") led by John Etchemendy.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "First Steps Towards Inferential Programming,"
Conference Room by William L. Scherlis and Dana S. Scott.
Discussion led by Stuart Shieber.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Discussion led by Stanley Peters.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall Talk by Patrick Hayes.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
-----------
! Page 2
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday at Ventura Hall, on the Stanford
University campus, as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of TINLunch
papers are available at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
NEXT WEEK: "First Steps Towards Inferential Programming"
by William L. Scherlis and Dana S. Scott
Discussion led by Stuart Shieber
March 8 Brian Smith
March 15 Mark Stickel
March 22 Susan Stucky
March 29 Patrick Suppes
-----------
CSLI COLLOQUIUM SCHEDULE
Thursdays, 4:15 p.m., Redwood Hall, Room G-19
March 1 Pat Hayes
Topic to be announced.
March 8 Ray Jackendoff, Stanford Linguistics Department
"The Syntax of Conceptual Structure"
March 15 Roger Sheppard, Stanford Psychology Department
"Intimations of a Mental Mechanism"
Ray Jackendoff is giving a series of lectures on semantics and
cognition, the first of which is the CSLI colloquium on March 8, shown
above. The other two are Linguistics Department Colloquia:
Tuesday Preference Rule Systems in Vision, Music, and Language
April 3 3:15 p.m., bldg. 200, rm. 217
Tuesday The semantics of Spatial Expressions and Some Extensions
April 10 3:15 p.m., bldg. 200, rm. 217
-----------
VISIT BY GEORGE MILLER, FEBRUARY 27-29
George Miller, a member of the CSLI Advisory Panel, will be
visiting from February 27 through February 29. The purpose of his
visit is to help us understand how to develop a stronger connection
between the abstract theoretical activities that most of us are
engaged in and the more empirical constraints on language and
information that psychological research might provide. This visit is
one step towards planning a larger psychological component to CSLI
research, with closer ties to other research in the Psychology
Department.
Miller will give a special colloquium, co-sponsored by CSLI and
the Stanford Psychology Department, at 4:15 p.m. on Monday, February
27, in room 380Y (Mathematics Dept.). The topic is "Some Thoughts
About Lexicons, Objective and Subjective."
! Page 3
-----------
AREA CL SEMINAR TO BEGIN IN MARCH
On the first and third Monday of every month, beginning March 5,
we will have an internal Area CL (Computer Languages) seminar. The
purpose is for us to become better acquainted with each other's work
and to continue defining a coherent direction for the area as a whole.
We will go into substantially more technical detail than we did in the
computation seminar the first quarter. This seminar will not replace
the existing C.1 (Programming semantics) and C.2 (Talkware) seminars,
which are intended to bring in outside work and reach a more general
audience. The seminar will meet from 1:00 to 2:30 p.m. in the Ventura
conference room. Brian Smith will be the first speaker.
- Terry Winograd
-----------
PROJECT C1 SEMINAR
Semantics of Programming Languages
Tuesday, February 28, 9:30 a.m., Ventura Hall Seminar Room
Having considered the basic constructions on domains, including
product, coproduct, and function space, we will turn to the solution
of domain equations in the category of cpo's. The approach will
indicate the relationship to initial algebra semantics.
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
Because of the Presidents' Day weekend, the discourse seminar
scheduled for Tuesday, February 21 was postponed until Tuesday,
February 28. Thus, Scott Soames of Princeton University will give his
second talk at 3:15 p.m., Tuesday, February 28, in the Ventura
conference room.
------------
CSLI BULLETIN BOARD
On the SRI-AI system, a CSLI bulletin board has been established
and can be accessed by typing BBOARD CSLI. All messages sent to
CSLI-FRIENDS are received by the CSLI bulletin board, so you may want
to check there for CSLI messages rather than receiving (or storing)
them in your own mail file.
Your suggestions are welcome as to how the CSLI Newsletter can
best be distributed over the net without burdening individual mail
files. Any questions or suggestions, as well as announcements, can be
sent to DKanerva@SRI-AI or CSLI-NEWSLETTER@SRI-AI.
- Dianne Kanerva
-----------
-------
∂23-Feb-84 0914 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 09:12:38 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 09:11:17-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 16:33:00-PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 16:30:15-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA, dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA
Special Lecture at SRI, 3:00pm on Monday, 27 February 1984
An overview of HISP
by K. Futatsugi
HISP (hierarchical software processor) is an experimental
language/system, which has been developed at ETL (Electrotechnical
Laboratory, Japan) by the author's group, for hierarchical software
development based on algebraic specification techniques.
In HISP, software development is simply modeled as the incremental
construction of a set of hierarchically structured clusters of
operators (modules). Each module is the constructed as a result of
applying one of the specific module building operations to the already
existing modules. This basic feature makes it possible to write
inherently hierarchical and modularized software.
This talk will inroduce HISP informally by the use of simple
examples. The present status of HISP implementation and future
possibilities will also be sketched.
-------
∂23-Feb-84 0917 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 09:17:07 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 09:16:14-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 16:44:06-PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 16:36:20-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
To: csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA, dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA
Special Lecture at SRI, 3:00pm on Monday, 27 February 1984
SRI International, Room EL381
An overview of HISP
by K. Futatsugi
HISP (hierarchical software processor) is an experimental
language/system, which has been developed at ETL (Electrotechnical
Laboratory, Japan) by the author's group, for hierarchical software
development based on algebraic specification techniques.
In HISP, software development is simply modeled as the incremental
construction of a set of hierarchically structured clusters of
operators (modules). Each module is the constructed as a result of
applying one of the specific module building operations to the already
existing modules. This basic feature makes it possible to write
inherently hierarchical and modularized software.
This talk will inroduce HISP informally by the use of simple
examples. The present status of HISP implementation and future
possibilities will also be sketched.
*** Non-SRI Personnel please be early so you can be escorted to the
lecture room; telephone J. Goguen, X5454. ***
-------
∂23-Feb-84 0923 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:rodrigue@LBL-CSAM Re: Industry lecturers
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 09:23:09 PST
Received: from lbl-csam.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 17:10:36-PST
Return-Path: <rodrigue@LBL-CSAM>
Received: by lbl-csam.ARPA ; Wed, 22 Feb 84 17:13:03 pst
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 84 17:13:03 pst
From: (Garry Rodrigue [ams/llnl]) rodrigue@LBL-CSAM
Message-Id: <8402230113.AA20859@lbl-csam.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI, faculty@SU-SCORE
Subject: Re: Industry lecturers
∂23-Feb-84 1011 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Congratulations
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 10:10:57 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 19:20:47-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Congratulations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: SU-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Congratulations to David Cheriton, John Hennessey, Ernst Mayr and
Brian Reid . They have won the Presidential Young Investigators award.
Altogether CS/EE won 4 of the nine awarded to Stanford and 4 of the 200
nationally awarded. A lot of hard work was done by our staff in submitting
their applications.
GENE
-------
∂23-Feb-84 1015 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lantz@diablo Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 10:15:18 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 19:52:09-PST
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 84 19:51:59 pst
To: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed 22 Feb 84 11:03:47-PST.
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@diablo>
I don't think there's anything for you or the administrative staff to
apologize for. First, I think the new database format is a vast
improvement. Second, I think the faculty and students as a whole
should take responsibility for keeping the appropriate administrators
informed when they change advisors, etc., not to mention taking some
responsibility for monitoring students' progress over the various
hurdles. Yes, it would be nice to get data on "problem" students, in
particular, in advance of the meeting, but one would think that the
advisors involved would be aware of the problems and either notify the
staff (as requested) or show up at the meeting. So, in general,
I'd say the staff is doing an excellent job and it's us faculty that
could shape up a bit!
As to late bloomers, I tend to agree with Gene's comments. Seven years
should be enough for anyone in any field. Four years is pretty brief,
especially for "good citizens" = hackers by any other name; in those
cases at least, 5-6 years seems acceptable.
Keith
∂23-Feb-84 1019 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:pratt@navajo Average time to graduation
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 10:18:54 PST
Received: from Navajo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 19:55:57-PST
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 84 19:55:47 pst
To: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Average time to graduation
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed 22 Feb 84 11:03:47-PST.
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@navajo>
Would it be reasonable to set a goal of four years for Ph.D. students in
theoretical areas?
-v
∂23-Feb-84 1032 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Average time to graduation
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 10:32:18 PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 22:26:05-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Average time to graduation
To: pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Vaughan Pratt <pratt@navajo>" of Wed 22 Feb 84 19:56:06-PST
Four years is desirable but it often takes a while longer. Again,
in physics the theoretical physicists finish in a short time but the
experimentalists take longer ( almost never ten years though).
GENE
-------
∂23-Feb-84 1033 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:A.SANDY@[36.40.0.210] Re: QUME QVT103 TERMINAL DEMO
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 10:33:37 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 10:32:43-PST
Received: from [36.40.0.210] by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Feb 84 22:11:00-PST
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 15:04:32-PST
From: Sandy Lerner <A.SANDY@[36.40.0.210]>
Subject: Re: QUME QVT103 TERMINAL DEMO
To: LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA, a.sandy%gsb-why@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
s.strickland%gsb-why@SU-SCORE.ARPA, tom@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
A.SANDY@[36.40.0.210]
In-Reply-To: Message from "Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 22 Feb 84 12:46:17-PST
You left out the most important info...PRICE!!!
-------
∂23-Feb-84 1138 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA General Advisors
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 11:38:16 PST
Date: Thu 23 Feb 84 09:48:47-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: General Advisors
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The department is required to provide one general adviser. If you would
like to participate please let me know. $500 is awarded to your unrestricted
funds and more importantly it's very satisfying.
GENE
-------
∂23-Feb-84 1141 YEARWOOD@SU-SCORE.ARPA Courses and Degrees
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 11:41:22 PST
Date: Thu 23 Feb 84 09:49:24-PST
From: Marlene Yearwood <YEARWOOD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Courses and Degrees
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-2266
Please stop by Kathy's Office, Room 256, and read Courses and Degrees.
Keep in mind that the quarters that courses will be taught as well as
times, etc. are still being looked at by the Curriculum Committee, and
so are likely to change.
The most important aspect of the reading at this point is the course
descriptions. Once these are submitted, only minor changes can be made.
If you have not turned in corrected copy to Kathy, it will be assumed that
last year's description is acceptable.
Thanks.
-------
∂23-Feb-84 1155 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@diablo Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 11:55:39 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 10:39:58-PST
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 84 10:23 PST
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@diablo>
Subject: Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
To: GOLUB@SU-Score, faculty@SU-Score
Cc: mwalker@SU-Score
My strongest reaction to the Grey Tuesday review was that we are being too
soft on students that lack commitment to the Ph.D. program. In particular,
I would favor eliminating leaves of absence except for medical reasons.
Also, I would side with Gene that any student that has been here too long
(> 5 years) should be leaned on but good, with solid support from some faculty
necessary to keep the student in the program.
After all, we do have lots of great candidates each year and a student lacking
commitment to the program is just wasiting our time and denying equal or beeter
students the opportunity.
(flame off)
∂23-Feb-84 1214 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Feb 27 meeting of Issues in Perception, Cognition and Language
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 12:14:04 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 12:14:03-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 11:54:27-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 11:54:41-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Thu 23 Feb 84 10:38:59-PST
Date: 23 Feb 1984 10:37:33-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: Feb 27 meeting of Issues in Perception, Cognition and Language
Issues in Perception, Language and Cognition (Psych 279)
WHO: Professor Richard Thompson
Psychology Department, Stanford University
WHEN: Monday February 27, noon to 1:15
WHERE: Jordan Hall (Psychology) room 100
WHAT: Detection, decision, memory and the brain
ABSTRACT
------------
Professor Thompson will speak on his recent work attempting to localize
various aspects of brain function. Part of the talk will be about the
analysis of sensory processes including detection and discrimination
judgments. The remainder of the talk will be on the search for the site of
plasiticity for learning in mammals.
-------
The next few speakers will be
John Barwise (CSLI, Stanford Philosophy)
Phil Cohen (Fairchild Artificial Intelligence Lab)
Announcements and abstracts will be posted.
∂23-Feb-84 1708 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Summer Housing for Visiting Faculty
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 17:08:10 PST
Date: Thu 23 Feb 84 17:06:43-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Summer Housing for Visiting Faculty
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
If you have any summer visitors who want housing at Escondido Village
or environs, please send me their name , address, home institution,
purpose of stay and dates.
GENE
-------
∂23-Feb-84 2105 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 23 Feb 84 21:04:57 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Feb 84 21:03:20-PST
Date: Thu 23 Feb 84 20:56:46-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Grey Tuesday, students, tec.
To: GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
*"PS:<WIEDERHOLD>PRINT.WINTER-83-84.1"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Wed 22 Feb 84 11:33:20-PST
1 Expecting and pushing students to finish in about 5 years is reasonable.
2 Having two classes of students - theory and experimental - appears awkward,
not all students fall neatly into one category.
3 Limiting experimental projects to demonstrations, rather than expecting
prototype systems ( which they or the university can try to sell ) is a
way to reduce the time even for experimentalists. That means they will
not have learned some important practicalities - having only expended
50% rather than 99% perspiration, but that may not be our role anyhow.
4 experimental projects can be greatly aided by Masters students - the AI
MS program is an example which may be selectively emulated.
5 In the particular case of Arthur Keller, and perhaps other late bloomers,
the record should show that he had 1.5 years of approved leave of absence;
in his case spent here after Denny Brown left. Maybe we should restrict
leaves, but while they exist we must realize that they will slow blooming.
Gio
-------
∂24-Feb-84 0041 CLT SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Prof. Martin Davis,
Courant Institute, NYU, visiting Berkeley
TITLE: "Some influences of logic on computer science"
TIME: Wednesday, Feb. 29, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
Abstract:
It is difficult to be unaware of the truly breathtaking
advances taking place today in computer technology. But it is
easy to forget the profound and subtle interplay between the
abstract concerns of logicians and these practical developments.
Indeed the work of logicians has presaged many aspects of
computational practice which are now commonplace and whose
intellectual antecedents are typically unkown to users.
In this talk some of these connections will be discussed.
Remaining meetings for the quarter:
Mar. 7 Warren Goldfarb,
"The Godel class with identity is unsolvable"
Mar. 14 Johan van Benthem
"Incompleteness theorems in modal logic"
S. Feferman
∂24-Feb-84 1202 LB@SRI-AI.ARPA Monday's meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Feb 84 12:02:19 PST
Date: Fri 24 Feb 84 12:02:21-PST
From: Stanley Peters <PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Monday's meeting
Sender: LB@SRI-AI.ARPA
To: csli-b1@SRI-AI.ARPA
Jerry Hobbs will talk at 2:00 Monday in Ventura instead of 3:15. This
will allow whoever wants to also to hear George Miller at 4:00. We will
talk Monday about the best time for a regular meeting time.
-------
∂24-Feb-84 1449 ASHOK@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS course clashes
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Feb 84 14:49:18 PST
Date: Fri 24 Feb 84 14:47:35-PST
From: Ashok Subramanian <ASHOK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS course clashes
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: ASHOK@SU-SCORE.ARPA
One can't help noticing the number of clashes of CS course timings in
the spring quarter Time Schedule. I believe that this is mainly
because most CS classes seem to meet at a few favourite
times. I wonder why this is so, and what could be done to correct
this situation. This is especially relevant right now because next year's
Time Schedule is in the process of being finalised.
--ashok
-------
-------
∂24-Feb-84 1516 @SRI-AI.ARPA:desRivieres.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Talk and Visit by David McAllester
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Feb 84 15:16:25 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 24 Feb 84 15:15:35-PST
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 84 15:13 PST
From: desRivieres.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Talk and Visit by David McAllester
To: csli-folks@sri-ai.ARPA
David McAllester (MIT) will probably be visiting the Palo Alto area
during part of the second week of March. He is tentatively scheduled
to give a talk on Monday March 12th (abstract forthcoming). Please
let me know if you would be interested in meeting with him.
---Jim
∂24-Feb-84 1518 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: CS course clashes
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Feb 84 15:18:08 PST
Date: Fri 24 Feb 84 15:09:49-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: CS course clashes
To: ASHOK@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Ashok Subramanian <ASHOK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Fri 24 Feb 84 14:47:45-PST
The time table was on display at the receptionist last year. I asked the
student bureaucrats to look at it and they made some suggestions. I hope
we can do better next year.
GENE
-------
∂24-Feb-84 1653 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA IBM Fellowship Applications
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Feb 84 16:53:08 PST
Date: Fri 24 Feb 84 16:50:55-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: IBM Fellowship Applications
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: NA.Paul@SU-SCORE.ARPA, PPH@SU-AI.ARPA, STEFAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
MANN@SU-HNV.ARPA, FOULSER@SU-SCORE.ARPA, DMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
M.CHAD@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, WORLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMM@SU-AI.ARPA, FY@SU-AI.ARPA,
: ;
The IBM Fellowship Applications are going out today. Thank you all for
your assistance and cooperation.
Jitendra Malik and Frank Yellin are being nominated for renewal of their
IBM Fellowships.
David Chelberg, Stefan Demetrescu, David Foulser, Peter Hochschild,
Tim Mann, Chad Mitchell, and Pat Worley have been nominated for the
1984/85 IBM Fellowship.
They are outstanding candidates, and I'm glad that I'm not the one making
the decisions. We wish you all good luck.
As soon as the results are announced, you will be notified.
Carolyn
-------
∂24-Feb-84 1655 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI-TURING
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 24 Feb 84 16:54:46 PST
Date: Fri 24 Feb 84 16:52:34-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI-TURING
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Damn! After all of 48+ hours, our new DEC has crashed again!
Reminder: Those of you who wish to secure accounts on CSLI's DEC2060,
please contact me ASAP.
Michele
-------
∂26-Feb-84 2005 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 26 Feb 84 20:05:07 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 26 Feb 84 17:14:11-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 26 Feb 84 17:12:10-PST
Date: 26 Feb 1984 1712-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
On Tuesday 2.28.84, we have a meeting of the discourse seminar.
Scott Soames' second talk is postponed till next week (so, we do have
Soames on 3.6.84).
This Tuesday the speaker is J.Hobbs from SRI. His lecture renews
the Grosz-Perry strategy we followed at the beginning of term, i.e. looking
at particular texts and searching for some interpretation strategy.
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Jerry Hobbs, SRI
Tuesday, 28.2.84, 3.15pm, Ventura Hall
A stretch of discourse will be analyzed, and the relation between discourse
structure and underlying knowledge will be examined.
-------
∂27-Feb-84 0748 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA ACCOUNTS ON DEC-20 AT CSLI
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Feb 84 07:47:53 PST
Date: Mon 27 Feb 84 07:47:45-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: ACCOUNTS ON DEC-20 AT CSLI
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
******************************************************************************
OK, OK!
I give up. Anyone who was on the direct CSLI list has an account already on
our DEC-2060. For those of you who did not send in the requested paperwork,
the accountname default is your current accountname at SRI or wherever, and
the temporary password is that same string.
Rest assured that I will no longer request paperwork or information from any
of you.
******************************************************************************
-------
∂27-Feb-84 1025 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA automatic deduction seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Feb 84 10:25:48 PST
Date: Mon 27 Feb 84 10:24:22-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: automatic deduction seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
The first meeting of the automatic deduction seminar will be this Wednesday,
February 29th, at 1:30 p.m. in room 301 of Margaret Jacks Hall. It is
fervently hoped that the next meeting will not be on a similar date! I will
endeavour to give a brief talk on what I regard "automatic deduction" as
meaning, its place in the Grand Scheme of Things, etc., and then will try to
get some discussion going as to what this seminar is / ought to be for. I
would like to encourage the attendance of people who *don't* know much about
automatic deduction but would be interested in finding out some.
This is also a test of my mailing list. If the number of copies of this
message that you received is different from the number you would like to have
received, please tell me about it.
- Richard
-------
∂27-Feb-84 1029 HOBBS@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Pat Hayes
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Feb 84 10:29:10 PST
Date: Mon 27 Feb 84 10:28:09-PST
From: HOBBS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Dinner with Pat Hayes
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: hobbs@SRI-AI.ARPA
I thought we could go to Hsi-Nan the Little (Louies), in Palo Alto on
University Avenue with Pat Hayes after his colloquium at 7 pm this Thursday.
If you want to join us let me know by phone (859-2229, leave a message) or
computer (hobbs@sri-ai) by Thursday noon.
-- Jerry
-------
hobbs%sri-ai
Pat Hayes Dinner.
I would like to come.
∂27-Feb-84 1031 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA automatic deduction seminar
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Feb 84 10:30:46 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 27 Feb 84 10:28:18-PST
Date: Mon 27 Feb 84 10:24:22-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: automatic deduction seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
The first meeting of the automatic deduction seminar will be this Wednesday,
February 29th, at 1:30 p.m. in room 301 of Margaret Jacks Hall. It is
fervently hoped that the next meeting will not be on a similar date! I will
endeavour to give a brief talk on what I regard "automatic deduction" as
meaning, its place in the Grand Scheme of Things, etc., and then will try to
get some discussion going as to what this seminar is / ought to be for. I
would like to encourage the attendance of people who *don't* know much about
automatic deduction but would be interested in finding out some.
This is also a test of my mailing list. If the number of copies of this
message that you received is different from the number you would like to have
received, please tell me about it.
- Richard
-------
∂27-Feb-84 1054 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Hayes' talk at CSLI Colloquium, Thursday, March 1
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Feb 84 10:52:26 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 27 Feb 84 10:42:57-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 27 Feb 84 10:41:16-PST
Date: Mon 27 Feb 84 10:41:09-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Hayes' talk at CSLI Colloquium, Thursday, March 1
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Pat Hayes, of the Departments of Philosophy and Computer Science
at the University of Rochester, New York, will speak on "The Naive
Continuum" at this week's CSLI Colloquium (4:15 p.m., Thursday, March 1,
in Redwood Hall, Room G-19).
-------
∂27-Feb-84 1805 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay BATS
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 27 Feb 84 18:05:37 PST
Received: from rand-relay.ARPA (CSNET2.ARPA) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 27 Feb 84 17:52:19-PST
Date: 27 Feb 1984 10:15:53-PST (Monday)
From: Maria Klawe <KLAWE%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Return-Path: <KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Subject: BATS
To: aflb.all@su-score
Via: IBM-SJ; 27 Feb 84 17:02-PST
The next BATS meeting will be at IBM San Jose on Friday March 30.
So far only two talks have definitely been scheduled.
These are:
Mike Fredman from U.C. San Diego speaking about his recent work
with Bob Tarjan on Fibonacci heaps and their applications to
network optimization problems.
Avi Wigderson from Berkeley talking about a layout problem.
We have openings for two more talks so let me know if you have one
you would like to give.
∂28-Feb-84 1054 LB@SRI-AI.ARPA Next meeting
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 28 Feb 84 10:53:59 PST
Date: Tue 28 Feb 84 10:54:36-PST
From: Stanley Peters <PETERS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Next meeting
Sender: LB@SRI-AI.ARPA
To: csli-b1@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: lb@SRI-AI.ARPA
We will meet again next Monday to continue discussion of Jerry
Hobbs' proposals about logical form. Meeting time will be
3:15
and the place will be Ventura Hall (room to be announced later).
-------
∂28-Feb-84 1138 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:berglund@diablo My Gray Tuesday Thoughts
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 28 Feb 84 11:38:10 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 28 Feb 84 11:26:23-PST
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 84 11:25 PST
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@diablo>
Subject: My Gray Tuesday Thoughts
To: faculty@score
Cc: bureaucrat@score
I sent the following message to phd@score yesterday:
From @SU-SCORE.ARPA:berglund@diablo Mon Feb 27 21:34:03 1984
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Diablo with TCP; Mon, 27 Feb 84 21:33:58 pst
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 27 Feb 84 21:04:48-PST
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 84 21:04 PST
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@diablo>
Subject: Gray Tuesday Observations
To: phd@score
Cc: rjb@sail
Status: R
As one of your two faithful student bureaucrats, I had the opportunity
to watch the Gray Tuesday process last week. Though it didn't
contain too many surprises, I did feel somewhat more informed than
before the experience, so I thought I should pass along some
thoughts before I forget them:
1. The faculty takes both the deadline to file the G81 and the
expiration of candidacy seriously, though exceptions are made.
(As I understand it, the G81 form--which announces your thesis
title and reading committee--must be filed within one year of
passing the qual, and candidacy expires five years after you've
been granted it--which is usually right after you finish both
parts of the comp.) I would say that the vast majority of people
who get vaguely threatening letters this time were pushing one
of these two deadlines.
2. The whole Gray Tuesday process is the faculty's attempt to ensure
that each Ph.D. student is making "reasonable progress" toward
the degree. The deadlines for comp, qual, G81, and expiration
of candidacy are set by the department or the university to
help in the measurement of such progress. Deadlines for the comp
and qual are rarely extended; the other two seem to be extended
only with strong support from a faculty member--usually your
advisor--and some evidence of progress, even if slow. Several
faculty members seemed to suggest that a student who is generally
making major commitments of time and effort to the department
should be given more consideration when deadlines approach; still,
SOME progress must be evident even in this case.
3. I was asked specifically to warn Ph.D. students to take conditional
passes in the comp and qual very seriously. Failure to satisfy
the conditions within the specified time limit could result in failure
of the entire exam.
I have deliberately not sent this message out under the "bureaucrat"
title, because these are my personal thoughts and interpretations
of the proceedings. I hope, though, that they're somewhat useful, and
that you'll ask Oren or me if you have any questions at all about
the Gray Tuesday/Black Friday evalutions.
Eric Berglund
∂28-Feb-84 1145 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:berglund@diablo Teaching Input So Far
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 28 Feb 84 11:45:20 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 28 Feb 84 11:31:30-PST
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 84 11:30 PST
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@diablo>
Subject: Teaching Input So Far
To: faculty@score
Cc: bureaucrat@score
I also sent this message to Ph.D. students yesterday. Your contribution to
the debate would be very helpful. I've been asking my constituents to send
their opinions to berglund@diablo so that mail boxes and bboard aren't
overflowing with debate. I've then been making the comments available on
score. My solicitation of student input is also on the file at score.
From @SU-SCORE.ARPA:berglund@diablo Mon Feb 27 22:18:29 1984
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by Diablo with TCP; Mon, 27 Feb 84 22:18:24 pst
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 27 Feb 84 21:53:52-PST
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 84 21:53 PST
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@diablo>
Subject: Teaching Requirement Debate
To: phd@score, rjb@sail
Status: R
I've gathered the teaching requirement responses in <cs.bureaucrat>teachingreq
on score. Please read the requirements and send further comment to
berglund@diablo. In a few days I'll put up a second file.
Several good arguments, both pro and con, have not been given enough airing
in the responses. I think these should be considered as well:
1. Tim Mann and Ginger Edighoffer both pointed out that no experience is as
good for learning as having to explain the material. Being required to
TA an advanced class, or even two, could reasonably be justified on the
basis of the learning experience alone.
2. Ernst Mayr notes that without good quality TAing in the advanced courses
the ultimate loser will be the students in these classes. Services such
as notes with lectures, office hours, grading of weekly problem sets and
relatively quick grading of exams are not heavily rewarded when faculty
are evaluated, leaving them almost necessarily in the hands of TAs.
3. My bias so far has been that the problem is essentially a personnel issue:
the department and the university have not had the ability and/or desire
to provide the resources necessary to get TAs for the advanced courses.
It should not be legitimate university or
department policy to add mandatory service to the graduation requirements
to solve a personnel problem. Such problems should be solved by the hiring
of more faculty--perhaps including lecturers whose only job is to teach,
or by making the positions attractive enough to entice qualified TAs.
I have contended that since much RA work contributes to the thesis, whereas
TA work virtually never does, TAing can only be made attractive by raising
the salaries substantially.
4. Several other good arguments for both proposals have been given to me ver-
bally, but not sent in mail messages, and I haven't been able to remember
them all. I don't believe that the responses in the teachingreq file
are necessarily an accurate measure of student feeling, but it's all I
have to show the faculty--please contribute by sending me mail.
5. David Cheriton has suggested that any increase in teaching requirements
might/should be accompanied by a statement that Teaching Assistants should
not be used principally as graders, but should instead contribute AS
apprentice colleagues. Would such conditions make any changes more
palatable? Can you think of any other changes that are necessary?
Eric Berglund
Teaching Requirement Committee
berglund@diablo
∂29-Feb-84 0017 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM*@SU-AI AFLB talks for this week and the next one:
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 00:16:54 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 00:15:41-PST
Date: 29 Feb 84 0000 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: AFLB talks for this week and the next one:
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE
3/1/84 - Dr. Avi Wigderson (Berkeley)
"How discreet is the discrete log?"
Blum and Micali showed how to "hide" one bit in the Discrete Logarithm
function. We show how to hide k bits, for all k=O(log log P), where P
is the modulus. This cuts the trade-off time vs. secure bits by a
factor of k for coin flipping and pseudo-random number generation.
******** Time and place: March 1, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
Special AFLB (Note date, time and room!)
3/2/84 - Dr. D. S. Johnson (ATT Bell Labs)
"Some Unexpected Expected Behavior Results for Bin Packing"
This will be an informal presentation of recent work on the probabilistic
analysis of simple heuristics for bin packing. We have two main results. For
the first-fit heuristic, we show that, if the items are evenly distributed
between 0 and 1, then the expected error grows as the 4/5 power of the optimum.
It was widely believed that the error is linear. Our second result states that,
if the items are spread between 0 and 1/2, then the expected error of the
first-fit decreasing heuristic is constant. We prove these average-case results
by doing essentially worst-case analysis on certain dense subsets of the inputs.
This is joint work with Bentley, Leighton, C.C.McGeoch, and L. McGeoch.
******** Time and place: FRIDAY, March 2, 2:15 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) *******
3/8/84 - Prof. Shmuel Friedland (Hebrew Univ. - Jerusalem)
"Is graph isomorphism polynomially solvable?"
Let U and V be two graphs. They are represented by 0-1 symmetric
matrices, A and B respectively. U and V are isomorphic iff A and B
are permutationally similar. We formulate a necessary condition for
two symmetric matrices to be permutationally similar. In the case
that A and B are 0-1 matrices, these conditions can be checked in
polynomial time. Our approach uses Hacijan's ellipsoidal algorithm.
We conjecture that this necessary condition is also sufficient. We
verify our conjecture in a few cases. We also prove that our
necessary condition implies that the matrices (graphs) have the same
spectra.
******** Time and place: March 8, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
∂29-Feb-84 0230 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #10
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 02:30:19 PST
Date: Tuesday, February 28, 1984 5:41PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #10
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 29 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Cuts & Sets & Arrays,
Query - Lambda Abstraction,
Puzzle - Lamps,
Administration - Correction,
LP Library - Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun 19 Feb 84 14:24:54-EST
From: Paul G. Weiss <PGW@MIT-XX>
Subject: Handling of Cuts
The following Prolog interpreter is taken from the DEC-10
Prolog manual:
Terms representing clauses are specified using the unary
predicate my←clause, e.g.
my←clause( (grandparent(X,Z):-parent(X,Y),parent(Y,Z)) ).
A unit clause will be represented by a term such as
my←clause( (parent(john,mary) :- true) )
The mini-interpreter consists of four clauses:
| execute(true) :- !.
| execute((P,Q)) :- !, execute(P), execute(Q).
| execute(P) :- my←clause((P:-Q)), execute(Q).
| execute(P) :- P.
The last clause enables the mini-interpreter to cope with
calls to ordinary Prolog predicates, E.g. evaluable
predicates.
Now, am I confused, or does this interpreter not handle cuts.
In particular, if I do
execute((a, !, b)).
this expands into
!, execute(a), execute((!,b)).
Suppose execute(a) succeeds. Then the execute((!,b)) goal
expands into
Suppose now, the execute(b) goal fails. Then this causes the
execute((!,b)) goal ot fail. But now the execute(a) goal is
free to backtrack, which is what I sought to prevent by using
execute((a,!,b)) instead of the simpler execute((a,b)).
Q: Am I correct in this analysis.
Q: If so, is there a fix to allow this interpreted to correctly
handle cuts.
Thank you.
------------------------------
Date: 23 February 1984 16:38 EST
From: Reevesr.ULC at HIS-BILLERICA-MULTICS
Subject: Lambda Abstraction
The following mapping program is written in micro-Prolog with
"←" as the sole variable prefix. It parodies a functional
example by Wand (1).
((maphd ← () ()))
((maphd ←f (←X|←Y) (←x|←y)) (←f ←X ←x) (maphd ←f ←Y ←y))
It simply asserts that two lists have a fixed relation between
corresponding elements. It can be called with ←f bound to the
name of any binary relation in the dictionary, but it would be
more useful if the relation could be written on the fly. The
following clause, written in micro-Prolog continues
Wand's example:
((f1 ←X ←Y ←Z) (maphd g ←Y ←Z) where ((g ←x (←X|←x)))
It suggests that every element of ←Z is the corresponding
element of ←Y with the element ←X cons'ed on to it.
I am, of course, fantasising that I have lambda abstraction
and there seems to be a real need for it here, but is Prolog
irreparably damaged ?
We have a schematic definition for g which is not to be found
by indexing in the dictionary but by direct reference as a term.
It exists in the scope of another definition and will be
instantiated when f1 is.
The syntactic difficulties introduced by the "where" form may
be avoided by the anonymous lambda form as follows:
((f1 ←X ←Y ←Z) (maphd ((lambda ←x (X|←x))) ←Y ←Z))
but this is still not the end of the matter, because the lambda
abstraction may be disjunctive. Suppose we introduce square
brackets to denote a list of disjunctive clauses, I.e. a program.
Then we might have:
((f2 ←X1 ←X2 ←Y ←Z) ((maphd
[((lambda ←x (X1 ←X2|←x)) (LESS ←X1 ←X2))
((lambda ←x (←X2 ←X1|←x))]
←Y ←Z))
From the point of view of logic, specifying a closure relation
seems no worse than specifying an axiom name except for the
environmental complication, but surely any modular system of
logic is prone to the same criticism.
-- Ray Reeves
(1) Wand, M. Continuation-Based Program Transformation Strategies.
JACM Vol. 27 No.1 January 1980. 165
------------------------------
Date: 17 Feb 84 19:27:59-PST (Fri)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!Marcel @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Lamps Puzzle productions - (nf)
Here's another solution to the Lamps puzzle. (I cooked this
one up last night, and find it more intuitive than the gyrations
necessary to get a good solution out of Prolog).
The problem again:
1. either "a" is on or "b" is on;
2. when "a" is on, "b" is off;
3. "a" and "b" are either on or off.
Find all possible solutions without doing an exhaustive
generate-and-test.
There have been a couple of good solutions in Prolog, especially
those by Debray (on net.ai) and that by Naish (above). They both ran
roughly as follows:
axiom1(1,←).
axiom1(←,1).
axiom2(1,0).
axiom2(0,←).
axiom3(1).
axiom3(0).
go(A,B) :- axiom1(A,B),
axiom2(A,B),
axiom3(A),
axiom3(B).
You can check that the potential solutions (1,1) and (0,0) are
never generated. The code blurs the distinction between generator
and filter so that the generator need not be exhaustive, without
risking loss of actual solutions.
Now that I've got a solution I like, I can afford to air my
intuitive objections to the above solution:
- the axioms must be applied in fixed order (1-2-3), when other
orders are useful and other solution methods are possible;
- I'd rather not specify the default case of axiom 2;
- all the axioms are brought to bear when only two would be
sufficient (1 & 2, or 3 & 2, see below);
- you have to reduce the lamps to elements of a relation, though
they are unrelated except by the axioms (the logical problem
statement contains more solution info than necessary);
- I think of the axioms as rules to be executed, not data to be
matched.
Here's a solution using a modified version of S.A.Vere's relational
production interpreter. The modifications are:
- an atom in a rule cannot match a variable in the database;
- the interpreter can't use a rule on a term if that rule was used to
produce the term;
- the arrow is implication, if the consequent is false we
get the contrapositive (antecedent must also be false);
- if a rule matches, and then fails, the state must be abandoned.
The problem axioms become:
1. lamp(a,X), lamp(b,Y) -> X=on ; Y=on.
2. lamp(a,on), lamp(b,Y) -> Y=off.
3. lamp(←,X) -> X=on ; X=off.
We now pose the question "lamp(a,X), lamp(b,Y)" and get the
following solution process:
lamp(a,on) lamp(a,on) SOLUTION
lamp(b,Y) -<rule2> lamp(b,off)
lamp(a,X) /
lamp(b,Y) --<rule1>
\ lamp(a,on) -<rule2> FAIL
lamp(a,Y) / lamp(b,on)
lamp(b,on) -<rule3>
\ lamp(a,off)
lamp(b,on) SOLUTION
Note that this doesn't use any more rules than necessary to generate
each solution, and that the rules are not constrained as to usage
order.
Here we used rules 1 & 3 as generators, and rule 2 in both deductive
and checking modes. Just for interest's sake, here's another solution:
lamp(a,on) -<rule2> lamp(a,on) SOLUTION
lamp(b,Y) lamp(b,off)
lamp(a,X) /
lamp(b,Y) --<rule3>
\ lamp(a,off) SOLUTION
lamp(a,off) / lamp(b,on)
lamp(b,Y) -<rule3>
\ lamp(a,off)
lamp(b,off) -<rule1> FAIL
This time we used only rule 3 as a generator, rule 2 in deductive
mode, and rule 1 as a filter. Now THAT's using knowledge to good
effect!
-- Marcel Schoppers
------------------------------
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 08:58:08-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: Arrays
For those arguing about arrays for Prolog, and implementing their code
in Prolog, the following practical considerations may be of interest:
1. Because of lack of indexing and general slowness of database
updates, any method using database side-effects will be orders of
magnitude slower than a method not using side effects.
2. My experience is that the above applies even when the method with
side-effects gives theoretical constant access whereas the one not
using side effects has, say, log N access time.
3. The best and nicest log array implementations in Prolog have log N
access and update but require no search.
4. In a REAL computer, memory is limited. C log N, in the
implementation I use, is 4 or so for the largest array I could fit
in memory. BUT
5. The real beauty of the log methods is the space-efficient
implementation of SPARSE arrays: big unused holes need not be there
at all (Ken Kahn's method does not provide this). With sparse arrays,
though, point (4) above is less applicable.
I haven't had the time yet to look in detail at the various
implementations and plans thereof offered to the net. My main
application of arrays requires efficient storage of sparse arrays
and very frequent access to "old" versions of arrays. For
applications of this kind, well implemented log N arrays seem to
be the best bet, at least when the implementation of arrays has
to be in Prolog.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 25-Feb-84 20:53:34-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: MoRe Sets/Arrays
Yet another installment in the continuing story OF
Sets and Arrays in Prolog
This is my reply to Shimon Cohen's reply to my reply to ...
He says:
It seems that you equate O(1) with O(log N), I guess some
theoretical guys will love to use your METHOD to "prove"
that P=NP ... Now seriously: I think you are right in most
everyday cases BUT the best you can do with a tree is O(log n)
pointer accesses and the same amount of label comparisons.
If N is in the millions then the ratio can be one order of
magnitude in favor of "Hashing"...
What I had said:
If you want to do a lot of membership tests, using binary trees
is nearly as efficient as using hash tables. For the next
couple of years on VAXen and M68000s (or on the DEC-10 with its
tiny address space), the difference between O(lgN) and O(1) is
likely to be swallowed up by the overheads of hashing.
How anyone can get out of this that I equate O(1) and O(lgN) is
quite beyond me. Surely it is clear that it is ONLY the "everyday"
cases that I was talking about, and from my reference to the DEC-10 it
should have been clear that I was considering only N << 2↑18. Let me
give an example of what I mean. <PROLOG>ARRAYS.PL yields O(1) access
and update to single-version arrays with integer subscripts. The cost
is about 80 "logical instructions". <PROLOG>TREES.PL yields O(lgN)
access and update to arrays with integer subscripts, where multiple
versions of an array can exist at once. The cost is about 8lgN
"logical instructions". So for lgN <= 10 (i.e. for N <= 1024) the
tree version is faster. By extrapolation, for N <= 2↑20 the binary
tree version would be only twice as slow. The costs of garbage
collection are different for the two versions, and binary trees may
stay superior for even higher N. (The cross- over point in DEC-10
Prolog turned out to be around N=2000). There are two mistakes you
shouldn't make. The first is that I am saying anything about the
efficiency of Cohen's code. The second is that *asymptotic* orders of
efficiency are an infallible guide for any specific application.
Check the constant factor!
He says:
You proposed several ways to implement 'sets'; Can we make
this "internal representation" problem hidden from the user.
Namely: Instead of doing it the hard way (Selecting proper
impl.) do it the easy way (Use detailed specifications).
I'm afraid I don't understand the last sentence. When we write
Prolog programs today we HAVE to select the implementation. There is
no form of specification which Prolog can read so that it can pick the
right implementation. (SETL is one of the few systems around with a
data structure optimiser, which is said to be a very large program in
itself.) I agree that it would be nice to have such a feature in the
language. First we need proper modules and abstract data types. Can
we perhaps discuss in this digest what they should look like? Until
then, once we have written the detailed specs (I for one find this
*much* harder than just selecting the right data structure), we are
*still* left to write either
add←element(X, Y, Z)
or ord←union([X], Y, Z)
or add←to←tree(X, Y, Z)
or cohen←set←plus(Y, X, Z)
or whatever in our Prolog code. I even doubt sometimes whether this
form of decision *should* be taken from the user. When I am trying to
make a program (whether in Prolog or Algol 68 or Pascal or Pop) as
efficient as I can, I very often *invent* new data structures, as
combinations of others. Such as adding a numbering to the nodes of a
graph to speed up some operation. Such as having a fast structure for
a bulky fixed table and a slow "overflow table". (Which is like the
way Kahns LM-arrays work.) In such a case, having a library of
implementations around that one can *modify* is vital, and so is
having a good understanding of how they work. To hide this multiple
representation *resource* from me would be to cripple me as a
programmer.
His message goes into a little more detail about his algorithm. I
begin to see how it works. Do you think, sir, that you could write up
your algorithm and data structure? I'm afraid no-one here can figure
out from your code what it is doing. It looked as though access took
O(total number of history tokens) time, evidently we had radically
misunderstood.
I have lately been working on multiple-context data-bases (a la
CONNIVER and PEARL). No, not in Prolog. The method could of course
be applied to Prolog. Suppose you have |I| items, |C| contexts (in
a context tree, which can have any shape), and |D| changes (items
added to context or removed from contexts). Then my data structure
and algorithm require about 6(|C| + |I| + |D|) pointers, accessing
or updating an arbitrary item in an arbitrary context takes at most
O(lg|number of changes to that item|) time, and accessing an item
in the same context you referred to it last time takes O(1) time.
Getting this performance requires a really hairy data structure. It
could not, I think, be implemented in Prolog this efficiently, and I
doubt whether it is possible to do better in any language. (The
O(1) cost for repeated access is obtained by not only having a tree
of changes for each element, but also a pointer to the last node you
looked at.) The connection between this and arrays is obvious.
(Don't ask about the constant factor!)
Just a word on how this data structure could be applied to give
a "multiple-context Prolog". In this system a database is a function
from items to values, not just to present/absent. So we would admit
predicates (represented by their functor block address) and clauses
(represented by their header address) as items, and the value of an
item would be a pair of pointers : to the first and last clauses for
a predicate, to the next and previous clauses for a clause.
Asserting or retracting a clause in a particular context would
involve changing the values of three items, the clause and its
predecessor and successor in that context.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 21 Feb 84 08:35:37-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: Misattribution
For the last few Digests, some work on arrays has been attributed
to "Ken Forbus", when in fact it is due to Ken Kahn, of Uppsala
University. Ken (Kahn) has an account at MIT, which may be the
reason for the confusion.
[ "Arrays←Forbus.Pl" has been changed to "Arrays←Kahn.Pl" -ed]
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Tue 28 Feb 84 17:33:51-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE>
Subject: LP Library Update
Michael McCord's "slot grammar" as published in the AI Journal
is on the <Prolog> directory at SU-SCORE. The files are:
MCCORD.Pl MCREAD.Pl
MCDICT.Pl MCTRAN.Pl
MCGRAM.Pl MCUNIV.Pl
BagUtil.Pl and Listut.Pl have been updated. Thanks to Richard
O'Keefe for submitting all of the above.
-ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂29-Feb-84 1035 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI A Seminat TODAY 4:15pm - Sedgewick on Algorithm Animation
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 10:35:17 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 10:29:34-PST
Date: 29 Feb 84 1026 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI>
Subject: A Seminat TODAY 4:15pm - Sedgewick on Algorithm Animation
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE
EE380 - Computer Systems Seminar
Wednesday, February 29, 4:15 pm
Terman Auditorium
Algorithm Animation
Robert Sedgewick
Brown University
The central thesis of this talk is that it is possible to expose fundamental
characteristics of computer programs through the use of dynamic (real-time)
graphic displays, and that such algorithm animation has the potential to be
useful in several contexts. Recent research in support of this thesis will be
described, including the development of a conceptual framework for the process
of animation, the implementation of a software environment on high-performance
graphics-based workstations supporting this activity, and the use of the system
as a principal medium of communication in teaching and research. In particular,
we have animated scores of numerical, sorting, searching, string processing,
geometric, and graph algorithms. Several examples will be described in detail.
[Editorial remark: This is great stuff. - Forest]
∂29-Feb-84 1332 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 13:32:13 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 13:12:33-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 13:10:33-PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 13:07:26-PST
From: MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA
To: dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: meseguer@SRI-AI.ARPA
REWRITE RULE SEMINAR AT SRI-CSL
Wednesday March 7, 3:00 pm
Speaker: Carolyn Talcott
---------------
A Model of Computation
Theory and application to LISP-like systems
Carolyn Talcott
Stanford University
Abstract
The goal of this work is to provide a rich context in which a
variety of aspects of computation can be treated and where new
ideas about computing can be tested and developed. An important
motivation and guide has been the desire to understand the construction
and use of LISP like computation systems.
The first step was to define a model of computation and develop the
theory to provide basic tools for further work. The main components are
⊗ basic model and notion of evaluation
⊗ equivalence relations and extensionality
⊗ an abstract machine as a subtheory
⊗ formalization of the metatheory
Key features of this theory are:
⊗ It is a construction of particular theories uniformly
from given data structures (data domain and operations).
⊗ Focus is on control aspects of computation
⊗ A variety of objects
Forms -- for describing control aspects of computation
Pfns -- abstraction of form in an environment
-- elements of the computation domain
-- computational analogue of partial functions
Carts -- for collecting arguments and values
Envs -- intepretation of symbols appearing in forms
cTrees -- objects describing particular computations
Applications of this theory include
⊗ proving properties of pfns
⊗ implementation of computation systems
⊗ representing and mechanizing aspects of reasoning
In this talk I will describe RUM - the applicative
fragment (flavor). RUM is the most mathematically
developed aspect of the work and is the foundation
for the other aspects which include implementation
of a computation system called SEUS.
-------
∂29-Feb-84 1334 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA next c1 seminar (March 6th)
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 13:34:13 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 13:25:31-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 13:23:11-PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 13:13:19-PST
From: MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: next c1 seminar (March 6th)
To: dkanerva@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: meseguer@SRI-AI.ARPA, goguen@SRI-AI.ARPA
We will continue the topic of domain equations. We will look at the
relationship between limits and colimits of chains in the category
of cpo's, and give a general theorem about existence of a minimal
solution for a domain equation in a category.
-------
∂29-Feb-84 1515 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Sergei Nirenburg
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 15:15:32 PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 15:14:37-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Sergei Nirenburg
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
I have recieved a request from Sergei Nirenberg, of Colgate U. C.S.
dept to suppport him 1/2 time next year. He has a sabbatical with
1/2 pay. His work seems to be in computational linguistics. I have
his papers and vita. Does anyone know anything about him?
JOn
-------
∂29-Feb-84 1547 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #22
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 15:47:19 PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 1984 13:46-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #22
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 29 Feb 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 22
Today's Topics:
Robotics - Personal Robotics Request,
Books - Request for Laws of Form Review,
Expert Systems - EURISKO Information Request,
Automated Documentation Tools - Request,
Mathematics - Fermat's Last Theorem & Map Coloring,
Waveform Analysis - EEG/EKG Interpretation,
Brain Theory - Parallelism,
CS Culture - Computing Worlds
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 16 Feb 84 17:59:03-PST
From: PIERRE@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Information about personal robots?
Do you know anything about domestic robots? personal robots?
I'm interested by the names and adresses of companies, societies,
clubs, universities involved in that field. Does there exist any review
about this? any articles? Do you work or have you heard of any projects
in this field?
Thank you to answer at Pierre@SRI-AI.ARPA
Pierre
------------------------------
Date: 23 Feb 84 13:58:28 PST (Thu)
From: Carl Kaun <ckaun@aids-unix>
Subject: Laws of Form
I hope that Charlie Crummer will share some of the substance he finds in
"Laws of Form" with us (ref AIList Digest V2 #20). I myself am more in the
group that does not understand what LoF has to say that is new, and indeed
doubt that it does say anything unique.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 84 15:32 MST
From: RNeal@HIS-PHOENIX-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: EURISKO
I have just begun reading the AI digests (our copy starts Nov 3 1983)
and I am very interested in the one or two transactions dealing with
EURISKO. Could someone explain what EURISKO does, and maybe give some
background of its development?
On a totally different note, has anyone done any AI work on lower order
intelligence (ie. that using instinct) such as insects, reptiles, etc.?
Seems they would be easier to model, and I just wondered if anyone had
attempted to make a program which learns they way they do and the things
they do . I don't know if this belongs in AI or some simulation meeting
(is there one?).
>RUSTY<
------------------------------
Date: 27 Feb 1984 07:26-PST
From: SAC.LONG@USC-ISIE
Subject: Automated Documentation Tools
Is anyone aware of software packages available that assist in the
creation of documentation of software, such as user manuals and
maintenance manuals? I am not looking for simple editors which
are used to create text files, but something a little more
sophisticated which would reduce the amount of time one must
invest in creating manuals manually (with the aid of a simple editor).
If anyone has information about such, please send me a message at:
SAC.LONG@USC-ISIE
or Steve Long
1018-1 Ave H
Plattsmouth NE 68048
or (402)294-4460 or reply through AIList.
Thank you.
-- Steve
------------------------------
Date: 16 Feb 84 5:36:12-PST (Thu)
From: decvax!genrad!wjh12!foxvax1!minas @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Fermat's Last Theorem & Undecidable Propositions
Article-I.D.: foxvax1.317
Could someone please help out an ignorant soul by posting a brief (if that
is, indeed, possible!) explanation of what Fermat's last theorem states as
well as what the four-color theorem is all about. I'm not looking for an
explanation of the proofs, but, simply, a statement of the propositions.
Thanks!
-phil minasian decvax!genrad!wjh12!foxvax1!minas
------------------------------
Date: 15 Feb 84 20:15:33-PST (Wed)
From: ihnp4!mit-eddie!rh @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Four color...
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.1290
I had thought that 4 color planar had been proved, but that
the "conjectures" of 5 colors for a sphere and 7 for a torus
were still waiting. (Those numbers are right, aren't they?)
Randwulf (Randy Haskins); Path= genrad!mit-eddie!rh
------------------------------
Date: 17 Feb 84 21:33:46-PST (Fri)
From: decvax!dartvax!dalcs!holmes @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Four color...
Article-I.D.: dalcs.610
The four colour problem is the same for a sphere as it is
for the infinite plane. The problem for a torus was solved many
years ago. The torus needs exactly 7 colours to paint it.
Ray
------------------------------
Date: 26 Feb 1984 21:38:16-PST
From: utcsrgv!utai!tsotsos@uw-beaver
Subject: AI approach to ECG analysis
One of my PhD students, Taro Shibahara, has been working on an expert
system for arrhythmia analysis. The thesis should be finished by early summer.
A preliminary paper discussing some design issues appeared in IJCAI-83.
System name is CAA - Causal Arrhythmia Analyzer. Important contributions:
Two distinct KB's, one of signal domain the other of the electrophysiological
domain, communication via a "projection" mechanism, causal relations to assist
in prediction, use of meta-knowledge within a frame-based representation
for statistical knowledge. The overall structure is based on the
ALVEN expert system for left ventricular performance assessment, developed
here as well.
John Tsotsos
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
[Ray Perrault <RPERRAULT@SRI-AI> also suggested this lead. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 24 Feb 84 10:07:36-PST (Fri)
From: decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!jwb @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: computer ECG
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2043
At least three companies are currently marketing computer ECG analysis
systems. They are Marquette Electronics, IBM, Hewlett-Packard. We use the
Marquette system which works quite well. Marquette and IBM use variants of
the same program (the "Bonner" program below, original development funded by
IBM.) Apparently because of fierce competition, much current information,
particularly with regard to algorithms, is proprietary. Worst in this regard
(a purely personal opinion) is HP who seems to think nobody but HP needs to
know how they do things and physicians are too dumb to understand anyway.
Another way hospitals get computer analysis of ECG's is through "Telenet" who
offers telephone connection to a time sharing system (I think located in the
Chicago area). Signals are digitized and sent via a modem through standard
phone lines. ECG's are analyzed and printed information is sent back.
Turn-around time is a few minutes. They offer an advantage to small hospitals
by offering verification of the analysis by a Cardiologist (for an extra fee).
I understand this service has had some financial problems (rumors).
Following is a bibliography gathered for a lecture to medical students about
computer analysis of ECG's. Because of this it is mainly from more or less
clinical literature and is oriented toward methods of validation (This is
tough, because reading of ECG's by cardiologists, like many clinical
decisions, is partly a subjective process. The major impact of these systems
so far has been to force the medical community to develop objective criteria
for their analysis.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Computer Analysis of the Electrocardiogram
August 29, 1983
BOOK
Pordy L (1977) Computer electrocardiography: present status and criteria.
Mt. Kisco, New York, Futura
PAPERS
Bonner RE, Crevasse L, Ferrer MI, Greenfield JC Jr (1972) A new computer
program for analysis of scalar electrocardiograms. Computers and Biomedical
Research 5:629-653
Garcia R, Breneman GM, Goldstein S (1981) Electrogram computer analysis.
Practical value of the IBM Bonner-2 (V2MO) program. J. Electrocardiology
14:283-288
Rautaharju PM, Ariet M, Pryor TA, et al. (1978) Task Force III: Computers in
diagnostic electrocardiography. Proceedings of the Tenth Bethesda Conference,
Optimal Electrocardiography. Am. J. Cardiol. 41:158-170
Bailey JJ et al (1974) A method for evaluating computer programs for
electrocardiographic interpretation
I. Application to the experimental IBM program of 1971. Circulation 50:73-79
II. Application to version D of the PHS program and the Mayo Clinic program
of 1968. Circulation 50:80-87
III. Reproducibility testing and the sources of program errors. Circulation
50:88-93
Endou K, Miyahara H, Sato (1980) Clinical usefulness of computer diagnosis in
automated electrocardiography. Cardiology 66:174-189
Bertrand CA et al (1980) Computer interpretation of electrocardiogram using
portable bedside unit. New York State Journal of Medicine. August
1980(?volume):1385-1389
Jack Buchanan
Cardiology and Biomedical Engineering
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
(919) 966-5201
decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!jwb
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 24-Feb-84 18:35:44-GMT
From: JOLY G C QMA (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: re: Parallel processing in the brain.
To compare the product of millions of years of evolution
(ie the human brain) with the recent invention of parallel
processors seems to me to be like trying to effect an analysis
of the relative properties of chalk and cheese.
Gordon Joly.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 84 13:17:04 PST
From: Dr. Jacques Vidal <vidal@UCLA-CS>
Subject: Brains: Serial or Parallel?
Is the brain parallel? Or is the issue a red herring?
Computing and thinking are physical processes and as all physical
processes unfold in time are ultimately SEQUENTIAL even "continu-
ous" ones although the latter are self-timed (free-running, asyn-
chronous) rather than clocked.
PARALLEL means that there are multiple tracks with similar func-
tions like availability of multiple processors or multiple lanes
on a superhighway. It is a structural characteristic.
CONCURRENT means simultaneous. It is a temporal characteristic.
REDUNDANT means that there is structure beyond that which is
minimally needed for function, perhaps to insure integrity of
function under perturbations.
In this context, PARALLELISM, i.e. the deployment of multiple
processors is the currency with which a system designer may pur-
chase these two commodities: CONCURRENCY and REDUNDANCY (a neces-
sary but not sufficient condition).
Turing machines have zero concurrency. Almost everything else
that computes exhibit some. Conventional processor architectures
and memories are typically concurrent at the word level.
Microprogram are sequences of concurrent gate events.
There exist systems that are completely concurrent and free-
running. Analog computers and combinational logic circuits have
these properties. There, computation progresses by chunk between
initial and final states. A new chunk starts when the system is
set to a new initial state.
Non-von architectures have moved away from single track computing
and from the linear organization of memory cells. With cellular
machines another property appears: ADJACENCY. Neighboring proces-
sors use adjacency as a form of addressing.
These concepts are applicable to natural automata: Brains cer-
tainly employ myriads of processors and thus exhibit massive
parallelism. From the numerous processes that are simultaneously
active (autonomous as well as deliberate ones) it is clear that
brains utilize unprecedented concurrency. These proces-
sors are free-running. Control and data flows are achieved
through three-dimensional networks. Adjacency is a key feature in
most of the brain processes that have been identified. Long dis-
tance communication is provided for by millions of parallel path-
ways, carrying highly redundant messages.
Now introspection indicates that conscious thinking is limited to
one stream of thought at any given time. That is a limitation of
the mechanisms supporting consciousness amd some will claim that
it can be overcome. Yet even a single stream of thinking is cer-
tainly supported by many concurrent processes, obvious when
thoughts are spoken, accompanied by gestures etc...
Comments?
------------------------------
Date: 18 Feb 1984 2051-PST
From: Rob-Kling <Kling%UCI-20B%UCI-750a@csnet2>
Subject: Computing Worlds
[Forwarded from Human-Nets Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Sherry Turkle is coming out with a book that may deal in part with the
cultures of computing worlds. It also examines questions about how
children come to see computer applications as alive, animate, etc.
It was to be called, "The Intimate Machine." The title was
appropriated by Neil Frude who published a rather superficial book
with an outline very similar to that Turkle proposed to
some publishers. Frude's book is published by New American Library.
Sherry Turkle's book promises to be much deeper and careful.
It is to be published by Simon and Schuster under a different
title.
Turkle published an interesting article
called, "Computer as Rorschach" in Society 17(2)(Jan/Feb 1980).
This article examines the variety of meanings that people
attribute to computers and their applications.
I agree with Greg that computing activities are embedded within rich
social worlds. These vary. There are hacker worlds which differ
considerably from the worlds of business systems analysts who develop
financial applications in COBOL on IBM 4341's. AI worlds differ from
the personal computing worlds, and etc. To date, no one appears to
have developed a good anthropological account of the organizing
themes, ceremonies, beliefs, meeting grounds, etc. of these various
computing worlds. I am beginning such a project at UC-Irvine.
Sherry Turkle's book will be the best contribution (that I know of) in
the near future.
One of my colleagues at UC-Irvine, Kathleen Gregory, has just
completed a PhD thesis in which she has studied the work cultures
within a major computer firm. She plans to transform her thesis into
a book. Her research is sensitive to the kinds of langauage
categories Greg mentioned. (She will joining the Department of
Information and Computer Science at UC-Irvine in the Spring.)
Also, Les Gasser and Walt Scacchi wrote a paper on personal computing
worlds when they were PhD students at UCI. It is available for $4
from:
Public Policy Research Organization
University of California, Irvine
Irvine,Ca. 92717
(They are now in Computer Science at USC and may provide copies upon
request.)
Several years ago I published two articles which examine some of the
larger structural arrangments in computing worlds:
"The Social Dynamics of Technical Innovation in the
Computing World" ↑&Symbolic Interaction\&,
1(1)(Fall 1977):132-146.
"Patterns of Segmentation and Intersection in the
Computing World"
↑&Symbolic Interaction\& 1(2)(Spring 1978): 24-43.
One section of a more recent article,
"Value Conflicts in the Deployment of Computing Applications"
↑&Telecommunications Policy\& (March 1983):12-34.
examines the way in which certain computer-based technologies
such as automated offices, artificial intelligence,
CAI, etc. are the foci of social movements.
None of my papers examine the kinds of special languages
which Greg mentions. Sherry Turkle's book may.
Kathleen Gregory's thesis does, in the special setting of
one major computing vendor's software culture.
I'll send copies of my articles on request if I recieve mailing
addresses.
Rob Kling
University of California, Irvine
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂29-Feb-84 1555 RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA Re: Sergei Nirenburg
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 15:55:22 PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 15:54:34-PST
From: Ray Perrault <RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Sergei Nirenburg
To: KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA, RPERRAULT@SRI-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 29 Feb 84 15:14:58-PST
I know the name but have never seen any of his work. I would
be willing to look over the papers, though.
Ray
-------
∂29-Feb-84 1557 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA QUESTEL--French online bibliographic databases
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 15:57:14 PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 15:56:05-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: QUESTEL--French online bibliographic databases
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I now have access to QUESTEL the French version of Dialog. It includes
numerous databases which may be searched online with prices very similar
to what we pay for Dialog. Hits may be printed offline and mailed. Some
of the files which may interest you include: BSI-Computers and Robotics,
Pascal-the large interdisciplinary science file, REDOSI- Information Systems,
TELEDOC-Telecommunications-Electronics. A demonstration search in PASCAL
on expert systems turned up over 60 citations.
These files although they are French will also include international coverage.
One may search these files in English or French. If you have a research
topic you would like to search on this system, send me a message and I will
set up an appointment. If there is enough general interest I might be able
to set up a demonstration of the system. If you have a research topic that
you feel the French are particularly interested in also, it might be interest-
ing to do a search on these files.
Harry
-------
∂29-Feb-84 1645 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #23
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 16:44:59 PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 1984 14:11-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #23
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 1 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 23
Today's Topics:
Seminars - VLSI Knowledge Representation
& Machine Learning
& Computer as Musical Scratchpad
& Programming Language for Group Theory
& Algorithm Animation
Conference - Very Large Databases Call for Papers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 22 Feb 84 16:36:20-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Hierarchical Software Processor
[Forwarded by Laws@SRI-AI.]
An overview of HISP
by K. Futatsugi
Special Lecture at SRI, 27 February 1984
HISP (hierarchical software processor) is an experimental
language/system, which has been developed at ETL (Electrotechnical
Laboratory, Japan) by the author's group, for hierarchical software
development based on algebraic specification techniques.
In HISP, software development is simply modeled as the incremental
construction of a set of hierarchically structured clusters of
operators (modules). Each module is the constructed as a result of
applying one of the specific module building operations to the already
existing modules. This basic feature makes it possible to write
inherently hierarchical and modularized software.
This talk will inroduce HISP informally by the use of simple
examples. The present status of HISP implementation and future
possibilities will also be sketched.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 23 Feb 84 00:26:45-MST
From: Subra <Subrahmanyam@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Very High Level Silicon Compilation
[Forwarded by Laws@SRI-AI. This talk was presented at the SRI
Computer Science Laboratory.]
VERY HIGH LEVEL SILICON COMPILATION: THEORY AND PRACTICE
P.A.Subrahmanyam
Department of Computer Science
University of Utah
The possibility of implementing reasonably complex special purpose systems
directly in silicon using VLSI technologies has served to underline the need
for design methodologies that support the development of systems that have both
hardware and software components. It is important in the long run for
automated design aids that support such methodologies to be based on a uniform
set of principles -- ideally, on a unifying theoretical basis. In this
context, I have been investigating a general framework to support the analytic
and synthetic tasks of integrated system design. Two of the salient features of
this basis are:
- The formalism allows various levels of abstraction involved in the
software/hardware design process to be modelled. For example,
functional (behavioral), architectural (system and chip level),
symbolic layout, and electrical (switch-level)-- are explicitly
modelled as being typical of the levels of abstraction that human
"expert designers" work with.
- The formalism allows for explicit reasoning about behavioral,
spatial, temporal and performance criteria.
The talk will motivate the general problem, outline the conceptual and
theoretical basis, and discuss some of our preliminary empirical explorations
in building integrated software-hardware systems using these principles.
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 84 12:19:09 EST
From: Giovanni <Bresina@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Machine Learning Seminar
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
*** MACHINE LEARNING SEMINAR AND PIZZA LUNCHEON ***
Empirical Exploration of Problem Reformulation and Strategy Acquisition
Authors: N.S. Sridharan and J.L. Bresina
Location: Room 254, Hill Center, Busch Campus, Rutgers
Date: Wednesday, February 29, 1984
Time: Noon - 1:30 pm
Speaker: John L. Bresina
The problem solving ability of an AI program is critically dependent on the
nature of the symbolic formulation of the problem given to the program.
Improvement in performance of the problem solving program can be made by
improving the strategy of controlling and directing search but more importantly
by shifting the problem formulation to a more appropriate form.
The choice of the initial formulation is critical, since certain formulations
are more amenable to incremental reformulations than others. With this in
mind, an Extensible Problem Reduction method is developed that allows
incremental strategy construction. The class of problems of interest to us
requires dealing with interacting subgoals. A variety of reduction operator
types are introduced corresponding to different ways of handling the
interaction among subgoals. These reduction operators define a generalized
And/Or space including constraints on nodes with a correspondingly generalized
control structure for dealing with constraints and for combining solutions to
subgoals. We consider a modestly complex class of board puzzle problems and
demonstrate, by example, how reformulation of the problem can be carried out by
the construction and modification of reduction operators.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Feb 84 15:16:08 EST
From: BERMAN@RU-BLUE.ARPA
Subject: Seminar: The Computer as Musical Scratchpad
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SEMINAR: THE COMPUTER AS MUSICAL SCRATCHPAD
Speaker: David Rothenburg, Inductive Inference, Inc.
Date: Monday, March 5, 1984
Place: CUNY Graduate Center, 33 West 42nd St., NYC
Room: 732
Time: 6:30 -- 7:30 p.m.
The composer can use a description language wherein only those
properties and relations (of and between protions of the musical
pattern) which he judges significant need be specified. Parameters of
these unspecified properties and relations are assigned at random. It
is intended that this description of the music be refined in response
to iterated auditions.
------------------------------
Date: Sun 26 Feb 84 17:06:23-CST
From: Bob Boyer <CL.BOYER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: A Programming Language for Group Theory (Dept. of Math)
[Forwarded from the UTexas-20 bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS COLLOQUIUM
A Programming Language for Group Theory
John Cannon
University of Sydney and Rutgers University
Monday, February 27, 4pm
The past 25 years has seen the emergence of a small but vigorous branch of
group theory which is concerned with the discovery and implementation of
algorithms for computing structural information about both finite and infinite
groups. These techniques have now reached the stage where they are finding
increasing use both in group theory research and in its applications. In order
to make these techniques more generally available, I have undertaken the
development of what in effect is an expert system for group theory.
Major components of the system include a high-level user language (having
a Pascal-like syntax) and an extensive library of group theory algorithms. The
system breaks new ground in that it permits efficient computation with a range
of different types of algebraic structures, sets, sequences, and mappings.
Although the system has only recently been released, already it has been
applied to problems in topology, algebraic number theory, geometry, graphs
theory, mathematical crystalography, solid state physics, numerical analysis
and computational complexity as well as to problems in group theory itself.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Feb 1984 2025-PST (Monday)
From: Forest Baskett <decwrl!baskett@Shasta>
Subject: EE380 - Wednesday, Feb. 29 - Sedgewick on Algorithm Animation
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
EE380 - Computer Systems Seminar
Wednesday, February 29, 4:15 pm
Terman Auditorium
Algorithm Animation
Robert Sedgewick
Brown University
The central thesis of this talk is that it is possible to expose
fundamental characteristics of computer programs through the use of
dynamic (real-time) graphic displays, and that such algorithm animation
has the potential to be useful in several contexts. Recent research in
support of this thesis will be described, including the development of
a conceptual framework for the process of animation, the implementation
of a software environment on high-performance graphics-based
workstations supporting this activity, and the use of the system as a
principal medium of communication in teaching and research. In
particular, we have animated scores of numerical, sorting, searching,
string processing, geometric, and graph algorithms. Several examples
will be described in detail.
[Editorial remark: This is great stuff. - Forest]
------------------------------
Date: 23 Feb 84 16:32:24 PST (Thu)
From: Gerry Wilson <wilson@aids-unix>
Subject: Conference Call for Papers
CALL FOR PAPERS
================
10'th International Conference on
Very Large Data Bases
The tenth VLDB conference is dedicated to the identification and
encouragement of research, development, and application of
advanced technologies for management of large data bases. This
conference series provides an international forum for the promotion
of an understanding of current research; it facilitates the exchange
of experiences gained in the design, construction and use of data
bases; it encourages the discussion of ideas and future research
directions. In this anniversary year, a special focus is the
reflection upon lessons learned over the past ten years and the
implications for future research and development. Such lessons
provide the foundation for new work in the management of large
data bases, as well as the merging of data bases, artificial
intelligence, graphics, and software engineering technologies.
TOPICS:
Data Analysis and Design Intelligent Interfaces
Multiple Data Types User Models
Semantic Models Natural Language
Dictionaries Knowledge Bases
Graphics
Performance and Control
Data Representation Workstation Data Bases
Optimization Personal Data Mangement
Measurement Development Environments
Recovery Expert System Applications
Message Passing Designs
Security
Protection Real Time Systems
Semantic Integrity Process Control
Concurrency Manufacturing
Engineering Design
Huge Data Bases
Data Banks Implementation
Historical Logs Languages
Operating Systems
Multi-Technology Systems
Applications Distributed Data Bases
Office Automation Distribution Management
Financial Management Heterogeneous and Homogeneous
Crime Control Local Area Networks
CAD/CAM
Hardware
Data Base Machines
Associative Memory
Intelligent Peripherals
LOCATION: Singapore
DATES: August 29-31, 1984
TRAVEL SUPPORT: Funds will be available for partial support of most
participants.
HOW TO SUBMIT: Original full length (up to 5000 words) and short (up
to 1000 words) papers are sought on topics such as those above. Four
copies of the submission should be sent to the US Program Chairman:
Dr. Umeshwar Dayal
Computer Corporation of America
4 Cambridge Center
Cambridge, Mass. 02142
[Dayal@CCA-UNIX]
IMPORTANT DATES: Papers Due: March 15, 1984
Notification: May 15, 1984
Camera Ready Copy: June 20, 1984
For additional information contact the US Conference Chairman:
Gerald A. Wilson
Advanced Information & Decision Systems
201 San Antonio Circle
Suite 286
Mountain View, California 94040
[Wilson@AIDS]
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂29-Feb-84 1702 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 21, March 1, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 17:00:03 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 16:48:20-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Feb 84 16:46:52-PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 16:45:23-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 21, March 1, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
! CSLI Newsletter
March 1, 1984 * * * Number 21
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, March 1, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Discussion of Bob Moore's paper ("A Formal Theory
Conference Room of Knowledge and Action") led by John Etchemendy.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "First Steps Towards Inferential Programming,"
Conference Room by William L. Scherlis and Dana S. Scott.
Discussion led by Stuart Shieber.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Discussion led by Stanley Peters.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "The Naive Continuum"
Room G-19 by Patrick Hayes, University of Rochester
Philosophy and Computer Science Departments,
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Discussion of Bratman's paper, "Taking Plans
Conference Room Seriously," led by Stan Rosenschein.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Learning Theory and Natural Language,"
Conference Room by Daniel N. Osherson, Michael Stob,
and Scott Weinstein.
Discussion led by Scott Weinstein.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Discussion led by Richard Larsen.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "The Syntax of Conceptual Structure,"
Room G-19 by Ray Jackendoff, Stanford Linguistics Dept.
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday noon at Ventura Hall on the Stan-
ford University campus as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of
TINLunch papers are at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
NEXT WEEK: "Learning Theory and Natural Language"
by Daniel N. Osherson, Michael Stob, Scott Weinstein
Discussion led by Scott Weinstein
Marc 1 Stuart Shieber
March 8 Scott Weinstein
March 15 Mark Stickel
March 22 Susan Stucky
March 29 Brian Smith
-----------
MCCARTHY LECTURES ON THE FORMALIZATION OF COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE
John McCarthy's remaining two lectures in his series on the
formalization of commonsense knowledge will be held as shown below on
the next two Fridays at 3:00 p.m. in the Ventura Hall Conference Room.
Friday, March 2 "Formalization of Knowledge and Belief"
Modal and first-order formalisms. Formalisms in which
possible worlds are explicit objects. Concepts and
propositions as objects in theories.
Friday, March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
-----------
TALK AND VISIT BY DAVID MCALLESTER OF MIT
David McAllester (MIT) will probably be visiting the Palo Alto
area during part of the second week of March. He is tentatively
scheduled to give a talk on Monday, March 12 (abstract forthcoming).
Jim des Rivieres of Xerox PARC is McAllester's informal contact while
he is in the area.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
PROJECT C1 SEMINAR: Semantics of Programming Languages
On Tuesday, March 6 (9:30 a.m., Ventura Conference Room), we will
continue the topic of domain equations. We will look at the
relationship between limits and colimits of chains in the category of
cpo's and give a general theorem about existence of a minimal solution
for a domain equation in a category.
-----------
ISSUES IN PERCEPTION, LANGUAGE, AND COGNITION (PSYCH 279)
On Monday, February 27, at noon, Professor Richard Thompson of
the Stanford Psychology Department spoke on the topic "Detection,
Decision, Memory, and the Brain." On March 5, Jon Barwise of CSLI
will speak and on March 12, Phil Cohen of the Fairchild Artificial
Intelligence Lab. The seminar meets in Jordan Hall, room 100.
Announcements and abstracts will be posted.
-----------
SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Wednesdays, 4:15 p.m., Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
On Wednesday, February 29, Professor Martin Davis of Courant
Institute, NYU, now visiting Berkeley, spoke on "Some Influences of
Logic on Computer Science." Remaining meetings for the quarter:
Mar. 7 Warren Goldfarb,
"The Godel Class with Identity Is Unsolvable"
Mar. 14 Johan van Benthem
"Incompleteness Theorems in Modal Logic"
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
Scott Soames' second talk is postponed until next week (3:15
p.m., Tuesday, March 6, Ventura Hall). On February 28, the speaker
was Jerry Hobbs from SRI. His lecture on discourse analysis renews
the Grosz-Perry strategy we followed at the beginning of term, that
is, looking at particular texts and searching for some interpretation
strategy.
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
REWRITE RULE SEMINAR AT SRI-CSL
WHO: Carolyn Talcott, Stanford University
WHAT: "A Model of Computation: Theory and Application
LISP-like Systems"
WHEN: Wednesday, March 7, 3:00 p.m.
WHERE: SRI-CSL
ABSTRACT:
The goal of this work is to provide a rich context in which a
variety of aspects of computation can be treated and where new ideas
about computing can be tested and developed. An important motivation
and guide has been the desire to understand the construction and use
of LISP like computation systems.
The first step was to define a model of computation and develop
the theory to provide basic tools for further work. The main
components are:
- basic model and notion of evaluation
- equivalence relations and extensionality
- an abstract machine as a subtheory
- formalization of the metatheory.
Key features of this theory are:
- It is a construction of particular theories uniformly
from given data structures (data domain and operations).
- Focus is on control aspects of computation.
- A variety of objects
Forms -- for describing control aspects of computation
Pfns -- abstraction of form in an environment
-- elements of the computation domain
-- computational analogue of partial functions
Carts -- for collecting arguments and values
Envs -- intepretation of symbols appearing in forms
cTrees -- objects describing particular computations.
Applications of this theory include:
- proving properties of pfns
- implementation of computation systems
- representing and mechanizing aspects of reasoning.
In this talk I will describe RUM--the applicative fragment
(flavor). RUM is the most mathematically developed aspect of the work
and is the foundation for the other aspects which include
implementation of a computation system called SEUS.
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
CALL FOR PAPERS
10th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases
Singapore, August 29-31, 1984
The tenth VLDB conference is dedicated to the identification and
encouragement of research, development, and application of advanced
technologies for management of large data bases. This conference
series provides an international forum for the promotion of an
understanding of current research; it facilitates the exchange of
experiences gained in the design, construction and use of data bases;
it encourages the discussion of ideas and future research directions.
In this anniversary year, a special focus is the reflection upon
lessons learned over the past ten years and the implications for
future research and development. Such lessons provide the foundation
for new work in the management of large data bases, as well as the
merging of data bases, artificial intelligence, graphics, and software
engineering technologies.
TOPICS:
Data Analysis and Design Intelligent Interfaces
Multiple Data Types User Models
Semantic Models Natural Language
Dictionaries Knowledge Bases
Graphics
Performance and Control
Data Representation Workstation Data Bases
Optimization Personal Data Mangement
Measurement Development Environments
Recovery Expert System Applications
Message Passing Designs
Security
Protection Real Time Systems
Semantic Integrity Process Control
Concurrency Manufacturing
Engineering Design
Huge Data Bases
Data Banks Implementation
Historical Logs Languages
Operating Systems
Multi-Technology Systems
Applications Distributed Data Bases
Office Automation Distribution Management
Financial Management Heterogeneous and Homogeneous
Crime Control Local Area Networks
CAD/CAM
Hardware
Data Base Machines
Associative Memory
Intelligent Peripherals
(continued, next page)
! Page 6
(Call for Papers, continued)
TRAVEL SUPPORT: Funds will be available for partial support of most
participants.
HOW TO SUBMIT: Original full-length (up to 5000 words) and short (up
to 1000 words) papers are sought on topics such as those above. Four
copies of the submission should be sent to the US Program Chairman:
Dr. Umeshwar Dayal
Computer Corporation of America
4 Cambridge Center
Cambridge, Mass. 02142
[Dayal@CCA-UNIX]
IMPORTANT DATES: Papers Due: March 15, 1984
Notification: May 15, 1984
Camera Ready Copy: June 20, 1984
For additional information contact the US Conference Chairman:
Gerald A. Wilson
Advanced Information & Decision Systems
201 San Antonio Circle
Suite 286
Mountain View, California 94040
[Wilson@AIDS]
-----------
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPUTER COLLOQUIUM
Thursday, March 8, 1984 4:00 p.m.
Hewlett Packard, Stanford Division, 5M Conference Room
1501 Page Mill Rd, Palo Alto
"A Prolog Technology Theorem Prover"
by Mark E. Stickel, SRI International
An extension of Prolog, based on the model elimination
theorem-proving procedure, would permit production of a Prolog
technology theorem prover (PTTP). This would be a complete theorem
prover for the full first-order predicate calculus, not just Horn
clauses, and provide capabilities for full handling of logical
negation and indefinite answers. It would be capable of performing
inference operations at a rate approaching that of Prolog
itself--substantially faster than conventional theorem-proving
systems. PTTP differs from Prolog in its use of unification with the
"occurs check" for soundness, the complete model elimination input
inference procedure, and a complete staged depth-first search
strategy. The use of an input inference procedure and depth-first
search minimize the differences between this theorem-proving metod and
Prolog and permit the use of highly efficient Prolog implementation
techniques.
*** Be sure to arrive at the building's lobby on time, so that you may
be escorted to the meeting room.
-------
∂29-Feb-84 1821 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tomorrow's meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 29 Feb 84 18:20:53 PST
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 18:19:22-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tomorrow's meeting
To: CS440: ;
Algorithm Independent Topological Requirements for Numerical Simulations
Joseph Oliger
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
Abstract
Algorithm independent topological requirements for the computation of
approximate solutions to partial differential equations will be discussed.
It will be shown that it is essential to introduce an explicit error
requirement to develope meaningful results. Once this has been done several
classes of problems have finite domains of dependence but others require the
introduction of notions of information density and momentum to obtain useful
results. Balanced computations then satisfy conservation laws for these
components of momenta. Bounds on required data flow rates and optimal
directions of dissection can then be determined. Results on granularity
and a notion of optimal algorithms which require minimal flux of information
then follow.
-------
∂01-Mar-84 0928 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kay.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Re: Sergei Nirenburg
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 09:28:17 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 09:28:51-PST
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 84 09:24 PST
From: Kay.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Re: Sergei Nirenburg
In-reply-to: "KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA's message of Wed, 29 Feb 84 15:14:37 PST"
To: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
cc: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
Never heard of him!
--Martin.
∂01-Mar-84 0958 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA cabin
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 09:58:06 PST
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 09:59:19-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: cabin
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
My family and I would like to get away for 3 or 4 weeks this summer,
some nice cabin in the woods sort of place. Water neaby would be
nice, or maybe mountains. Does anyone know of a good place to rent?
Jon
-------
∂01-Mar-84 1036 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Ray Jackendoff's affiliation
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 10:36:16 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 10:27:22-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 10:24:33-PST
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 10:25:47-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Ray Jackendoff's affiliation
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Contrary to what was announced in this week's CSLI Newsletter,
Ray Jackendoff is from Brandeis (not Stanford Linguistics) and
is spending the year at the Center for Advanced Study in
Behavioral Sciences. He will be speaking at the March 8
CSLI Colloquium at Ventura Hall.
Dianne Kanerva
-------
∂01-Mar-84 1323 PAPAG@SU-SCORE.ARPA D. S. Johnson's talk today
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 13:23:20 PST
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 13:19:59-PST
From: George Papageorgiou <PAPAG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: D. S. Johnson's talk today
To: AFLB.LOCAL@SU-SCORE.ARPA
David S. Johhnson is in town. Besides his AFLB talk he is speaking today
at 3.00 in Durant 450 on " Optimisation by Simulated Annealing: an
Expirimental Evaluation ". It is a very interesting empirical study of
heuristics for Combinatorial problems and especially of a recently proposed
controversial approach.
-------
∂01-Mar-84 1545 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA CSLI & Philosophy Conference
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 15:45:24 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 15:32:38-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 15:29:36-PST
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 15:30:55-PST
From: RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: CSLI & Philosophy Conference
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
Dear CSLI-friends
March 19-21 CSLI and the Philosophy Department at Stanford are
sponsoring a conference on "Themes from David Kaplan". The tentative,
but at this point, fairly definite schedule is given below.
The conference is a combination of a workshop and public lectures. The
workshop portion will be held at the Palo Alto Hyatt. We hope we can
retain the character of a serious workshop, but those interested in
Kaplan's philosophy and the work of the discussants are very welcome.
Please let Sandy McConnel-Riggs know if you plan to attend these
sessions, so we can plan accordingly. (Riggs@SRI-AI or 497-0939)
We have reserved a room at the hotel for a luncheon after the morning
sessions. If you want to eat lunch here, contact Sandy before March
10. Payment in advance is required for these lunches.
Monday evening and Tuesday afternoon there will be talks on campus by
Saul Kripke, Hector Neri-Castaneda, and Roderick Chisholm that we hope
will be of interest to fairly large audiences. Please attend even if
you are only vaguely interested in the topics, expect to have nothing
to contribute, and really are just somewhat curious. And bring your
friends and colleagues.
Tuesday evening there will be a no-host dinner at China First. Please
tell Sandy by March 10 if you want to attend.
Wednesday afternoon David Kaplan will respond to the various talks.
This should be interesting, even to those who have not attended many
of the papers, given Kaplan's wit and capacity for spontaneous
insights. There will be plenty of room, so feel free to attend
without warning.
Thank you
John Perry
Joseph Almog
"THEMES FROM KAPLAN"
SCHEDULE
Sponsored by the Center for the Study of Language and Information
and Stanford Philosophy Department
March 19-21, 1984
MONDAY, MARCH 19
9:30 - 11:30 a.m. Howard Wettstein/Talk
Keith Donnellan/Commenting
John Etchemendy/Chair
11:45 - 1:15 Lunch
1:30 - 3:30 p.m. Joseph Almog/Talk
Hans Kamp/Commenting
Dana Scott/Chair
7:00 - 10:00 p.m. Saul Kripke
Introduced by W. V. Quine
at Kresge Auditorium, Stanford
TUESDAY, MARCH 20
9:00 - 10:45 a.m. Robert Adams/Talk
Terrance Parsons/Commenting
Richmond Thomason/Chair
ll:00 - 12:45 Kit Fine/Talk
Christopher Peacocke/Commenting
Karel Lambert/Chair
1:00 - 2:30 Lunch
3:00 - 5:45 p.m. Roderick Chisholm & Hector-Neri Castaneda
Symposium
Julius Moravscik/Chair
Room G-19, Redwood Hall, Stanford
6:00 Reception at CSLI
7:30 No Host Dinner
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21
9:00 - 10:45 a.m. Symposium on Context in Linguistic Theory
Stanley Peters, Barbara Grosz
and Geoff Nunnberg
Jon Barwise/Chair
11:00 - 12:45 Nathan Salmon/Talk
Graham Forbes/Commenting
Michael Bratman/Chair
1:00 - 2:30 Lunch
3:00 - 6:00 p.m. David Kaplan
Introduced by Ruth Marcus
Introduced by Patrick Suppes
∂01-Mar-84 1609 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 16:09:29 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 15:59:54-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 1 Mar 84 15:53:39-PST
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 15:47:43-PST
From: RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA
After receiving my return conference announcement, I saw that
I had inadvertantly sent two schedules of the same conference.
The first schedule is the correct one. Please forgive my
innattentiveness.
Sandy McConnel-Riggs
-------
∂01-Mar-84 1634 RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA Thanks
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 1 Mar 84 16:34:26 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 16:33:10-PST
From: RIGGS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Thanks
To: CSLI-Folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Thanks to all those strong volunteers who carried four
very large and heavy boxes to the second floor of
Ventura Hall. Your timely help is greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Leslie Batema
-------
∂02-Mar-84 0051 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ARK@SU-AI Sigma Xi Membership Drive
Received: from SU-SCORE by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Mar 84 00:51:16 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 00:50:46-PST
Date: 02 Mar 84 0050 PST
From: Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI>
Subject: Sigma Xi Membership Drive
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE, PhD@SU-SCORE
I am handling nominations for membership for Sigma Xi for Computer
Science. If you would like to become a member, or simply want to find out
about Sigma Xi, please send me a message. Sigma Xi publishes a bi-monthly
periodical called American Scientist, which is quite readable and
interesting.
Arthur
∂02-Mar-84 0929 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in language, perception and cognition
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Mar 84 09:29:43 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 09:30:47-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 09:09:36-PST
Date: Fri 2 Mar 84 09:07:29-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues in language, perception and cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
WHO: Jon Barwise
WHAT: Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
WHEN: Monday, March 5, 12:00 noon
WHERE: Room 050, Psychology Building, Stanford
The Perceptual Roots of Situation Semantics
Jon Barwise, Center for the Study of Linguistics and Information (CSLI)
People learn about the world by gathering information directly by
perception and indirectly through language. They learn about language
through perception of language and the world. Thus it would seem that
anything like a complete semantic theory must concern itself with
meaning in both language and perception. Barwise and Perry have
recently be developing an approach to problems of meaning that
addresses the relationship between perception, language and meaning.
This theory is known as Situation Semantics. This talk will discuss
the perceptual roots of the theory, and how they relate to meaning in
language.
-------
∂02-Mar-84 1014 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Mar 84 10:13:51 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 10:04:44-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 10:01:15-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 10:02:34-PST
Date: 02 Mar 84 0952 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI
SPEAKER: Warren Goldfarb
Harvard University, visiting U.C. Berkeley
TITLE: "The Godel class with Identity is Undecidable"
TIME: Wednesday, Mar. 7, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
Abstract:
The Godel Class with Identity is the class of prenex
formulas of quantification theory with prefixes of the form
(A)(A)(E....E) and matrices that contain arbitrary predicate
letters and the identity sign "=". In 1932 Godel showed
the decidability of the (A)(A)(E...E) class without Identity.
He then claimed that his method extends to the Godel Class
with identity. Godel's claim is false. In fact, the Godel
Class with Identity is undecidable. The core of the proof
is the construction of a formula in the Class that has
infinite models but no finite model. Moreover, a refinement
of the construction yields the undecidability of the (A)(A)(E)
class with Identity. This provides an exhaustive classification
of the prefix-classes of quantification theory with identity
into decidable and undecidable.
∂02-Mar-84 1528 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Metrics Conference
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 2 Mar 84 15:26:46 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 15:18:35-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 2 Mar 84 15:14:17-PST
Date: Fri 2 Mar 84 15:15:22-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Metrics Conference
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
STANFORD METRICS CONFERENCE
March 10 - 12, 1984
Saturday, March 10 (CERAS, Room 204)
9.00 - 12.15 Metrical Structure
Chair: Stephen Anderson (UCLA)
Ray Jackendoff (Brandeis University) "Comparison of Rhythmic Structures
in Language and Music"
Carlos Piera (University of Madrid) "Possible Meters and Impossible Words"
Break
Alan Prince (U. Mass., Amherst) "Towards a Theory of MetricalStructures"
2.00 - 5.00 Rhythm and Meter
Chair: Donca Steriade (Berkeley)
Mark Liberman (Bell Laboratories) "Speech Rhythms"
Richard Oehrle (U. of Arizona) "Temporally Rigid Rhythmic Rendition of
Linguistic Texts"
Break
Marina Tarlinskaja (Seattle) "Rhythmic-Grammatical Aspects of Metrical
Idiosyncrasy"
Sunday, March 11 (CERAS, Room 204)
9.30 - 12.30 Theory of English Meter
Chair: Terry Brogan (U. of Hawaii)
Beth Bjorklund (Columbia University) "On the Alleged Identity of
Iambic and Trochaic Verse"
Derek Attridge (U. of Southampton) "The Rhythms of English Poetry:
Responses and Revisions"
Break
Bruce Hayes (UCLA) "The Prosodic Hierarchy in Meter"
2.00 - 5.00 Issues in English Metrics
Chair: Morris Halle (MIT)
Edward Weismiller (Washington, D.C.) "Triple Threats to Duple Rhythm"
Paul Kiparsky (MIT and Xerox) "Sprung Rhythm"
Break
Elizabeth Traugott (Stanford) "The Meter of Auden's 'Streams'"
Gilbert Youmans (U. of Kansas) "Milton's Meter"
Monday, March 12 (Ventura Hall, Room 17)
9.00 - 12.00 Concluding session
This will be a second round of discussion. For each paper we will have
a three-minute summary by the author followed by 10 - 15 minutes of
general discussion.
* * * * * * * * * * *
The funding for this conference is part of a gift from the System
Development Foundation through the Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Stanford University.
-------
∂04-Mar-84 1204 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on why DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 4 Mar 84 12:04:26 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 4 Mar 84 11:57:37-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 4 Mar 84 11:55:02-PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 4 Mar 84 11:56:40-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SRI-KL.ARPA with TCP; Sun 4 Mar 84 11:55:05-PST
Date: 4 Mar 1984 1154-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: Reminder on why DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
To: csli-friends at SRI
On Tuesday 6.3.84, Scott Soames will complete his second lecture on
presuppositions and discourse interpretation.
Next tuesday Scott Weinstein, visiting from U. Penn., will be giving
us a talk on his recent work in the area.
Meetings are on Tuesday(s) 3.15pm, Ventura Hall.
PRESUPPOSITION, ACCOMMODATION, AND CONTEXT CHANGE II
Scott Soames, Princeton University
I will sketch the shape of a theory of presupposition and attempt
to integrate it with a theory of how semantical information is encoded
by sentences in a context, and a pragmatical theory of how information
is exchanged on the basis of utterances.
Given the survey of work on presupposition in the first lecture, I
believe the most pressing remaining question concerns the possibe semantic
basis for pragmatic presuppositional requirements of sentences. I started
to consider (and reject) the strategy of deriving these requirements
from a non bivalent semantics. In the second lecture, I will explore the
possibility of deriving them from the mechanisms provided by the contextual-
change semantics of Irene Heim.
-------
∂05-Mar-84 1409 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA GB
Received: from SRI-AI by SU-AI with TCP/SMTP; 5 Mar 84 14:03:22 PST
Date: Mon 5 Mar 84 14:04:07-PST
From: Susan Stucky <Stucky@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: GB
To: CSLI-principals: ;
A number of non-linguists have expressed a curiosity about and
interest in the government-binding framework that Chomsky has been
developing over the past few years. Given that Richard Larson will be
visiting the center this week, it seemed appropriate to ask the
(primarily) non-linguistic community whether they would find an
introductory lecture on GB worthwhile. Richard is well-versed in GB
but is not unfamiliar with other syntactic frameworks. In addition,
he wrote one of the first theses in situation semantics. He is
presently preparing a GB primer and would be a good person to
introduce the theory from a broad perspective. HOWEVER, given the
vast number of talks around here, I am soliciting responses before
announcing the meeting. Please let me know as soon as possible if you
would be interested in attending a one and a one-half hour lecture on
Friday morning March 9. We will meet either at Ventura or SRI,
depending on who responds. -Susan
-------
∂05-Mar-84 1817 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:Guibert.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Talk by David McAllester: Mon. Mar. 12 at 11:00 at PARC
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 84 18:17:00 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 5 Mar 84 18:05:06-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 5 Mar 84 17:51:04-PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 5 Mar 84 17:50:50-PST
Date: 5 Mar 84 17:45 PST
From: Guibert.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Talk by David McAllester: Mon. Mar. 12 at 11:00 at PARC
To: ComputerResearch↑.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA, CSLI-friends@sri-ai.ARPA,
CSLI-Newsletter@sri-ai.ARPA, DAM@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: Guibert.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Title: "MATHEMATICAL ONTOLOGY"
Speaker: David McAllester (M.I.T.)
When: Monday March 12th at 11:00am
Where: Xerox PARC Twin Conference Room, Room 1500
Abstract:
MATHEMATICAL ONTOLOGY
AI techniques are often divided into "weak" and "strong" methods. A
strong method exploits the structure of some domain while a weak method
is more general and therefore has less structure to exploit. But it may
be possible to exploit UNIVERSAL structure and thus to find STRONG
GENERAL METHODS. Mathematical ontology is the study of the general
nature of mathematical objects. The goal is to uncover UNIVERSAL
RELATIONS, UNIVERSAL FUNCTIONS, and UNIVERSAL LEMMAS which can be
exploited in general inference techniques. For example there seems to
be a natural notion of isomorphism and a standard notion of essential
property which are universal (they can be meaningfully applied to ALL
mathematical objects). These universal relations are completely ignored
in current first order formulations of mathematics. A particular theory
of mathematical ontology will be discussed in which many natural
universal relations can be precisely defined. Some particular strong
general inference techniques will also be discussed.
----- End of Forwarded Messages -----
∂06-Mar-84 0237 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #11
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 02:36:57 PST
Date: Sunday, March 4, 1984 11:39PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #11
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 6 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Findall & Bagof & Arrays & Portability,
LP Library - Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 26-Feb-84 22:05:03-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: "First N solutions"
One of the variants of findall/bagof/setof/collect that is drifting
around is
firstN(N, Template, Generator, Solutions)
which finds the first N solutions that findall would have found (it
is rather tricky to find the first N solutions that bagof or setof
would have found without finding all the solutions, given that they
will backtrack over different free variable bindings it isn't even
clear what it would mean).
Apart from the obvious case of N=1, for which once(Generator) is
better suited, does anyone have a real use for this? It wouldn't
be hard to add it to the SETOF.PL library file.
[PS: once(Goal) :- call(Goal), !. ]
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 1-Mar-84 21:18:00-GMT
From: Dave FHL (on ERCC DEC-10) <Bowen%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Paul Weiss is absolutely right: the Prolog in Prolog interpreter
given in back of the DEC-10 manual does not implement cut, and it
should say so (sorry). There is unfortunately no easy fix for
this unless your Prolog system provides some kind of remote cut
capability: the DEC-10 system has (internally) an ancestral cut
which is written e.g. like this
!(execute(←))
The effect of this goal is like a cut in the body of the most
recent call of execute/1 which is an ancestor of this goal.
Unfortunately, the ancestral cut is not available to the user -
it is only implemented in theversion of the compiler which is
used for building the Prolog system itself. One reason for this
may be that the built-in compiler does tail-recursion optimisation
which implies that there may be no way of finding a particular
ancestor.
In the New Implementation of Prolog, which we are currently working
on here in Edinburgh, we intend to implement a remote cut by having
a predicate label(Thing) which marks a particular place in the
computation. Then another predicate, perhaps also called !(Thing),
can be used to cut away all choice points since a call of label with
a matching argument. This is more general than ancestral cut, but
I don't know if the extra generality is particularly useful. I
think ICOT are planning something along similarlines.
-- Dave Bowen
------------------------------
Date: Fri 2 Mar 84 07:41:13-PST
From: Ken@MIT-OZ
Subject: More about Arrays
A few comments about the recent discussion of arrays and sets.
First of all, I am Ken Kahn. Ken Forbus and I were both
students together at the MIT AI lab so the confusion is
understandable.
As was pointed out, LM-Prolog's handling of arrays is
optimized for access to the most recently updated array. We
feel this is by far the most common way of using arrays.
(It is the only way arrays are used in Lisp, Pascal, etc.)
Cohen's scheme has some advantages when many of the "older"
arrays are used. The older arrays and their old values seem
very difficult to garbage collect, while in LM-Prolog the
old arrays become garbage just like any other term. Also as
I understand Cohen's scheme, each array element needs to be a
full word to hold the data structure. This is not the case
with our scheme. Also maybe I'm missing something but along
with O'Keefe I don't see how an integer time can work in
general. Regarding schemes based upon binary trees, they
put too high a cost on use of the most recent array. Both
Cohen's scheme and the binary tree one probably have their
place. We have, however, had a hard time coming up with many
convincing examples where the older arrays are truly useful.
Someone commented upon my comment that strings can be
provided as byte arrays. Its true that they already exist
in LM-Prolog as constants but in order to get inside of them
one must use Lisp functions (E.g. substring) or LM-Prolog
predicates which call such functions. In principle, one
could use byte arrays and directly index the characters in
the string. This may not be too practical compared with
using carefully micro-coded string manipulating primitives
of the Lisp Machine and was suggested more as a way of
providing strings in Prolog's lacking them. I'm agnostic
on the question of whether performing side effects upon
strings is so bad. Remember that at the Prolog level no side
effects are taking place. Its true as someone guessed that
since lists in LM-Prolog are cdr-coded when possible, so the
savings by packing characters in strings is just a factor of
4 for us.
Since my original message I have implemented "array usage
declarations". These declare that arrays will be used in
only certain limited ways. In the best case, no trailing is
performed and no consing is done upon array update. It is
also possible to have the system do run-time checks that the
declarations are correct. It would be an interesting
project to automate the generation of these usage
declarations.
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 1-Mar-84 16:01:50-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Cohen's Arrays
I have now seen the LISP version of his code, which is beautifully
clear. What a GEM of an idea! I wish I'd thought of it.
My claim that this method took O(number of changes to this element)
time to access an element is in fact true of his Prolog code, which
has to stick things at the ends of lists. It is not true of his LISP
code, which puts changes at the front of lists (which is possible
because LISP already has updatable arrays). The LISP code does get
O(1) update time, but it isn't guaranteed to get O(1) access time save
when you have but a single version of the array, because updates that
are not relevant to this version but are more recent than the one that
is relevant can get in the way. Even so, it is pretty good.
There are two problems I would like to see solved before Cohen-
style arrays are added to a Prolog. The first is what do you
put on the trail? Can we avoid trailing every change? The second,
and this applies to an implementation for any applicative language,
is garbage collection. In the LISP version, as long as you have
a reference to any version of the array, LISP will hang on to *all*
the changes. This is clearly a silly thing to do if you are using
only a single version of the array. I don't think there is any
fundamental difficulty in solving these problems.
What a LOVELY data structure!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 84 12:06:50 pst
From: Cohen%UCBernie@Berkeley (Shimon Cohen)
Subject: Answer to all of U out there ...
Here is the code for the mutable array in LISP (Franz)
The reason for this "unfortunate" use of LISP is that
I needed side effect ( OH Nooooo ) 'rplaca' (brrrr ...)
Following the code is a small script file.
; Multi version arrays for LISP systems (This package is for FRANZ
; LISP)
; Written By: Shimon Cohen
; Time: Feb 4, 1984
; Place : UC Berkeley
; NOTE: To help implement this package in another LISP system
; we list the functions which seem to be unique to FRANZ LISP.
; (In FRANZ LISP the array we are using is called 'vector'):
; The rest is written in "standard" LISP which will (hopefully)
; be portable without modification.
;
; (new-vector 'size)
; RETRUNS: Internal LISP array of size 'size'
; (vset 'mvarray 'index 'value)
; RETURNS: the value
; (vref 'mvarray 'index)
; RETURNS: The element 'index
;
; The above functions are used by this package to implement
; the following MVA (Multi Version Array) package:
; (mvaarray 'size)
; RETURNS: A new array of size 'size'.
; (mvap 'array)
; RETURNS: true if 'array' is mva array.
; (mvaset 'oldarray 'index 'value)
; RETRUNS a new array (the old one retains it's values)
; (mvaref 'array 'index)
; RETURNS: the value of 'index' element.
; (mvasize 'array)
; RETURNS: The mva array size.
; (mvachanges 'array)
; RETURNS: The number of modifications made to the array.
; (mvacopy 'array)
; RETURNS: a copy of the array (without old history)
(def mvaarray (lambda (size)
(cons (cons 0 (new-vector size)) (list '( 0 . 0)))))
(def mvap (lambda (array)
(and (listp array)
(listp (car array))
(listp (cdr array))
(numberp (caar array))
(vectorp (cdar array)))))
(def mvasize (lambda (a) (vsize (cdar a))))
(def mvachanges (lambda (a) (caar a)))
; A pointer to a mvaarray has the following structure:
; The 'car' points to a dotted pair whose 'car' is the 'clock'
; and the 'cdr' is the actual array
; The 'cdr' is a list of pair of numbers (time periods)
(def mvaset (lambda (oldarray index value)
(prog (clock ; internal array "clock"
clock1 ; plus 1
a ; "internal array" (a real one)
l ; history list
cl ; dotted pair f the above
)
(setq cl (car oldarray))
(setq clock (car cl))
(setq clock1 (add1 clock))
(setq a (cdr cl))
(setq l (cdr oldarray))
(vset a index (cons (cons clock1 value) (vref a index)))
(rplaca cl clock1) ; update "internal clock"
(return (cons cl
(cond ((eq clock (caar l))
(cons (cons clock1 (cdar l)) (cdr l)))
(t (cons (cons clock1 clock1) l)))
))))); end of MVASET function
(def mvaref (lambda (array index)
(mvaref-find (cdr array) ; the pointer history
(vref (cdar array) index) ; The element history
)))
(def mvaref-find (lambda ( plist elist )
(prog nil
loop
(cond ((null elist) (return nil))
((< (caar plist) (caar elist))
(setq elist (cdr elist))
(go loop))
(( >= (caar elist) (cdar plist)); the element "time"
(return (cdar elist)))
(t (setq plist (cdr plist))
(go loop)))
))) ; end of MVAREF-FIND
; MVACOPY
; Fast Copy of 'mva array'
(def mvacopy (lambda ( oldarray )
(prog (newarray i size a v)
(setq size (mvasize oldarray))
(setq newarray (mvaarray size))
(setq a (cdar newarray))
(setq i 0)
loop
(cond ((eq i size) (return newarray)))
(setq v (mvaref oldarray i))
(cond ((null v) nil) ; default is nil anyway ...
(t (vset a i (list (cons 0 v)))))
(setq i (add1 i))
(go loop))
)) ; end of MVACOPY
(def mvaprint (lambda ( array flag )
(prog (i size a v)
(setq size (mvasize array))
(setq a (cdar array))
(setq i 0)
loop
(cond ((eq i size) (return array)))
(print i)
(patom '": ") ; prints without quotes marks
(cond (flag (print (vref a i)))
(t (print (mvaref array i))))
(terpri)
(setq i (add1 i))
(go loop))
)) ; end of MVACOPY
; -------------------------------- END of CODE -----
Script started on Wed Feb 29 11:44:08 1984
% lisp
Franz Lisp, Opus 38.90
-> (load 'arf.l)
[load arf.l]
-> (setq t a (mvaarray 7]
((0 . vector[7]) (0 . 0))
-> (setq b (mvaset a 1 111]
((1 . vector[7]) (1 . 0))
-> (mvaref b 1]
111
-> (setq c (mvaset b 1 112]
((2 . vector[7]) (2 . 0))
-> (mvaref b 1]
111
-> (mvaref c 1]
112
-> (mvaref a 1]
nil
-> (setq d (mvaset b 1 113]
((3 . vector[7]) (3 . 3) (1 . 0))
-> (mvaref a 1)
nil
-> (mvaref b 1)
111
-> (mvaref c 1)
112
-> (mvaref d 1]
113
-> (setq physical-array (cdar a]
vector[7]
-> (vref physical-array 1]
((3 . 113) (2 . 112) (1 . 111))
-> a
((3 . vector[7]) (0 . 0))
-> b
((3 . vector[7]) (1 . 0))
-> c
((3 . vector[7]) (2 . 0))
-> d
((3 . vector[7]) (3 . 3) (1 . 0))
-> (exit)
%
script done on Wed Feb 29 11:47:45 1984
QUIZ of the day:
The BEATLES (bitless) : "And in the end the ←←←←
you get is equal to the ←←←← you made"
Write a Prolog program that generates all possible
substitutions ...
-- Shimon Cohen
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 22-Feb-84 23:45:00-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Portability of C-Prolog
There was a question in this Digest about whether C-Prolog had
been ported to Apollos. I don't know about that, but I have had a
great deal to do with C-Prolog, so I can say what might give trouble
and what shouldn't.
The first thing to beware of is that there are two main versions
of C-Prolog drifting around. The one most people have is the one
distributed by EdCAAD (which is where Fernando Pereira wrote it), and
while that runs under VAX/UNIX and VAX/VMS both, and is said to run
on at least one 68000 box, V7 C compilers don't like it much. The
other version is distributed by EdAI on a very informal basis, but it
should be available from Silogic in a couple of weeks. The EdAI
version has been ported to the Perq (running ICL's C-machine micro-
code and their PaNiX port of V7 UNIX) and to another C-machine called
the Orion (that compiler isn't a derivative of PCC). C-Prolog has
something like one cast per line, the EdAI version has stronger type
declarations so that the compiler produces no warning messages. Both
versions are essentially the same, so EdAI cannot distribute their
version to anyone who hasn't got a licence for the EdCAAD version.
What C-Prolog v1.4d.edai requires is
[1] a V7 or later C compiler
[2] pointers should be 32 bits long
[3] the compiler should support 32 bit integer arithmetic, and
floats should be storable in 32 bits. (In fact if anyone has
a decent C compiler for the Dec-10 [a] please can we have a copy
and [b] C-Prolog should run quite happily on it.)
[4] It needs to steal 3 bits out of floats, so it needs to know a bit
about the floating-point storage format. IEEE and VAX-11 are ok.
[5] I/O uses <stdio> exclusively.
C-Prolog supports ~username/X and $envvar/X expansion, but if the
"unix" identifier is not defined it knows not to ask.
[6] brk() and sbrk() are needed. If you haven't got them, you could
declare a huge array and use that, but that would require source
hacking.
[7] The MAJOR portability problem is that C-Prolog assumes that all
pointers into the area managed by brk() and sbrk() look like
POSITIVE integers. It doesn't matter if the stack or text areas
lie in negative address space (in fact the stack IS in negative
address space on the Perq and Orion). Getting around this would
be a major exercise, not to be undertaken by anyone without a
thorough understanding of the way C-Prolog works. Since we have
a GEC series 63 machine, and since there is some political
pressure to adopt this as a UK IKBS machine (to which application
it is NOT suited, nor any other), and since that machine puts
everything in negative address space, we may produce a version of
C-Prolog which can handle this. But don't hold your breath.
The Perq (running C) and the Orion are both word-addressed. This is
no problem. Getting C-Prolog running on the Orion was a matter of
telling it where to look for its files and saying "make", but then
the Orion, though nothing like a VAX, runs 4.1bsd. Getting it going
on a Perq was harder, but the bugs were in the Perq software, not in
C-Prolog. The main thing anyone porting C-Prolog to a new machine
with a decent C and positive address space should have to worry about
is the sizes of the data areas, in the file parms.c.
To give this message some interest for people who couldn't care
less about porting C-Prolog, here are some general notes on porting
Prolog interpreters written in C. (I've seen seven of them, but not
UNH Prolog.)
A well written Prolog interpreter uses the stdio library, so that
I/O shouldn't be too much of a problem. But it may also want to
rename and/or delete files, to change the working directory, or to
call the command interpreter. These operations should be in one file
and clearly labelled as being operating-system dependent. Porting
from one version of UNIX to another should cause no difficulty, but
there is a problem with calling the shell: people using ?.?bsd will
expect the C-shell, and an interpreter written for V7 may not know
about that. If you change it, be sure to use the environment
variable SHELL to determine what shell to use. (Ports to S3 should
do this too, so that users who are supposed to be restricted to rsh
can't escape to sh via prolog.)
No Prolog implementor worth his salt would dream of using malloc.
As a result, a Prolog interpreter is pretty well bound to use brk()
and/or sbrk(). It may do so only at start-up (C-Prolog does this),
or it may do so dynamically (a Prolog with a garbage collector, and
pitifully few of them have, will probably do this). In either case
allocation is virtually certain to be word-aligned and in units of
words, where a word is a machine pointer.
There are two ways of telling what sort of thing a pointer is
pointing to. One way is to use TAGS, that is to reserve part of the
word to hold a code saying (integer,pointer to atom,pointer to clause
pointer to variable,&c). This is particularly tempting on machines
like the M68000 where part of an address is spare anyway. The other
way is to divide the address space into a number of partitions, such
as (integers, atoms, clauses, global stack, local stack, trail), and
to tell what something points to by checking *where* it points.
C-Prolog could be described as "semi-tagged": integers, floats,
pointers to clauses, and pointers to records all live in the virtual
partition [-2↑31,0) and are tagged, pointers to real objects are
discriminated by where they point. Other things being equal, tagged
systems are likely to be slower. But tagged systems should be immune
to the "positive address space problem". So you have to check which
sort your system is. If it is tagged, you should check the macros
for converting between tagged form and machine addresses VERY VERY
carefully. They may not work on your machine, and it may be possible
to do better. Here is an example of what can go wrong.
/* Macro to convert a 24-bit byte pointer and a 6-bit tag to a
32-bit tagged pointer
*/
#define Cons(tag,ptr) (((int)(ptr)<<8) | tag)
/* Macro to extract the tag of a tagged pointer */
#define Tag(tptr) ((tptr)&255)
/* Macro to convert a tagged pointer to a machine pointer */
#define Ptr(tptr) (pointertype)(tptr>>8)
/* Macro to find the number of words between two tagged
pointers
*/
#define Delta(tp1,tp2) (((tp1)-(tp2))>>8)
DRAT! That was meant to be >>10 not >>8.
What can go wrong with this? Well, Delta can go wrong if the machine
uses word addresses rather than byte addresses, in which case it
should be >>8 as I first wrote instead of >>10. Cons can go wrong
if the top bits of a pointer are significant. (On the Orion the top
2 bits and the bottom 24 bits are significant.) Ptr can go wrong
if addresses are positive and user addresses can go over 2↑23, in
which case an arithmetic right shift may do horrid things. I have
seen at least two tagged Prolog interpreters which would go wrong on
the Orion.
Prolog interpreters tend to be written by people who do not know
all the obscure tricks they can get up to in C, so at least you ought
not be plagued by the "dereferencing 0" problem.
If anyone reading this Digest has problems porting C-Prolog other
than the positive address space problem, please tell me. I may be
able to help. There is one machine with a C compiler that someone
tried to port it to, and failed, and that is a Z8000 box where the
user's address space is divided up into a lot of 64kbyte chunks, and
the chunks aren7t contiguous! A tagged system could handle that,
though with some pain. C-Prolog can't handle it at all.
If anyone has already ported some version of C-Prolog to another
machine (not a VAX, Perq/UNIX, Orion, or M68000/UNIX) please let me
know so that we can maintain a list of C-Prolog versions, saying
what machine, what problems, and whether your version is available to
people holding an EdCAAD licence.
------------------------------
Date: Sat 3 Mar 84 14:47:18-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE>
Subject: LP Update
Anthony Kusalik sent the following letter to the Digest:
I would like to make known to those who receive the Prolog
Digest that there is available a document entitled "Porting
Concurrent Prolog". The paper outlines the steps taken to
port Shapiro's Concurrent Prolog interpreter from Prolog-10
to Edinburgh UNIX Prolog on a PDP-11/23. I feel that it may
be of interest to others. However, I do not have access to
a computer through which I can communicate to users on
ARPAnet or CSNET.
Thank you.
Interested parties can request a copy by writing to me:
-- Anthony Kusalik
Department of Computer Science
University of British Columbia
2075 Wesbrook Mall
Vancouver, B.B., Canada V6T 1W5
Richard O'Keefe submitted a random number generator in C-Prolog,
it is available from the <Prolog> directory at {SU-SCORE} as:
{SU-SCORE}SCORE:<Prolog>Random←Generator←1.Pl
-ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-84 1112 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA The Artificial Intelligence Report
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 11:12:06 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 10:58:51-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: The Artificial Intelligence Report
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I have received a sample copy of the Artificial Intelligence Report, vol. 1
number 1, January 1984. It is being published locally and will have ten
issues per year. It is more of a newsletter type publication with the
latest information on research (academic and industrial) and applied AI
within industry. The cost is $250 per year. The first issue has 15 pages.
I will place on the new journal shelf.
I need to know what you think of this new publication and whether or not
we need to purchase it for the library. This type of publication can be
useful if it provides you with new informtion on a timely basis. However
it could also be reporting news that you already receive elsewhere. I
would appreciate receiving evaluations of this serial from those interested
in it. thanks Harry
-------
∂06-Mar-84 1159 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #24
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 11:59:24 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 1984 10:22-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #24
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 6 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 24
Today's Topics:
Conferences - AAAI-84 Paper Submission Deadline,
AI Tools - LISP for IBM PC & UNIX VAX Tools,
Manual Generators - Replys,
Parser Generator - Request,
Mathematics - Fermat's Last Theorem & Map Coloring,
Personal Robotics - Reply,
Waveform Analysis - ECG Systems & Validation,
Review - U.S. Response to Japan's AI efforts
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 15:44:06-PST
From: Ron Brachman <Brachman at SRI-KL>
Subject: AAAI-84 Paper Submission Deadline
******* AAAI-84 PAPER SUBMISSION DEADLINE IS APRIL 2, 1984 *******
The SIGART Newsletter (No. 87, January 1984) has mistakenly published
two conflicting dates for submission of papers to AAAI-84. Please note
that papers must be received in the AAAI Office in Menlo Park, CA, on or
before April 2, 1984. This is the date that appears in the AAAI-84 Call
for Papers (printed on page 17 of the above-mentioned Newsletter). The
date printed in the "Calendar" section on page 1 of the Newsletter is
incorrect.
Thank you,
Ron Brachman, Program Chair
Claudia Mazzetti, AAAI Executive Director
------------------------------
Date: Sun 4 Mar 84 13:33:49-PST
From: Ted Markowitz <G.TJM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: LISP for IBM PC
I asked the list a while back about implementations of LISPs for
IBM PC's. I got a pointer for IQLISP, but seem to have misplaced
the pertinent info on how to order it. Can anyone supply this?
If you have any other implementations, I'll be glad to pass any
reviews back to the list.
--ted
[The original message must have been prior to issue 53, and I
don't have it online. Does some have the address handy? -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 27 Feb 84 16:26:42-PST (Mon)
From: ihnp4!houxm!hou2a!zev @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: AI (LISP,PROLOG,ETC.) for UNIX VAX
Article-I.D.: hou2a.269
A friend of mine is looking for a LISP, PROLOG, and/or
any other decent Artificial Intelligence system that
will run on a VAX under UNIX.
Please send replies directly to Mr. Leonard Brandwein at
aecom!brandw
He asked me to post this as a favor, since he does not
have direct access to the net.
In the likely case that you don't have a direct path
to aecom, here is one that will get you there from
any machine that can reach houxm:
houxm!hou2a!allegra!philabs!aecom!brandw
Of course, you can shorten the path if you can reach
any of the intermediate machines directly.
Thank you very much.
Zev Farkas hou2a!zev 201 949 3821
[When sending to Usenet from the Arpanet, be sure to put double quotes
around all of the address prior to the @-sign. Readers who want help
getting messages through the gateways should contact AIList-Request@SRI-AI.
Useful summaries or interesting replys may be published directly in
AIList, of course. I will pass along some information about CProlog
in the next issue. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 84 5:12:55 EST
From: Stephen Wolff <steve@brl-bmd>
Subject: Re: AI (LISP,PROLOG,ETC.) for UNIX VAX
[Forwarded from the Info-Unix distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Franz Lisp comes with Berkeley UNIX. Interlisp is available. Also T.
CProlog is available from Edinburgh. You can get Rosie from RAND.
And these are just basics. There's LOTS! There are many schools out there
who are (possibly newly) in the AI business who couldn't afford DEC-20's
(obviously not SRI, UTexas, CMU, etc.), but who DID buy VAXen back when they
were good value for money. And they're mostly running BSD, and they're
busily developing all the tools and software that AI folk do. Is there any
PARTICULAR branch of AI you're interested in? [...]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 84 4:23:11 EST
From: Stephen Wolff <steve@brl-bmd>
Subject: Documentation tools
Artificially intelligent it's not, and not even fancy; but there are
folks hereabouts that use the UNIX tools SCCS (or RCS) to do documentation
of various sorts. Although intended for managing the writing, evolving and
maintaining of large software packages, they can't tell C from Fortran from
straight English text and they will quite cheerfully maintain for you the
update/revision tree in any case.
I should imagine with a bit if thought you could link your code AND
documentation modules and manage 'em both simultaneously and equitably.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 84 18:43:59 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Manual generators
The SCRIBE system (Brian K. Reid of CMU and Janet H. Walker of BBN)
may be close to what you are looking for. It has automatic paragraph
numbering, automatic table-of-contents generation, automatic indexing,
and automatic bibliography. (I use the word "automatic" somewhat
loosely. The user has to be involved.) A more sophisticated system,
I believe, is in use at the University of Michigan's Information
Systems Design and Optimization System (ISDOS) project. The contact
is Prof. Dan Teichroew in the Industrial and Operations Engineering
department at Ann Arbor. It may be avaliable to ISDOS sponsors.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 20:24:33-EST
From: Howard Reubenstein <HBR@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: Looking for a Parser Generator
[Forwarded from the MIT-MC bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
A friend of mine needs a parser generator which produces
output in either FORTRAN or LISP. Does anyone know where he can
get access to one?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 84 08:34 EST
From: MJackson.Wbst@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Re: Fermat's Last Theorem & Undecidable Propositions
Fermat's Last Theorem:
is the assertion that
A↑N + B↑N = C↑N
has no solution in integers for N > 2. (For N = 2, of course, all the
well-known right triangles like [3,4,5] are solutions.)
The Four-Color Theorem:
states that any planar map can be colored so that no two adjacent
regions are the same color using no more than four different colors.
(Regions must be connected; "adjacent" means having a common boundary of
finite length, i.e. not just touching at a point.
The latter was shown to be true by two mathematicians at the University
of Illinois, using a combination of traditional mathematical reasoning
and computer-assisted analysis of a large set of graphs. An article
describing the proof can be found in a back issue of /Scientific
American/.
The former appears in a manuscript by Fermat, with a marginal notation
to the effect that he had found a slick proof, but didn't have enough
space to write it down. This was discovered after his death, of course.
Most mathematicians believe the theorem to be true, and most do not
think Fermat is likely to have found a valid proof, but neither
proposition has been proved beyond question.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: 28 Feb 84 20:42:40-PST (Tue)
From: decvax!genrad!wjh12!n44a!ima!inmet!andrew @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: Re: Fermat's Last Theorem & Undecida - (nf)
Article-I.D.: inmet.945
Fermat's Last Theorem states that the equation
n n n
A + B = C
has solutions in positive integers a, b, c, n only when n = 2.
The "four-color map problem" states that any map (think of, say, a map of the
US) requires at most four colors to color all regions without using the same
color for any two adjacent ones. (This is for 2-dimensional maps. Maps
on a sphere or torus require more - 5 and 7, I think.)
The former has neither been proven nor disproven. The latter was "proven"
with the aid of a computer program; many feel that this does not constitute
a true proof (see all the flames elsewhere in this group). Incidentally,
the school where it was "proven" changed their postage meters to print
"FOUR COLORS SUFFICE" on outgoing mail.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 1 Mar 84 13:53:05-PST
From: Sam Hahn <SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Domestic Robotics
I find that Robotics Age (the journal of intelligent machines), published by
Robotics Age, Inc, located at:
Strand Building
174 Concord Street
Peterborough, NH 03458 (603) 924-7136
is a good source of information on low-end, more personal, and thus more
"domestic"ly oriented robotics. For example, the advertisers include
Micromation: voice command system for Hero-1
Iowa Precision Robotics:
68000-controlled educ/pers'l robot
Micron Techn.: computer vision for your PC
S.M. Robotics: PR kit for $59.95
just to name a few from the February 1984 issue.
Their articles are also more PR-oriented, and often include some level of
design info.
I'm new to the publication myself (about 1/2 year), but find it a source of
information not elsewhere available.
-- sam hahn
------------------------------
Date: 27 Feb 84 19:25:34-PST (Mon)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!marcel @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Re: computer ECG - (nf)
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.5890
Ivan Bratko, of the Josef Stefan Institute in Ljubljana, Yugoslavia, has
recently achieved some remarkable results. With the aid of computer
simulation he has built an expert system capable of diagnosing multiple
simultaneous heart malfunction causes from ECG outputs. This was a
significant contribution to medical science, since for the class of failures
he treated, there was no known method of diagnosing anything more complicated
than a single cause.
His work will be printed as a monograph from the newly-formed "International
School for the Synthesis of Expert Knowledge" (ISSEK), which will have its
first meeting this summer. ISSEK is an affiliation of computer science labs
dedicated to the automatic generation of new knowledge of super-human quality.
(Membership of ISSEK is by invitation only).
Marcel Schoppers
U of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign
{ pur-ee | ihnp4 } ! uiucdcs ! marcel
------------------------------
Date: 2 Mar 84 20:54:42 EST
From: Ron <FISCHER@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Re: computer ECG, FDA testing of AI programs
Apparently because of fierce competition, much current information,
particularly with regard to algorithms, is proprietary. Worst in this
regard (a purely personal opinion) is HP who seems to think nobody but
HP needs to know how they do things and physicians are too dumb to
understand anyway.
...
They offer an advantage to small hospitals by offering verification of
the analysis by a Cardiologist (for an extra fee).
What the latter seems to say is that the responsibility for accepting
the diagnosis is that of the local cardiologist. I cannot see a
responsable doctor examining a few runs of a program's output and
proclaiming it "correct."
A hedge against complaints of computers taking over decision making
processes from human has been that we can look at the algorithms
ourselves or examine the reasons that a system concluded something.
If this information becomes proprietary the government will probably
license software for medical purposes the way the FDA does for new
drugs.
Imagine a testing procedure for medical diagnostic AI programs that is
as expensive and complicated as that for testing new drugs.
(ron)
[Ron makes a good point. As a side issue, though, I would like
to mention that H-P has not been entirely secretive about its
techniques. On March 8, Jim Lindauer of H-P will present a seminar
at Stanford (MJH 352, 2:45PM) on "Uses of Decision Trees in ECG
Analysis". -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 29 Feb 84 15:36:33 PST (Wednesday)
From: Hoffman.es@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: U.S. Response to Japan's AI efforts
In the new "soft" computer journal from Springer-Verlag, 'Abacus', Vol.
1, #2, Winter 1984, is an essay by Eric A. Weiss reviewing Feigenbaum
and McCorduck's 'Fifth Generation' book and general AI books. The
general A.I. review is worth reading. The whole piece is lengthy, but I
quote only from the final section.
--Rodney Hoffman
[This is a rather remarkable book review. In addition to discussing the
"The Fifth Generation" and several AI reference works and textbooks,
Eric Weiss describes the history and current partitioning of AI, the
disputes and alignments of the major AI centers, and the solution to
our technological race with foreign powers. It's well worth reading.
This second issue of Abacus also has interesting articles on Ada,
the language and the countess, tomographic and NMR imaging (with
equations!), and the U.S. vs. IBM antitrust suit, as well as columns
on computers and the laws and other topics. The magazine resembles
a Scientific American for the computer-oriented, and the NMR article
is of quality comparable to IEEE Computer. -- KIL]
------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Response
On the basis of all this perspective, let me return to the Fifth
Generation Project itself and suggest that the U.S. response should be
thoughtful, considered, not guided by panic or fear, but based on
principles this nation has found fruitful:
build on experience
do what you do best
encourage enthusiasm
What has been our experience with foreign science and technology? We
know that new scientific knowledge gives the greatest benefit to those
nations which are most ready to exploit and use it, and this ready group
may not include the originating nation.... [discussion of rocketry,
automobiles, shipbuilding, steel, consumer electronics]
From this experience, the U.S. should look forward to reaping the
benefits from whatever the Japanese Fifth Generation Project develops,
and, just because we are bigger, richer, and stronger, benefiting more
from these improvements than the originating nation....
... "Do what you do best." We do not compete with the Japanese very
well, but we do best in helping them.... [The U.S.] is best at helping
others, especially Japan, and at giving money away.... Thus, the
indicated course for the U.S. ... is to help the Japanese Fifth
Generation Project in every way we can: by supplying grants of money; by
loaning college professors; by buying and copying its product,
exploiting its scientific and technological developments and
breakthroughs as fast as they appear; and by ignoring or clucking
sympathetically over any failures or missed schedules. Finally,...
encourage enthusiasm.
Young military people may murmur against this stance on the grounds that
military developments must be home-grown and that the development of
technology which might be used in weapons should be guided by the
military. This assertion is borne out neither by history nor by the
present public attitude of the DoD.... [discussion of WWII anti-aircraft
guns, mines, torpedoes, and many other such]
... The advantages of letting another nation develop your military
hardware are frequently and forcefully explained to other countries by
the DoD and its industrial toadies, but these logical arguments... are
never put in their equally logical vice-versa form....
The danger is not that the Japanese will succeed -- for their successes
will result in U.S. benefits -- but that somehow we will not make prompt
use of whatever they accomplish. We might manage this neglect if we
overdo our national inclination to fight them and compete with them....
A related but more serious danger lies in the possibility that our
military people will get their thumbs into the American AI efforts and
make secret whatever they don't gum up.... Even the best ideas can be
killed, hurt, or at least delayed if hedged around with bureaucrats and
secrecy limitations.
... We should press vigorously forward on all fronts in the unplanned
and uncoordinated fashion that we all understand. We should let a
thousand flowers bloom. We should encourage everyone.... We should hand
out money. We should transport experts. We should jump up and down.
We should be ready to grab anybody's invention , even our own, and use
it. We should be ready to seize winners and dump losers, even our own.
We should look big, fearless, happy, and greedy, and not tiny,
frightened, worried, and dumb.
... The conclusion is: don't bet on the Japanese, don't bet against
them, don't fear them. Push forward with confidence that the U.S. will
muddle through -- if it can keep its government from making magnificent
plans for everyone.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-84 1305 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #25
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 13:01:19 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 1984 11:50-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #25
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Tuesday, 6 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 25
Today's Topics:
Review - Laws of Form,
Brain Theory - Parallelism,
AI Reports - Stanford Acquisitions,
Administrivia - New Location for List-of-Lists,
AI Software - Portability of C-Prolog
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 84 18:36:25 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
Subject: Laws of Form
I don't pretend to be an expert on LoF but I think there are at least two
interesting aspects to it. One is that it provides a calculus that can be used
to "compile" a set of syllogisms (page 124 of the Dutton 1979 edition). A
second is that it does away with Russell and Whitehead's cumbersome Theory
of Types. All orders of self-referential sets of statements can be evaluated
within the set of "imaginary" values.
You can argue that the compilation of syllogism sets (rule sets) can already
be done using truth tables. I think that the benefit of Spencer-Brown's
calculus is that it is much more efficient and should run much faster.
Those who are really interested should loosen up and plow through the book
a few times with an open mind. It is really very thought-provoking.
--Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Mon 5 Mar 84 20:34:27-EST
From: David Rogers <DRogers%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: parallel minds?
For a very good (if 3 years old) discussion on parallism
in the brain, refer to Hinton and Anderson's book "Parallel
Models of Associative Memory, pages 32-44 [Hin 81]. The
applicable section is entitled "Parallelism and Distribution
in the Mammalian Nervous System". Structurally, paralleism is
inherent throughout the nervous system, making simple
sequential models of human low-level cognition highly
suspect.
Though it was not openly stated in the discussion on this list,
there seems to be two issues of parallelism involved here:
low-level parallelism, and parallelism at some higher
"intellectual" level. The latter subject is rightly the domain
for experimentalists, and should not be approached with
simple AI techniques as introspection ("Well, I *feel*
sequential when I think...").
One known experimental fact does suggest a high degree of
parallelism, even in higher cognitive functions. Since
the firing rate of a neuron is on the order of
2-3 milliseconds, and some highly complex tasks (such as
face recognition) are performed in about 300 ms, it seems
clear that the brain uses massive parallelism, not just
in the visual system but throughout [Fel 79].
I would suggest that future discussions offer the reader
a few more experimental details, lest the experimental
psychologists in our midst feel unappreciated.
---------
[Hin 81]
"Parallel Models of Associative Memory, G. Hinton,
J. Anderson, eds, Laurence Earlbaum Assoc., 1981, pages 32-44.
[Fel 79]
"A Distributed Information Processing Model of Visual
Memory", J.A. Feldman, University of Rochester Computer
Science Department, TR52, December 1979.
------------------------------
Date: Sun 4 Mar 84 21:56:21-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Latest Math & CS Library "New Reports List" posted on-line.
[Every month or two Stanford announces its new CS report acquisitions.
I culled and sorted many of the citations for an earlier set of AIList
issues, but I have not gotten around to doing so for the last six
months or so. Instead, I am forwarding this notice as an example
of the notices you can get by contacting LIBRARY@SU-SCORE. For those
interested in FTPing the report listings, I would characterize them
as being lengthy, somewhat cryptic and inconveniently formatted, and
usually divided about equally between AI-related topics and non-AI
math/CS topics (VLSI design, hardware concepts, operating systems,
networking, office automation, etc.). -- KIL]
The latest Math & Computer Science Library "New Reports List" has been
posted on-line. The file is "<LIBRARY>NEWTRS" at SCORE, "NEWTRS[LIB,DOC]"
at SAIL, "<CSD-REPORTS>NEWTRS" at SUMEX, and "<LIBRARY>NEWTRS" at SIERRA.
In case you miss a reports list, the old lists are being copied to
"<LIBRARY>OLDTRS" at SCORE and "<LIBRARY>OLDTRS" at SIERRA where they will
be saved for about six months.
If you want to see any of the reports listed in the "New Reports List,"
either come by the library during the display period mentioned or send a
message to LIBRARY at SCORE, giving your departmental address and the
six-digit accession numbers of the reports you want to see, and we will
check them out in your name and send them to you as soon as they are available.
The library receives technical reports from over a hundred universities
and other institutions. The current batch includes - among others -
reports from:
Eidgenoessische Technische Hochschule Zuerich. Instituet fuer Informatik.
IBM. Research Division.
Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (INRIA).
New York University. Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences.
U.K. National Physical Laboratory. Division of Information Technology
and Computing.
Universite de Montreal. Departement d'Informatique et de Recherche
Operationnelle.
University of Edinburgh. Department of Computer Science.
University of Southern California. Information Sciences Institute.
University of Wisconsin-Madison. Computer Sciences Department.
- Richard Manuck
Math & Computer Science Library
Building 380 - 4th Floor
LIBRARY at SCORE
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 1984 2142-PST
From: Zellich@OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich)
Subject: New location for list-of-lists (Interest-Groups.TXT)
File Interest-Groups.TXT has been moved from OFFICE-3 and is now
available on the SRI-NIC host in file <NETINFO>INTEREST-GROUPS.TXT
Requests for copies of the list, updates to the list, etc., should be
sent to ZELLICH@SRI-NIC in the future, instead of ZELLICH@OFFICE-3 or
RICH.GVT@OFFICE-3.
Cheers,
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 22-Feb-84 23:45:00-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Portability of C-Prolog
[The following is forwarded from the Prolog digest. I consider
it an interesting account of the difficulties of making AI
software available on different systems. The message is
8K characters, so I have put it last in the digest for those
who want to skip over it. -- KIL]
There was a question in this Digest about whether C-Prolog had
been ported to Apollos. I don't know about that, but I have had a
great deal to do with C-Prolog, so I can say what might give trouble
and what shouldn't.
The first thing to beware of is that there are two main versions
of C-Prolog drifting around. The one most people have is the one
distributed by EdCAAD (which is where Fernando Pereira wrote it), and
while that runs under VAX/UNIX and VAX/VMS both, and is said to run
on at least one 68000 box, V7 C compilers don't like it much. The
other version is distributed by EdAI on a very informal basis, but it
should be available from Silogic in a couple of weeks. The EdAI
version has been ported to the Perq (running ICL's C-machine micro-
code and their PaNiX port of V7 UNIX) and to another C-machine called
the Orion (that compiler isn't a derivative of PCC). C-Prolog has
something like one cast per line, the EdAI version has stronger type
declarations so that the compiler produces no warning messages. Both
versions are essentially the same, so EdAI cannot distribute their
version to anyone who hasn't got a licence for the EdCAAD version.
What C-Prolog v1.4d.edai requires is
[1] a V7 or later C compiler
[2] pointers should be 32 bits long
[3] the compiler should support 32 bit integer arithmetic, and
floats should be storable in 32 bits. (In fact if anyone has
a decent C compiler for the Dec-10 [a] please can we have a copy
and [b] C-Prolog should run quite happily on it.)
[4] It needs to steal 3 bits out of floats, so it needs to know a bit
about the floating-point storage format. IEEE and VAX-11 are ok.
[5] I/O uses <stdio> exclusively.
C-Prolog supports ~username/X and $envvar/X expansion, but if the
"unix" identifier is not defined it knows not to ask.
[6] brk() and sbrk() are needed. If you haven't got them, you could
declare a huge array and use that, but that would require source
hacking.
[7] The MAJOR portability problem is that C-Prolog assumes that all
pointers into the area managed by brk() and sbrk() look like
POSITIVE integers. It doesn't matter if the stack or text areas
lie in negative address space (in fact the stack IS in negative
address space on the Perq and Orion). Getting around this would
be a major exercise, not to be undertaken by anyone without a
thorough understanding of the way C-Prolog works. Since we have
a GEC series 63 machine, and since there is some political
pressure to adopt this as a UK IKBS machine (to which application
it is NOT suited, nor any other), and since that machine puts
everything in negative address space, we may produce a version of
C-Prolog which can handle this. But don't hold your breath.
The Perq (running C) and the Orion are both word-addressed. This is
no problem. Getting C-Prolog running on the Orion was a matter of
telling it where to look for its files and saying "make", but then
the Orion, though nothing like a VAX, runs 4.1bsd. Getting it going
on a Perq was harder, but the bugs were in the Perq software, not in
C-Prolog. The main thing anyone porting C-Prolog to a new machine
with a decent C and positive address space should have to worry about
is the sizes of the data areas, in the file parms.c.
To give this message some interest for people who couldn't care
less about porting C-Prolog, here are some general notes on porting
Prolog interpreters written in C. (I've seen seven of them, but not
UNH Prolog.)
A well written Prolog interpreter uses the stdio library, so that
I/O shouldn't be too much of a problem. But it may also want to
rename and/or delete files, to change the working directory, or to
call the command interpreter. These operations should be in one file
and clearly labelled as being operating-system dependent. Porting
from one version of UNIX to another should cause no difficulty, but
there is a problem with calling the shell: people using ?.?bsd will
expect the C-shell, and an interpreter written for V7 may not know
about that. If you change it, be sure to use the environment
variable SHELL to determine what shell to use. (Ports to S3 should
do this too, so that users who are supposed to be restricted to rsh
can't escape to sh via prolog.)
No Prolog implementor worth his salt would dream of using malloc.
As a result, a Prolog interpreter is pretty well bound to use brk()
and/or sbrk(). It may do so only at start-up (C-Prolog does this),
or it may do so dynamically (a Prolog with a garbage collector, and
pitifully few of them have, will probably do this). In either case
allocation is virtually certain to be word-aligned and in units of
words, where a word is a machine pointer.
There are two ways of telling what sort of thing a pointer is
pointing to. One way is to use TAGS, that is to reserve part of the
word to hold a code saying (integer,pointer to atom,pointer to clause
pointer to variable,&c). This is particularly tempting on machines
like the M68000 where part of an address is spare anyway. The other
way is to divide the address space into a number of partitions, such
as (integers, atoms, clauses, global stack, local stack, trail), and
to tell what something points to by checking *where* it points.
C-Prolog could be described as "semi-tagged": integers, floats,
pointers to clauses, and pointers to records all live in the virtual
partition [-2↑31,0) and are tagged, pointers to real objects are
discriminated by where they point. Other things being equal, tagged
systems are likely to be slower. But tagged systems should be immune
to the "positive address space problem". So you have to check which
sort your system is. If it is tagged, you should check the macros
for converting between tagged form and machine addresses VERY VERY
carefully. They may not work on your machine, and it may be possible
to do better. Here is an example of what can go wrong.
/* Macro to convert a 24-bit byte pointer and a 6-bit tag to a
32-bit tagged pointer
*/
#define Cons(tag,ptr) (((int)(ptr)<<8) | tag)
/* Macro to extract the tag of a tagged pointer */
#define Tag(tptr) ((tptr)&255)
/* Macro to convert a tagged pointer to a machine pointer */
#define Ptr(tptr) (pointertype)(tptr>>8)
/* Macro to find the number of words between two tagged
pointers
*/
#define Delta(tp1,tp2) (((tp1)-(tp2))>>8)
DRAT! That was meant to be >>10 not >>8.
What can go wrong with this? Well, Delta can go wrong if the machine
uses word addresses rather than byte addresses, in which case it
should be >>8 as I first wrote instead of >>10. Cons can go wrong
if the top bits of a pointer are significant. (On the Orion the top
2 bits and the bottom 24 bits are significant.) Ptr can go wrong
if addresses are positive and user addresses can go over 2↑23, in
which case an arithmetic right shift may do horrid things. I have
seen at least two tagged Prolog interpreters which would go wrong on
the Orion.
Prolog interpreters tend to be written by people who do not know
all the obscure tricks they can get up to in C, so at least you ought
not be plagued by the "dereferencing 0" problem.
If anyone reading this Digest has problems porting C-Prolog other
than the positive address space problem, please tell me. I may be
able to help. There is one machine with a C compiler that someone
tried to port it to, and failed, and that is a Z8000 box where the
user's address space is divided up into a lot of 64kbyte chunks, and
the chunks aren7t contiguous! A tagged system could handle that,
though with some pain. C-Prolog can't handle it at all.
If anyone has already ported some version of C-Prolog to another
machine (not a VAX, Perq/UNIX, Orion, or M68000/UNIX) please let me
know so that we can maintain a list of C-Prolog versions, saying
what machine, what problems, and whether your version is available to
people holding an EdCAAD licence.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-84 1337 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Logging on at sri-ai
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 13:37:41 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 13:37:15-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Logging on at sri-ai
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
All,
I have had serious trouble logging on to sri-ai during the day for the
past couple of weeks. So I have two requests.
1) Please do not count on my seeing messages very soon after they
are sent.
2) to those of you who, like me, use the micom: if we all agree
to hang up when not logged in, there really would be little trouble.
It is because we all are worried that we will not be able to get back on
that we stay logged on. So, I would suggest that we not stay logged on
when there is going to be more than a 20 minute break.
Jon
-------
∂06-Mar-84 1615 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #26
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 16:15:00 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 1984 15:09-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #26
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Wednesday, 7 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 26
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Extended Prolog Theorem Prover &
A Model of LISP Computation &
YOKO Random Haiku Generator &
Emulation of Human Learning &
Circuit Design by Knowledge-Directed Search &
Knowledge Structures for Automatic Programming &
Mathematical Ontology &
Problem Solving in Organizations &
Inequalities for Probablistic Knowledge
Conference - STeP-84 Call for Papers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 Feb 84 13:54:56 PST (Wednesday)
From: Kluger.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Reply-to: Kluger.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: HP Computer Colloquium 3/8/84
[Forwarded from the SRI-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Mark E. Stickel
SRI International
A Prolog Technology Theorem Prover
An extension of Prolog, based on the model elimination theorem-proving
procedure, would permit production of a Prolog technology theorem prover
(PTTP). This would be a complete theorem prover for the full first-order
predicate calculus, not just Horn clauses, and provide capabilities for
full handling of logical negation and indefinite answers. It would be
capable of performing inference operations at a rate approaching that of
Prolog itself--substantially faster than conventional theorem-proving
systems.
PTTP differs from Prolog in its use of unification with the "occurs
check" for soundness, the complete model elimination input inference
procedure, and a complete staged depth-first search strategy. The use of
an input inference procedure and depth-first search minimize the
differences between this theorem-proving method and Prolog and permit the
use of highly efficient Prolog implementation techniques.
Thursday, March 8, 1984 4:00 pm
Hewlett Packard
Stanford Division
5M Conference room
1501 Page Mill Rd
Palo Alto
*** Be sure to arrive at the building's lobby on time, so that you may
be escorted to the meeting room.
------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 Feb 84 13:07:26-PST
From: MESEGUER@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: A Model of LISP Computation
[Forwarded from the CLSI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
REWRITE RULE SEMINAR AT SRI-CSL
Wednesday March 7, 3:00 pm
A Model of Computation
Theory and application to LISP-like systems
Carolyn Talcott
Stanford University
The goal of this work is to provide a rich context in which a
variety of aspects of computation can be treated and where new
ideas about computing can be tested and developed. An important
motivation and guide has been the desire to understand the construction
and use of LISP like computation systems.
The first step was to define a model of computation and develop the
theory to provide basic tools for further work. The main components are
- basic model and notion of evaluation
- equivalence relations and extensionality
- an abstract machine as a subtheory
- formalization of the metatheory
Key features of this theory are:
- It is a construction of particular theories uniformly
from given data structures (data domain and operations).
- Focus is on control aspects of computation
- A variety of objects
Forms -- for describing control aspects of computation
Pfns -- abstraction of form in an environment
-- elements of the computation domain
-- computational analogue of partial functions
Carts -- for collecting arguments and values
Envs -- intepretation of symbols appearing in forms
cTrees -- objects describing particular computations
Applications of this theory include
- proving properties of pfns
- implementation of computation systems
- representing and mechanizing aspects of reasoning
In this talk I will describe RUM - the applicative
fragment (flavor). RUM is the most mathematically
developed aspect of the work and is the foundation
for the other aspects which include implementation
of a computation system called SEUS.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 1984 10:00:33-EST
From: walter at mit-htvax
Subject: GRADUATE STUDENT LUNCH
[Forwarded from the MIT-MC bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
Computer Aided Conceptual Art (CACA)
Eternally Evolving Seminar Series
presents
YOKO: A Random Haiku Generator
Interns gobble oblist hash | We will be discussing YOKO and the
Cluster at operations | related issues of computer modeling
Hidden rep: convert! | of artists, modeling computer artists,
| computer artists' models, computer
Chip resolve to bits | models of artists' models of computers,
Bus cycle inference engine | artist's cognitive models of computers,
Exposing grey codes | computers' cognitive models of artists
| and models, models' models of models,
Take-grant tinker bucks | artists' models of computer artists,
Pass oblist message package | modelling of computer artists' cognitive
Federal express | models and artist's models of cognition.
Hosts: Claudia Smith and Crisse Ciro
REFRESHMENTS WILL BE SERVED
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 84 09:26:46 EST
From: PETTY@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: VanLehn Colloquium on Learning
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SPEAKER: Dr. Kurt VanLehn
Xerox Corp.
Palo Alto Research Center
TITLE: "FELICITY CONDITIONS FOR HUMAN SKILL ACQUISITION"
A theory of how people learn certain procedural skills will be
presented. It is based on the idea that the teaching and learning
that goes on in a classroom is like an ordinary conversation. The
speaker (teacher) compresses a non-liner knowledge structure (the
target procedure) into a linear sequence of utterances (lessons). The
listener (student) constructs a knowledge structure (the learned
procedure) from the utterance sequence (lesson sequence). In recent
years, linguists have discovered that speakers unknowingly obey
certain constraints on the sequential form of their utterances.
Apparently, these tacit conventions, called felicity conditions or
conversational postulates, help listeners construct an appropriate
knowledge structure from the utterance sequence. The analogy between
conversations and classrooms suggests that there might be felicity
conditions on lesson sequences that help students learn procedures.
This research has shown that there are. For the particular kind of
skill acquisition studied here, three felicity conditions were
discovered. They are the central hypotheses in the learning theory.
The theory has been embedded in a model, a large AI program. The
model's performance has been compared to data from several thousand
students learning ordinary mathematical procedures: subtracting
multidigit numbers, adding fractions and solving simple algebraic
equations. A key criterion for the theory is that the set of
procedures that the model "learns" should exactly match the set of
procedures that students actually acquire including their "buggy"
procedures. However, much more is needed for psychological validation
of this theory, or any complex AI-based theory, than merely testing
its predictions. Part of the research has involved finding ways to
argue for the validity of the theory.
DATE: Tuesday, March 6, 1984
TIME: 11:30 a.m.
PLACE: Room 323 - Hill Center
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 84 09:27:06 EST
From: PETTY@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Tong Colloquium on Knowledge-Directed Search
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SPEAKER: Christopher Tong
TITLE: "CIRCUIT DESIGN AS KNOWLEDGE-DIRECTED SEARCH"
The process of circuit design is usefully viewed as search through
a large space of circuit descriptions. The search is knowledge-diverse
and knowledge-
intensive: circuits are described at many levels of abstraction (e.g.
architecture, logic, layout); designers use many kinds of knowledge and
styles of reasoning to pursue and constrain the search.
This talk presents a preliminary categorization of knowledge about
the design process and its control. We simplify the search by using a
single processor-oriented language to cover the function to structure
spectrum of circuit abstractions. We permit the circuit design and the
design problem (i.e. the associated goals) to co-evolve; nodes in the
design space contain explicit representations for goals as well as
circuits. The design space is generated by executing tasks, which
construct and refine circuit descriptions and goals (aided by libraries
of components of goals). The search is guided locally by goals and
tradeoffs; globally it is resource-limited (in design time and quality),
conflict-
driven, and knowledge-intensive (drawing on a library of strategies).
Finally, we describe an interactive knowledge-based computer
program called DONTE (Design ONTology Experiment) that is based on the
above framework. DONTE transforms architectural descriptions of a
digital system into circuit-level descriptions.
DATE: Thursday, March 8, 1984
TIME: 2:50 p.m.
PLACE: Room 705 - Hill Center
* Coffee Served at 2:30 p.m. *
------------------------------
Date: 1 Mar 84 09:27:23 EST
From: PETTY@RUTGERS.ARPA
Subject: Ferrante Colloquium on Automatic Programming
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
SPEAKER: Jeanne Ferrante
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Yortown Heights, NY
TITLE: "PROGRAMS = CONTROL + DATA
A new program representation called the program dependence graph or
PDG is presented which makes explicit both the data values on which
an operation depends (through data dependence edges) and the control
value on which the execution of the operation depends (through control
dependence edges). The data dependence relationships determine the
necessary sequencing between operations with the same control
conditions, exposing, exposing potential parallelism. In this talk we
show how the PDG can be used to solve a traditional stumbling block in
automatic program improvement. A new incremental solution to the
problem of updating data flow following changes in control flow such
as branch deletion is presented.
The PDG is the basis of current work at IBM Yorktown Heights for
compiling programs in sequential languages like FORTRAN to exploit
parallel architectures.
DATE: Friday, March 9, 1984
TIME: 2:50 p.m.
PLACE: Room 705 - Hill Center
* Coffee Served at 2:30 p.m. *
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 84 17:45 PST
From: Guibert.pa@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Talk by David McAllester: Mon. Mar. 12 at 11:00 at PARC
[Forwarded from the CSLI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Title: "MATHEMATICAL ONTOLOGY"
Speaker: David McAllester (M.I.T.)
When: Monday March 12th at 11:00am
Where: Xerox PARC Twin Conference Room, Room 1500
AI techniques are often divided into "weak" and "strong" methods. A
strong method exploits the structure of some domain while a weak method
is more general and therefore has less structure to exploit. But it may
be possible to exploit UNIVERSAL structure and thus to find STRONG
GENERAL METHODS. Mathematical ontology is the study of the general
nature of mathematical objects. The goal is to uncover UNIVERSAL
RELATIONS, UNIVERSAL FUNCTIONS, and UNIVERSAL LEMMAS which can be
exploited in general inference techniques. For example there seems to
be a natural notion of isomorphism and a standard notion of essential
property which are universal (they can be meaningfully applied to ALL
mathematical objects). These universal relations are completely ignored
in current first order formulations of mathematics. A particular theory
of mathematical ontology will be discussed in which many natural
universal relations can be precisely defined. Some particular strong
general inference techniques will also be discussed.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1984 22:41 EST (Mon)
From: "Daniel S. Weld" <WELD%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: AI Revolving Seminar
[Forwarded from the MIT-XX bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Wednesday, March 7 4:00pm 8th floor playroom
Knowledge and Problem Solving Processes
in Organizations
Gerald Barber
Human organizations have frequently been used as models for AI systems
resulting in such theories as the scientific community metaphor, the
society of mind and contract nets among others. However these human
organizational models have been limited by the fact that do no take
into account the epistemological processes involved in organizational
problem solving. Understanding human organizations from an
epistemological perspective is becoming increasingly important as a
source of insight into intelligent activities and for computer-based
technology as it becomes more intricately involved in organizational
activities.
In my talk I will present the results of an organizational study which
attempted to identify problem solving and knowledge processing
activities in the organization. I will also outline the possibilities
for development of both human organizational models and artificial
intelligence systems in light of this organizational study. More
specifically, I will also discuss the shortcoming of organizational
theories and application of the results of this work to highly
parallel computer systems such as the APIARY.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 09:05:05-PST
From: Juanita Mullen <MULLEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: SIGLUNCH ANNOUNCEMENT -- Friday, March 9, 1984
[Forwarded from the SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Friday, March 9, 1984
LOCATION: Braun Lecture Hall (smaller), ground floor of Seeley Mudd
Chemistry Building (approx. 30 yards west of Gazebo)
12:05
SPEAKER: Ben Grosof
Stanford University, HPP
TOPIC: AN INEQUALITY PARADIGM FOR PROBABILISTIC KNOWLEDGE
Issues in Reasoning with Probabilistic Statements
BACKGROUND: Reasoning with probabilistic knowledge and evidence is
a key aspect of many AI systems. MYCIN and PROSPECTOR were pioneer
efforts but were limited and unsatisfactory in several ways. Recent
methods address many problems. The Maximum Entropy principle
(sometimes called Least Information) provides a new approach to
probabilities. The Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence provides a new
approach to confirmation and disconfirmation.
THE TALK: We begin by relating probabilistic statements to logic. We
then review the motivations and shortcomings of the MYCIN and
PROSPECTOR approaches. Maximum Entropy and Dempster-Shafer are
presented, and recent work using them is surveyed. (This is your big
chance to get up to date!) We generalize both to a paradigm of
inequality constraints on probabilities. This paradigm unifies the
heretofore divergent representations of probability and evidential
confirmation in a formally satisfactory way. Least commitment is
natural. The interval representation for probabilities includes in
effect a meta-level which allows explicit treatment of ignorance and
partial information, confidence and precision, and (in)dependence
assumptions. Using bounds facilitates reasoning ABOUT probabilities
and evidence. We extend the Dempster-Shafer theory significantly and
make an argument for its potential, both representationally and
computationally. Finally we list some open problems in reasoning with
probabilities.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 84 11:18 EST
From: Leslie Heeter <heeter%SCRC-VIXEN@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: STeP-84
[Forwarded from the SRI-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
In addition to the call for papers below, Eero Hyvonen
has asked me to announce that they are looking for a lecturer
for the tutorial programme. The tutorial speaker should preferably
have experience in building industrial expert systems. For a few
hours' lecture, they are prepared to pay for the trip, the stay, and
some extra.
Exhibitors and papers are naturally welcome, too.
C A L L F O R P A P E R S
STeP-84
Finnish Artificial Intelligence Symposium
(Tekoalytutkimuksen paivat)
Otaniemi, Espoo, Finland
August 20-22, 1984
Finnish Artificial Intelligence Symposium (STeP-84) will be held at
Otaniemi campus of Helsinki University of Technology. The purpose of
the symposium is to promote AI research and application in Finland.
Papers (30 min) and short communications (15 min) are invited on
(but not restricted to) the following subfields of AI:
Automaattinen ohjelmointi (Automatic Programming)
Kognitiivinen mallittaminen (Cognitive Modelling)
Asintuntijajarjestelmat (Expert Systems)
Viidennen polven tietokoneet (Fifth Generation Computers)
Teolliset sovellutukset (Industrial Applications)
Tietamyksen esittaminen (Knowledge Representation)
Oppiminen (Learning)
Lisp-jarjestelmat (Lisp Systems)
Logikkaohjelmointi (Logic Programming)
Luonnollinen kieli (Natural Language)
Hahmontunnistus (Pattern Recognition)
Suunnittelu ja etsinta (Planning and Search)
Filosofiset kysymykset (Philosophical Issues)
Robotiikka (Robotics)
Lauseen todistaminen (Theorem Proving)
Konenako (Vision)
The first day of the symposium is reserved for the Tutorial programme
on key areas of AI presented by foreign and Finnish experts. There will
be an Industrial Exhibition during the symposium. Submission deadline
for one page abstracts of papers and short communications is April 15th.
Camera ready copy of the full text is due by July 31st. The address of
the symposium is:
STeP-84
c/o Assoc. Prof. Markku Syrjanen
Helsinki University of Technology
Laboratory of Information Processing Science
Otakaari 1 A
02150 Espoo 15 Telex: +358-0-4512076
Finland Phone: 125161 HTKK SF
Local Arrangements:
Eero Hyvonen, Jouko Seppanen, and Markku Syrjanen
helsinki University of Technology
Program Committee:
Kari Eloranta Erkki Lehtinen
University of Tampere University of Jyvaskyla
Seppo Haltsonen Seppo Linnainmaa
Helsinki University of Tech. University of Helsinki
Rauno Heinonen Klaus Oesch
State Technical Research Centre Nokia Corp.
Harri Jappinen Martti Penttonen
Sitra Foundation University of Turku
Matti Karjalainen Matti Pietikainen
Helsinki University of Tech. University of Oulu
Kimmo Koskenniemi Matti Uusitalo
University of Helsinki Finnish CAD/CAM Association
Kari Koskinen
Finnish Robotics Association
Organised under the auspices of Finnish Computer Science Society.
Conference languages will be Finnish, Swedish, and English.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-84 1624 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Call for Papers on Combinatorial Algorithms on Words
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 16:24:12 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 15:56:20-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Call for Papers on Combinatorial Algorithms on Words
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
N.B. I posted a more detailed announcement on the physical bboards at
Stanford - Andrei
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
CALL FOR PAPERS
N.A.T.O. Advanced Research Workshop on
COMBINATORIAL ALGORITHMS ON WORDS
Maratea, Italy, June 18--22, 1184.
Contributions are solicited with focus on combinatorial and complexity
issues arising in manipulations of strings of symbols on serial as
well as parallel models of computation. Main Topics: String and
pattern matching; Periodicities, repetitions and permutations in
words; Data compression; Coding theory, Free groups and symbolic
dynamics.
Submit five copies of an abstract by MAY 1, 1984 to:
Prof. Renato Capocelli, Program Chairman
Istituto di Scienze dell' Informazione
University of Salerno
I-84100 Salerno, Italy
Tel. (89) 878299
Notification of acceptance by MAY 30, 0984. For further information contact
the above or:
Alberto Apostolico or Zvi Galil
Computer Science Dept. Computer Science Dept.
Purdue University Columbia University
West Lafayette, IN 47907 New York, N.Y. 10027
[ARPA: axa@purdue [ARPA: galil@columbia
tel. (317) 494-6014] tel. (212) 280-8191]
Selected papers will be included in the Proceedings of the Workshop, to be
published by Springer in the N.A.T.O. ASI series.
-------
∂06-Mar-84 1722 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting 3/8/84
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 17:22:34 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 17:18:38-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Meeting 3/8/84
To: CS440: ;
The speaker this week is Forest Baskett of DEC talking about
"Architectural Trends in Commercial Computing Systems."
We meet 4:15 in 352 MJH, as usual.
-------
∂06-Mar-84 1742 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Call for Papers - Errata
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 17:41:55 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 17:37:36-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Call for Papers - Errata
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
Sorry for the typos in my "Call for Papers" msg. All dates are of
course in 1984, and not 1184, or 0984. - Andrei
-------
∂06-Mar-84 1826 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA GB
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 84 18:26:50 PST
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 18:28:13-PST
From: Susan Stucky <Stucky@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: GB
To: CSLI-principals: ;
There have been a number of people who have requested that the GB
tutorial by Richard Larson be held on Friday afternoon rather than
Friday morning. I have contacted some people who indicated an
interest and they have said that Friday afternoon suits them.
The time now is 2:30. Place to be announced. I hope the change is not too
inconvenient.
-Susan
-------
∂07-Mar-84 1142 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Salaries
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 11:42:00 PST
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 11:35:23-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Salaries
To: CSD-Faculty: ;
I have just received a memo from the Dean's office concerning salaries
for the next year.The average increase will be 6% but as I indicated
persons at the top of the scale can expect a smaller increase than
younger persons.
Please send me your updated CV by 5pm on Friday, March 9 and any other
information you may want to supply. I will base my recommendation on the
following:
50%, research; 25%, teaching; 25%, departmental activities.
GENE
-------
∂07-Mar-84 1151 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Announcement from the Dept. of the Army
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 11:48:15 PST
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 11:39:10-PST
From: Elyse Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Announcement from the Dept. of the Army
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-9746
Short-Term Innovative Research
The U.S. Army Research Office will award a limited numer of contracts
(approximately 15) for short-term (two months) exploratory research
efforts during the Summer of 1984. Each contract award will be for
approximately $20,000. The concept is to support preliminary investi-
gations of innovative ideas which have a potential for applications in Army
technology. While support of theoretical and computational work appears
to be most appropriate for this program, experimental tests with avail-
able equipment will not be excluded. The end product will be a concise
report including a realistic assessment of the feasibility of applications.
Areas of interest to the Army are described in the ARO program guide dated
July 1983.
Proposals with no more than three pages of description of objectives must be
received at ARO no later than 20 April 1984. Proposals will be evaluated
and selected on the basis of scientific merit and relevance to Army technology.
Submitters will be notified of proposal selections on or about 11 May 1984.
Interested proposers may obtain copies of the ARO Program Guide by writing
to:
Director
U.S. Army Research Office
ATTN: Scientific Advisor
P.O. Box 12211
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
-------
∂07-Mar-84 1534 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier influencing admissions: now is your chance
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 15:34:34 PST
Received: from Glacier by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 7 Mar 84 15:30:12-PST
Date: Wednesday, 7 March 1984 11:40:20-PST
To: Faculty@Score
Cc: Yearwood@Score, MWalker@Score
Subject: influencing admissions: now is your chance
From: Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>
At a recent faculty lunch I mentioned that the admissions committee
would automatically move into "Round II" any student specifically
requested by a faculty member. I know that some of you have written
letters of recommendation for various students, but it is often hard to
tell from those letters whether or not this student is The One that you
would like to see admitted.
In a day or two we will be making our Round-II cuts. If there is some
student that you want to whiteball into Round II, please tell us now.
"Us" is me, Marlie, and Marilynn.
Brian
∂07-Mar-84 1632 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #27
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 16:30:06 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Wed 7 Mar 1984 15:12-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #27
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Thursday, 8 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 27
Today's Topics:
Automatic Programming - Request for Bibliography,
Pattern Recognition - Request for Character Recognition Algorithms,
Expert Systems - Request for MYCIN Source Code, Tutorial,
AI Tools - IQLISP Source,
Mathematics - The Four-Color Theorem,
AI Literature - The Artificial Intelligence Report,
Expert Systems - EURISKO/AM Overview
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 6 Mar 1984 1612-EST
From: CASHMAN at DEC-MARLBORO
Subject: For AI digest: request for program synthesis bibliography
Does anyone have (a pointer to) a bibliography (preferably annotated) of
papers on program synthesis? Is there a good survey paper or article on
the field (other than what's in the Handbook of AI)?
-- Paul Cashman (Cashman@DEC-Marlboro)
[Richard Waldinger (@SRI-AI) suggests a survey and bibliography on
program synthesis in "Synthesis: Dreams -> Programs" which appeared in
the IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering about 1975. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 1984 0643 PST
From: Richard B. August <AUGUST@JPL-VLSI>
Reply-to: AUGUST@JPL-VLSI
Subject: SEARCH FOR PATTERN/CHARACTER RECOGNITION ALGORITHMS,
ARTICLES ETC.
BEGINNING RESEARCH ON CHARACTER RECOGINITION TECHNIQUES.
OBJECTIVE: DEVELOP CHARACTER INPUT DEVICE (WAND) TO ACCEPT THE MAJORITY
OF FONTS FOUND IN PUBLICATIONS.
POINTER TO PUBLICATIONS ARE HELPFUL.
THANKS
REGARDS RAUGUST
[The international joint conferences on pattern recognition would
be a good place to start. Proceedings are available from the IEEE
Computer Society. A 1962 book I've found interesting is "Optical
Character Recognition" by Fischer, et al. Good luck (you'll need
it). -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 84 14:14:35 PST
From: William Jerkovsky <wj@AEROSPACE>
Subject: MYCIN
I would like to execute a simple problem on MYCIN. I have recently gotten
interested in expert systems; since my wife is bacteriologist I think both
of us would enjoy the interaction with the program via our home computer
(terminal).
Can anyone point out the way to get a (free) copy of MYCIN (even if it is
only a simple early version)? Is there a way I can execute a version
interactively from home without actually getting a copy? Does anybody know
of an on-line tutorial on MYCIN? Is there a simple version of MYCIN (or a
reasonable facsimile) which runs on an
Apple //e or on an IBM PC?
I'll appreciate whatever help I can get.
Thanks
Bill Jerkovsky
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 15:48:55-PST
From: Sam Hahn <SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: IQLISP Source
The source for IQLisp is:
Integral Quality, Inc.
P.O. Box 31970
Seattle, WA 98103
(206) 527-2918
Claims to be similar to UCI Lisp, except function def's are stored in cells
within identifiers, not on property lists; arg. handling is specified in the
syntax of the expression defining the function, I/O functions take an explicit
file argument, which defaults to the console; doesn't support FUNARGS.
IQLisp does provide:
32kb character strings,
77000 digit long integers,
IEEE format floating point,
point and line graphics,
ifc to assembly coded functions,
31 dimensions to arrays,
Costs $175 for program and manual, PCDOS only.
I've taken the liberty to include some of their sales info for those who may
not have heard of IQLisp. It's fairly new, and they claim to soon make a
generic MSDOS version (though probably without graphics support).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 84 09:16 EST
From: MJackson.Wbst@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Re: The Four-Color Theorem
By "planar map" in my previous message I meant to connote a structure on
a two-dimensional surface, not strictly a flat plane. In fact, the
plane and the sphere are topologically equivalent (the plane is a sphere
if infinite radius) so four colors suffice for both; for the torus,
which has a different "connectivity," it has long been known that seven
colors are both necessary and sufficient.
I'm not a mathematician but at one time (right after reading an article)
I felt as if I understood the proof. As I recall it is based on the
fact that if there are any maps that require five colors there is a
minimal (smallest) map that requires five colors. It is possible to
construct sets of graphs (representing map regions) of varying
complexity for which any map must include at least one member of the
set. It is also possible to determine for some particular graph whether
it can be "reduced" (so that it represents fewer regions) without
altering its four-colorability or its interactions with its neighbors.
Clearly the minimal five-color map cannot contain a "reducible" graph
(else it is not minimal).
Evidently, if one can construct a set of graphs of which ANY map must
contain at least one member, and show that EVERY member of that set is
reducible, then the minimal five-color map cannot exist; hence no
five-color map can exist. Now if it were possible to construct such a
set with, say, 20 graphs one could show explicitly BY HAND that each
member was reducible. No one would call such a proof "ugly" or "not a
true proof;" it might not be considered particularly elegant but it
wouldn't be outside the mainstream of mathematical reasoning either (and
it doubtless would have been found years ago). The problem with the
actual case is that the smallest candidate set of graphs had thousands
of members. What was done in practice was to devise algorithms which
would succeed at reducing "most" (>95%?) reducible graphs. So most of
the graph reduction was done by computer, the remaining cases being done
by hand. (I understand that to referee the paper another program had to
be written to check the performance of the first.)
I would like to hear any criticism of the Illinois proof that is more
specific than "ugly" or "many feel that this does not constitute a true
proof." A pointer to the mathematical literature will suffice; my
impression is that the four-color theorem is widely accepted as having
been proved. (We may be getting a bit far afield of AI here; I would
say that my impression of the techniques used in the automatic reduction
program was that they were not "artificial intelligence," but since they
were manifestly "artificial" I hesitate to do so for fear of rekindling
the controversy over what constitutes "intelligence!")
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 10:58:51-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: The Artificial Intelligence Report
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
I have received a sample copy of the Artificial Intelligence Report, vol. 1
number 1, January 1984. It is being published locally and will have ten
issues per year. It is more of a newsletter type publication with the
latest information on research (academic and industrial) and applied AI
within industry. The cost is $250 per year. The first issue has 15 pages.
I will place on the new journal shelf. [...]
[I may try to start charging for AIList ... -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 84 16:50 PST
From: "Allen Robert"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
Subject: EURISKO/AM review (415) 422-4881
In response to Rusty's request regarding EURISKO (V2,#22), the following
is a brief excerpt from my thesis qualifying/background paper on knowledge
acquisition in expert systems. I tried to summarize the system and its
history; a lot of detail has been removed. I hope the description is
accurate; please feel free to criticize.
EURISKO is a part of Doug Lenat's investigation of machine learning,
drawing its roots from his Stanford Ph.D. thesis research with
AM [Lenat 76]. AM was somewhat unusual among learning systems in that it
does not have an associated performance element (expert system). Rather,
AM is supplied with an initial knowledge base representing simple set
theoretic concepts, and heuristics which it employs to explore those
concepts. The goal is for AM to search for new concepts, and
relationships between concepts, guided by those heuristics.
AM represents concepts (eg. prime and natural numbers) in frames. A
frame's slots describe attributes of the concept, such as its name,
definition, boundary values, and examples. A definition slot includes one
or more LISP predicate functions; AM applies definition functions to
objects (values, etc.) to determine whether they are examples of the
concept. For instance, the Prime Number frame has several definition
predicates which can each determine (for different circumstances) if an
integer is prime or not; those predicates (and boundary values)
effectively define the concept "prime number" within AM.
Any slot may have zero or more heuristics, expressed as production rules,
expressing strategies for exploring concepts. Heuristics primarily obtain
or verify slot values; the may also postulate new concepts/frames, or
specify tasks to be performed. AM maintains an "agenda of tasks"
expressed as goals, in the form "Find or verify the value of slot S, from
concept/frame C." The basic control structure selects a task from the
agenda, and checks the slot (S) for heuristics. If one or more are found,
a rule interpreter is invoked to execute them. If slot S has no
heuristics, it may point (possibly through several levels) to another
frame whose corresponding (same name) slot does, in which case those
heuristics are executed; thus, heuristics from higher-level concepts may
be employed or inherited in exploring less abstract concepts. This
continues until all the related heuristics are executed; AM then returns
to the agenda for a new goal.
AM is provided with an initial knowledge base of around one hundred
frames/concepts from finite set theory, which include around 250
heuristics. The system is then "set loose" to explore those concepts,
guided by heuristics; AM postulates new concepts and then attempts to
judge their validity and utility. Over a period of time, AM may
conjecture and explore several hundred new concepts; some eventually
become well established and are themselves used as extensions of the
initial knowledge base.
AM never managed to discover concepts that were not already known in
mathematics; however it did discover many well known mathematical
principles (eg. de Morgan's laws, unique factorization), some of which
were originally unknown to Lenat. It was hoped that AM might might also
be applied to the domain of heuristics themselves; i.e. exploring
heuristic concept/frames instead of mathematical concept/frames, but the
system did not make much progress in this area. Lenat explains an
underlying problem : AM's representation of domain knowledge (LISP
functions) is fundamentally similar to the primitives of mathematical
notation, while heuristics lack a similar close relationship. He has
developed new ideas regarding the meaning and representation of
heuristics, which are being explored with the AM's successor,
EURISKO [Lenat 82,83a,83b].
One significant lesson learned from AM, and being applied in EURISKO, is
(roughly) that explicit treatment of heuristics and meta-knowledge (as
well as assertive domain knowledge) is a necessary condition for learning
heuristics (and assertive domain knowledge). The main focus of the
EURISKO project is to investigate representation and reasoning/control
issues related to learning (heuristics, operators, and new domain
objects). Also, where concepts in AM were related to mathematical notions
(like Prime Numbers), flexibility is an important design criteria for
EURISKO, which is being applied to a number of problem domains (see
[Lenat 83b]).
Like AM, EURISKO is a frame based system which represents domain objects
in frames. However, where AM attached heuristics to slots in
concepts/frames, EURISKO represents heuristics themselves as frames. In
general, EURISKO goes much further than AM in explicitly defining and
representing knowledge at many levels; everything possible is explicitly
represented as an object. For example, every kind of slot (eg. ISA,
Examples) has a frame associated with it, which explicates the meanings
and operations of the slot. This allows the system to reason with each
kind of slot (as well as with the slot value), for example to know whether
a particular type of slot represents guaranteed, probable, or assumed
knowledge.
Part of the approach in EURISKO is to emphasize the importance of the
representation language itself in solving a problem. The RLL frame based
language [Greiner 80] was developed for this purpose. In RLL, almost
every object (notably including heuristics) is represented as an explicit,
discrete frame ("unit" as they are called in RLL). Thus heuristics become
objects which a system can use, manipulate, and reason about just like any
other object. Without going into details, RLL has a number of features
which are oriented toward explicit representation and manipulation of
domain knowledge, both factual and heuristic. It has a more sophisticated
"multiple-agendae" control structure which is itself represented as frames
in the knowledge base. Operations with and on frames include a lot of
bookkeeping by RLL, intended to retain explicit knowledge which was lost
in AM. Because heuristics are explicitly represented objects (frames), it
is possible for built-in or domain-specific knowledge to be applied to the
learning of heuristics (i.e. using built-in heuristics which specify how
to postulate and explore new heuristics).
EURISKO has been notably successful as both a learning and a performance
(expert) system in a number of domains. [Lenat 83b] describes the use of
EURISKO in playing the Traveller Trillion Credit Squadron (TCS) game,
where it has won two national tournaments, and discovered some interesting
playing strategies. In [Lenat 82a], EURISKO's application to "high-rise"
VLSI circuit design is described. EURISKO constructed a number of useful
devices and circuits, and has discovered some important heuristics for
circuit design.
----------
Greiner, R., Lenat, D. 1980. "A Representation Language Language." Proc.
AAAI 1, pp. 165-169.
Lenat, D.B. 1976. "AM: An artificial intelligence approach to discovery
in mathematics as heuristic search." Ph.D. Diss. Memo AIM-286,
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.
(Revised version in R. Davis, D. Lenat (Eds.), Knowledge Based Systems
in Artificial Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1982.)
Lenat, D.B. 1982. "The nature of heuristics." AI Journal 19:2.
Lenat, D.B. 1983a. "The nature of heuristics II." AI Journal 20:2.
Lenat, D.B. 1983b. "EURISKO: A program that learns new heuristics and
domain concepts, The nature of heuristics III." AI Journal 21:1-2.
----------
Rob Allen <ALLEN ROBERT@LLL-MFE.ARPA>
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂07-Mar-84 1823 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 22, March 8, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 18:20:33 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 7 Mar 84 18:15:21-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 7 Mar 84 18:04:36-PST
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 18:05:04-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 22, March 8, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
CSLI Newsletter
March 8, 1984 * * * Number 22
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, March 8, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Discussion of Bratman's paper, "Taking Plans
Conference Room Seriously," led by Stan Rosenschein.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Learning Theory and Natural Language,"
Conference Room by Daniel N. Osherson, Michael Stob,
and Scott Weinstein.
Discussion led by Scott Weinstein.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall Discussion led by Richard Larsen.
Room G-19 Topic to be announced.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "The Syntax of Conceptual Structure,"
Room G-19 by Ray Jackendoff, Brandeis University
(this year at Center for Advanced Study
for the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford)
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Speaker and topic to be announced.
Conference Room
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Automatic Reasoning: Real Uses and
Conference Room Potential Uses," by L. Wos.
Discussion led by Mark Stickel.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall "Questions and Anaphora,"
Room G-19 by Elisabet Engdahl.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Intimations of a Mental Mechanism,"
Room G-19 by Roger Sheppard, Stanford Psychology Dept.
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday noon at Ventura Hall on the Stan-
ford University campus as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of
TINLunch papers are at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
NEXT WEEK: "Automated Reasoning: Real Uses and Potential Uses"
by L. Wos
Discussion led by Mark Stickel
March 8 Scott Weinstein
March 15 Mark Stickel
March 22
March 29 Brian Smith
-----------
MCCARTHY LECTURES ON THE FORMALIZATION OF COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE
John McCarthy's remaining lecture in his series on the formaliza-
tion of commonsense knowledge will be held at 3:00 p.m. on Friday,
March 9, in the Ventura Hall Conference Room.
Friday, March 9 "Philosophical Conclusions Arising from AI Work"
Approximate theories, second-order definitions of concepts,
ascription of mental qualities to machines.
-----------
VISIT AND TALK BY DAVID MACQUEEN OF BELL LABS
Dave MacQueen of Bell Laboratories will be visiting CSLI from
Monday through Thursday, March 12-15. He will be giving a talk at the
Semantics of Programming Languages Seminar on Tuesday, March 13, to
which all are invited (details and abstract follow). Anyone who would
like to talk to MacQueen while he is here should contact Fernando
Pereira at SRI (Pereira@SRI-AI or 859-5494) or Brian Smith at Xerox
PARC (BrianSmith@PARC or 494-4336).
"Quantification and Dependency in Types"
by David MacQueen
Time: 9:30-11:15 a.m., Tuesday, March 13
Place: Seminar Room, Ventura Hall
ABSTRACT: I will discuss notions of type quantification (universal and
existential) and dependent types and their application to the design
of a module facility for the programming language ML.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
VISIT BY SCOTT WEINSTEIN, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Scott Weinstein from the Department of Philosophy, University of
Pennsylvania, is visiting CSLI for about 3 weeks and will be working
with Barbara Grosz.
-----------
VISIT BY LAURI CARLSON
Lauri Carlson of MIT will be visiting CSLI sometime between March
25 and April 25. If you are interested in meeting with him, please
let Elsie Chappell (Chappell@SRI-AI) know.
-----------
CSLI WORKSHOP ON PITCH ACCENT AND RELATED PHONETIC ISSUES
CSLI is sponsoring a workshop on pitch accent and related
phonetic issues to be held March 13-15. Visiting from Bell
Laboratories in this connection will be Gosta Bruce (also Lund
University, Sweden), Osamu Fujimura, Mark Liberman, and Janet
Pierrehumbert. For more information, please contact Leslie Batema
(497-9007) or Meg Withgott (494-4324).
-----------
SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
On Wednesday, March 7, Warren Goldfarb of Harvard University, now
visiting U.C. Berkeley, spoke on "The Godel Class with Identity Is Un-
decidable."
NEXT WEEK: Wednesday, March 14, 4:15-5:30 p.m.
Stanford Mathematics Dept., Room 383-N
"From Completeness Results to Incompleteness Results in Modal Logic"
by Johan van Benthem
University of Groningen (now at CSLI)
ABSTRACT: For a long time, the main activity in intensional logic
consisted in proving completeness theorems, matching some logic with
some modal class. In the early 1970s, however, various incompleteness
phenomena were discovered--e.g., such a match is not always possible.
By now, we know that the latter phenomenon is the rule rather than the
exception, and the issue of the `semantic power' of the possible
worlds approach has become a rather complex and intriguing one. In
this talk, I will give a survey of the main trends in the above area,
concluding with some open questions and partial answers. In par-
ticular, a new type of incompleteness theorem will be presented,
showing that a certain tense logic defies semantic modelling even when
both modal class and truth definition are allowed to vary.
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
Tuesdays, 3:15 p.m., Ventura Hall Seminar Room
On Tuesday, March 6, Scott Soames of Princeton University gave
his second lecture on presuppositions and discourse interpretation,
entitled "Presupposition, Accommodation, and Context Change II."
On Tuesday, March 13, Scott Weinstein, visiting from the
University of Pennsylvania, will be giving us a talk on his recent
work in the area.
-----------
TALKWARE SEMINAR (CS 377)
Mondays, 2:15-4:00 p.m., Building 200, Room 205
On Monday, March 5, Ole Lehrman Madsen, University of Aarhus
(Denmark), spoke on "Specification and Implementation Languages:
Research in Denmark and Norway."
NEXT WEEK: "Programming by Example"
3/12 Daniel Halbert (Berkeley and Xerox OSD)
and David C. Smith (Visicorp)
ABSTRACT: Most computer-based applications systems cannot be
programmed by their users. We do not expect the average user of a
software system to be able to program it, because conventional
programming is not an easy task. But ordinary users can program their
systems, using a technique called "programming by example." At its
simplest, programming by example is just recording a sequence of
commands to a system, so that the sequence can be played back at a
later time, to do the same or a similar task. The sequence forms a
program. The user writes the program--in the user interface--of the
system, which he already has to know in order to operate the system.
Programming by example is "Do what I did." A simple program written
by example may not be very interesting. I will show methods for
letting the user generalize the program so it will operate on data
other than that used in the example, and for adding control structure
to the program. In this talk, I will describe programming by example,
discuss current and past research in this area, and also describe a
particular implementation of programming by example in a prototype of
the Xerox 8010 Star office information system.
-----------
LIBRARY FASTBOOK SERVICE
FASTBOOK is a book and photocopy delivery service offered by the
University Libraries that is designed to help faculty, graduate stu-
dents, and staff (currently, ONLY those people) with their research
needs. Simply phone your request for loan or photocopy of library ma-
terials to 497-FAST at any time. The library will deliver loaned mate-
rials from the holding library to another campus library of your
choice, send photocopies to your office or home, or notify you if the
material is unavailable. There is a charge of 10 cents per page for
photocopy. You do not have to know the call number of location of the
requested material.
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
THE PHILOSOPHY OF SPACE EXPLORATION
An unusual course is being offered in Philosophy next quarter, by
a Fellow at the Humanities Center, that won't make it into the Time
Schedule. Although it isn't up CSLI's official alley, I suspect the
issues to be discussed may interest some CSLI-ers.
The Philosophy of Space Exploration (PHIL 273)
Spring Quarter, Wednesday, 4:15 to 6:05
Room: Physics 102
Excerpt from Course Description:
A forum for the discussion of several philosophical issues pertaining
to space exploration. The first issue is whether that exploration is
justified. Appeals to man's nature or destiny are insufficient, and
pointing to the benefits of the space program still may not justify
the most exciting and adventurous aspects of space exploration. On the
other hand, those who think that expenditures for space are justified
in the face of many serious human problems and those who suspect that
space is just one more technological fix make several assumptions
about the nature of science that bear investigation. The issue then
becomes largely a problem in applied philosophy of science . . .
For further information, please contact Gonalo Munevar, Stanford
Humanities Center, ex 74265 or for messages 73052.
- John Perry
-----------
ISSUES IN LANGUAGE, PERCEPTION, AND COGNITION
Mondays, 12 noon, Room 050, Psychology Bldg., Stanford
On Monday, March 5, Jon Barwise of CSLI spoke on "The Perceptual
Roots of Situation Semantics." The abstract of his talk is given
below.
ABSTRACT:
People learn about the world by gathering information directly by
perception and indirectly through language. They learn about language
through perception of language and the world. Thus it would seem that
anything like a complete semantic theory must concern itself with
meaning in both language and perception. Barwise and Perry have
recently been developing an approach to problems of meaning that
addresses the relationship between perception, language, and meaning.
This theory is known as Situation Semantics. This talk discusses the
perceptual roots of the theory, and how they relate to meaning in
language.
-----------
! Page 6
-----------
STANFORD METRICS CONFERENCE
March 10-12, 1984
SATURDAY, March 10 (CERAS, Room 204)
9:00 - 12:15 Metrical Structure
Chair: Stephen Anderson (UCLA)
Ray Jackendoff (Brandeis) "Comparison of Rhythmic Structures
in Language and Music"
Carlos Piera (U. Madrid) "Possible Meters and Impossible Words"
Alan Prince (U. Mass., Amherst) "Towards a Theory of MetricalStructures"
2:00 - 5:00 Rhythm and Meter
Chair: Donca Steriade (Berkeley)
Mark Liberman (Bell Labs) "Speech Rhythms"
Richard Oehrle (U. Arizona) "Temporally Rigid Rhythmic Rendition
of Linguistic Texts"
Marina Tarlinskaja (Seattle) "Rhythmic-Grammatical Aspects of
Metrical Idiosyncrasy"
SUNDAY, March 11 (CERAS, Room 204)
9:30 - 12:30 Theory of English Meter
Chair: Terry Brogan (U. Hawaii)
Beth Bjorklund (Columbia) "On the Alleged Identity of
Iambic and Trochaic Verse"
Derek Attridge (U. Southampton) "The Rhythms of English Poetry:
Responses and Revisions"
Bruce Hayes (UCLA) "The Prosodic Hierarchy in Meter"
2:00 - 5:00 Issues in English Metrics
Chair: Morris Halle (MIT)
Edward Weismiller (Washington, D.C.) "Triple Threats to Duple Rhythm"
Paul Kiparsky (MIT and Xerox) "Sprung Rhythm"
Elizabeth Traugott (Stanford) "The Meter of Auden's `Streams'"
Gilbert Youmans (U. Kansas) "Milton's Meter"
(Metrics Conference, cont'd next page)
! Page 7
(Metrics Conference, cont'd from p. 6)
MONDAY, March 12 (Ventura Hall, Room 17)
9:00 - 12:00 Concluding Session
This will be a second round of discussion. For each paper, we will
have a 3-minute summary by the author followed by 10-15 minutes of
general discussion.
*** The funding for this conference is part of a gift from the System
Development Foundation through the Center for the Study of Language
and Information, Stanford University.
-----------
CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
"Themes from Kaplan"
On March 19-21, CSLI and the Philosophy Department at Stanford
are sponsoring a conference on "Themes from David Kaplan." The tenta-
tive but at this point fairly definite schedule is given below.
The conference is a combination of workshops and public lectures.
The workshop portion will be held at the Palo Alto Hyatt. We hope we
can retain the character of a serious workshop, but those interested
in Kaplan's philosophy and the work of the discussants are very
welcome. Please let Sandy McConnel-Riggs know if you plan to attend
these sessions, so we can plan accordingly (Riggs@SRI-AI or 497-0939).
We have reserved a room at the hotel for a luncheon after the
morning sessions. If you want this lunch at the hotel, contact
McConnel-Riggs before March 10. Payment in advance is required for
these lunches.
On Monday evening and Tuesday afternoon, there will be talks on
campus by Saul Kripke, Hector Neri-Castaneda, and Roderick Chisholm
that we hope will be of interest to fairly large audiences. Please
attend even if you are only vaguely interested in the topics, expect
to have nothing to contribute, and really are just somewhat curious.
And bring your friends and colleagues.
On Tuesday evening, there will be a no-host dinner at the China
First Restaurant. Please tell McConnel-Riggs by March 10 if you want
to attend.
On Wednesday afternoon, David Kaplan will respond to the various
talks. This should be interesting, even to those who have not
attended many of the talks, given Kaplan's wit and capacity for spon-
taneous insights. There will be plenty of room, so feel free to
attend without advance enrollment.
- John Perry, Joseph Almog
(Kaplan Conference, cont'd next page)
! Page 8
(Kaplan Conference, cont'd from p. 7)
SCHEDULE
MONDAY, MARCH 19
9:30 - 11:30 a.m. Howard Wettstein/Talk
Keith Donnellan/Commenting
John Etchemendy/Chair
11:45 - 1:15 Lunch
1:30 - 3:30 p.m. Joseph Almog/Talk
Hans Kamp/Commenting
Dana Scott/Chair
7:00 - 10:00 p.m. Saul Kripke
Introduced by W. V. Quine
at Kresge Auditorium, Stanford
TUESDAY, MARCH 20
9:00 - 10:45 a.m. Robert Adams/Talk
Terrance Parsons/Commenting
Richmond Thomason/Chair
ll:00 - 12:45 Kit Fine/Talk
Christopher Peacocke/Commenting
Karel Lambert/Chair
1:00 - 2:30 Lunch
3:00 - 5:45 p.m. Roderick Chisholm and Hector-Neri Castaneda
Symposium
Julius Moravcsik/Chair
Room G-19, Redwood Hall, Stanford
6:00 Reception at CSLI
7:30 No-Host Dinner
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21
9:00 - 10:45 a.m. Symposium on Context in Linguistic Theory
Stanley Peters, Barbara Grosz, and Geoff Nunnberg
Jon Barwise/Chair
11:00 - 12:45 Nathan Salmon/Talk
Graham Forbes/Commenting
Michael Bratman/Chair
1:00 - 2:30 Lunch
3:00 - 6:00 p.m. David Kaplan
Introduced by Ruth Marcus
Introduced by Patrick Suppes
-----------
! Page 9
-----------
JOINT SEMINAR ON CONCURRENCY
Carnegie-Mellon University
July 9-11, 1984
The National Science Foundation (NSF) of the United States and
the Science and Engineering Council (SERC) of Great Britain have
agreed to support a Joint Seminar on Concurrency. The seminar intends
to discuss the state of the art in concurrent programming languages,
their semantics, and the problems of proving properties of concurrent
programs.
A small number of participants from Britain and the United States
have already been invited, but other interested researchers are
encouraged to attend. Because of the limited NSF and SERC funding, no
financial support is available. However, if you are interested in
participating and can find your own support, please contact as soon as
possible:
Stephen D. Brookes Brookes@CMU-CS-A
Department of Computer Science Home (412) 441-6662
Carnegie-Mellon University Work (412) 578-8820
Schenley Park
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
The other organizers of the meeting are Glynn Winskel (Cambridge
University) and Bill Roscoe (Oxford University), but inquiries should
be directed to Brookes at Carnegie-Mellon.
-----------
AAAI-84 PAPER SUBMISSION DEADLINE IS APRIL 2, 1984
The SIGART Newsletter (No. 87, January 1984) has mistakenly
published two conflicting dates for submission of papers to AAAI-84.
Please note that papers must be received in the AAAI Office in Menlo
Park, CA, on or before April 2, 1984. This is the date that appears
in the AAAI-84 Call for Papers (printed on page 17 of the
above-mentioned Newsletter). The date printed in the "Calendar"
section on page 1 of the SIGART Newsletter is incorrect.
Ron Brachman, Program Chair
Claudia Mazzetti, AAAI Executive Director
-----------
-------
∂07-Mar-84 1824 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA GB
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 18:24:05 PST
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 18:10:02-PST
From: Susan Stucky <Stucky@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: GB
To: CSLI-principals: ;
The GB tutorial by Richard Larson will take place at SRI on Friday,
March 9 in EK242 at 2:30.
-Susan
-------
∂07-Mar-84 2031 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: influencing admissions: now is your chance
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 20:31:37 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 7 Mar 84 20:30:08-PST
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 20:29:01-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: influencing admissions: now is your chance
To: reid@SU-GLACIER.ARPA, Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Yearwood@SU-SCORE.ARPA, MWalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA, yearwood@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>" of Wed 7 Mar 84 15:36:39-PST
THE ONE for me is Eric Schoen.
Ed F.
-------
∂07-Mar-84 2235 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Situation semantics seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 84 22:35:12 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 7 Mar 84 22:23:43-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 7 Mar 84 22:21:15-PST
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 22:22:34-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Situation semantics seminar
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
A number of us have decided to continue the situation semantics
seminar as a small working group next quarter. The discussion
will be more detailed and technical. Let me know if you are
interested in attending. The meetings will probably be Wednesday
afternoons.
-------
∂08-Mar-84 0535 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ARK@SU-AI.ARPA Re: Sigma Xi Membership Drive
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 05:35:28 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 05:34:35-PST
Date: 08 Mar 84 0532 PST
From: Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Sigma Xi Membership Drive
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, PhD@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Several people have sent requests for more information, and I assume that
more of you have ignored my message because you had no idea what Sigma Xi
is. If you are annoyed by my broadcast messages, please accept my
apologies in advance.
Sigma Xi is a scientific research "honor" society. Its purpose is ``to
encourage original investigation in science, pure and applied.'' Annual
membership dues are $20.00 (plus $5.00 initiation fee). In order to join
you must fill out a form (available from me) and get someone who is
already a member to nominate you. I can do the seconding. (If you don't
know who can nominate you, just fill out the form and I'll try to get
someone to nominate you.)
Some benefits derived from membership in Sigma Xi are:
Automatic subscription to American Scientist
Access to small grants (up to $1,000)
Invitation to Chapter Lectures and Conferences
Participation in Regional Activities
Exposure to interdisciplinary aspects of research
Possibility of more active national role in expressing
the ``scientific opinion'' on national issues, and
Cosmetic on your resume'.
Faculty and PhD students with nearly completed thesis are generally
nominated for Full Membership; earlier PhD students are generally
nominated for Associate Membership. (I'm not sending this to BBoard,
since I don't feel masters students in CS are qualified.)
If you have any questions, or you would like a nomination form, please
send me a message. Membership need to be returned to me by March 28 so I
can send them in by March 30. Thank you for your patience and interest.
Arthur
∂08-Mar-84 1220 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Dave MacQueen Visit and Talk
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 12:20:10 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 12:20:05-PST
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 84 12:19 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Dave MacQueen Visit and Talk
To: CSLI-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Reply-to: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Dave MacQueen of Bell Laboratories will be visiting CSLI from Monday
through Thursday March 12 - 15. He will be giving a talk at the regular
Semantics of Programming Languages Seminar (CL1) on Tuesday March 13,
which you are all encouraged to attend (details and abstract follow).
Anyone who would like to talk to Dave while he is here should contact
Fernando Pereira at SRI (Pereira@SRI-AI or 859-5494), or Brian Smith or
Jackie Guibert at PARC (BrianSmith@PARC or 494-4336; Guibert@PARC or
494-4354).
Quantification and Dependency in Types
Time: Tuesday, March 13 9:30 - 11:15
Place: Seminar room Ventura Hall
Abstract:
I will discuss notions of type quantification (universal and
existential) and dependent types and their application to the design of
a module facility for the programming language ML.
∂08-Mar-84 1222 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Dave MacQueen
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 12:21:23 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 12:21:51-PST
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 84 12:21 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Dave MacQueen
To: CSLI-Principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
As you will note from another message, Dave MacQueen of Bell
Laboratories will be visiting CSLI and PARC next week from Monday
through Thursday, March 12 - 15. We would very much like to be able to
bring Dave here in a collaborative arrangement between CSLI and Xerox,
so I hope we can all make him feel especially welcome. Fernando and I
will be taking care of arrangements; anyone who would like to talk to
him should contact Fernando Pereira at SRI (Pereira@SRI-AI or 859-5494),
or Brian Smith or Jackie Guibert at PARC (BrianSmith@PARC or 494-4336;
Guibert@PARC or 494-4354). I think Dave will by and large be at PARC on
Monday, at SRI on Wednesday, and at Stanford on Thursday -- Tuesday
afternoon is still fairly open.
Thanks very much.
Brian
∂08-Mar-84 1516 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley March 13--UCB Cogsci Seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 15:16:05 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 15:16:12-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 14:50:11-PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 14:50:26-PST
Received: from ucbkim.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.22/4.25)
id AA03453; Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:47:00 pst
Received: by ucbkim.ARPA (4.16/4.22)
id AA20111; Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:46:28 pst
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:46:28 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8403082246.AA20111@ucbkim.ARPA>
To: cogsci-friends%ucbkim@Berkeley
Subject: March 13--UCB Cogsci Seminar
←λB←λE←λR←λK←λE←λL←λE←λY ←λC←λO←λG←λN←λI←λT←λI←λV←λE ←λS←λC←λI←λE←λN←λC←λE ←λP←λR←λO←λG←λR←λA←λM
←λS←λp←λr←λi←λn←λg ←λ1←λ9←λ8←λ4
←λI←λD←λS ←λ2←λ3←λ7←λB - ←λC←λo←λg←λn←λi←λt←λi←λv←λe ←λS←λc←λi←λe←λn←λc←λe ←λS←λe←λm←λi←λn←λa←λr
Time: Tuesday, March 13, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
***** Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker *****
*** in the IHL Library (Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2 ***
INTENTION AND INDIRECTNESS:
PROBLEMS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONVERSATION
Susan Ervin-Tripp
Department of Psychology, U.C. Berkeley
The retrospective recall of talk has led to the development
of speech act terminology, and to theories concerning inten-
tional deviousness in the expression of purpose. The com-
plexity of indirect expression of intention, in contrast to
the direct maps in the acquisition of referential vocabu-
lary, suggests grave difficulties for acquisition. Experi-
mental studies of comprehension of indirection and sarcasm
at various ages reveal that the computing of intention plays
a different role in successful exchanges than has been
believed. The indirectness found in young children's natur-
alistic texts, the constructing of control acts through
several turns, and the major importance of activity struc-
ture and key in the production and interpretation of verbal
exchanges alter what is acceptable in applying speech act
theory to natural interaction.
**********
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
Date Speaker Affiliation
March 10 George Bealer Reed College, Philosophy
March 27 Nina Hyams UCLA, Linguistics
April 3 Barbara Tversky Stanford, Psychology
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy
∂08-Mar-84 1548 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction Seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 15:48:47 PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 15:47:09-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Deduction Seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
First, a brief review of what happened at the first meeting of the seminar.
About 15-20 people showed up; after a short spiel about why I wanted this
seminar to exist, we introduced ourselves and our research interests, then went
on to discuss what we wanted in the way of talks at the seminar.
Interest was concentrated on the technology of automatic deduction, i.e.
programs that do the stuff. I therefore propose to invite a series of talks
about particular systems, preferably with some amount of reference to the
theories on which they are based and the application demands that went into
their design; but there does not seem to be much market for talks exclusively
about theories or applications. (Still, watch this space.) There was also
some demand for one or more "history lessons", reviewing the development of
parts of automatic deduction technology. I will try to arrange this.
The next seminar will be at 1:30 on March 14th, in Jacks 301; speaker and
subject to be announced. I'm trying to decide a day and time for next
quarter's meetings: interested parties please send me your conflicts and
preferences. I prefer Thursday afternoon.
- Richard
-------
∂08-Mar-84 1556 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction Seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 15:56:18 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 15:52:24-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 15:47:09-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Deduction Seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
First, a brief review of what happened at the first meeting of the seminar.
About 15-20 people showed up; after a short spiel about why I wanted this
seminar to exist, we introduced ourselves and our research interests, then went
on to discuss what we wanted in the way of talks at the seminar.
Interest was concentrated on the technology of automatic deduction, i.e.
programs that do the stuff. I therefore propose to invite a series of talks
about particular systems, preferably with some amount of reference to the
theories on which they are based and the application demands that went into
their design; but there does not seem to be much market for talks exclusively
about theories or applications. (Still, watch this space.) There was also
some demand for one or more "history lessons", reviewing the development of
parts of automatic deduction technology. I will try to arrange this.
The next seminar will be at 1:30 on March 14th, in Jacks 301; speaker and
subject to be announced. I'm trying to decide a day and time for next
quarter's meetings: interested parties please send me your conflicts and
preferences. I prefer Thursday afternoon.
- Richard
-------
∂08-Mar-84 1630 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA CHANGES: David McAllester 3:30 p.m. Mon. Mar. 12 at PARC
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 16:26:04 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 16:25:52-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 15:45:28-PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 15:43:47-PST
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:57 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: CHANGES: David McAllester 3:30 p.m. Mon. Mar. 12 at PARC
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
David McAllester's talk has been rescheduled in both time and space (in
part to avoid conflict with a visit to PARC by the King of Sweden!); I
hope this makes it easier for people to attend. It will now take place
at 3:30 on Monday in room 3312, instead of at 11:00.
Title: "MATHEMATICAL ONTOLOGY"
Speaker: David McAllester (M.I.T.)
When: Monday March 12th at 3:30 p.m.
Where: Xerox PARC Executive Conference Room, Room 3312
(non-Xerox people should come a few moments early,
so that they can be escorted to the conference room)
Abstract:
AI techniques are often divided into "weak" and "strong" methods. A
strong method exploits the structure of some domain while a weak method
is more general and therefore has less structure to exploit. But it may
be possible to exploit UNIVERSAL structure and thus to find STRONG
GENERAL METHODS. Mathematical ontology is the study of the general
nature of mathematical objects. The goal is to uncover UNIVERSAL
RELATIONS, UNIVERSAL FUNCTIONS, and UNIVERSAL LEMMAS which can be
exploited in general inference techniques. For example there seems to
be a natural notion of isomorphism and a standard notion of essential
property which are universal (they can be meaningfully applied to ALL
mathematical objects). These universal relations are completely ignored
in current first order formulations of mathematics. A particular theory
of mathematical ontology will be discussed in which many natural
universal relations can be precisely defined. Some particular strong
general inference techniques will also be discussed.
∂08-Mar-84 1705 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA March 13--UCB Cogsci Seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 17:05:26 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 17:05:42-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 16:33:36-PST
Return-Path: <@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley>
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 15:16:12-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 14:50:11-PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 14:50:26-PST
Received: from ucbkim.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.22/4.25)
id AA03453; Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:47:00 pst
Received: by ucbkim.ARPA (4.16/4.22)
id AA20111; Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:46:28 pst
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:46:28 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8403082246.AA20111@ucbkim.ARPA>
To: cogsci-friends%ucbkim@Berkeley
Subject: March 13--UCB Cogsci Seminar
ReSent-date: Thu 8 Mar 84 16:28:22-PST
ReSent-from: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
ReSent-to: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
←λB←λE←λR←λK←λE←λL←λE←λY ←λC←λO←λG←λN←λI←λT←λI←λV←λE ←λS←λC←λI←λE←λN←λC←λE ←λP←λR←λO←λG←λR←λA←λM
←λS←λp←λr←λi←λn←λg ←λ1←λ9←λ8←λ4
←λI←λD←λS ←λ2←λ3←λ7←λB - ←λC←λo←λg←λn←λi←λt←λi←λv←λe ←λS←λc←λi←λe←λn←λc←λe ←λS←λe←λm←λi←λn←λa←λr
Time: Tuesday, March 13, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
***** Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker *****
*** in the IHL Library (Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2 ***
INTENTION AND INDIRECTNESS:
PROBLEMS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONVERSATION
Susan Ervin-Tripp
Department of Psychology, U.C. Berkeley
The retrospective recall of talk has led to the development
of speech act terminology, and to theories concerning inten-
tional deviousness in the expression of purpose. The com-
plexity of indirect expression of intention, in contrast to
the direct maps in the acquisition of referential vocabu-
lary, suggests grave difficulties for acquisition. Experi-
mental studies of comprehension of indirection and sarcasm
at various ages reveal that the computing of intention plays
a different role in successful exchanges than has been
believed. The indirectness found in young children's natur-
alistic texts, the constructing of control acts through
several turns, and the major importance of activity struc-
ture and key in the production and interpretation of verbal
exchanges alter what is acceptable in applying speech act
theory to natural interaction.
**********
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
Date Speaker Affiliation
March 10 George Bealer Reed College, Philosophy
March 27 Nina Hyams UCLA, Linguistics
April 3 Barbara Tversky Stanford, Psychology
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy
∂08-Mar-84 1753 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Building Meeting
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 17:53:50 PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 17:54:42-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Building Meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We have nearly completed the design phase of the building, and have
a new model and drawings that are more detailed than you saw at
the last meeting. Tuesday we go to the UCLBD for design approval.
We'd like to invite you to a meeting at 1:30 Monday in the VEntura
Conference room to see the results of this phase and give us your
reactions. I hope you can come then, because we'd like your reactions
before the UCLBD meeting. However, I should be able to keep the model
and drawings for a while for anyone who wants to drop by my office
later in the week to see them.
B.
-------
∂08-Mar-84 1755 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: influencing admissions: now is your chance
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 17:54:55 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 17:53:53-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 17:50:26-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: influencing admissions: now is your chance
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: reid@SU-GLACIER.ARPA, Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Yearwood@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
MWalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA, yearwood@SU-SCORE.ARPA, mwalker@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>" of Thu 8 Mar 84 09:40:36-PST
I hear my whiteball was lost - XL Qian.
Gio
-------
∂08-Mar-84 1929 @SRI-AI.ARPA:EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA New SRI Phone Book
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 19:29:41 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 19:26:45-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 19:15:49-PST
From: EMAIL Survey <EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA>
Subject: New SRI Phone Book
To: phone-book-request@SRI-KL.ARPA
We need your help to complete the latest issue of the
SRI Phone Directory. This issue of the Phone Directory will
include, for the first time, an Electronic Mail (EMAIL) address
for those SRI employees utilizing this computer communications
resource.
The response we need, sent either by EMAIL or by
inter-office mail, is your preferred EMAIL address. Please send
us your username and machine name for the machine you use to
read mail most frequently. Also, please include your SRI I.D.
number for internal use. Your SRI I.D. number will not be
included in the SRI Phone Directory. Please REPLY via email to
EMAIL@SRI-KL, or by inter-office mail to "EMAIL" at location
PN314.
EXAMPLE:
>
> My username is SMH, the machine I use most frequently
> for reading mail is SRI-KL, and my I.D. number is 31416.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott M. Hinnrichs, x6199
Please respond as soon as possible, and by Thursday,
March 15th. To include your EMAIL address in this issue of the
phone directory you must act promptly.
For those of you unfamiliar with the available EMAIL
resources we invite you to call Computer Consulting (X4000)
about the added communications flexibility EMAIL provides.
This message is being sent via EMAIL and inter-office
mail. Please reply via the appropriate medium.
Thank you for your help.
Scott M. Hinnrichs
EMAIL address: smh@sri-kl
Office: PN333
-------
∂08-Mar-84 1929 @SRI-AI.ARPA:EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA New SRI Phone Book
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 19:29:41 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 19:26:45-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 19:15:49-PST
From: EMAIL Survey <EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA>
Subject: New SRI Phone Book
To: phone-book-request@SRI-KL.ARPA
We need your help to complete the latest issue of the
SRI Phone Directory. This issue of the Phone Directory will
include, for the first time, an Electronic Mail (EMAIL) λaddress
for those SRI employees utilizing this computer communications
resource.
The response we need, sent either by EMAIL or by
inter-office mail, is your preferred EMAIL address. Please send
us your username and machine name for the machine you use to
read mail most frequently. Also, please include your SRI I.D.
number for internal use. Your SRI I.D. number will not be
included in the SRI Phone Directory. Please REPLY via email to
EMAIL@SRI-KL, or by inter-office mail to "EMAIL" at location
PN314.
EXAMPLE:
>
> My username is SMH, the machine I use most frequently
> for reading mail is SRI-KL, and my I.D. number is 31416.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott M. Hinnrichs, x6199
Please respond as soon as possible, and by Thursday,
March 15th. To include your EMAIL address in this issue of the
phone directory you must act promptly.
For those of you unfamiliar with the available EMAIL
resources we invite you to call Computer Consulting (X4000)
about the added communications flexibility EMAIL provides.
This message is being sent via EMAIL and inter-office
mail. Please reply via the appropriate medium.
Thank you for your help.
Scott M. Hinnrichs
EMAIL address: smh@sri-kl
Office: PN333
-------
∂08-Mar-84 1943 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA New SRI Phone Book
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 19:43:19 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 19:31:36-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 19:28:31-PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 19:26:45-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 19:15:49-PST
From: EMAIL Survey <EMAIL@SRI-KL.ARPA>
Subject: New SRI Phone Book
To: phone-book-request@SRI-KL.ARPA
We need your help to complete the latest issue of the
SRI Phone Directory. This issue of the Phone Directory will
include, for the first time, an Electronic Mail (EMAIL) address
for those SRI employees utilizing this computer communications
resource.
The response we need, sent either by EMAIL or by
inter-office mail, is your preferred EMAIL address. Please send
us your username and machine name for the machine you use to
read mail most frequently. Also, please include your SRI I.D.
number for internal use. Your SRI I.D. number will not be
included in the SRI Phone Directory. Please REPLY via email to
EMAIL@SRI-KL, or by inter-office mail to "EMAIL" at location
PN314.
EXAMPLE:
>
> My username is SMH, the machine I use most frequently
> for reading mail is SRI-KL, and my I.D. number is 31416.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott M. Hinnrichs, x6199
Please respond as soon as possible, and by Thursday,
March 15th. To include your EMAIL address in this issue of the
phone directory you must act promptly.
For those of you unfamiliar with the available EMAIL
resources we invite you to call Computer Consulting (X4000)
about the added communications flexibility EMAIL provides.
This message is being sent via EMAIL and inter-office
mail. Please reply via the appropriate medium.
Thank you for your help.
Scott M. Hinnrichs
EMAIL address: smh@sri-kl
Office: PN333
-------
∂08-Mar-84 2102 REID@SU-SCORE.ARPA admissions status: whiteballs
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 21:02:11 PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 21:00:27-PST
From: Brian Reid <Reid@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: admissions status: whiteballs
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Today we placed into Round II 9 applicants who otherwise would not have made
the cut. Several of the whiteball applicants had ranked high enough that they
would not have needed the whiteball. Gio, calm down: your Ms. Qian made it
in just fine.
In Round II every member of the admissions committee will read every folder.
Unless the admissions committee hears from you in writing, in the form of
a letter that can be made a permanent part of the application folder, I am
proposing that no further whiteballing be done, i.e. that these
faculty special-request applicants be processed in exactly the same way
as other applicants who have made it into Round II.
We intend to make our final decisions by the Ides of March.
Brian
-------
∂08-Mar-84 2301 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: admissions status: whiteballs
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 23:01:11 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 23:00:15-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 22:59:26-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: admissions status: whiteballs
To: Reid@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brian Reid <Reid@SU-SCORE.ARPA>" of Thu 8 Mar 84 21:02:24-PST
I agree with Brian that we can and should trust the admission committee to
select the best for all of us out of the very good. Gio.
-------
∂08-Mar-84 2353 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 84 23:51:58 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 23:51:25-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 8 Mar 84 23:41:25-PST
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 23:39:45-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
WHO: Phil Cohen, SRI International
WHAT: Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
WHERE: room 100, Psychology dept., Stanford
WHEN: Monday March 12, 12:00 noon
What Good are Illocutionary Acts?
Many theories of communication require a hearer to determine what illocu-
tionary act(s) (e.g., requests, commands, warnings) the speaker performed
in making each utterance. This talk presents joint work (with Hector
Levesque) in progress that aims to call this presumption into question.
Illocutionary acts (IAs) will be shown to be definable as beliefs about
the conversants' shared knowledge of the speaker's goals and the causal
consequences of achieving those goals. For example, the "request"
pattern of beliefs should characterize circumstances in which one might
want to say a (perhaps indirect) request was performed. A hearer need
not actually characterize the consequences of each utterance in terms of
the IA patterns, but may simply infer and respond to the speaker's intentions.
However, the hearer could retrospectively summarize a complex of utterances
as satisfying an IA pattern. This move may alleviate a number of technical
obstacles in applying speech act theory to extended discourse.
Next speakers:
Jerry Fodor, MIT Psychology and Philosophy, April 4
Len Talmy, UCB German Dept., April 12
-------
∂09-Mar-84 0151 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 84 01:51:44 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 9 Mar 84 01:44:53-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 9 Mar 84 01:42:37-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 9 Mar 84 01:44:03-PST
Date: 09 Mar 84 0134 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
SPEAKER: Johan van Benthem, University of Groningen
TITLE: "From Completeness Results to Incompleteness
Results in Modal Logic"
TIME: Wednesday, Mar. 14, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
Abstract:
For a long time the main activity in intensional logic
consisted in proving completeness theorems, matching some
logic with some modal class. In the early seventies,
however, various incompleteness phenomena were discovered -
e.g. such a match is not always possible. By now, we know that
the latter phenomenon is the rule rather than the exception,
and the issue of the `semantic power' of the possible worlds
approach has become a rather complex and intriguing one.
In this talk I will give a survey of the main trends in the
above area, concluding with some open questions and partial
answers. In particular, a new type of incompleteness theorem
will be presented, showing that a certain tense logic defies
semantic modelling even when both modal class and truth
definition are allowed to vary.
∂09-Mar-84 1336 ICHIKI@SRI-AI.ARPA Richard Larson talk late
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 84 13:36:17 PST
Date: 9 Mar 1984 1336-PST
From: Ichiki at SRI-AI
Subject: Richard Larson talk late
To: nlr.people:
cc: CSLI-principals:
The talk by Richard Larson this afternoon in EK242 will be at least 15 minutes
late; apologies in advance. Susan Stucky
-------
∂09-Mar-84 2228 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #28
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 84 22:28:19 PST
Date: Fri 9 Mar 1984 21:42-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #28
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 10 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 28
Today's Topics:
Games - SMAuG Player Simulation,
Mathematics - The Four-Color Theorem,
AI Tools - Interlisp Availability,
Review - Playboy AI Article,
Expert Systems - Computer Graphics & Hardware/Software Debugging,
Expert Systems - Production Tools,
Review - Laws of Form
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 84 17:17:53 EST
From: GOLD@RU-BLUE.ARPA
Subject: a request for suggestions....
Some of you may be aware of the project known as SMAuG (Simultaneous
Multiple AdventUrer Game) that is ongoing at Rutgers University. It is
an applied research project designed to examine the problems of distrib-
uting the work of a complex piece of software accross local intelligent
devices and a remote timesharing computer. The software is a multiple
player adventure game.
Within the game a player may interact with other players, or with
software controlled players referred to as Non Player Characters (NPC's).
The NPC's are the area of the project which I am personally involved
with and for which I write to this bboard. There are many interesting
subtopics within the NPC issue. NPC communication, self mobility,
acquisition of knowledge, and rescriptability just to name a few.
The object is to create an NPC which can interact with a player character
without making it obvious that the it is machine controlled and not
another player character. [Aha! Another Turing test! -- KIL]
I would like to request suggestions of relevent publications that I
should be familiar with. This is a large project, but I am loathe
to make it even larger by ignoring past work that has been done.
I would greatly appreciate any suggestions for books, journal articles,
etc. that might offer a new insight into the problem.
Please send responses to Gold@RU-Blue.
Thank you very much,
Cynthia Gold
------------------------------
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 10:54:46-PST
From: Wilkins <WILKINS@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: The Four-Color Theorem
I am not familiar with the literature on the 4-color proof, nor with whether it
is commonly accepted. I do however have a lot of experience with computer
programs and have seen a lot of subtle bugs that do not surface 'til long after
everyone is convinced the software works for all possible cases after having
used it. The fact that another person wrote a different program that got the
same results means little as the same subtle bugs are likely to be unforeseen
by other programmers. If the program is so complicated that you cannot prove
it or its results correct, then I think the mathematicians would be foolish
to accept its output as a proof.
David
------------------------------
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 09:59:26-PST
From: Slava Prazdny <Prazdny at SRI-KL>
Subject: Re: The Four-Color Problem
re: the 4-color problem
A nice overview paper by the authors is in "Mathematics Today",
L.A.Steen (ed),Vintage Books, 1980.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 1984 11:22-PST
From: Raymond Bates <RBATES at ISIB>
Subject: Interlisp Availability
A version of Interlisp is available from ISI that runs on the VAX
line of computers. We have versions for Berkeley UNIX 4.1 or 4.2
and a native VMS version. It is a full and compete
implementation of Interlisp. For more information send a message
to Interlisp@ISIB with your name and address or send mail to:
Information Science Institute
ISI-Interlisp Project
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Interlisp is a programming environment based on the lisp
programming language. Interlisp is in widespread use in the
Artificial Intelligence community. It has an extensive set of
user facilities, including syntax extensions, uniform error
handling, automatic error correction, an integrated
structure-based editor, a sophisticated debugger, a compiler and
a file system.
P.S. I just got AGE up and running under ISI-Interlisp (the new
name of Interlisp-VAX) and will start to work on EMYCIN soon.
/Ray
------------------------------
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 20:35:02-CST
From: Werner Uhrig <CMP.WERNER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Playboy 4/84 article: AI-article by Lee Gomes
If you needed an excuse to read playboy (even deduct it from your taxes ?? )
on page 126 is an article:
The Mind of a New Machine. can the science of artificial intelligence
produce a computer that's smarter than the men who build it?
nothing earth-shaking, a little history, a little present state of the art,
a little outlook into the future. but, it's interesting what's being fed
to this audience. Something to hand to a friend who wants to know what
this is all about, and doesn't mind getting side-tracked by "Playmates
Forever" on page 129.
Enjoy or Suffer, it's your choice.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 16:55:31-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Expert Systems in Computer Graphics
The February issue of IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications has a short
blurb on Dixon and Simmons' expert system for mechanical engineering design.
Following the blurb, on p. 61, is the notice
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications is planning an issue
featuring articles on expert systems in computer graphics
applications in early 1985. Those interested in contributing
should contact Carl Machover, Machover Associates, Inc., 199
Main St., White Plains, NY 10601; (914) 949-3777.
The issue also contains an article on "Improved Visual Design for Graphics
Display" by Reilly and Roach. The authors mention the possibility of
developing an expert consulting system for visual design that could be
used to help programmers format displays. (I think automated layout
for the graphics industry would be even more useful, and an excellent
topic for expert systems research.) They cite
J. Roach, J.A. Pittman, S.S. Reilly, and J. Savarse, "A Visual
Design Consultant," Int'l Conf. Cybernetics and Society, Seattle,
Wash., Oct. 1982.
as a preliminary exploration of this idea.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: Fri 9 Mar 84 17:23:30-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Expert System for Hardware/Software Debugging
The March issue of IEEE Computer has an article by Roger Hartley
of Kansas State University on the CRIB system for fault diagnosis.
The article starts with a discussion of expertise among experts
vs. that among practitioners, and about the process of building
a knowledge base. Hartley then introduces CRIB and discusses, at
a fairly high level, its application to fault diagnosis in ICL 2903
minicomputers. He then briefly mentions use of the same hierarchical
diagnostic strategy in debugging the VME/K operating system.
This article is an expanded version of the paper "How Expert Should an
Expert System Be?" in the 7th IJCAI, 1981.
-- Ken Laws
------------------------------
Date: 8 March 1984 1426-est
From: Roz <RTaylor.5581i27TK @ RADC-MULTICS>
Subject: Expert Systems Production tools
To all who have queried me regarding what info I have or have received on
expert systems production tools...I must apologize. Have not gotten it
into suitable format as yet; I am literally behind the power curve
with some new efforts (high visibility) recently assigned to me (approx
4 weeks ago--about the time I could start editing what I have). I will
post it to the AIList, but unless something helps it won't be before
April. Unfortuanately, what has already been massaged is in 132 char
[tabular] format and would not post easily to the list that way. I am
sorry, folks. But I have not forgotten you.
Roz
------------------------------
Date: 7 Mar 84 19:12:34 PST (Wed)
From: Carl Kaun <ckaun@aids-unix>
Subject: More Laws of Form
Before I say anything, you all should know that I consider myself at best
naive concerning formal logic. Having thus outhumbled myself relative to
anyone who might answer me and having laid a solid basis for my subsequent
fumbling around, I give you my comments about Laws of Form. I do so with the
hope that it stirs fruitful discussion.
First, as concerns notation. LoF uses a symbol called at one point a
"distinction" consisting of a horizontal bar above the scope of the
distinction, ending in a vertical bar. Since I can't reproduce that very
well here, I will use parentheses to designate scope where the scope is
otherwise ambiguous. Also, LoF uses a blank space which can be confusing. I
will use an underline "←" in its place. And LoF places symbols in an
abutting position to indicate disjunction. I will use a comma to separate
disjunctive terms.
In Lof, the string of symbols " (a)|, b ", or equivalently, " a|, b" is
equivalent logically to the statement " a implies b". The comparison with
the equivalent statement " (not a) or b" is also obvious. The "|" symbol
seems to be used as a postfix unary [negation] operator. "a" and "b" in the
formulae are either "←" or "←|" or any allowable combination of these in
terms of the constructions available through the finite application of the
symbols "|" and "←". LoF goes on to talk about this form and what it implies
at some length. Although it derives some interesting looking formulae (such
as the one for distribution), I could find nothing that cannot be equivalently
derived from Boolean Algebra.
Eventually, LoF comes around to the discussion of paradoxical forms, of which
the statement "this sentence is false" is the paradigm. As I follow the
discussion at this point, what one really wants is some new distinction (call
it "i") which satisfies the formula " (i|)|, i". At least I think it should
be a distinction, perhaps it should also be considered simply to be a symbol.
The above form purports to represent the sentence "this sentence is false".
The formulation in logic is similar to the way one arrives at complex
numbers, so LoF also refers to this distinction as being "imaginary". At
this point I am very excited, I think LoF is going to explore the formula,
create an algebra that one can use to determine paradoxical forms, etc. But
no development of an algebra occurs. I played around with this some years
ago trying to get a consistent algebra, but I didn't really get anywhere
(could well be because I don't know what I'm doing). Lof goes on to describe
the distinction "i" in terms of alternating sequences of distinctions,
supposedly linking the imaginary distinction to the complex number generator
exp(ix), however I find this discussion most unconvincing and unenlightening.
Now LoF returns to the subject of distinction again, describing distinctions
as circles in a plane (topologically deformable), where distinction occurs
when one crosses the boundary of a circle. In this description, the set of
distinctions one can make is firmly specified by the number of circles, and
the ways that circles can include other circles, etc. LoF gives a most
suggestively interesting example of how the topology of the surface might
affect the distinctions, and even states that different distinctions result
on spheres than on planes, and on toroids than on either, etc. Unfortunately
he does not expound in this direction either, and does not link it to his
"imaginary" form above, and I think I might have given up on LoF at this
time. LoF doesn't even discuss intersecting circles/distinctions.
The example that LoF gives is of a sphere where one distinction is the
equator, and where there are two additional distinctions (circles,
noninclusive one of the other) in the southern hemisphere. Then the
structure of the distinctions one can make depends on whether one is in the
northern hemisphere, or in the southern hemisphere external to the two
distinctions there, or inside one of the circles/distinctions in the southern
hemisphere. As I say, I really thought (indeed think today) that perhaps
there is some meat to be found in the approach, but I don't have the time to
pursue it.
I realize that I have mangled LoF pretty considerably in presenting my
summary/assessment/impressions of it. This is entirely in accordance with
my expertise established above. Still, this is about how much I got out of
LoF. I found some suggestive ideas, but nothing new that I (as a definite
non-logician) could work with. I would dearly love it if someone would show
me how much more there is. I suspect I am not alone in this.
@πrl Kaun ( ckaun@AIDS-unix )
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂09-Mar-84 2324 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA AIList Digest V2 #29
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 84 23:24:20 PST
Date: Fri 9 Mar 1984 21:56-PST
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI>
Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI
US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: (415) 859-6467
Subject: AIList Digest V2 #29
To: AIList@SRI-AI
AIList Digest Saturday, 10 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 29
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - New Osborne Users Group,
Obituary - A. P. Morse,
Courses - Netwide AI Course Bites the Dust,
Seminars - Joint Seminar on Concurrency &
Programming by Example &
Mathematical Ontology Seminar Rescheduled &
Incompleteness in Modal Logic &
Thinking About Graph Theory
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Mar 84 17:14:40-PST (Sat)
From: decvax!linus!philabs!sbcs!bnl!jalbers @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Atten:Osborne owners
Article-I.D.: bnl.361
ATTENTION users of Osborne computers. The Capital Osborne Users Group (CapOUG)
is seeking other Osborne users groups across the country. If you are a member
of such a group, please send the name of the president, along with an address
and phone number. We are also looking for contacts via the net (USENET or
ARPA/MILNET) between groups across the country. If you can be such a contact
or know of someone who can, please send me mail. All that would be envolved
is sending and recieving summaries of meetings, parts of newsletters, and
acting as an interface between your group and the other groups 'subscribing' to
this 'mailing list'. At this point, it is not certain wheather communication
would be through a mail 'reflector', or via a 'digest', however the latter is
most likely. In return for your service, the CapOUG will exchange our software
library, which consists of over 120 SD disketts, and articles from our
newsletter. The 'interface' would be asked to offer the like to the other
members of the list.
Even if you don't belong to a group, this would be a great way to find
the group in your area.
Jon Albersg
ARPA jalbers@BNL
(UUCP)...!ihnp4!harpo!floyd!cmc12!philabs!sbcs!bnl!jalbers
------------------------------
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 22:55:24-CST
From: Bob Boyer <CL.BOYER@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: A. P. Morse
[Forwarded from the UTexas-20 bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A. P. Morse, Professor of Mathematics at UC Berkeley, author
of the book "A Theory of Sets," died on Monday, March 5.
Morse's formal theory of sets, sometimes called Kelley-Morse
set theory, is perhaps the most widely used formal theory
ever developed. Morse and his students happily wrote proofs
of serious mathematical theorems (especially in analysis)
within the formal theory; it is rare for formal theories
actually to be used, even by their authors. A key to the
utility of Morse's theory of sets is a comprehensive
definitional principle, which permits the introduction of
new concepts, including those that involve indicial (bound)
variables. Morse's set theory was the culmination of the
von Neumann, Bernays, Godel theory of sets, a theory that
discusses sets (or classes) so "large" that they are not
members of any set. Morse took delight in making the
elementary elegant. His notion of ordered pair "works" even
if the objects being paired are too "big" to be members of a
set, something not true about the usual notion of ordered
pairs. Morse's theory of sets identifies sets with
propositions, conjunction with intersection, disjunction
with union, and so forth. Through his students (e.g., W. W.
Bledsoe), Morse's work has influenced automatic
theorem-proving. This influence has shaped the development
of mechanized logics and resulted in mechanical proofs of
theorems in analysis and other nontrivial parts of
mathematics.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 84 09:00:57 pst
From: bobgian%PSUVAX1.BITNET@Berkeley
Subject: Netwide AI Course Bites the Dust
The "Netwide AI and Mysticism" course I had hoped to offer to all
interested people has become the victim of my overenthusiam and the
students' underenthusiasm.
π
The term here is half over, and student energies and motivations are
YET to rise to the occasion. I have tried my best, but (aside from a
very select and wonderful few) Penn State students just do not have
what it takes to float such a course. I am spending most of my time
just trying to make sure they learn SOMETHING in the course. The
inspiration of a student-initiated and student-driven course is gone.
My apologies to ALL who wrote and offered useful comments and advice.
My special thanks to all who mailed or posted material which has been
useful in course handouts. I WILL try this again!! I may give up on
the average Penn State student, but I WON'T give up on good ideas.
I will be moving soon to another institution -- one which EXPLICITLY
encourages innovative approaches to learning, one which EXPLICITLY
appeals to highly self-motivated students. We shall try again!!
In the meantime, the "Netwide AI course" is officially disbanned. Those
students here who DO have the insight, desire, and maturity to carry it
on may do so via their own postings to net.ai. (Nothing I could do or
WANT to do would ever stop them!) To them all, I say "You are the hope
for the world." To the others, I say "Please don't stand in our way."
-- Bob "disappointed, but ever hopeful" Gian...
[P.s.]
Since my last posting (808@psuvax.UUCP, Sunday Mar 4) announcing the
"temporary cessation" of the "Netwide AI and Mysticism" course from Penn
State, I have received lots of mail asking about my new position. The thought
struck, just AFTER firing that note netwards, that instead of saying
"I will be moving soon to another institution ...."
I SHOULD have said
"I will soon be LOOKING for another institution -- one which EXPLICITLY
encourages innovative approaches to learning, one which EXPLICITLY
appeals to highly self-motivated students. We shall try again!!"
That "new institution" might be a school or industrial research lab. I want
FIRST to leave behind at Penn State the beginnings of what someday could be
one of the finest AI (especially Cognitive Science and Machine Learning)
labs around. Then I'll start looking for a place more in tune with my
(somewhat unorthodox, by large state school standards) teaching and research
style.
To all who wrote with helpful comments, THANKS. And, if anybody knows of
such a "new institution", I'm WIDE OPEN to suggestions!!!
-- Bob "ever hopeful" Gian...
Bob Giansiracusa (Dept of Computer Science, Penn State Univ, 814-865-9507)
Arpa: bobgian%PSUVAX1.BITNET@Berkeley
Bitnet: bobgian@PSUVAX1.BITNET CSnet: bobgian@penn-state.CSNET
UUCP: bobgian@psuvax.UUCP -or- allegra!psuvax!bobgian
USnail: 333 Whitmore Lab, Penn State Univ, University Park, PA 16802
------------------------------
Date: Wed 7 Mar 84 18:05:04-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Joint Seminar on Concurrency
[Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.]
JOINT SEMINAR ON CONCURRENCY
Carnegie-Mellon University
July 9-11, 1984
The National Science Foundation (NSF) of the United States and
the Science and Engineering Council (SERC) of Great Britain have
agreed to support a Joint Seminar on Concurrency. The seminar intends
to discuss the state of the art in concurrent programming languages,
their semantics, and the problems of proving properties of concurrent
programs.
A small number of participants from Britain and the United States
have already been invited, but other interested researchers are
encouraged to attend. Because of the limited NSF and SERC funding, no
financial support is available. However, if you are interested in
participating and can find your own support, please contact as soon as
possible:
Stephen D. Brookes Brookes@CMU-CS-A
Department of Computer Science Home (412) 441-6662
Carnegie-Mellon University Work (412) 578-8820
Schenley Park
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
The other organizers of the meeting are Glynn Winskel (Cambridge
University) and Bill Roscoe (Oxford University), but inquiries should
be directed to Brookes at Carnegie-Mellon.
------------------------------
Date: 07 Mar 84 1358 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Programming by Example
[Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Talkware Seminar (CS 377)
Date: Monday March 12
Speaker: Daniel Halbert (Berkeley & Xerox OSD) and David C. Smith (Visicorp)
Topic: Programming by Example
Time: 2:15-4
Place: 200-205
Most computer-based applications systems cannot be programmed by their
users. We do not expect the average user of a software system to be able
to program it, because conventional programming is not an easy task.
But ordinary users can program their systems, using a technique called
"programming by example". At its simplest, programming by example is
just recording a sequence of commands to a system, so that the sequence
can be played back at a later time, to do the same or a similar task.
The sequence forms a program. The user writes the program -in the user
interface- of the system, which he already has to know in order to
operate the system. Programming by example is "Do what I did."
A simple program written by example may not be very interesting. I will
show methods for letting the user -generalize- the program so it will
operate on data other than that used in the example, and for adding
control structure to the program.
In this talk, I will describe programming by example, discuss current
and past research in this area, and also describe a particular
implementation of programming by example in a prototype of the Xerox
8010 Star office information system.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 84 14:57 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Mathematical Ontology Seminar Rescheduled
[Forwarded from the CSLI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
David McAllester's talk has been rescheduled in both time and space (in
part to avoid conflict with a visit to PARC by the King of Sweden!); I
hope this makes it easier for people to attend. It will now take place
at 3:30 on Monday in room 3312, instead of at 11:00.
Title: "MATHEMATICAL ONTOLOGY"
Speaker: David McAllester (M.I.T.)
When: Monday March 12th at 3:30 p.m.
Where: Xerox PARC Executive Conference Room, Room 3312
(non-Xerox people should come a few moments early,
so that they can be escorted to the conference room)
------------------------------
Date: 09 Mar 84 0134 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Incompleteness in Modal Logic
[Forwarded from the CSLI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
SPEAKER: Johan van Benthem, University of Groningen
TITLE: "From Completeness Results to Incompleteness
Results in Modal Logic"
TIME: Wednesday, Mar. 14, 4:15-5:30 PM
PLACE: Stanford Mathematics Dept. Room 383-N
For a long time the main activity in intensional logic
consisted in proving completeness theorems, matching some
logic with some modal class. In the early seventies,
however, various incompleteness phenomena were discovered -
e.g. such a match is not always possible. By now, we know that
the latter phenomenon is the rule rather than the exception,
and the issue of the `semantic power' of the possible worlds
approach has become a rather complex and intriguing one.
In this talk I will give a survey of the main trends in the
above area, concluding with some open questions and partial
answers. In particular, a new type of incompleteness theorem
will be presented, showing that a certain tense logic defies
semantic modelling even when both modal class and truth
definition are allowed to vary.
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 84 12:55:47 EST
From: Smadar <KEDAR-CABELLI@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Thinking About Graph Theory
[Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
III Seminar on AI and Mathematical Reasoning
Title: Thinking About Graph Theory
Speaker: Susan Epstein
Date: Tuesday, March 13, 1984, 1:30-2:30 PM
Location: Hill Center, Seventh floor lounge
Dr. Susan Epstein, a recent graduate of our department, will give an informal
talk based on her thesis work. Here is her abstract:
A major challenge in artificial intelligence is to provide computers
with mathematical knowledge in a format which supports mathematical
reasoning. A recursive formulation is described as the foundation of a
knowledge representation for graph theory. Benefits include the
automatic construction of examples and related algorithms, hierarchy
detection, creation of new properties, conjecture and theorem proving.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
∂10-Mar-84 1433 @SRI-AI.ARPA:sag%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA visits by J.D. Fodor, Crain, Pelletier, Klein & Tait
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 84 14:32:48 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 10 Mar 84 14:32:53-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Sat 10 Mar 84 14:30:11-PST
Date: Saturday, 10 Mar 1984 14:30-PST
To: csli-folks@sri-ai at Score
Subject: visits by J.D. Fodor, Crain, Pelletier, Klein & Tait
From: Ivan Sag <sag@Su-psych>
A number of visitors will arrive this week. These include:
Janet Fodor: 3/12-3/18
Stephen Crain: 3/12-3/16
Jeff Pelletier:3/14-3/20
Ewan Klein: 3/18-4/3
Mary Tait: 3/18-4/3
Anyone who would like to meet with any of the above people
should contact me.
Ivan Sag
∂10-Mar-84 1819 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 84 18:19:21 PST
Date: Sat 10 Mar 84 18:17:11-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
There will be 4 (four) AFLB talks during the next ten days!!!
Tuesday at 12:30, Thursday at 12:30, Friday at 2:15, and next Tuesday
at 12:30. The Friday talk is in 252, all the other are in 352.
We will have a two weeks break afterwards, to recuperate.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Special AFLB (note date!)
3/13/84 - Prof. Glenn Manacher (U. of Illinois - Chicago)
"New average case results for the maximum circle chord clique problem"
Abstract will be sent later.
**** Time and place: TUESDAY, March 13, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ****
3/15/84 - Prof. Hugh C. Williams (U. of Manitoba)
"Continued fractions and number theoretic computations"
Let D be a square-free positive integer and let K = Q(sqrt(D)) be the
algebraic number field formed by adjoining sqrt(D) to the rationals Q.
I will show how a continued fraction expansion of sqrt(D) or
(1+sqrt(D))/2 can be used in the development and analysis of
algorithms for solving computational problems in K. These include:
the problem of factoring D, the determination of whether an ideal in K
is principal, and the computation of the class group structure of K.
Some attention is also given to the extension of these methods to
complex cubic fields. No extensive knowledge of algebraic number
theory will be assumed.
******** Time and place: March 15, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
Special AFLB (Note date, time, and room!)
3/16/84 - Prof. Richard Cole (NYU)
"Finding a Ham Sandwich Cut"
Given two sets, each of n points, we show how to find a ham sandwich
cut -- a line dividing the two sets evenly. We give two algorithms:
one taking time O(n (logn)↑2)), and one taking time O(n logn).
To obtain the second algorithm we improve a technique due to Megiddo;
it provides a general method for obtaining serial algorithms for one
problem using parallel algorithms for a second problem. We show how
to improve Megiddo's construction when the parallel algorithm is a
sorting network.
***** Time and place: FRIDAY, March 16, 2:15 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) ****
Special AFLB seminar (Note date and time!)
3/20/84 - Prof. Rave Kannan (MIT)
"Are the bits of sqrt(2), pi random?"
Joint work with A. K. Lenstra and L. Lovasz.
Manuel Blum raised the following interesting question: suppose we are
given an approximate root of an unknown polynomial with integer
coefficients and a bound on the degree and magnitude of the
coefficients of the polynomial. Is it possible to infer the
polynomial? We answer his question in the affirmative. We are able to
show that if a complex number alpha satisfies an irreducible
polynomial p(x) of degree d with integer coefficients each of
magnitude at most H then given O(d↑2+d log H) bits of the binary
expansion of the real and complex parts of alpha , we can find p(x) in
deterministic polynomial time and then compute in polynomial time any
further bit of alpha . Using the concept of secure psuedo random
sequences formulated by Blum, Micali and Yao we show then that the
binary (or p-ary for any p ) expansions of algebraic numbers do not
form secure sequences in a certain well defined sense.
The technique is based on the lattice basis reduction algorithm of
Lenstra, Lenstra and Lovasz. Our answer to Blum's question enables us
to devise a simple polynomial time algorithm to factor polynomials
over the rationals: we find an approximate root of the polynomial by
Newton's method and use our algorithm to find the irreducible
polynomial satisfied by the exact root which must then be a factor of
the given polynomial. The technique of the paper also provides a
natural, efficient method to compute with algebraic numbers.
We are able to extend our results with the same techniques to
transcendental numbers of the form log alpha, cos↑(-1) alpha, etc.,
where alpha is algebraic. (pi is included in the latter class since
it is cos↑(-1) 1.)
**** Time and place: TUESDAY, March 20, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ***
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year have been filled
so far.
For more information about future AFLB meetings and topics you might
want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂11-Mar-84 2316 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 84 23:15:57 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 11 Mar 84 23:09:54-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 11 Mar 84 23:06:33-PST
Date: 11 Mar 1984 2307-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: Reminder on WHY DISCOURSE WONT GO AWAY
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
On Tuesday, March 13, we have our last meeting of the term.
The speaker is Scott Weinstein who is visiting from U. of Pennsylvania. He
will report on joint work he has been pursuing with Barbara Grosz.
Next term we focus on the notion of "INFORMATION CONTENT".
What is the information content encoded by a word, phrase or sentence? Is
the information value of a complex phrase computable compositionally from
the information values of its constituents? Are information values
merely conceptual or can there be expressions whose information value is
objectual? When do two expressions encode the same information? are some
of the questions we will raise. The list of speakers looks very promising.
We hope to see you there.
I attach Weinstein's abstract:
The Interpretation of Noun Phrases in Discourse
Scott Weinstein
Dept. of Philosophy, Univ. of Pennsylvania
Situation semantics provides a cogenial setting in which to develop
a theory of the interpretation of noun phrases in discourse. Certain
discourse phenomena appear to require refinements of this framework.
In this talk, I will survey some such phenomena related to singular
definite noun phrases and centering.
-------
-------
∂12-Mar-84 0947 BMOORE@SRI-AI.ARPA visit by Ray Turner
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 84 09:47:05 PST
Date: Mon 12 Mar 84 09:37:23-PST
From: Bob Moore <BMOORE@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: visit by Ray Turner
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Ray Turner, from the computer science department at the University of
Essex, will be visiting next Thursday and Friday. Ray
has doctorates in both computer science and philosophy, the latter
earned under Hans Kamp. He has done work on the programming-language
semantics, philosophical logic, and formal semantics of natural
language. Some of his most recent work concerns the application of
Scott-Strachy denotational semantics to problems in natural language.
Elsie Chappell will be coordinating his visit; please contact her to
arrange a time to talk to Ray.
--Bob
-------
∂12-Mar-84 1157 WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA [BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA: Building Meeting]
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 84 11:57:10 PST
Date: Mon 12 Mar 84 11:57:58-PST
From: Pat Wunderman <WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: [BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA: Building Meeting]
To: CSLI-Folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear Friends,
Evidently some people did not receive the notice about meeting today at
1:30 in the Ventura Conference Room to discuss the latest designs for
our new building, so we are forwarding it on to you in case you did not
receive the first message. Hope to see you all then!
--Pat Wunderman (for Betsy Macken)
---------------
Mail-From: BMACKEN created at 8-Mar-84 17:54:42
Date: Thu 8 Mar 84 17:54:42-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Building Meeting
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We have nearly completed the design phase of the building, and have
a new model and drawings that are more detailed than you saw at
the last meeting. Tuesday we go to the UCLBD for design approval.
We'd like to invite you to a meeting at 1:30 Monday in the VEntura
Conference room to see the results of this phase and give us your
reactions. I hope you can come then, because we'd like your reactions
before the UCLBD meeting. However, I should be able to keep the model
and drawings for a while for anyone who wants to drop by my office
later in the week to see them.
B.
-------
-------
∂12-Mar-84 1402 BERGLUND@SU-SCORE.ARPA Salary Survey Survey
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 84 14:01:50 PST
Date: Mon 12 Mar 84 13:49:47-PST
From: Student Bureaucrats <BERGLUND@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Salary Survey Survey
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: bureaucrat@SU-SCORE.ARPA, bureaucrat@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: bureaucrat@score
We've been meaning to talk about the student reaction to a salary survey
at the faculty lunch for a few weeks now, and never quite worked it in, so
we thought we'd send you a message on it. Professor Golub will also get
all of the student responses forwarded to him--some of them had some advice
and comments in them.
For the most part the response was extremely positive, provided that the
survey is optional and anonymous, the results are made available to the
students, and that master's students were also polled. A few indicated that
they would not participate even under those conditions, and at least one
suggested that the data be made available only to students--and not to
companies. (The workability of the latter seems extremely doubtful, so
we didn't even discuss the desirability--or lack of it.)
Conclusion: Students are for it.
-------
∂12-Mar-84 1419 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA David McAllester TODAY, 3:30 p.m. Room 3312 PARC
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 84 14:19:24 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 12 Mar 84 14:19:54-PST
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 84 09:41 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: David McAllester TODAY, 3:30 p.m. Room 3312 PARC
To: CSLI-Folks@SRI-AI.ARPA, ComputerResearch↑.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Reply-To: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
David McAllester will talk this afternoon at 3:30 p.m. in Room 3312 at
PARC:
Title: "MATHEMATICAL ONTOLOGY"
Speaker: David McAllester (M.I.T.)
When: Monday March 12th at 3:30 p.m.
Where: Executive Conference Room (3312) at Xerox PARC
(non-Xerox people should come a few moments early,
so that they can be escorted to the conference room)
Abstract:
AI techniques are often divided into "weak" and "strong" methods. A
strong method exploits the structure of some domain while a weak method
is more general and therefore has less structure to exploit. But it may
be possible to exploit UNIVERSAL structure and thus to find STRONG
GENERAL METHODS. Mathematical ontology is the study of the general
nature of mathematical objects. The goal is to uncover UNIVERSAL
RELATIONS, UNIVERSAL FUNCTIONS, and UNIVERSAL LEMMAS which can be
exploited in general inference techniques. For example there seems to
be a natural notion of isomorphism and a standard notion of essential
property which are universal (they can be meaningfully applied to ALL
mathematical objects). These universal relations are completely ignored
in current first order formulations of mathematics. A particular theory
of mathematical ontology will be discussed in which many natural
universal relations can be precisely defined. Some particular strong
general inference techniques will also be discussed.
∂12-Mar-84 1424 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA Dave MacQueen TOMORROW, 9:30 a.m. at Ventura
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 84 14:21:54 PST
Received: from PARC-MAXC.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 12 Mar 84 14:20:02-PST
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 84 09:44 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Subject: Dave MacQueen TOMORROW, 9:30 a.m. at Ventura
To: CSLI-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA, ComputerResearch↑.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Reply-to: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
Dave MacQueen will talk tomorrow (Tuesday March 13) at 9:30 a.m. at
Ventura Hall at Stanford -- abstract below. We will be having dinner
tomorrow evening at 7:00 for Dave at Theo's; if you are interested in
joining us, please let Jackie Guibert know (Guibert@PARC, 494-4354) so
we can make reservations.
Quantification and Dependency in Types
Time: Tuesday, March 13 9:30 - 11:15
Place: Seminar room, Ventura Hall, Stanford University
(At the corner of Campus Drive and Panama, close to
the Medical Center)
Dave will discuss notions of type quantification (universal and
existential) and dependent types and their application to the design of
a module facility for the programming language ML.
∂12-Mar-84 1921 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Inference Seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 84 19:20:51 PST
Date: Mon 12 Mar 84 19:16:47-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Inference Seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
(This is tax-filing season; I'm getting slightly too many groanworthy remarks
about "automatic deduction", hence the name change).
The Automatic Inference Seminar will meet on Wednesday March 14th in MJH 352
(note change of room from 301) at 1:30 p.m.
Speaker: Richard Treitel (oh no, not again)
Subject: Theorem Proving in the Stanford Pascal Verifier
Abstract:
The Stanford Pascal Verifier was developed in the late 1970's for research in
program verification. Its deductive component, designed mainly by Greg Nelson
and Derek Oppen, has some features not found in many other natural deduction
systems, including a powerful method for dealing with equalities, a general
framework for combining the results of decision procedures for fragments of the
problem domain, and a control structure based on an unusual "normal form" for
expressions. I will attempt to explain these and relate them both to other
provers and to post-Oppen work on the same technology.
-------
∂13-Mar-84 1357 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Date for Computer Forum 1985
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 84 13:57:10 PST
Date: Tue 13 Mar 84 13:55:05-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Date for Computer Forum 1985
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The date for the 1985 Computer Forum Annual Meeting has been set for
Wednesday/Thursday, February 13/14. Please mark your calendars now.
-------
∂13-Mar-84 1519 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Next quarter's situation semantics seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 84 15:18:56 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 13 Mar 84 15:15:00-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 13 Mar 84 15:04:18-PST
Date: Tue 13 Mar 84 15:06:46-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Next quarter's situation semantics seminar
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
This Thursday will (contrary to earlier announcements) be the last
for this quarter. We will start again April 4. Next quarter's
seminar will meet Wednesdays from 3:15-5:15. This was the least
objectionable time. It will meet in the Ventura seminar room and
be a small, hard working group. We will treat different topics, some
in situation theory, some in situation semantics. The first talk will
be by Barbara Grosz, on applications to the analysis of discourse.
-------
∂13-Mar-84 1520 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA New position
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 84 15:20:39 PST
Date: Tue 13 Mar 84 15:21:07-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: New position
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
All,
Starting Monday, Susan Stucky will assume a new position, that
of Special Assistant. Betsy and I are very pleased that Susan has
consented to devote her mornings to this position, to help us with a
number of tasks related to the administration of the research. This
appointment is for the remainder of this year and 1984-85. Her first
major task will be to begin the coordination of all our preparation of
the year 1 report, which is due in its final form June 1. This is
going to be a lot of work for all of us, and I am very relieved to
have Susan agree to coordinate this. She is sacrificing research time
to help make the Center work. Please give her all the help you can.
Jon
-------
∂14-Mar-84 0234 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #12
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 84 02:34:31 PST
Date: Tuesday, March 13, 1984 8:50PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #12
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 14 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Arrays & C-Prolog & Reality,
& Copying Terms & Speed
LP Library - Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 84 13:23:56 pst
From: Cohen%UCBernie@Berkeley (Shimon Cohen)
Subject: Arrays
I want to thank Fernando Periera for his comments about
the tree method for maintaining arrays. The tree method
is good for SPARSE arrays but if the array is full you
have big overhead because the array is THREE (3) times
bigger (Two additional pointers per element).
On the other hand I just discover (I probably discover
the wheel again ...) that the tree method is very useful
and efficient when you want to extend the size of the
array OR insert a block in the middle.
As an exercise for you all:
Given; O'Keefe method try to program the following
predicate:
array←insert←block( Array, Index, Block, NewArray ).
Which means: If 'Array' and 'Block' are arrays and
'Index' is any positive integer number then 'NewArray'
is the array which is created by inserting the 'Block'
after element 'Index' in the array 'Array' (Note:
Previous elements in 'Array' after 'Index' are pushed
forward ...).
Good luck to you all
-- Shimon Cohen
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 09:49:47-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: C-Prolog versions
C-Prolog status:
As of last week, EdCAAD is distributing C-Prolog
version 1.5. This system definitely runs on the
following machines/environments:
VAX: 4.? BSD Unix, VAX/VMS+DEC C compiler, Eunice
Sun: 4.? BSD Unix
Other people have ported earlier versions to:
Apollo
Data General MV-8000
Various Japanese IBM-compatible mainframes
Various MC68000 Unix System III or System V implementations
C-Prolog 1.5 has many improvements over earlier versions,
including the retry option on the debugger, which allows
the user to move around the execution tree. It adds a new
dimension to the debugging process! Many bugs fixed, and
better runtime space management also help.
With version 1.5, I am closing my C-Prolog activities. I
am aware that newer and better compiler-bases systems will
soon be available, and I am all too glad to become just an
user rather than an implementor...
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Tue 6 Mar 84 10:02:59-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: Log arrays vs. binary trees
Although the asymptotic access and update costs of log
arrays and balanced binary trees are the same, the practical
reality is very different. Ken Kahn's comment in is last
contribution, that "binary tree" implementations of updatable
arrays are too slow is correct, but what I was talking about
are more sophisticated schemes that reduce the constant
factor in O(log N) designs. The one I use requires just
log←K N binary shifts, masks and procedure calls to access
or update an element. K can be chosen appropriately to make
this number as low as necessary for the expected array
sizes. I use K=4.
Clearly, Ken's arrays are faster when most accesses are
to the latest version, but this is not the case in my
application.
Soon I'll submit the implementation I use to the Digest.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: 8 Mar 84 23:25:48-PST (Thu)
From: decvax!mulga!munnari!basser!AndrewT @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: IF Prolog
Proprietory reasons aside I think copying the code of C-Prolog
is very unwise. C-Prolog design is good but the implementation
is very crook.
-- Andrew Taylor
!decvax!mulga!AndrewT:basservax
------------------------------
Date: 11 Mar 84 12:38:41-PST (Sun)
From: Pereira@SRI-AI (Fernando Pereira)
Subject: Realities of Prolog implementation
Andrew Taylor says: "C-Prolog design is good but the
implementation very crook."
I'm afraid the truth is a bit more complicated:
1. It is rather difficult to write a good, elegant and
space-efficient Prolog INTERPRETER in anything but Prolog,
witness the fact that most Prolog INTERPRETERS are either
VERY slow, space-extravagant, or have minimal debugging
facilities. I'm speaking here from experience in studying
the internals of Prolog systems, my first Prolog adventure
being the translation in 1975 of the original Marseille
interpreter from FORTRAN to Algol 60.
2. Moral: if you want a good and elegant Prolog interpreter,
write first a Prolog compiler and then write the interpreter
in Prolog (that's how DEC-10/20 Prolog is built).
3. C is a poor language to implement elegantly and
efficiently interpreters for tagged languages like Prolog.
4. The design of C-Prolog is far more of a crock than its
implementation (refer to 1. above). The handling of database
changes and the metacall call(X) in a structure-sharing
system are particularly difficult and error-prone.
5. C-Prolog is a stopgap system, translated into C from
IMP (you don't want to know IMP, I assure you...) in two
months for a particular project. The original IMP system,
incomplete and crocky as it was, proved to be a much more
solid basis than the "elegant" candidates available at the
time. C-Prolog was NEVER intended as the ultimate in Prolog
implementation, but as a useful local maximum in the effort
benefit curve. C-Prolog has been much improved since the
initial implementation in the Summer of 1982, but it has
now very nearly reached the limits of the initial design.
The goal of C-Prolog was the respectable engineering goal
of having a practically useful system available at the right
time with the available effort. Not a few people have been
able to pursue their particular line of work only because
C-Prolog was available when they needed it (while waiting
for better & elegant things, of course...)
6. That C-Prolog has become probably the most widespread
Prolog system for VAXes comes to show that building a Prolog
system that is USEFUL for serious programming (even if not
elegantly designed and implemented) is more easily said than
done. If anyone has used C-Prolog code (and it is not my
business to comment in public on such serious allegations) ,
it may be that they knew better than Andrew Taylor how much
effort they would have to employ to produce a comparable
system from scratch, particularly when lacking experience
with Prolog implementation.
7. I've seen many people working very hard for years on
"better", "more elegant" or "getting rid of the disgusting
crocks" Prolog implementations. Like with the witch tower
of fairy tales, few are ever much heard of again, and fewer
still become useful to a wider community.
8. The point bears repetition: it is a moderately simple
exercise to write a minimal elegant Prolog system, but
when you start running LARGE programs your elegant toy
will soon become useless.
9. As Prolog becomes more seriously used, engineering
and economic questions become central in Prolog
implementation. This may be distasteful for people
concerned with academic elegance, but REALLY elegant
solutions in the real engineering world take more than
home-brew aesthetics; rather, a hard-earned understanding
of engineering tradeoffs and of the best tricks of the
trade.
10. The Prolog world has lost its primitive innocence,
as it was bound to happen if Prolog became successful.
A deep understanding of Prolog implementation is now a
very valuable skill, and will be the basis of the best
of the coming Prolog products. For academic elegance
achievable with academic resources within academic
timescales, we would be well advised to look elsewhere...
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 12-Mar-84 0:59:33-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <OKeefe%EDXA@UCL-CS>
Subject: Three Ways of Copying Prolog Terms and their Speed.
/* ICOT Technical Memorandom TM-0027:
"An Ordered Linear Resolution Theorem Proving Program
im[sic] Prolog",
Kuniaki Mukai & Koichi Furukawa
contains a predicate "rename←term" (see copy2 below), with the
comment that "Surprisingly, the short version using 'assert-retract'
does not work so efficiently as this version. The reason is not
known yet."
Well, I wasn't in the least bit surprised. I always EXPECT to
see things hacking the data base run slowly. But I thought it
would be interesting to see *how much* slower the assert-and-
retract method was. However, there was another factor that I
thought would be worth looking into. Their code uses lists much
more than I think healthy, so I decided to roll my own copying
routine and time that as well.
The results were disappointing. Contrary to Mukai & Furukawa,
on the Edinburgh KL-10 at midnight on a Monday morning, using
version 3.52 of Dec-10 Prolog, with everything compiled, I got
these figures:
Example 0 1 2 3 4
copy1 2 5 6 8 30
copy2 3 14 15 33 114
copy3 2 9 10 20 68
All times are in milliseconds for a single copy, and are
reproducible to within 1 millisecond, and are based on 60
times. I have this much consolation: my code *is* faster
than theirs, but the crude boring old data base hack that
everyone knows was always faster.
Here is the complete source code in case anyone would like
to try the experiment on another machine. Of course without
a compiler the times are even more in favour of copy1, single
tests for example 4 (it was done a slightly different way)
gave copy1=24, copy2=566, copy3=474 milliseconds in interpreted
Prolog, same machine, same time of night.
*/
:- public
copy1/2, % \
copy2/2, % } These must be public for "call"
copy3/2, % /
time/2. % The real entry point.
:- mode
copy1(+, -),
copy2(+, -),
copy2(+, -, +),
map2(+, ?),
copy3(+, -),
copy3(+, -, +, -),
copy3(+, +, +, +, -),
map3(+, +, -),
time(+, +),
example(+, -).
% copy1 does it the easy way.
copy1(OldTerm, NewTerm) :-
asserta(''(OldTerm)),
retract(''(NewTerm)),
!. % retract is non-determinate
% copy2 is due to Kuniaki Mukai and Koichi Furukawa.
% Their mode declaration was suboptimal.
copy2(OldTerm, NewTerm) :-
copy2(OldTerm, NewTerm, ←).
copy2(X, Y, Z) :-
var(X),
!,
map2(X-Y, Z).
copy2([], [], ←) :- !.
copy2([X|Y], [Z|U], V) :- !,
copy2(X, Z, V),
copy2(Y, U, V).
copy2(X, Y, V) :-
X =.. [A|L],
copy2(L, M, V),
Y =.. [A|M].
map2(X, Y) :-
var(Y),
!,
Y = [X|←].
map2(X-Y, [Z-Y|←]) :-
Z == X,
!.
map2(X, [←|Y]) :-
map2(X, Y).
% copy3 is what *I* regard as the "obvious" code.
% *not* adding things at the end of the map has two advantages:
% it is cleaner (insofar as anything using "var" or "==" can be
% called clean), and it can exploit bunching of occurrences.
copy3(OldTerm, NewTerm) :-
copy3(OldTerm, NewTerm, var, ←).
copy3(OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars0, Vars) :-
nonvar(OldTerm),
functor(OldTerm, FunctionSymbol, Arity),
functor(NewTerm, FunctionSymbol, Arity),
!,
copy3(Arity, OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars0, Vars).
copy3(OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars0, Vars0) :-
map3(Vars0, OldTerm, NewTerm),
!.
copy3(OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars0, var(OldTerm,NewTerm,Vars0)).
copy3(0, ←, ←, Vars0, Vars0) :- !.
copy3(N, OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars0, Vars) :-
arg(N, OldTerm, OldArg),
copy3(OldArg, NewArg, Vars0, Vars1),
arg(N, NewTerm, NewArg),
M is N-1, !,
copy3(M, OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars1, Vars).
map3(var(Old,New,←), Var, New) :-
Old == Var,
!.
map3(var(←,←,Rest), Var, New) :-
map3(Rest, Var, New).
:- op(910, fy, ~).
:- op(920, xfy, and).
:- op(930, xfy, or).
:- op(940, xfx, [=>, <=>]).
example(0, a and b or c).
example(1, (copy2([X|Y], [Z|U], V) :- !,
copy2(X, Z, V),
copy2(Y, U, V) )).
example(2, (copy2(X, Y, V) :-
X =.. [A|L],
copy2(L, M, V),
Y =.. [A|M] )).
example(3, (copy3(N, OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars0, Vars) :-
arg(N, OldTerm, OldArg),
copy3(OldArg, NewArg, Vars0, Vars1),
arg(N, NewTerm, NewArg),
M is N-1, !,
copy3(M, OldTerm, NewTerm, Vars1, Vars) )).
example(4, (true(P) <=> t(w0,P)) and
(t(W1,P1 and P2) <=> t(W1,P1) and t(W1,P2)) and
(t(W1,P1 or P2) <=> t(W1,P1) or t(W1,P2)) and
(t(W1,P1 => P2) <=> (t(W1,P1) => t(W1,P2))) and
(t(W1,P1 <=> P2) <=> (t(W1,P1) <=> t(W1,P2))) and
(t(W1,~P1) <=> ~t(W1,P1)) and
(t(W1,know(A1,P1)) <=> all(W2,k(A1,W1,W2)=>t(W2,P1)))
and k(A1,W1,W1) and
(k(A1,W1,W2) => (k(A1,W2,W3) => k(A1,W1,W3))) and
(k(A1,W1,W2) => (k(A1,W1,W3) => k(A1,W2,W3))) and
(t(W1,know(A,P)) <=> all(W2,k(A,W1,W2) => t(W2,P)))).
time(Method, Example) :-
example(Example, OldTerm),
Goal =.. [Method,OldTerm,NewTerm],
statistics(runtime, ←),
( call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; call(Goal), fail
; true
),
statistics(runtime, [←,T]),
write(T), nl.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 13 Mar 84 15:32:09-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: LP Library - Update
Allen Van Gelder submitted an updated version of his random
number generator, it is more accurately documented and slightly
more efficient.
Saumya Debray submitted a useful file for users of Prolog and
Gosling's Emacs on UNIX(TM) machines, an editor interface for
Prolog. It would be appreciated if a TECO person translated
it for Stallman's Emacs on TOPS-20.
Debray's code does limited syntax checking (flashes cursor back
to balancing '(''[', a la Franz lisp, checks for unbalanced
'('/'['s in a clause and permits direct manipulation of a Prolog
process from within Emacs.
Fernando Pereira submitted a logarithmic arrays package
created by David Warren and slightly modified by
Pereira. This package handles extendable arrays with
logarithmic access time.
These files are kept on {SU-SCORE}'s <Prolog> directory as:
SCORE:<Prolog>Random←Generator.Pl
and
SCORE:<Prolog>Emacs←PlMode.UNIX
and
SCORE:<Prolog>Arrays←Logarithmic.Pl
If anyone needs a file but cannot FTP from {SU-SCORE},
send a note to me.
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂14-Mar-84 1040 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA A new course: Visual sensing by humans and computers
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 84 10:40:35 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 10:41:48-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 10:13:02-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 10:15:45-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Wed 14 Mar 84 10:11:44-PST
Date: 14 Mar 1984 10:12:03-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: A new course: Visual sensing by humans and computers
Cc: eddie, farrell@parc-maxc at score, jan, larry, mis, vision
VISUAL SENSING BY HUMANS AND COMPUTERS
PSYCH 187/287
(A course for advanced undergraduates)
WHEN : Tuesday and Thursday 4 to 5
WHERE: Room 358, Jordan Hall (Psychology Building)
WHO : Brian Wandell
UNITS: By arrangement
The course will be structured around the question of how one might design a
visual system. The course will cover some of the formal tools used in
vision (sampling, the Fourier Transform, linear systems), and we will pay
particular attention to empirical results from the physiology of the human
visual pathways, human visual perception, and computer vision. The course
will have a limited enrollment of 5 (at most 10) people. I hate grading:
we will work something out.
Two types of goals for vision systems will be considered: (a) weak systems
whose goal is the detection and discrimination of patterns, and (b) strong
systems whose goal is the identification of objects. Both types of systems
are assumed to be operating in a noisy environment. Because of the
emphasis on design, we will first look for optimal strategies. When
optimal strategies are not known, or when the concept of optimal is ill-
defined for some application, we will turn to human visual physiology and
human visual perception for guidance and inspiration.
The textbook will be Brown and Ballard's book Computer Vision. Additional
readings will include
Physiology: G. S. Brindley ``Physiology of the Retina and Visual Pathways"
Enroth-Cugell and Robson on retinal encoding
Hubel and Wiesel, DeValois on Cortical encoding
Rushton on Light and Dark adaptation
Perception: E. H. Land and D. B. Judd on color vision
Graham, Nachmias, Robson, Campbell on linear filtering
models of human vision
Computer Vision: D. Marr's book ``Vision"
Duda and Hart on Pattern Classification
Pratt on Digital Image Processing
brian
497-3748
brian@su-psych
∂14-Mar-84 1421 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Bell Fellowship Awarded to John Lamping
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 84 14:21:40 PST
Date: Wed 14 Mar 84 14:16:46-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Bell Fellowship Awarded to John Lamping
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: PHD@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
: ;
Congratulations to John Lamping, who has been named the new
Bell Fellow beginning 1984/85. The Fellowship is for four years.
Marianne Winslett is a Bell Fellow beginning 1983/84.
We nominated four outstanding students. My only regret is that only
one could receive the honor. The other nominees expressed their
congratulations to John also.
Carolyn Tajnai
Manager Development Activities
Computer Science
-------
∂14-Mar-84 1431 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay bats
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 84 14:31:05 PST
Received: from rand-relay.ARPA (CSNET2.ARPA) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 14:21:05-PST
Date: 14 Mar 1984 12:44:13-PST (Wednesday)
From: Maria Klawe <KLAWE%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Return-Path: <KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Subject: bats
To: AFLB.ALL@SU-SCORE
Via: IBM-SJ; 14 Mar 84 13:45-PST
The next BATS meeting will be in the main auditorium of Building 28,
IBM San Jose on Friday March 30.
The schedule is:
10 a.m. Michael Tanner (U.C.S.C.) on:
A FAST TRANSFORM ON FINITE FIELD
11 a.m. Joe Halpern (IBM-SJ) on:
ON THE POSSIBILITY AND IMPOSSIBILITY OF ACHIEVING CLOCK SYNCHRONIZATION
12 a.m. Lunch (Cafeteria Classroom B)
1 p.m. Mike Fredman (U.C.S.D.) on:
FIBONACCI HEAPS
2 p.m. Avi Wigderson (U.C.B.) on:
RECTILINEAR GRAPHS AND THEIR EMBEDDINGS
Recently IBM has closed gate number 3 (the one beside building 28)
so you have to enter by the main gate (number 1). They will ask you
the purpose of your visit (to attend BATS seminar), who you are visiting
(Maria Klawe, 6-1213), and to see identification (so make sure you bring
some with you).
After gaining entrance to the site, make your way to the lobby of
building 28 as usual.
Here are the abstracts of the talks:
ON THE POSSIBILITY AND IMPOSSIBILITY OF ACHIEVING CLOCK SYNCHRONIZATION
Joe Halpern, IBM
It is known that clock synchronization
can be achieved in the presence of faulty
processors as long as the nonfaulty processors are connected,
provided that some authentication technique is used.
Without authentication the number of faults that can
be tolerated has been an open question.
Here we show that
if we restrict logical clocks to running within some linear
function of real time, then clock synchronization is impossible,
without authentication, when
one-third or more of the processors are faulty. However, if there is
a bound on the rate at which a processor can generate messages, then
we show that
clock synchronization is achievable, without authentication, as long as
the faults do not disconnect the network.
Finally, we provide a lower bound on the closeness to which simultaneity
can be achieved in the network
as a function of the transmission and processing
delay properties of the network.
A FAST TRANSFORM ON FINITE FIELD
Michael Tanner, U.C. Santa Cruz
The discrete Fourier transform is central to the understanding of circulant
matrices, matrices that are invariant under the action of an additive
cyclic group.
The columns of the transform matrix are eigenvectors of any circulant matrix,
and two circulant matrices can be multiplied using relatively few
multiplications by using the FFT to change to the diagonalizing basis for
the space.
In this talk we present a transform that yields comparable benefits for
matrices over finite fields that are invariant under a group generated by an
additive subgroup and a multiplicative subgroup (a Frobenius group).
We also describe a fast algorithm for computing the transform that is
closely analogous to the Goode-Thomas FFT and discuss the application
of the transform to the problem of multiplying matrices in this restricted
class.
Title: Rectilinear Graphs and their Embeddings
Speaker: Avi Wigderson (joint work with G. Vijayan)
Abstract:
The following embedding problem, which arises in the context of
VLSI layout design, is studied. A rectilinear graph has no vertex of
degree exceeding four, and the edges incident on each vertex have distinct
labels from the set {Left, Right, Up, Down}. A (planar) embedding of a
rectilinear graph is a mapping of its vertices to grid points of a
rectangular grid, so that each edge is a straight line segment, leaving
each of its endpoints in a direction consistent with its label, and no
two edges cross or overlap.
The main results are recognition and embedding algorithms for
embeddable rectilinear graphs, which run in O(|V|) and O(|V|**2) time
respectively. Related embedding problems and their complexity are
discussed.
To appreciate (or depreciate) the difficulty of the problem,
I strongly recommend that people invest ten minutes in solving a very
special case of this problem - the case when the given graph is a
simple cycle.
Speaker: Michael Fredman, U.C. San Diego
Title: Fibonacci Heaps
Astract:
This talk describes a new method for implementing heaps,
permitting very efficient handling of update operations.
Applications of this new data structure include improved
shortest path and minimum spanning tree algorithms.
(These results were obtained jointly with Robert Tarjan.)
∂14-Mar-84 1553 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA 84-85 postdocs
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 84 15:52:58 PST
Date: Wed 14 Mar 84 15:53:45-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: 84-85 postdocs
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Except for Area CL, the postdocs have been settled. Pat
Wunderman called them last week. They all seemed likely
to accept -- and thrilled to be coming. Letters will go
out this week. They seem like a very good group.
Here are the names of the ones we have notified:
Lauri Carlson
Peter Sells
Mats Rooth
Edit Doran
Paul Schacht
Ed Zalta
Douglas Edwards
Christoper Menzel
Ivan Blair
Moshe Vardi
-------
∂14-Mar-84 1804 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 23, March 15, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 84 18:03:50 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 18:04:38-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 16:38:45-PST
Date: Wed 14 Mar 84 16:41:17-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 23, March 15, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
! CSLI Newsletter
March 15, 1984 * * * Number 23
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, March 15, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Speaker and topic to be announced.
Conference Room
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Automatic Reasoning: Real Uses and
Conference Room Potential Uses," by L. Wos.
Discussion led by Mark Stickel.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Situation Semantics
Redwood Hall "Questions and Anaphora,"
Room G-19 by Elisabet Engdahl.
(LAST MEETING for winter quarter)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Intimations of a Mental Mechanism,"
Room G-19 by Roger Shepard, Stanford Psychology Dept.
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Foundations of Situated Language
Ventura Hall Speaker and topic to be announced.
Conference Room (LAST MEETING for winter quarter)
12 noon TINLunch **CANCELLED**
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Discourse and Comprehension During Medical
Room G-19 Diagnostic Reasoning,"
by Aaron Ciccourel, Department of Sociology,
Cognitive Science Program, and Medical School,
University of California at San Diego
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
TINLUNCH SCHEDULE
TINLunch is held each Thursday noon at Ventura Hall on the Stan-
ford University campus as a part of CSLI activities. Copies of
TINLunch papers are at SRI in EJ251 and at Stanford in Ventura Hall.
NEXT WEEK: Cancelled
March 15 Mark Stickel
March 22 CANCELLED
March 29 Brian Smith
-----------
SITUATION SEMANTICS SEMINAR
This Thursday will (contrary to earlier announcements) be the
last for this quarter. We will start again April 4. Next quarter's
seminar will meet Wednesdays from 3:15 to 5:15 p.m.; this was the
least objectionable time. We will meet in the Ventura seminar room
and be a small, hardworking group. We will treat different topics,
some in situation theory, some in situation semantics. The discussion
will more detailed and technical than this quarter. The first talk
will be by Barbara Grosz, on applications to the analysis of
discourse.
- Jon Barwise
-----------
VISITORS
A number of visitors are arriving this week (with Ivan Sag their
informal contact). These include:
Stephen Crain: March 12-16
Janet Fodor: March 12-18
Jeff Pelletier: March 14-20
Ewan Klein: March 18 - April 3
Mary Tait: March 18 - April 3
Ray Turner, from the Computer Science Department at the
University of Essex, will be visiting this Thursday and Friday.
Turner has doctorates in both computer science and philosophy, the
latter earned under Hans Kamp. He has done work on the
programming-language semantics, philosophical logic, and formal
semantics of natural language. Some of his most recent work concerns
the application of Scott-Strachy denotational semantics to problems in
natural language. Elsie Chappell at SRI will be coordinating his
visit.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
ISSUES IN LANGUAGE, PERCEPTION, AND COGNITION
Mondays, 12 noon, Stanford Psychology Dept., Room 100
On Monday, March 12, Phil Cohen of SRI International spoke on
"What Good are Illocutionary Acts?" Many theories of communication
require a hearer to determine what illocutionary act(s) (e.g.,
requests, commands, warnings) the speaker performed in making each
utterance. This talk presented joint work (with Hector Levesque) in
progress that aims to call this presumption into question.
Illocutionary acts (IAs) were shown to be definable as beliefs about
the conversants' shared knowledge of the speaker's goals and the
causal consequences of achieving those goals. For example, the
"request" pattern of beliefs should characterize circumstances in
which one might want to say a (perhaps indirect) request was
performed. A hearer need not actually characterize the consequences
of each utterance in terms of the IA patterns, but may simply infer
and respond to the speaker's intentions. However, the hearer could
retrospectively summarize a complex of utterances as satisfying an IA
pattern. This move may alleviate a number of technical obstacles in
applying speech act theory to extended discourse.
NEXT SPEAKERS:
Monday, April 4: Jerry Fodor, MIT Psychology and Philosophy
Monday, April 12: Len Talmy, UCB German Department
-----------
WHY DISCOURSE WON'T GO AWAY
At the last meeting of the term on Tuesday, March 13, Scott
Weinstein from the University of Pennsylvania reported on joint work
he has been pursuing with Barbara Grosz during his visit here. The
title of his talk was "The Interpretation of Noun Phrases in
Discourse." Situation semantics provides a cogenial setting in which
to develop a theory of the interpretation of noun phrases in
discourse. Certain discourse phenomena appear to require refinements
of this framework. In his talk, Weinstein surveyed some such
phenomena related to singular definite noun phrases and centering.
Next term, we focus on the notion of "INFORMATION CONTENT." Some
of the questions we will raise are the following: What is the
information content encoded by a word, phrase, or sentence? Is the
information value of a complex phrase computable compositionally from
the information values of its constituents? Are information values
merely conceptual or can there be expressions whose information value
is objectual? When do two expressions encode the same information?
The list of speakers looks very promising. We hope to see you there.
- Joseph Almog
-----------
! Page 4
-----------
TALK BY DAVID MCALLESTER OF MIT
On Monday, March 12, David McAllester of MIT spoke at Xerox PARC
on "Mathematical Ontology." AI techniques are often divided into
"weak" and "strong" methods. A strong method exploits the structure
of some domain while a weak method is more general and therefore has
less structure to exploit. But it may be possible to exploit
universal structure and thus to find strong general methods.
Mathematical ontology is the study of the general nature of
mathematical objects. The goal is to uncover universal relations,
universal functions, and universal lemmas that can be exploited in
general inference techniques. For example, there seems to be a
natural notion of isomorphism and a standard notion of essential
property that are universal (they can be meaningfully applied to all
mathematical objects). These universal relations are completely
ignored in current first-order formulations of mathematics. A
particular theory of mathematical ontology was discussed in which many
natural universal relations can be precisely defined. Some particular
strong general inference techniques were also discussed.
-----------
U.C. BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEMINAR - SPRING 1984
Tuesdays, 11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m., 240 Bechtel, U.C. Berkeley
On March 13, Susan Ervin-Tripp of the Department of Psychology,
U.C. Berkeley, spoke on "Intention and Indirectness: Problems in the
Development of Conversation." The retrospective recall of talk has
led to the development of speech act terminology, and to theories con-
cerning intentional deviousness in the expression of purpose. The
complexity of indirect expression of intention, in contrast to the di-
rect maps in the acquisition of referential vocabulary, suggests grave
difficulties for acquisition. Experimental studies of comprehension
of indirection and sarcasm at various ages reveal that the computing
of intention plays a different role in successful exchanges than has
been believed. The indirectness found in young children's natural-
istic texts, the constructing of control acts through several turns,
and the major importance of activity structure and key in the
production and interpretation of verbal exchanges alter what is
acceptable in applying speech act theory to natural interaction.
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester:
March 20 George Bealer Reed College, Philosophy
March 27 Nina Hyams UCLA, Linguistics
April 3 Barbara Tversky Stanford, Psychology
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI and Stanford CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy and CSLI
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
MANUSCRIPTS SOLICITED FOR NEW MIT PRESS/BRADFORD BOOKS SERIES
MIT Press/Bradford Books has announced a new series entitled
"Computational Models of Cognition and Perception" edited by Jerome A.
Feldman, Patrick J. Hayes, and David E. Rumelhart.
The series will include state-of-the-art reference works and
monographs, as well as upper level texts, on computational models in
such subject domains as knowledge representation, natural language
understanding, problem solving, learning and generalization, motor
control, speech perception and production, and all areas of vision.
The series will span the full range of computational models in
cognition and perceptual research and teaching, including detailed
neural models, models based on symbol-manipulation languages, and mod-
els employing techniques of formal logic. Especially welcome are works
treating experimentally testable computational models of specific
cognitive and perceptual functions; basic computational questions,
particularly relationships between different classes of models; and
representational questions linking computation and semantics to par-
ticular problem domains.
Manuscript proposals should be submitted to one the three
editors, or to Henry Bradford Stanton, Publisher, Bradford Books, The
MIT Press, 28 Carleton Street Cambridge, MA 02142 (617-253-5627).
However, we welcome your discussing ideas for books and software
programs and packages with any of the members of the Editorial
Advisory Board who may be your close colleagues:
John Anderson Drew McDermott
Horace Barlow Robert Moore
Jon Barwise Allen Newell
Emilio Bizzi Raymond Perrault
John Seely Brown Roger Schank
Daniel Dennett Candy Sidner
Geoffrey Hinton Shimon Ullman
Stephen Kosslyn David Waltz
Jay McClelland Robert Wilensky
Yorick Wilks
-------
∂15-Mar-84 0847 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty lunches
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 84 08:47:40 PST
Date: Thu 15 Mar 84 08:45:57-PST
From: Elyse Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty lunches
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-9746
There will be no Tuesday Faculty Lunches until the new quarter begins. I'll
send you a message with the start date.
Elyse
-------
∂15-Mar-84 1308 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA today's meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 84 13:08:44 PST
Date: Thu 15 Mar 84 13:05:33-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: today's meeting
To: CS440: ;
Here is the title and abstract. The speaker is Tom Blank.
****************************************************
A 3-D Bit Map Data Structure in Hardware
Summary: The architecture of a parallel array processor implementing a
3-D bit map data structure will be presented. Both routing and design
rule checking algorithms have been developed for the machine achieving
orders of magnitude increase over conventional sequential computer
implementations. A machine prototype is currently near completion
here at Stanford which will allow an effective test bed for new more
computationally intensive algorithms.
-------
∂15-Mar-84 1424 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA Area CL meetings to begin next Monday
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 84 14:24:42 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 14:25:05-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 11:12:30-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 11:14:46-PST
Date: 15 Mar 84 1110 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Area CL meetings to begin next Monday
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Beginning next monday, we will be holding a weekly Area CL meeting and
informal lunch.
The meeting will be from 1 to 3 every Monday in the Ventura conference
room. Its primary goal is to better define the overall direction for Area
CL work, and to begin moving towards a more coherent program. We will
begin by having presentations of the various aspects of the work that are
already underway. These presentations are intended to be in greater depth
than those at the computation seminar first quarter, so that there can be
substantive technical discussion. The meeting is intended for active
participants in Area CL, but others will be welcome as long as it doesn't
get too large. After the initial presentations, we will take a few
sessions to formulate a report on current activities and develop a plan
for the coming years.
The first presentation (next Monday, the 19th) will be Brian Smith,
talking about his work on MANTIQ (Area CL.3), an architecture for
reasoning.
The lunch will be a chance to informally discuss the technical issues,
plus organizational, political and whatever else. At least initially we
will have no agenda, but just use it as an opportunity for people to get
together and share what is on their minds. After the first week, when we
have had a chance to see how many people come, we will try to get
sandwiches supplied. For this coming Monday it is brown-bag. The lunches
will be at 12, also in the seminar room.
∂15-Mar-84 1541 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Thursday Colloquium
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 84 15:41:10 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 15:31:49-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 15:26:35-PST
Date: Thu 15 Mar 84 15:28:56-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Thursday Colloquium
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Aaron Cioccourel's talk has been postponed from March 22 to
April 5.
There will be no Colloquium on March 22.
Emma Pease
-------
∂15-Mar-84 1638 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 20
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 84 16:38:46 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 16:32:00-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 16:27:30-PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 16:29:03-PST
Received: from ucbkim.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.24/4.25)
id AA06570; Thu, 15 Mar 84 16:21:40 pst
Received: by ucbkim.ARPA (4.24/4.22)
id AA04302; Thu, 15 Mar 84 16:14:39 pst
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 84 16:14:39 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8403160014.AA04302@ucbkim.ARPA>
To: bair%ucbkim@Berkeley, cogsci%ucbkim@Berkeley, csli-friends@sri-ai,
eli@uw-june, faustus%ernie@Berkeley, gersho@ucsbcsl,
gillen%ucbpopuli.CC@Berkeley, hum%ucbkim@Berkeley, kube%ernie@Berkeley,
larsen%D.CC@Berkeley, npomo%E.CC@Berkeley, teddy%topaz.CC@Berkeley
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 20
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1984
IDS 237B - Cognitive Science Seminar
Time: Tuesday, March 20, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
***** Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker *****
*** in the IHL Library (Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2 ***
MIND AND ANTI-MIND: WHY IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DEFINE
THINKING IN FUNCTIONAL OR COMPUTER-THEORETIC TERMS
George Bealer
Department of Philosophy, Reed College
Several theories of mind go by the name of `functionalism.'
What these theories all have in common is the following cen-
tral thesis: the standard mental relations (or properties or
states) are uniquely determined by their causal roles in
functioning organisms. That is, the principles of psychol-
ogy specify the characteristic way that (behavioral or phy-
siological) input, the standard mental relations such as
belief and desire, and (behavioral or physiological) output
are causally arranged; and the central idea of functionalism
is that, e.g., belief's characteristic causal role can be
fulfilled by exactly one relation--namely, belief itself.
The most direct way to refute functionalism, therefore,
would be to show that there are relations that demonstrably
differ from the standard mental relations and yet could ful-
fill the same causal role as those mental relations. This
talk develops a technique for constructing such non-standard
relations. This technique leads to a refutation of all ver-
sions of functionalism, whether behavioral, physiological,
or computer-theoretic in orientation.
**********
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
Date Speaker Affiliation
March 27 Nina Hyams UCLA, Linguistics
April 3 Barbara Tversky Stanford, Psychology
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy
∂15-Mar-84 1735 ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS440
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 84 17:35:25 PST
Date: Thu 15 Mar 84 17:32:24-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS440
To: super@SU-SCORE.ARPA
This was the last of the CS440 seminars.
I'm on leave next quarter.
If anyone wants to continue it, you can have the mailing list
<ullman>cs440.dis
-------
∂16-Mar-84 0823 HALPERN.SJRLVM1@csnet-relay.arpa Knowledge seminar March 23 at IBM with Lotfi Zadeh and Ron Fagin
Received: from SU-HNV.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 08:23:29 PST
Received: from csnet-relay by Diablo with TCP; Fri, 16 Mar 84 08:22:28 pst
Received: by csnet-relay via xibm-sj; 15 Mar 84 19:41 EST
Date: 15 Mar 1984 15:08:29-PST (Thursday)
From: Joe Halpern <HALPERN%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
To: KNOWLEDGE%su-hnv.arpa@csnet-relay.ARPA
Subject: Knowledge seminar March 23 at IBM with Lotfi Zadeh and Ron Fagin
Cc: konrad%ucsc.csnet@csnet-relay.ARPA
The knowledge seminar continues on March 23 in the main auditorium of
Building 28 at IBM. The first talk will be given by Lotfi Zadeh and
will start at 10 AM; the second talk will be by Ron Fagin, and will
start about 11:15. I've appended the abstracts below. The following
meeting will be on April 6, and the speakers will be Mike Genesereth
and Gio Wiederhold.
FUZZY LOGIC AND COMMONSENSE REASONING -- Lotfi Zadeh, U. C. Berkeley
A feature of fuzzy logic which differentiates it from first-order
logic, modal logic, and multivalent logical systems is that it
allows the use of fuzzy quantifiers exemplified by most, few, almost
all, not very many, frequently, rarely, etc.
By providing a basis for representing the meaning of -- and inferring
from -- propositions containing such quantifiers, fuzzy logic may be
employed in a framework for commonsense reasoning and, in particular,
for reasoning with dispositions, that is, with propositions which are
preponderantly, but not necessarily always, true. (E.g. overeating
causes obesity, slimness is attractive, etc.) We discuss this
application of fuzzy logic and relate it to the rules of combination
of evidence in expert systems.
MODELLING KNOWLEDGE -- Ron Fagin, IBM San Jose
Understanding knowledge is a fundamental
issue, not only in computer science but in many
other disciplines. We want to be able to reason about statements
such as "I don't know if he knows whether or not I know how to break
the code". We propose what we believe to be a general semantic
model of knowledge. It seems to more naturally
model a state of knowledge than any previous proposals (including Kripke
models). It is easy to extend the model to incorporate time, belief, and
ignorance. This talk will be completely self-contained.
∂16-Mar-84 1004 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Ph.D. admissions report
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 10:04:43 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 16 Mar 84 09:47:27-PST
Date: Fri 16 Mar 84 09:47:45-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Ph.D. admissions report
To: reid@SU-GLACIER.ARPA, Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: phd-admissions@SU-GLACIER.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>" of Fri 16 Mar 84 09:33:02-PST
TO BRIAN AND THE COMMITTEE:
THANKS FROM ALL FOR A TIME-CONSUMING JOB SO WELL DONE!
Ed Feigenbaum
-------
∂16-Mar-84 1517 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA goodbye to Amy
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 15:17:26 PST
Date: Fri 16 Mar 84 15:12:46-PST
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: goodbye to Amy
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-4776
Please join the students and staff in wishing Amy farewell and
good luck at 4:30 today in the student lounge on the 3rd floor.
Cake and juice will be provided.
-------
∂16-Mar-84 1521 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Commencement
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 15:21:49 PST
Date: Fri 16 Mar 84 15:12:56-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Commencement
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Would one of you lovely people volunteer to be a Marshal for
Commencement?
Date of Commencement is Sunday, June 17 (Happy Father's Day!)
There will be a rehearsal scheduled for Friday, June 15.
H&S would like to know by Monday. My apologies -- this one sat on my
desk for a few days.
Carolyn
-------
∂16-Mar-84 1530 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lantz@diablo Xerox 1984 University Equipment Grant Program
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 15:29:24 PST
Received: from Diablo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 15 Mar 84 11:14:22-PST
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 84 11:14:18 pst
To: faculty@Score
Cc: csl-faculty@Sierra
Subject: Xerox 1984 University Equipment Grant Program
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@diablo>
On March 1 and 2 I attended meetings at Xerox related to a new
university grant program. I will be sending you all copies of the
grant guidelines, but summarize some of the points here and offer an
assessment of the program with respect to Stanford. Note that Xerox
would prefer that discussion on this subject be as "confidential" as
possible for the time being, meaning that we are requested to discuss
it among ourselves (or other potential grantees) but not, for example,
with (other) companies.
***********************************
"The purposes of this program are to extend the research and teaching
capabilities of the recipient departments and their respective
universities, and to foster research on programming environments and
applications of these environments in computer science...
Xerox believes that the Xerox Development Environment offers many
unique opportunities for applied research for novel workstation
applications. These opportunities include not only workstation
user-interface applications, but applications based on the use of
network services. In addition to these benefits, Xerox believes that
XDE and the XNS standards can be applied fruitfully in the teaching of
system concepts.
Based on the results from the first year of the program, we expect to
continue with an expanded program in 1985, including new recipients in
each successive year.
The grant package will have the following components:
- A functionally complete system of Series 8000 [Dandelion] equipment in
workstation, file server, printer server, and communication server
configurations...
- A license for the current release of office systems software [Star].
- A license for the Xerox Development Environment (XDE) software [Mesa and
Tajo].
- A license for the use of curently released XNS [Xerox Network Systems]
protocols and data standards.
- Xerox standard field service and support for at least 1 year [,
including initial installation].
- Software support for at least 1 year.
- The availability of special training courses for system
administration and XDE...
The proposals can be any length, but should be comprehensive enough to
permit rating and configuration sizing. Applications will be judged
and equipment allocated on the basis of XDE applications. Proposals
will be compared on relative merit, using the following areas as
criteria:
- Contribution to teaching
- Productivity enhancement of system development
- Network systems research
- Support for the XNS standards objectives
- Synergy achieved with other grantees
- Network application integration
- Workstation appications in general, including:
- Value to end-users of current and novel network applications
- Value of user-interfaces
- Integration across applications...
Our main objective in licensing the XNS standards is to build a
community of users and vendors who use these standards to make their
systems work successfully with systems from others in the community.
This requires special effort to insure the successful integration of
products, but gives users a larger set of products from which to choose
in assembling an office system. A related, but separate objective is
to give software developers the right to use these standards in
software that they implement using XDE. This use provides the means to
interface new XDE applications to our network products when specific
knowledge and application of the standards are required. We believe
that the universities will have and will support these two goals.
In addition to these two goals, we believe that the university will
want to use the XNS protocols and data standards in combination with
Xerox' system implementations in a teaching capacity..."
*****************************
So... what does this really mean? Basically, Xerox is concerned about
three things:
1) its continued lack of presence in the academic community;
2) the relatively slow pace at which XNS is being "adopted" by
vendors;
3) a lack of trained Mesa programmers to support continued
product development.
The new grant program is an attempt to address those concerns. In an
ideal world, universities would get a grant and then proceed to
(1) develop XNS software for all their existing equipment; (2) teach
Mesa in programming language classes; and (3) use XDE in many systems
classes. There is no question, for example, that both XNS and
Mesa/XDE are admirable products.
Unfortunately, the program can present some formidable problems. In
particular, the software and hardware to be provided is incompatible
with most hardware and software currently in the hands of the
universities, or anywhere else for that matter. As mentioned above, it
is the universities' responsibility to implement XNS protocols on their
machines, such that their existing equipment can communicate with the
grant equipment. Worse, Xerox still has no intention of releasing Mesa
(the virtual machine), such that compilers could be developed for other
machines. Thus, any software developed in Mesa is useful only on Xerox
equipment. These considerations make a grant rather undesirable from
the viewpoint of a systems researcher.
As to other languages, requests for Interlisp-D or Smalltalk will be
considered on a case-by-case basis, independent of the normal review
process -- simply because both those languages are in a different
administrative domain than Star/Mesa/XDE. However, requests for and
justification thereof should be included in any proposal. I cannot
comment on plans to support other (non-Xerox) languages or network
protocols...
For Stanford, I see the most viable option as teaching. Mesa IS a much
better (systems) language than anything we now teach and XDE is
wonderful programming environment. Likely courses include 108, 142,
143, 146, 246, 343, and 344. Stuart Reges has suggested something like
Brown University's Apollo-based teaching lab.
I will be glad to coordinate any initial thoughts you might have.
However, the ultimate proposal (due April 30) must list one PI and I am
not volunteering for that position at this time.
Keith
P.S. If "csl-faculty@sierra" is subsumed by "faculty@score", could
someone please let me know.
∂16-Mar-84 1533 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier Ph.D. admissions report
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 15:33:25 PST
Received: from Glacier by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 16 Mar 84 09:11:16-PST
Date: Friday, 16 March 1984 09:09:09-PST
To: Faculty@Score
Cc: phd-admissions@Glacier
Subject: Ph.D. admissions report
From: Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>
Well, the admissions committee has done its work. This message
summarizes the results.
We want 25 students. Last year we sent 36 letters and got 21 students.
We have therefore admitted 41 people with the expectation that 25 will
come. If all 41 of them come I will probably have to move to Bolivia
and start a new life trading coca leaves.
Some statistics:
Interest areas: AA AI MTC NA SYS ??? Sex: Male Female
8 16 7 2 5 3 31 10
U.S.A. 29 Australia 2 Belgium 1 Canada 2 P.R.China 1
France 1 Greece 2 India 1 Sweden 1 Venezuela 1
One of the admitted students is an official minority, a Chicano. One is
16 years old and another is 19 years old. We have interviewed the
16-year-old. The percentage of admitted women (25%) is the same as last
year; statistically we are unlikely to get more than 4 of them.
In general the candidates supported by our own faculty ranked very much
lower than might have been expected. I believe that this is because we
have been very haphazard about writing letters of recommendation for
the candidates we support.
There were 11 applicants who are currently Stanford students. Of them
we admitted Qian, Pack, Jonsson, Bronstein, Schoen, Mohammed, and
(probably) Ponceleon. 2 of that group would not have been admitted
except for the faculty whiteball letters we received. Pack and Mohammed
are Honors Coop students. Ponceleon is not included in the 41 count and
has not yet been decided.
In my 8 years of working on admissions at CMU and Stanford, this is the
strongest batch of AA and MTC people I have ever seen. We admitted 15;
if even half of them come this will be an enormous pool of geniuses in
that area. The systems and NA applicants were not dazzling this year
(but naturally they were good or we would not have admitted them).
I am not going to make the admit list public. Naturally any of you is
welcome to go down to Marlie or Marilynn and look at the list, but
after what happened last year with Cornell raiding our list when it was
sent out in computer mail (forwarded to Cornell by some sympathizer) I
do not want the list distributed online until we get acceptances.
Brian, for the committee: Vaughan Pratt, Christos Papadimitriou,
Jim Wilkinson, Andy Yao, Marianne Winslett,
Stan Rosenschein, Yoram Moses, John Herriot.
Invaluable help provided by Marilynn Walker
and Marlie Yearwood.
∂16-Mar-84 1537 pang%ISL.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Special Seminar given by Tom Leighton
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 15:37:44 PST
Received: from ISL by Score with Pup; Fri 16 Mar 84 12:57:59-PST
Date: Friday, 16 Mar 1984 12:59-PST
To: aflb.all at SCORE, alon at ISL, greene at ISL, itzhak at ISL,
yigal at ISL
cc: pang at ISL, abbas at ISL
Subject: Special Seminar given by Tom Leighton
From: pang at ISL
SEMINAR
Tuesday, March 27, 1984
Durand Room 450
2:00 pm
TIGHT BOUNDS ON THE COMPLEXITY OF PARALLEL SORTING
Tom Leighton
MIT
Abstract
In the talk, we describe tight upper and lower bounds on the
number of processors, information transfer, wire area and time
necessary to sort N numbers in a bounded-degree fixed-connection
network. In particular, we construct the first N-node, bounded
degree fixed connection network capable of sorting N numbers in
O(logN) steps. We also discuss applications of the results to the
design of large-scale, highly-parallel computers.
∂16-Mar-84 1602 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:santha%ucbernie@Berkeley Re: Special Seminar given by Tom Leighton
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 16:02:25 PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 16 Mar 84 15:38:08-PST
Received: from ucbernie.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.24/4.25)
id AA27503; Fri, 16 Mar 84 15:38:05 pst
Received: by ucbernie.ARPA (4.24/4.25)
id AA00637; Fri, 16 Mar 84 15:31:30 pst
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 84 15:31:30 pst
From: santha%ucbernie@Berkeley (Miklos Santha)
Message-Id: <8403162331.AA00637@ucbernie.ARPA>
To: aflb.all@SCORE, alon@ISL, greene@ISL, itzhak@ISL, pang@ISL, yigal@ISL
Subject: Re: Special Seminar given by Tom Leighton
Cc: abbas@ISL
∂17-Mar-84 0000 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Abstract for Manacher's talk
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 84 23:59:57 PST
Date: Fri 16 Mar 84 23:58:03-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Abstract for Manacher's talk
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
Here is the promised abstract for last Tuesday's talk.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3/13/84 - Prof. Glenn Manacher (U. of Illinois - Chicago)
"New average case results for the maximum circle chord clique problem"
Existing techniques due to Buckingham (also independently Rotem and
Urrutia) for finding the largest clique (under intersection) of a set
of n circle-chords, given their endpoints as input, yield an algorithm
running in worst-case time O(n↑2) and space O(n).
If the chords are random on the circle, in the sense that both
endpoints are placed on the circumference at random, it may be shown
that Buckingham's algorithm also yields time O(n↑2) on the average.
A new technique based on Hunt and Szymanski's method for finding
longest common subsequences when repeated symbols are infrequent
yields a linear-space worst-case time O(n↑2 log n), average-case
O(n↑{3/2}) algorithm. We believe a minor modification of this
technique will yield an improvement in this average case to time
O(n log n) .
-------
∂17-Mar-84 0006 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Last AFLB this quarter
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 84 00:06:22 PST
Date: Sat 17 Mar 84 00:02:02-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Last AFLB this quarter
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
Special AFLB seminar (Note date and time!)
3/20/84 - Prof. Rave Kannan (MIT)
"Are the bits of sqrt(2), pi random?"
Abstract already sent.
**** Time and place: TUESDAY, March 20, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ***
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year have been filled
so far.
For more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics
you might want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂18-Mar-84 1341 LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA DOWNTIME ON TURING
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 84 13:41:25 PST
Date: Sun 18 Mar 84 13:41:46-PST
From: Michele <LEISER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: DOWNTIME ON TURING
To: bboard@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
******************************************************************************
Turing, CSLI's DEC-2060 will be down until noon Monday at the earliest. We
have encountered tape drive problems and have field service on call for 8AM
Monday.
Sorry for the inconvenience!
******************************************************************************
-------
∂19-Mar-84 1425 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA scheduling the Automatic Seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 84 14:25:08 PST
Date: Mon 19 Mar 84 14:23:35-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: scheduling the Automatic Seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
From the responses I've received so far, the best time seems to be Friday early
afternoon or midafternoon, and second-best Monday midafternoon. I'm willing
to reconsider these if you have conflicts, but tell me @i(quickly).
P.S. there was an objection to "Automatic Inference". Maybe I should go back
to "Deduction".
- Richard
-------
∂19-Mar-84 1430 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA scheduling the Automatic Seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 84 14:29:52 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 19 Mar 84 14:29:29-PST
Date: Mon 19 Mar 84 14:23:35-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: scheduling the Automatic Seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
From the responses I've received so far, the best time seems to be Friday early
afternoon or midafternoon, and second-best Monday midafternoon. I'm willing
to reconsider these if you have conflicts, but tell me @i(quickly).
P.S. there was an objection to "Automatic Inference". Maybe I should go back
to "Deduction".
- Richard
-------
∂20-Mar-84 0939 SHIEBER@SRI-AI.ARPA An invitation
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 84 09:39:08 PST
Date: Tue 20 Mar 84 09:39:39-PST
From: shieber@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: An invitation
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
In honor of the many visiting CSLI and surrounds this week, and in
celebration of the long-awaited advent of spring, you are invited to a
lawn party on Thursday, the 22nd of March from 5 to 7 at 2557 Webster
in Palo Alto. Gin, tonic and sunset will be provided. Maps are
available upon request.
-- Stuart
P.S. Because many of the visitors, and even locals, have no
electronic mail facilities, I would appreciate your informing them of
the party by more conventional means if and when you run into them.
-------
∂20-Mar-84 1338 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEMINAR -- March 27
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 84 13:38:25 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 20 Mar 84 12:55:36-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 20 Mar 84 12:51:56-PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 20 Mar 84 12:54:30-PST
Received: from ucbkim.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.24/4.25)
id AA01935; Tue, 20 Mar 84 12:51:58 pst
Received: by ucbkim.ARPA (4.24/4.22)
id AA24408; Tue, 20 Mar 84 12:51:33 pst
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 84 12:51:33 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8403202051.AA24408@ucbkim.ARPA>
To: cogsci-friends%ucbkim@Berkeley
Subject: UCB COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEMINAR -- March 27
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1984
IDS 237B - Cognitive Science Seminar
Time: Tuesday, March 27, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
***** Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker *****
*** in the IHL Library (Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2 ***
CHILD LANGUAGE AND UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR:
`SUBJECTLESS' SENTENCES IN EARLY ENGLISH
Nina Hyams
Department of Linguistics, UCLA
This talk will center around certain well-known properties
of early child language -- the presence of `subjectless'
sentences and the general absence of modals and auxiliaries.
It will be argued that the co-occurrence of these properties
is not accidental, but follows as an effect of a particular
principle of Universal Grammar. A model of grammatical
development will be proposed which incorporates Universal
Grammar as a basic component, and this model will be com-
pared to similar systems in the development of other cogni-
tive abilities.
**********
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
Date Speaker Affiliation
April 3 Barbara Tversky Stanford, Psychology
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI; CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy; CSLI
∂20-Mar-84 1341 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Visit by Vavasis
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 84 13:41:11 PST
Date: Tue 20 Mar 84 13:37:59-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Visit by Vavasis
To: phd-admissions@SU-GLACIER.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Steve Vavasis, one of our top PhD admissions, will be visiting our
Berkeley competition next week. I told him to come visit us as well for
a day. He is interested in Theory, and has already a remarkable result on
approximately satisfying Boolean formulas. I think we should do all we can
to get him.
I did explain to him that next week is break at Stanford, and he is likely to
miss a few people he would like to see. He is going to be here either
Wednesday or Thursday. Please let me know if you would like to talk to him,
and what time would be most appropriate for you. Are you available for
lunch either of these two days?
---Christos.
-------
∂20-Mar-84 1956 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:mis%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 84 19:55:54 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 20 Mar 84 19:50:53-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 20 Mar 84 19:45:13-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 20 Mar 84 19:47:10-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Tue 20 Mar 84 19:43:37-PST
Date: 20 Mar 1984 19:44:13-PST
From: mis at SU-Tahoma
From mis Tue Mar 20 19:41:43 1984
To: 'bboard@kestrel' 'csli-friends%sri-ai@score' 'su-bboard@score'
Subject: Seminar on Protocol Analysis
Cc: mis
Seminar Announcement:
Protocol Analysis: Methodology, Evaluation and Applications.
M. Pavel and D. Sleeman
Time: Wednesdays, 1:00 - 3:00
Place: Jordan Hall, Room 100
DESCRIPTION
Building systems in AI and psychological models of complex behaviors
requires increasingly richer data collection methods.
While protocol analysis shows promise of becoming one such method
it lacks sufficient theoretical foundations and practical directives.
This seminar will attempt to bring together computer scientists
and psychologists for discussion of the area.
The seminar will include:
1. General Approaches to Protocol Analysis.
Verbal protocol analyses.
The notion of converging evidence.
Structural approach.
2. Evaluation of Protocol Analysis
Sufficiency of theoretical substrate.
Evaluation of constraints
Stochastic characteristics of protocols.
3. Application of Protocol Analysis
Expert Systems
Algebraic skills
Computer programming
∂21-Mar-84 0231 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #13
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 84 02:31:24 PST
Date: Monday, March 19, 1984 5:31PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #13
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 21 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 13
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Definition,
Implementations - Arrays & IF-Prolog & Indexing,
LP Library - Update
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 15 Mar 84 20:07:30-PST
From: Motoi Suwa <Suwa@SUMEX-AIM>
Subject: Quiz
Here is a very simple, but interesting quiz:
Define the predicate var(X) which succeeds iff X is a variable.
Note: There is a complete solution.
-- Hideyuki Nakashima
------------------------------
Date: Wed 14 Mar 84 03:50:44-EST
From: KenN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
Subject: Arrays
Manny Rayner had worked on a scheme for arrays which
like Cohen's was based upon each array element keeping a
history of updates. His scheme was based upon a version
numbers (later it became version lists). He eventually
became a fan of the scheme we use in LM-PRolog, namely
an array version consists of a real array and data
structure describing differences. He wrote the
following commentary to Cohen's previous entry in the
Digest. I agree with what he says.
Continuing the Arrays-in-Prolog Saga:
Having seen the LISP code, I agree with O'Keefe that
Cohen's scheme is extremely ingenious, and certainly
seems to have at least one clear advantage over ours,
namely that updating takes constant time and space. In
attempting to make a proper comparison of the two
schemes, we are somewhat handicapped by the fact that
there is (as yet) a certain lack of applications which
use the full power of the idea, I.e. which have updating
of both "old" and "new" arrays. I would make the
following points:
1. If array usage is "lisp-like", the two schemes are
comparable.
2. If usage is not "lisp-like", then access time in
both schemes is in general proportional to the total
number of updates that have been performed on the
array. This overhead will in general be unacceptable.
3. We suspect that, in this case, the only way to get
reasonable performance will be to employ a strategy
of replacing "critical" versions of the array by
"concrete" copies, I.e. converting them from virtual
to real arrays. This is easy to do in our scheme, but
appears to be impossible in Cohen's, since copying a
single version of the array has no effect on other
versions that may depend on it.
Further experimentation is clearly needed to produce
a balanced verdict.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 5-Mar-84 2:28:36-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10)
Subject: IF-Prolog
Do you know the word "chutzpah"? The standard
example is a man who has murdered both his parents,
and in Court asks for mercy on the grounds
that he is an orphan. Here's another example.
I have under my left hand at this moment ...
(now I've taken my hand off it) some promotional
literature for IF-Prolog, which is produced by an
outfit called InterFace Computer GmbH in Germany. On the
front cover (which carries in large letters "Prolog made
in Germany") they have a quotation from Alain Colmerauer,
from D. Bjoerner, and from me. The quotation from me is
repeated on the last of the 15 sheets. Obviously
it's good one. The quotation is in fact in praise of
their debugger.
I have no desire to withdraw my praise of that
debugger, but you ought to know the context in
which it was written. InterFace Computer were the
first commercial outfit to get a licence for EdCAAD's
C-Prolog. The British Technology Group, who administer
products that come out of UGC-funded research in
the UK, were dragging their feet, and hadn't got a
proper commercial agreement worked out. So as a
favour (and as a lever to try to get the BTG
de-leaded) InterFace Computer were given an ACADEMIC
licence for C-Prolog. InterFace Computer have
never had a commercial licence for C-Prolog,
and have rejected in the strongest terms the
suggestion that they should have one. Well, there's
no harm in that. But it came to EdCAAD's notice
that InterFace Computer were about to distribute their
Prolog system through Springer Verlag, and EdCAAD
said to Springer, "Can you assure us that this isn't
OUR Prolog they're trying to sell you?". To cut a
long story short, Springer finally arranged that
someone who knew something about C-Prolog would go to
Munich and look at the sources of IF Prolog.
Well, I went. Springer paid my air fare, and
InterFace Computer paid for my hotel accomodation
and food. The date had been arranged with Springer so
that a Springer representative could be there.
He wasn't. (Or she, or it.) The InterFace people were
all very nice to me. I had gone expecting to find that
IF-Prolog was completely new. After all, I thought, if
they knew their product was a ripoff, surely they'd
back down rather than let anyone know. I still hadn't
learned about chutzpah. While I found that the structure
of the interpreter was original (it is neater than C-Prolog,
but C-Prolog is a mess so that you can save the current
state), and that the debugger was entirely novel and quite
pleasant to use, nevertheless
[1] the program was no where near finished. I found several
bugs, which were fixed while I was there, but what I
really have in mind was the way the interpreter carefully
distinguished between local and global variables (like
DEC-10 and C-Prolog) and then proceeded to treat them
exactly alike. Because of the length of time involved,
I was left with some doubt as to whether this was the
program InterFace had intended selling in the first place,
or whether perhaps it had been written after EdCAAD's
letter to Springer. Preben Folkjaer seemed to me to be too
compentent to have taken so long on such an unfinished
program.
[2] Some of the claims made in the promotional literature
InterFace had been handing out at IJCAI 83 were
false (there was no IBM PC version, for example), and
others were true only if you re-interpreted them.
What I have in mind here is the claimed garbage collection
(no, only 'trimcore', IF Prolog *when I saw it* did not
garbage collect the stacks) and tail recursion optimisation
(when I saw it this only applied to predicates with no
arguments! and there was another restriction I've forgotten).
[3] This is the real point:
A blind baby couldn't have missed the fact that about 30 pages
(I haven't the report by me, but it was no less than that) was
essentially verbatim C-Prolog, with only minor editing.
The part of C-Prolog which had been incorported into IF-Prolog
was I/O. There could have been some doubt about output, as there
aren't all that many ways of coding "write", but fortunately they
had preserved all the bugs intact. I have seen the following
Prolog readers: DEC-10 Prolog, PDP-11 Prolog, C-Prolog, York
Prolog, UNSW Prolog, Prolog-X, PopLog, Leuven Prolog, and
MU-Prolog. Of these, only MU-Prolog's reader at all resembles
C-Prolog's, the others are radically different. And MU-Prolog's
author had the honesty to include the C-Prolog copyright
notice in his program.
I did not have the opportunity to benchmark IF-Prolog, I
was therelong enough to read the sources and write my report
and that was it. It is a tagged system, and the way it is done
suggests to me that it may be inherently slower than C-Prolog.
And C-Prolog in turn is slower than the current versions of
Prolog-X and Poplog. A serious lack in IF-Prolog is
that they didn't support term comparison (and from the
promotional literature ... my left hand is on it again ...
they still don't) so they haven't got setof or bagof.
(By the way, PopLog hasn't got term comparison either, but
it HAS got setof.) They do have findall, but anyone
with the Clocksin & Mellish book.
Well, given that an independent judge (I have had a very
great deal to do with C-Prolog, but I don't get a penny on
its sales) had ruled that there was enough of C-Prolog
in IF-Prolog for them to be in violation of the terms of the
academic licence, but that there was a lot that was original,
and given that said independent judge said he thought they
ought to come to terms with EdCAAD, who were principally
after recognition and weren't intending to demand much
in the way of royalties, you'd think that they would
either try to discredit my report or else that they'd
start talking to EdCAAD.
Unfortunately, EdCAAD had been unwise enough to include
a copy of a commerical licence form in their letter to Springer.
So InterFace are suing EdCAAD for "unfair competition"!
And they're using an unauthorised extract from a report
which politely pointed out what wasn't ripped off and what
WAS in their sales material!
THAT'S CHUTZPAH!
-- Richard A. O'Keefe.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 19-Mar-84 19:52:37-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10)
Subject: Doing your own indexing in DEC-10 and C-Prolog
DEC-10 Prolog indexes *compiled* clauses on their first
argument. Neither DEC-10 Prolog nor C-Prolog indexes
interpreted clauses at all, clause just get tried one
after the other. This is ok for append, but by the time
you have a table with > 100 clauses in it it's not so good.
It would be nice if Prolog provided a flexible and powerful
indexing scheme, and several interesting ones have been
proposed. A couple of Prolog interpreters have been
reported which support predicates held on disc and indexed
quite well.
But what about if you've already got DEC-10 Prolog or C
Prolog? Well, you can do your OWN indexing. The problem
is that you want a way of getting at a clause without
calling clause(Head,Body) and having to skip all the ones
in front. DEC-10 and C-Prolog have soomething called
DATA BASE REFERENCES
which let you do this. See section 4.9 "Internal Database"
in pp49-50 of the DEC-10 Prolog manual 1981. There is a
similar section in the C-Prolog manual, I think it has the same
title. Basically, a data base reference is just a pointer to
a clause (or data base record). If you have such a pointer
(call it Ref), clause(Head, Body, Ref) will pick that clause
out of the data base *without search* and unify the pieces against
Head and Body.
As an exercise, I wrote a toy program to load the 'country'
relation from CHAT-80 (156 clauses, 10 arguments, all arguments
ground), build an index (using ASSOC.PL, I told you it was a toy)
for two of the arguments, and then use the index to access the
relation. Accessing was picking up 9 clauses scattered through
the table. The times to do this 10 times were
using clause/2: 434 ms
interpreted indexing: 394 ms
compiled indexing: 134 ms
Now this is using binary search, so it can't compete with the
DEC-10 compiler's indexing for the first argument, which is sort
of hashed. But it was easy to build an index for more than one
argument.
My conclusion is that it isn't just *possible* to code your own
"access methods" in DEC-10 Prolog, it may be *useful* to do so
on sufficiently large tables.
A secondary conclusion is that a new primitive
termhash(+Term:any, +Depth:integer, +NBuckets:integer,
-Hash:integer)
which computs a hash code from a term (in which any variables
must be deeper than Depth) would be useful. One would still
have to use trees of some sort to get to the buckets, but the
routing decision would be shift and mask, not term comparison
as in my toy program. {computs=>computes}
------------------------------
Date: Mon 19 Mar 84 17:07:59-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE>
Subject: LP Library - Update
Richard O'Keefe submitted a utility for converting formulae
in first-order logic to clauses, e.g.
all(X, man(X) => some(Y, food(Y) & likes(X,Y) ))
=> [clause([food(f-1(X))],[man(X)])
,clause([likes(X,f-1(X))],[man(X)])]
It hasn't been extensively tested, but no-one has reported
any errors yet.
The utility is available for FTP from {SU-SCORE} as:
SCORE:<Prolog>Clause.PL
For those that could use a copy but cannot FTP, send me
a note.
If you have something useful, please send it in. It might
seem to some that Richard O'Keefe the only person in the
world writing code.
-- ed
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂21-Mar-84 1322 @MIT-MC:MILLGRAM@MIT-OZ bibliographical database
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 84 13:22:49 PST
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 1984 16:05 EST
Message-ID: <MILLGRAM.12001182621.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: MILLGRAM%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: phil-sci%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: mpsg%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: bibliographical database
In the course of writing a thesis on philosophy of mind,
I have developed a scribe-type bibliographical database
containing most of the central literature on functionalism,
and some of the not-so-central. Please feel free to help
yourself to it if it will be at all useful to you; it's in
<millgram.thesis>functionalism.bib. (However, please refrain
from making changes to my copy of the file.)
Lije
∂21-Mar-84 1234 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:BRESNAN.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA visit by Abdelkader Fassi Fehri
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 84 12:34:14 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 12:24:18-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 12:20:32-PST
Received: from PARC-GW.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 12:22:58-PST
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 21 MAR 84 12:17:54 PST
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 84 11:31 PST
From: BRESNAN.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
Subject: visit by Abdelkader Fassi Fehri
To: LFG↑.pa@PARC-GW.ARPA, csli-friends@sri-ai.ARPA
cc: BRESNAN.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
Reply-To: BRESNAN.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
Monday evening Abdu Fassi Fehri is arriving from Morocco. He will be
here for three days, then go to LA for the African Linguistics
conference. When he returns, he will be here at CSLI for a two-month
visit.
Abdu is the foremost generative linguist working on Arabic, and will be
a resource to everyone working on syntax, agreement, morphology, and
linguistics generally. Initially--that is, until his housing situation
is firmed up--you can contact him through me or by leaving a message
with Leslie Batema (lb@sri-ai).
If anyone knows of a reasonable place (i.e. rent not exorbitant) for him
to stay within bicycling distance of Stanford & PARC, please let us
know.
Thanks--
Joan
∂21-Mar-84 1854 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA Course Announcement -- Lisp: Language and Literature
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 84 18:53:59 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 18:43:03-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 18:39:15-PST
Received: from PARC-GW.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 18:41:48-PST
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 21 MAR 84 18:38:45 PST
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 84 18:38 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
Subject: Course Announcement -- Lisp: Language and Literature
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
Reply-to: BrianSmith.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
The following course will be the CSLI Seminar on Computer Languages
for the Spring Quarter. If you are interested in attending, please read
the notes on dates and registration, at the end.
Lisp: Language and Literature
A systematic introduction to the concepts and practices of programming,
based on a simple reconstructed dialect of LISP. The aim is both to
convey and to make explicit the programming knowledge that is
typically acquired through apprenticeship and practice. The material
will be presented under a linguistic reconstruction, using vocabulary
that should be of use in studying any linguistic system. Considerable
hands-on programming experience will be provided.
Although intended primarily for linguists, philosophers, and
mathematicians, anyone interested in computation is welcome. In
particular, no previous exposure to computation will be assumed.
However, since we will aim for rigorous analyses, some prior familiarity
with formal systems is essential. Also, the course will be more like a
course in literature and creative writing, than like a course in, say,
French as a second language. The use of LISP, in other words, will
be primarily as a vehicle for larger issues, not so much an object of
study in and of itself. Since LISP (unlike French) is really very
simple, we will be able to teach it in class and lab sessions. Tutorial
instruction and some individual programming assistance will be provided.
Topics to be covered include:
-- Procedural and data abstraction;
-- Objects, modularity, state, and encapsulation;
-- Input/output, notation, and communication protocols;
-- Meta-linguistic abstraction, and problems of intensional grain;
-- Architecture, implementation, and abstract machines;
-- Introspection, self-reference, meta-circular interpreters, and reflection.
Throughout, we will pay particular attention to the following themes:
-- Procedural and declarative notions of semantics;
-- Interpretation, compilation, and other models of processing;
-- Implicit vs. explicit representation of information;
-- Contextual relativity, scoping mechanisms, and locality;
-- Varieties of language: internal, external, theoretical;
-- Syntax and abstract structure: functionalism & representationalism.
Organizational Details:
Instructor: Brian C. Smith, Xerox PARC/Stanford CSLI; 494-4336 (Xerox);
497-1710 (Stanford), "BrianSmith@PARC" (Arpanet).
Classes: Tuesdays and Thursdays, 2:00 - 3:30, in Room G19, Redwood
Hall, Jordan Quad.
NB: Since we will be using the computers just now being installed
at CSLI, there may be some delay in getting the course underway.
In particular, it is possible that we will not be able to start until
mid-April. A follow-up note with more details will be sent out as
soon as plans are definite.
Registration: Again, because of the limited number of machines, we
may have to restrict participation somewhat. We would therefore
like anyone who intends to take this course to notify Brian Smith
as soon as possible. Note that the course will be quite demanding:
10 to 20 hours per week will probably be required, depending on
background.
Sections: As well as classes, there will be section/discussion periods
on a regular basis, at times to be arranged at the beginning of the
course.
Reading: The course will be roughly based on the "Structure and
Interpretation of Computer Programs" textbook by Abelson and
Sussman that has been used at M.I.T., although the linguistic
orientation will affect our dialects and terminology.
Laboratory: Xerox 1108s (Dandelions) will be provided by CSLI, to be
used for problem sets and programming assignments. Instructors &
teaching assistants will be available for assistance at pre-arranged
times.
Credit: The course may be listed as a special topics course in Computer
Science. However (in case that does not work out) anyone wishing
to take it for credit should get in touch, so that we can arrange
reading course credit.
∂21-Mar-84 2001 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:poser%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Labov talk
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 84 20:00:52 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 19:50:32-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 19:46:55-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 19:49:25-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Wed 21 Mar 84 19:46:01-PST
Date: Wednesday, 21 Mar 1984 19:46-PST
To: csli-friends@sri-ai at Score
Subject: Labov talk
From: Bill Poser <poser@Su-psych>
Professor William Labov of the University of Pennsylvania
will give a talk entitled:
The Continued Divergence of Black and White Speech
in Philadelphia
on at 19:00 Sunday 25 March 1984 in Room 40 Jordan Hall (Bldg. 420) at
Stanford. The talk is sponsored by the Stanford Linguistics Department
and the Bay Area Sociolinguistics Association. Immediately prior to the
talk, starting at 17:00, there will be a potluck dinner in the fourth floor
lounge of Jordan Hall.
∂21-Mar-84 2038 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 24, March 22, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 84 20:38:34 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 20:37:51-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 21 Mar 84 20:23:57-PST
Date: Wed 21 Mar 84 20:26:20-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 24, March 22, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
CSLI Newsletter
March 22, 1984 * * * Number 24
A weekly publication of
The Center for the Study of Language and Information
Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
-----------
** CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THURSDAY, MARCH 22, AND THURSDAY, MARCH 29 **
Because of the Kaplan Conference (sponsored by CSLI and the
Stanford Philosophy Department) and the end of the quarter this week,
there will be no CSLI activities except the 3:30 tea this Thursday.
The CSLI Colloquium by Aaron Ciccourel has been postponed from March
22 to April 5. The TINLunch discussion that was to be led by Brian
Smith on March 29 has likewise been postponed until April 5.
REGULAR CSLI THURSDAY ACTIVITIES WILL RESUME ON APRIL 5.
-----------
SCHEDULE AND ROOM RESERVATIONS FOR SPRING QUARTER
In making plans for seminars and meetings during the spring
quarter, be sure to check with the receptionist, Frances Igoni
(497-0628), to reserve the seminar room. The room has been in great
demand, so it is necessary to reserve it early for your group. It is
also very important to keep Frances informed weekly of changes or
cancellations of meetings so that she can make the room available to
someone else and also be able to respond to questions about seminar
and meeting schedules.
Please also send your spring-quarter schedules to the CSLI
Newsletter (CSLI-Newsletter@SRI-AI) by Tuesday, April 3, so that they
can get circulated in the first issue of the new quarter.
-----------
SECOND VISIT BY CSLI ADVISORY PANEL APRIL 5-7
The CSLI Advisory Panel will be visiting the Center from April 5
through April 7 (Thursday through Saturday) to participate in regular
Center activities and to talk with members of the Center, as they did
last November. Their visit and subsequent comments and recom-
mendations half a year ago were extremely valuable and we're looking
forward to their being here again. So far, all the panel members have
indicated that they will be able to participate: Rod Burstall, Jerry
Fodor, George Miller, Nils Nilsson, Barbara Partee, and Bob Ritchie.
-----------
VISIT BY ABDU FASSI FEHRI FROM MOROCCO
On Monday evening, March 26, Abdu Fassi Fehri is arriving from
Morocco. He will be here for three days and then go to Los Angeles
for the African Linguistics conference. When he returns, he will be
here at CSLI for a two-month visit. Fehri is the foremost generative
linguist working on Arabic and will be a resource to everyone working
on syntax, agreement, morphology, and linguistics generally.
Initially, you can contact him through me or by leaving a message with
Leslie Batema (lb@sri-ai).
- Joan Bresnan
! Page 2
WORKSHOP ON ACCENTOLOGY
A CSLI-sponsored workshop on accentology was held March 13-15.
Topics included the relationship between timing and accent in the
Scandinavian languages, morphological determination of accent in a
variety of languages, and the nature and formal representaion of
accent in the word and the sentence, as well as in discourse for
American English. Participants were from several research
laboratories and universities. From Bell Laboratories (Murray Hill)
were Osamu Fujimura, Mark Liberman, Janet Pierrehumbert, and Gosta
Bruce (also Lund University, Sweden); from CSLI, Meg Withgott; from
Stanford Linguistics Department, William Poser and Will Leben; from
the University of California at Los Angeles, Stephen Anderson; from
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Per-Kristian Halvorsen; and from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Paul Kiparsky.
-----------
AREA CL MEETINGS
Beginning Monday, March 19, we will be holding a weekly Area CL
meeting and informal lunch. The meeting will be from 1 to 3 every
Monday in the Ventura conference room. Its primary goal is to better
define the overall direction for Area CL work and to begin moving
towards a more coherent program. We will begin by having
presentations of the various aspects of the work that are already
under way. These presentations are intended to be in greater depth
than those at the computation seminar first quarter, so that there can
be substantive technical discussion. The meeting is intended for
active participants in Area CL, but others will be welcome as long as
it doesn't get too large. After the initial presentations, we will
take a few sessions to formulate a report on current activities and
develop a plan for the coming years. The first presentation (March
19) was Brian Smith, talking about his work on MANTIQ (Area CL.3), an
architecture for reasoning.
The lunch will be a chance to discuss informally the technical
issues, plus organizational, political, and whatever else. At least
initially we will have no agenda, but just use it as an opportunity
for people to get together and share what is on their minds. The
lunches will be at 12, also in the seminar room.
-----------
END OF TALKWARE SEMINAR (CS 377)
The seminar will not be continued next quarter. It is being
superseded by a more general area CL (computation languages) seminar
at CSLI, which is intended primarily for people working in that
project. My thanks to all of the guest speakers who made these last
two quarters so interesting.
- Terry Winograd
----------
! Page 3
MARCH 22 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPUTER COLLOQUIUM
Richard M. Tong
Advanced Information and Decision Systems
RUBRIC: An Intelligent Aid for Information Retrieval
In this talk I will describe an ongoing research project that is
concerned with developing a computer based aid for information
retrieval from natural language databases. Unlike other attempts to
improve upon Boolean keyword retrieval systems, this research
concentrates on providing an easily used rule-based language for
expressing retrieval concepts. This language draws upon work in
production rule systems in AI and allows the user to construct queries
that give better precision and recall than more traditional forms.
The talk will include a discussion of the main elements in the
system (which is written in LISP and C), the key research issues
(including some comments on the important role that uncertainty plays)
and some man-machine interface questions (in particular, the problem
of providing knowledge elicitation tools).
Thursday, March 22, 1984--4:00 pm--28C Lower Auditorium
*** Please note the location change ***
Hewlett-Packard, 1651 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA
Be sure to arrive at the building's lobby on time, so that you may be
escorted to the meeting room.
-----------
UCB COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEMINAR
Time: Tuesday, March 27, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker in the IHL Library
(Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2:00.
CHILD LANGUAGE AND UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR:
`SUBJECTLESS' SENTENCES IN EARLY ENGLISH
Nina Hyams, Department of Linguistics, UCLA
This talk will center around certain well-known properties of
early child language--the presence of `subjectless' sentences and the
general absence of modals and auxiliaries. It will be argued that the
co-occurrence of these properties is not accidental, but follows as an
effect of a particular principle of Universal Grammar. A model of
grammatical development will be proposed which incorporates Universal
Grammar as a basic component, and this model will be compared to
similar systems in the development of other cognitive abilities.
April 3 Barbara Tversky Stanford, Psychology
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI; CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy; CSLI
! Page 4
SEMINAR ON PROTOCOL ANALYSIS
Protocol Analysis: Methodology, Evaluation and Applications.
M. Pavel and D. Sleeman
Wednesdays, 1:00 - 3:00, Jordan Hall, Room 100
The seminar will include:
1. General Approaches to Protocol Analysis.
Verbal protocol analyses.
The notion of converging evidence.
Structural approach.
2. Evaluation of Protocol Analysis
Sufficiency of theoretical substrate.
Evaluation constraints
Stochastic characteristics of protocols.
3. Application of Protocol Analysis
Expert Systems
Algebraic skills
Computer programming
-----------
CALL FOR PAPERS -- CHDL-85
7th International Symposium on
Computer Hardware Description Languages and their Applications
August 29-31, 1985 -- Keidanren Building, Tokyo, Japan
Sponsored by the International Federation for Information Processing
(IFIP) and the Information Processing Society of Japan (IPSJ),
organized by IFIP TC-10 and IFIP WG 10.2, in cooperation with IEEE-CS
and ACM. The theme of the symposium is: TOOL, METHOD, AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION. The Symposium focuses on the design process as a whole.
The objective is to cover the various aspects of (computer-supported)
specification, verification, modelling, evaluation, and design of
computer systems based on suitable design languages.
Topic areas are:
- From Specification to Implementation of Digital Systems
- Computer System/Hardware Description Languages
- Tool Integration
- Acceptance and Experience
DEADLINE FOR PAPERS: DECEMBER 15, 1984
NOTIFICATION TO AUTHORS: MARCH 15, 1985
DEADLINE FOR FINAL VERSION: MAY 15, 1985
General Chairman: Program Chairman:
Professor Tohru Moto-oka Dr. Cees Jan Koomen
Department of Electrical Engineering BCS/System Engineeering
University of Tokyo Philips International
Hongo, 7 chome P.O. Box 32
Bunkyo-ku 1200 JD Hilversum, The Netherlands
Tokyo, Japan telephone (31) (35) 892292
telephone (212) 2111 ext. 6652 Telex 43712
-------
∂22-Mar-84 0859 @SRI-AI.ARPA:MICHELE@SU-CSLI.ARPA DOWNTIME ON TURING
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 08:59:20 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 22 Mar 84 08:58:56-PST
Date: Thu 22 Mar 84 08:55:26-PST
From: Bwana Michele <Michele@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: DOWNTIME ON TURING
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Turing will go down from 3pm to 4:30 today for preventative maintenance.
Please save your work by 2:45 and logout.
Thank you!
-------
∂22-Mar-84 0908 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE name addition
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 09:08:07 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 22 Mar 84 12:03-EST
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 84 08:58:54 PST
From: Dale A. Mills <mills@AEROSPACE>
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Subject: name addition
Please add my name to your distribution list.
∂22-Mar-84 1031 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Csli-folks list
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 10:31:52 PST
Date: Thu 22 Mar 84 10:16:06-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Csli-folks list
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
When we move over to the new csli computer, I intend to separate the
csli folks and the csli friends lists. This means the people who do
not have turing accounts will be added to the csli-friends list. Those
with turing accounts can read csli friends on the bboard.
If you are on turing and want to continue to receive friends mail,
please notify me. People at sites with a large group interested in
CSLI might wish to set up a bboard there.
Emma Pease (please send replies to csli-requests)
ps. I will notify everyone when I officially change over.
-------
∂22-Mar-84 1043 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@navajo For unto us a child is born,
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 10:43:02 PST
Received: from Navajo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 22 Mar 84 10:37:46-PST
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 84 10:37 PST
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@navajo>
Subject: For unto us a child is born,
To: su-bboards@score
Cc: faculty@score
a son is given,
and the government deficit (or some portion thereof) shall be upon his shoulder;
and his name shall be called Ross David Cheriton.
His yoke is easy (1 1/2 hour) labor and his burthen (8 lbs. 1 oz.) is light.
But who may abide the day of his coming
and who shall stand when he appeareth?
Well, I did, along with Iris, Olivia and Robert.
In fact, everyone is fine (except possibly George Frederic Handel).
∂22-Mar-84 1440 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA trailers
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 14:39:54 PST
Date: Thu 22 Mar 84 14:38:58-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: trailers
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We will begin installing the trailers on Monday, and they should be
ready for occupancy on April 5 or 6. (Possible oa day or so earlier.)
So that the Building Committee and I can begin planning the use of
space, would you please let me know your needs and those of any
one else you know of who will require space now and throughout the next
academic year. We are assuming that all CSLI researchers would like
office space here, and we are expecting many visitors, 10 postdocs,
etc. Since space will still be tight, will you give me some
indication of the amount of time you would like to spend here and how
strongly you prefer a single or double office. For visitors, will you
tell me the dates they will require an office and give me an indication
of the amount of time they will use it.
Thanks.
B.
-------
∂22-Mar-84 1454 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA PS on trailers
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 14:53:53 PST
Date: Thu 22 Mar 84 14:54:16-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: PS on trailers
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
I forgot to remind you that there will be a classroom in the trailer.
Schedule that with Francis as you do the Ventura seminar room.
B.
-------
∂22-Mar-84 1554 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA csli-folks list
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 15:53:56 PST
Date: Thu 22 Mar 84 15:54:08-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: csli-folks list
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Let me expand on my previous letter.
At the moment csli-friends calls the csli-folks list, hence noone on
the folks list can drop the friends mail (which some might want
to do because of the volume and because they have access to the
csli-bboards presently on sri-ai and csli (perhaps on sail and
hp-labs)). When we move to Turing, I hope to alleviate the problem of
cluttered mail files by adjusting the lists.
Note that I am updating the area mailing lists also.
Have a nice spring break,
Emma Pease
-------
∂22-Mar-84 1626 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DFH@SU-AI.ARPA
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 16:26:19 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 22 Mar 84 16:21:59-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 22 Mar 84 16:08:00-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 22 Mar 84 16:09:18-PST
Date: 22 Mar 84 1600 PST
From: Diana Hall <DFH@SU-AI.ARPA>
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
HOW COMPOSITIONAL CAN TEMPORAL LOGIC BE?
Speaker: Prof. Amir Pnueli
Weizmann Institute, Israel
Tuesday, March 27, 2:30 p.m.
Room 352 Margaret Jacks Hall
Abstract: A compositional proof system based on temporal logic is presented.
The system supports systematic development of concurrent systems by
specifying modules and then proving a specification for their combination.
The specifications of modules are expressed by temporal logic.
∂22-Mar-84 2342 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE name addition
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Mar 84 23:42:04 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 84 02:38-EST
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 84 09:46:21 PST
From: Dale A. Mills <mills@AEROSPACE>
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Subject: name addition
please add my name to your distribution list.
∂23-Mar-84 0227 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #14
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 02:27:05 PST
Date: Wednesday, March 21, 1984 10:37PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #14
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 23 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 14
Today's Topics:
Implementations - Compiling UNSW,
& Copying Terms & Realities
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 19 Mar 84 19:31:21-PST (Mon)
From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiuccsb!sammut @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Compiling UNSW Prolog under 4.2bsd - (nf)
Because of some minor differences between the C compiler in
4.1bsd and 4.2bsd, some files in UNSW Prolog will generate
syntax errors when you convert to 4.2
In files "prolog/srce/make.c" and "prolog/srce/p←meta.c"
the value returned by "sprintf" is assigned to an integer.
To compile these files correctly, simply remove the assignment
to the integer. That is, sprintf should be used as a procedure
not a function.
-- Claude Sammut
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
..!ihnp4!uiucdcs!sammut
------------------------------
Date: Wed 21 Mar 84 04:19:59-PST
From: Ken@MIT-OZ
Subject: Copying terms, First n solutions, and lazy bags
In recent issues of the Prolog Digest there have been
discussions about "firstn" and "copy←term". "firstn" is
a predicate which produces a list of the first n solutions
to a query. As I pointed out in my paper on "Collect" at
the Atlantic City Logic Programming Symposium, a much more
general way to provide this is by "lazy bags". The bags (or
sets) are produced only upon demand (as they are unified).
If one only "looks" at the first n solutions only that many
will be computed. One can go back and look for more though.
It's true that implementing lazy bags requires changes to at
least the Prolog unifier but this was done in LM-Prolog in a
general and yet practially cost-free manner. Apropos
"copy←term", I copy a term in LM-Prolog by saying
(lazy-bag-of (?new) ?old (true)). (In Prolog this would be
lazy←bag←of(Old,true,[New].) I.e. for every proof of
"true", instantiate "old" to produce the list containing
"new". Lazy-bag-of needs to copy its inputs, since the
embedded goal will be run asynchronously. Lazy bags aside,
perhaps ordinary "bagof" should copy any variables inside of
the resulting bag.
-- Ken Kahn
------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 84 19:58:26-PST (Sun)
From: decvax!mulga!munnari!basser!andrewt @ Ucb-Vax
Subject: Whose Reality ?
I find some of the statements in Fernando Pereira's
discourse on the "Realities of Prolog implementation"
hard to swallow.
Here are some of the more interesting.
1. It is rather difficult to write a good, elegant and
space-efficient Prolog INTERPRETER in anything but Prolog,
witness the fact that most Prolog INTERPRETERS are either
VERY slow, space-extravagant, or have minimal debugging
facilities.
I have written (what I consider) a good, elegant and space
efficient Prolog interpreter in C. It offers almost the
same debugging (and other) facilities as DEC-10 Prolog.
3. C is a poor language to implement elegantly and
efficiently interpreters for tagged languages
like Prolog.
This is what we in Australia call bullshit. C is an
ideal language for writing a good, fast interpreter
and indeed quite a few such interpreters have been
written. I can not see any reason why Prolog should
be any different. Indeed, as I said above, I have
proof of this.
2. Moral: if you want a good and elegant Prolog
interpreter, write first a Prolog compiler and
then write the interpreter in Prolog
Unfortunately I don't believe that this is true. You
may be able to produce an elegant Prolog interpreter
in Prolog. However your interpreter will not be as
fast or as space-efficient as a well written one in
a language such as C. Hopefully this situation will
eventually change.
Fernando gives a detailed explanation of how and why
C-Prolog was developed. I never disputed that for
the effort involved the production of C-Prolog was a
probably a good idea at the time. Its many users
testify to this. But as Fernando says C-Prolog is
only a stop-gap system. I think we need better
software. This may involve much work but someone
has to do it.
Fernando seems to show disdain for "academic" elegance
in software. I (and many others) believe that elegant
coding and good software go hand in hand. I understood
the great success of Unix was largely due to the elegance
of its design and implementation. I don't think Ritchie
& Thompson concerned themselves with "useful local
maximums on the effort/benefit curve".
-- Andrew Taylor
...decvax!mulga!andrewt:basser
------------------------------
Date: Wed 21 Mar 84 10:29:14-PST
From: Pereira@SRI-AI
Subject: Re: Whose Realities ?
I don't have the time or inclination to give a Prolog
implementation tutorial to the net, so I'll have to
let my earlier statements stand or fall by themselves.
As for Andrew Taylor's claims about his Prolog interpreter
and the C language, let's have some comprehensive time
and space benchmarks, and a description of the coverage of
the implementation, including compatibility with others.
Then we'll know whether he has been the lucky one to dig
up the philosopher's stone...
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂23-Mar-84 0821 @MIT-MC:cmacfarl@BBN-UNIX add me
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 08:21:40 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 84 11:17-EST
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 84 11:15:36 EST
From: Craig MacFarlane <cmacfarl@BBN-UNIX>
Subject: add me
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Please add me to this list.
thanks,
craig
∂23-Mar-84 0854 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA ONR Research Opportunities
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 08:54:17 PST
Date: Fri 23 Mar 84 08:52:58-PST
From: Elyse J. Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: ONR Research Opportunities
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I have a flyer in my office about ONR Selected Research Opportunities for
1985. It's goal is improved national defense over the long term.
If you're interested, let me know and I'll put a copy of it in your mail box.
Elyse
-------
∂23-Mar-84 1120 DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Names and Addresses for CSLI Reports Distribution List
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 11:20:48 PST
Date: Fri 23 Mar 84 11:20:38-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Names and Addresses for CSLI Reports Distribution List
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Our first seven tech reports are coming from the printer soon and
we need to compile a good distribution list for them. Each author
will get 30-40 copies (or as requested) but the Center will distribute
copies of all reports to the names on the distribution list.
Please send me names and addresses of any people you think would be
interested in receiving CSLI reports and whom it would be important
to keep informed by sending them our reports.
The following reports are currently being published:
CSLI REPORTS
1. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
"Research Program on Situated Language."
2. Barwise, Jon.
"The Situation in Logic--I."
3. Sag, Ivan A., Gazdar, Gerald, Wasow, Thomas, and Weisler, Stephen.
"Coordination and How to Distinguish Categories."
4. Konolige, Kurt.
"Belief and Incompleteness."
5. Goguen, Joseph A., and Meseguer, Jose.
"Equality, Types, Modules, and Generics for Logic Programming."
6. van Benthem, Johan.
"Lessons from Bolzano."
7. Kanerva, Pentti.
"Self-propagating Search: A Unified Theory of Memory."
-------
Please send me CSLI Technical reports 2 and 4 by Barwise and Konolige.
∂23-Mar-84 1328 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA Area CL (formerly C) meeting next Wednesday
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 13:28:35 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 23 Mar 84 13:28:35-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 23 Mar 84 13:04:13-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 23 Mar 84 13:06:15-PST
Date: 23 Mar 84 1303 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Area CL (formerly C) meeting next Wednesday
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
The area CL weekly meeting is moving from Mondays to Wednesdays, with the
meeting still 1-3 and the lunch 12-1. The coming meeting, on Wed, March
28 will be in the Ventura seminar room. Terry Winograd will talk on the
theoretical implications of computer language design for a new view of
computational semantics. Future meetings will be held at the same
(Wednesday) time, at a place to be announced (the seminar room is signed
up for next quarter).
All future notices will go out to the list of area CL Friends (which
includes the sub-area lists for CL-1, CL-2, and CL-3). If you did not
respond to a request to be put on these lists, and would like to receive
these and other such notices, please notify CSLI-REQUEST@SRI-AI.
∂23-Mar-84 1523 @SRI-AI.ARPA:Kay.PA%parc-gw.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa Re: Csli-folks list
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 15:22:53 PST
Received: from csnet-relay by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 23 Mar 84 15:21:38-PST
Received: From Parc-Gw.arpa by csnet-relay via smtp; 23 Mar 84 18:06 EST
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 23 MAR 84 10:50:18 PST
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 84 10:41 PST
From: Kay.PA%parc-gw.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Re: Csli-folks list
In-reply-to: "EMMA%sri-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa's message of Thu, 22 Mar
84 10:16:06 PST"
To: Emma Pease <EMMA%sri-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa>
cc: csli-folks%sri-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
If possible, I would like to continue receiving csli mail here at PARC
since that is where I do most of my mail reading. Would that be
convenient?
--Martin
∂23-Mar-84 1659 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE beginnings
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 16:59:14 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 84 19:57-EST
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 84 08:59:23 PST
From: Dale A. Mills <mills@AEROSPACE>
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Subject: beginnings
Hello to everyone in the Phil-Sci discussion group.
I'm new at this, so if something Isay doesn't seem to fit
the definition for this group (philosophy of science with emphasis on its
relevance for artificial intelligence), please forgive me.
I'm not sure why I joined this group. Maybe it was to learn.
Would someone out there please give me a personal definition for the terms,
philosophy of science and artificial intelligence? I guess I'm confused as
to the best way to approach these two topics. Any advice would be deeply
appreciated.
∂23-Mar-84 1823 @MIT-MC:LARRY@JPL-VLSI ENDINGS
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Mar 84 18:23:21 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 84 21:22-EST
Date: 23 Mar 1984 1815 PST
From: Larry Carroll <LARRY@JPL-VLSI>
Subject: ENDINGS
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Reply-To: LARRY@JPL-VLSI
Dale, and company:
I hadn't realized this group's focus was on artificial
intelligence. I asked to be put on the distribution list
because I understood it to center on philosophy of science.
After several months I've seen nothing about that topic
mentioned. Thus I'm retiring from the list.
Larry Carroll
Jet Propulsion Lab.
------
∂24-Mar-84 0620 @MIT-MC:ZIPPY@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Mar 84 06:19:24 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 24 Mar 84 09:13-EST
Date: 24 March 1984 09:11-EST
From: Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: mills @ AEROSPACE
cc: PHIL-SCI @ MIT-MC, MINSKY @ MIT-MC, INFO-COBOL @ MIT-MC
The last time we had a discussion about an operational definition of
intelligence, leading researchers in the field were afraid to even propose an
operational definition. The definition that people like to advance is that
"intelligence" is something that you admire in another person and wish you
had." Following this view, artificial intelligence is something that a
machine has and you wish you had! (a good adder? net access? lots of power? a
connectionist architecture?) Thus, the aim of the field of Artificial
Intelligence is to give computers something you wish you had.
Philosophy of science is meta-science, the second order study of scientific
method. There are some people (i.e., Radnidsky) who describe themselves as
meta-meta-scientists because they study the theories of meta-science. Then,
there is the great psychologist, Sigmund Fraud, who explained it all in his
detailed theory of science envy.
Artificial Intelligence is not a science because it doesn't appear to use
methods found in the various sciences. That is, without operational
definitions of the object of inquiry (intelligence), it isn't possible to
agree on a research agenda, therefore, it is not possible to have a scientific
research community. Also, introspection (typical AI proof technique) is not
widely accepted as a scientific method.
I suppose one good out is to say that AI is actually a social science. This
seems to make sense because:
1) the topic is so complex that nobody has even begun to understand it (just
like social science)
2) many people make careers out of confusion and mystification (just like
social sciences)
3) it depends on what intelligence is, and that falls under the aegis of
psychology (making AI a social science derivative!)
4) there is no agreement on a paradigm (just like social sciences, esp.
comparative ideology)
I guess that means that artificial intelligence is an art (maybe we can get a
wing in the National Gallery!).
In sum, there can be little doubt that Artificial Intelligence is a problem
for philosophy of science because of the difficulty in categorizing it as a
science. It seems that what is required is an army of analytical philosophers
to stuff AI into the procrustrean bed of science.
p.s. On the other hand, it is clear that AI is a science by the criterion of
research funding. Whatever it is, the funders want lots of it. Of course,
this is also true of Picassos.
p.p.s. I refuse to be held responsible for the preceding statements because I
was simulating an AI program (whatever that is) when I typed it in..
∂24-Mar-84 1241 @MIT-MC:KDF@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Mar 84 12:41:08 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 24 Mar 84 13:25-EST
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 1984 13:23 EST
Message-ID: <KDF.12001939629.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY@MIT-MC>
Cc: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1984 09:11-EST from Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY @ MIT-MC>
Will the intellectual coward who sent the last message please
identify himself? It is one thing to express an opinion, and
quite another to take anonymous pot-shots.
∂24-Mar-84 1602 @MIT-MC:ALAN@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Mar 84 16:01:56 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 24 Mar 84 18:57-EST
Date: 24 March 1984 19:00-EST
From: Alan Bawden <ALAN @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: ZIPPY @ MIT-MC
cc: MINSKY @ MIT-MC, PHIL-SCI @ MIT-MC, mills @ AEROSPACE
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1984 09:11-EST from Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY>
The real Zippy the Pinhead would have said something much more insightful.
The imposter's worship of such holy labels as "Science" and "Intelligence"
would be most uncharacteristic of an iconoclast like Zippy.
∂24-Mar-84 2345 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Mar 84 23:45:42 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 84 02:40-EST
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 1984 02:39 EST
Message-ID: <GAVAN.12002084581.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Cc: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC,
Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY@MIT-MC>
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1984 13:23-EST from KDF%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
From: KDF%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
Will the intellectual coward who sent the last message please
identify himself? It is one thing to express an opinion, and
quite another to take anonymous pot-shots.
Not I, but whoever it was didn't take any pot-shots. They seemed to
be well-directed broadsides. Anyone care to defend their discipline?
∂25-Mar-84 0720 @MIT-MC:KDF@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 84 07:20:28 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 84 10:16-EST
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 1984 10:16 EST
Message-ID: <KDF.12002167655.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Cc: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC,
PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC, Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY@MIT-MC>
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: Msg of Sun 25 Mar 1984 02:39 EST from GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Not I, but whoever it was didn't take any pot-shots. They seemed to
be well-directed broadsides. Anyone care to defend their discipline?
Not to some twit who won't even own up to "well-directed broadsides".
If someone is afraid to be known for what he thinks, the very least he
can do is to shut up. I don't respond to grafitti on bathroom walls,
either.
∂25-Mar-84 1948 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 84 19:48:48 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 84 13:50-EST
Date: Sun 25 Mar 84 10:47:03-PST
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: ZIPPY@MIT-MC.ARPA, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA
cc: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA, INFO-COBOL@MIT-MC.ARPA,
DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY @ MIT-MC>" of Sat 24 Mar 84 06:11:00-PST
Zippy assumed that we all knew what the scientific method was and
stated that AI doesn't follow it. My view of the scientific
method is that it is a very general (and very weak) method followed by
all inquiring systems--from newborn infants to nuclear physicists.
Hence, we in AI are certainly employing the scientific method. Some
might protest that "hard" scientists behave differently than "soft"
scientists (i.e., in the different uses of mathematics, in the role of
controlled experiments, and so on). However, I believe most of the
behavioral variety derives from differences in subject matter. For
simple systems that can be modelled by simple mathematics of continuous
variables (e.g., classical physics), such an approach was appropriate.
For systems that can be easily factored and controlled, controlled
experiments are terrific. Our subject matter is difficult to factor
and difficult to observe. We are using the best methods and the best
representations that we can bring to bear.
--Tom
-------
∂25-Mar-84 1949 @MIT-MC:DonWinter.pasa@PARC-GW Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 84 19:49:00 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 84 17:17-EST
Received: from Gamay.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 25 MAR 84 14:14:30 PST
From: DonWinter.pasa@PARC-GW.ARPA
Date: 25 Mar 84 14:14:24 PST
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA's message of Sun, 25 Mar 84 10:16
EST, <KDF.12002167655.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
To: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA,
PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA, Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Those of us not privy to an MIT directory can't put an identity on KDF
either! Perhaps you might consider signing your name, before you enter
your glass house.
Don Winter
∂25-Mar-84 2007 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 84 20:07:12 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 84 18:55-EST
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 1984 18:54 EST
Message-ID: <GAVAN.12002262054.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Cc: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA,
ZIPPY@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: Msg of 25 Mar 1984 13:47-EST from Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I believe most of the behavioral variety [between the "hard" and
"soft" sciences] derives from differences in subject matter. For
simple systems that can be modelled by simple mathematics of continuous
variables (e.g., classical physics), such an approach was appropriate.
For systems that can be easily factored and controlled, controlled
experiments are terrific. Our subject matter is difficult to factor
and difficult to observe. We are using the best methods and the best
representations that we can bring to bear.
This reads very much like a social scientist's apology to a
positivist. Are you suggesting then that ZIPPY was right, AI is
essentially some species of social science?
∂25-Mar-84 2252 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 84 22:50:22 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 01:45-EST
Date: Sun 25 Mar 84 22:41:03-PST
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA,
ZIPPY@MIT-MC.ARPA, DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA" of Sun 25 Mar 84 15:57:40-PST
From Dietterich
I believe most of the behavioral variety [between the "hard" and
"soft" sciences] derives from differences in subject matter. ...
.... Our subject matter is difficult to factor
and difficult to observe. ...
From GAVAN:
This reads very much like a social scientist's apology to a
positivist. Are you suggesting then that ZIPPY was right, AI is
essentially some species of social science?
ZIPPY sounds like a positivist to me when he insists on an operational
definition of intelligence. I doubt very much that that is a fruitful
path to pursue. A lot of bad social science was undertaken in pursuit
of the positivist ideal.
Is AI a social science? According to my definition of scientific
method, it doesn't really much matter. ZIPPY evidentially doesn't
like social science. I personally think most social science attempts
the impossible: application of the representations of physics and
chemistry to much more complex phenomena. AI representations have a
better chance of success. Herb Simon would say social science and AI
are both sciences of "the artificial". That sounds like a better
category to me.
-Tom
-------
∂25-Mar-84 2304 @MIT-MC:RMS.G.DDS@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 84 23:04:19 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 01:58-EST
Date: Mon 26 Mar 84 01:57:57-EST
From: RMS.G.DDS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: ALAN@MIT-MC
cc: ZIPPY@MIT-MC, MINSKY@MIT-MC, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Alan Bawden <ALAN @ MIT-MC>" of Sat 24 Mar 84 19:00:00-EST
What would you call the supposed embodiments ?
-------
∂26-Mar-84 0830 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Re: csli-folks list
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 08:30:20 PST
Date: Mon 26 Mar 84 08:30:47-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: csli-folks list
To: withgott.pa@PARC-GW.ARPA, csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "withgott.pa@PARC-GW.ARPA" of Fri 23 Mar 84 09:47:00-PST
Further expansion on csli-folks and friends list. People who are
folks but not on turing will be on BOTH lists. Emma
-------
∂26-Mar-84 1209 @MIT-MC:LEVITT@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 12:06:46 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 15:00-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 1984 14:59 EST
Message-ID: <LEVITT.12002481316.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA
Cc: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1984 09:11-EST from Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY at MIT-MC>
Umm, a belated welcome to PHIL-SCI, Dale. You got a quick
introduction to the problems that all but killed the discussion over a
year ago. Zippy found an amusing way to recapitulate this for you,
but his main claim is empirically false. Zippy says,
"Artificial Intelligence is not a science because it doesn't appear to
use methods found in the various sciences. That is, without
operational definitions of the object of inquiry (intelligence), it
isn't possible to agree on a research agenda, therefore, it is not
possible to have a scientific research community."
Fact is, there's enough overlap between all our different private,
social, messy ideas of what's smart, that there's been an AI research
community for several decades. Once there was some consensus that
chess and calculus were tricky enough to be nice demonstration areas;
later, a consensus that studying them wasn't going to reveal much
more. Of course, the consensus has never been absolute, but the
journals alone help define the huge community.
Zippy seems bothered that lots of people in AI have unrelated goals.
This bothers me too. If Zippy needs global goals, I'll offer one: a
program that's as good at acquiring new skills as a voracious 8 year
old. It's not clear to me that this requires any profound new
theories, either; I wish more people were working toward it.
∂26-Mar-84 1441 @MIT-MC:Laws@SRI-AI Determinism
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 14:40:47 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 16:49-EST
Date: Mon 26 Mar 84 13:48:16-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Determinism
To: Phil-Sci@MIT-MC.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>" of Mon 26 Mar 84 13:00:57-PST
Thus mechanism would have us believe that all of human creativity,
industry, and expression of free will is nothing more than the
pre-programmed response of a highly complex deterministic machine.
This may be a minor point in Ken Clark's message, but it warrants discussion.
First, "preprogrammed" is too strong: unless our environment and interactions
with it were >>very<< predictable, it seems wrong to speak of any adult
as having been fully determined. We are like pattern-recognition systems
trained on noisy data, hence unable to infer perfect rules of behavior or
even to maintain a stable set of rules. I will accept that I am "programmed"
at any particular instant, but the program changes continuously and
unpredictably in a manner inconsistent with the common meaning of
"preprogrammed."
Second, Ken glosses over the influence of internal state. Goals, as well
as a multitude of other internal determinants, are sufficient to cause
different responses to the same stimulus presented at different times
(or in different possible worlds). Action in pursuit of our goals is
a touchstone of self-determination, regardless of whether the goals
themselves and our manner of pursuing them are somehow "programmed".
(A machine or a rock can have self-determination in this sense.)
Third, in anything less than a completely mechanistic and predictable
environment (and we seem to have neither), our goal-directed responses
to stimuli are underdetermined. We thus invoke various random, or at
least conscously unpredictable, tie-breaker strategies for determining
our responses. It is our ability to do this that gives us the impression
of self-determination.
I claim that any self-conscious mechanism capable of pursuing its goals
and of selecting among its goals or behaviors in a "consciously random"
manner will believe itself to have self-determination. This begs the
question of whether it actually has self-determination: that can only
be discussed in terms of its particular goals, behaviors, randomization
method, and environment.
-- Ken Laws
-------
∂26-Mar-84 1509 @MIT-MC:DAM@MIT-OZ Determinism and Choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 15:08:49 PST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 1984 17:49 EST
Message-ID: <DAM.12002512402.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: phil-sci%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Determinism and Choice
I would like to present a theory of "free will" which I have
not seen before. Rather than discuss "free will" I would like to
discuss the related notion of "choice", and in particular statements
of the form "I COULD do X", or "I COULD HAVE done X instead of Y".
Consider a deterministic reasoning machine which is engaged in a game
of chess. The machine is considering various legal moves (it knows
the rules of chess). Furthermore suppose that it expresses the fact
that move M is legal via the statement:
S1: "I could make move M."
This statement is clearly TRUE in the sense that M is a legal move.
Furthermore it would be a mistake (it would be mal-adaptive) for the
machine to say that S1 is probabably false because "I am determined
and I in fact probably won't make move M". The point is that move M
is IN FACT an option which must be considered. Thus,
for the machine to function effectively it MUST be aware of its
choices. The machine does in fact "have choices" (which it should
consider and be aware of!) even though it is determined.
The situation (I claim) is much the same for people. We have
choices (physically allowed options) which we must consider in order
to do effective planning. The fact that we "have choice" in no way
contradicts the possibility that we are deterministic machines.
Determistic machines must also be aware of their "choices" in order
for them to make effective decisions.
Thus one interprets "free will" as "having choice" then we can
be BOTH determined AND have free will. If one interprets "free will"
as "not being determined" then the notion of free will becomes
irrelevent to our day-to-day existence. I think that people believe
in "free will" simply becasue they know (correctly) that they must
decide amoung certain choices.
David Mc
∂26-Mar-84 1522 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Free will explained
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 15:22:47 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 17:50-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 84 14:42:47 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
To: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
CC: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Free will explained
From LEVITT:
"But in a way I like Winston's 2-sentence explanation even better.
It seems like the greatest joke, after millenia of muddled efforts."
How nice our world is that millenia of efforts in defining free will,
by everyone from Plato to Kant, can be summed up in two sentences! One
would have thought that it required at least a page. However, until
someone can send me the listing for a Pascal program that cannot be
distinguished from a person, there will be those of us who will continue
to muddle along and investigate alternate explanations.
∂26-Mar-84 1545 @MIT-MC:BATALI@MIT-OZ What free will isn't.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 15:45:09 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 18:37-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 1984 18:14 EST
Message-ID: <BATALI.12002516865.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: BATALI%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Cc: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA>, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: What free will isn't.
In-reply-to: Msg of 26 Mar 1984 16:27-EST from LEVITT%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
From: LEVITT%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
o Marvin Minsky, "Matter, Mind and Models," in Semantic Information
Processing, ...MIT Press ... Minsky argues that free will is a human
device required because each person craves explanations for his own
behavior but must necessarily obtain explanations using an internal
model of himself which is incomplete. Free will is that part of
behavior determined by mechanisms which lie outside of those in the
model.
I don't buy this argument. For me the paradigm case of free will is
the case of a choice between two actions, A and B. I am free if I can
choose either, and if the one I choose to do, I do. One way to take
the above argument is to say that whichever one I choose, the one I
will do is fixed. Thus I choose A and I do A, or I choose B and I do
A anyway. But this can't be right, because if this always happened I
would not consider myself free, since the paradigm would often be
unsatisfied. (There would be many cases where I choose one thing and
do another.)
Suppose instead that the claim is that, although I THINK I can choose
between A and B, I can really only choose one, say A, and then I do
it. This isn't so objectionable, because it satisfies the paradigm
enough to make me think I'm free -- at least what I decide to do
something, I do it.
But on the other hand, in some cases, "choosing" ought to be thought
of as an action, and I can choose among alternative "choosings". In
this case the first objection applies.
It seems to me that freedom is crucially involved in the conception of
an agent as making choices based on its goals and beliefs. It is thus
a different category of description from that of a machine, or even of
a physical system. Now it may be the case that an agent can be
*implemented* by a machine, but the implementation relationship is not
that of simple identity.
determinism and choice
I am most in sympathy with the point of view expressed by DAM. It is
expressed more elaborately in McCarthy and Hayes, "Some Philosophical
Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence", Machine
Intelligence 4. The essence is that what a person or machine
CAN DO is determined by its position in the interaction structure
rather than by its internal structure. The latter determines what
it will do. This general idea is variously decorated in the paper.
∂26-Mar-84 1933 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE What is "intelligence"...
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 19:33:14 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 15:36-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 84 12:34:11 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
To: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
CC: \
Subject: What is "intelligence"...
There is an outstanding paradox that I think applies to this group's
domain of interest. The mechanistic world view that attempts to model
intelligence via deterministic concepts (such as Boolean logic) leads
to some interesting consequences. If there is only a quantitative diff-
erence between deterministic machines (computers) and human intelli-
gence (us), then what becomes of the generally accepted characteristic
of humanity known (for lack of a better term) as "free will"? Everyone
goes through life believing that they control their own actions, but if
I now "consciously" move my finger, the mechanistic world view would
say that my finger's movement was caused by electro-chemical signals
travelling down my nerves from my brain, where the signals were originated
by a group of neurons that obey deterministic laws (however complex). The
question of where the "thought" came from to originate the chain of events
leading to my finger's movement is answered by mechanism as follows: The
origination of "thoughts" is caused by the sum total of information input
to the system (brain) from outside (via the senses) acted on by the existing
deterministic logic processes of the system (the brain's programming). Thus
mechanism would have us believe that all of human creativity, industry,
and expression of free will is nothing more than the pre-programmed responce
of a highly complex deterministic machine.
The only escape from this conclusion is offered by quantum theory
which would allow the introduction of random events into my deterministic
brain from quantum processes, assuming that there are quantum processes
involved in the brain's architecture. Thus if I choose to sit here and
consciously move my finger for one hour, it is ultimately the result of
pre-programming, something I sensed, or a random occurrence. The same would
also be true of inventing the theory of relativity, or the writing
of "Hamlet".
There are some scientists who believe that quantum processes are not
necessarily random however. David Bohm, for one, has developed a concept
of components of reality being related in non-deterministic, non-local ways.
Alain Aspect's experiment, which was written up in "Physics Review Letters",
seemed to prove that there can be a description of reality that is non-local.
This line of inquiry would seem to offer the possibility of accounting for
what is called "free will" or "human consciousness". Perhaps this letter
deals more with "machine consciousness" rather than "machine intelligence"
as "intelligence" can certainly be imitated, but human consciousness seems
to be qualitatively different from machine intelligence.
Ken Clark
∂26-Mar-84 1933 @MIT-MC:AGHA@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 19:33:28 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 16:05-EST
Received: from MIT-APIARY-8 by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 15:39-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 84 15:42 EST
From: "Gul A. Agha" <AGHA%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Cc: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA,
ZIPPY@MIT-MC.ARPA
In-reply-to: The message of 26 Mar 84 01:41-EST from Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH at SUMEX-AIM>
There is a fundamental difference between the degree of verifiability possible in a
physical science and that in a social "science". Attempts to use control groups and the
like, in order to emulate the so-called scientific method, have typically produced a lot of
gobbly gue. This is because the large number of variables and complexity of the subject of
investigation does not lend itself well to the reductionist methods. The best work in
fields like psychology has been done when observers have used radically different
approaches, as in the case of Piaget's theory of cognitive development.
Artificial Intelligence is not science at least in the same sense as say physics would be.
Artificial Intelligence should not really be considered social science either. The best
analogy for A.I. are the fields of mathematics and philosophy where one creates worlds to
play with and study consequences of. Our tool, the computer, allows us to test, to some
degree, our theories. But the theoretical foundations remain "gedanken experimenten".
As to the problem of judging real progress in the field, well there are no hard and fast
rules ever. Unfortunately, "paradigms" in A.I. often tend to be matters of trend.
Theories should be required to be more formal and and there propositions proved more
rigorously in terms of specific assumptions. We may have the freedom to control more
variables then the lost cause of social "SCIENCE" since we control our own worlds.
∂26-Mar-84 1947 @MIT-MC:LEVITT@MIT-OZ What free will is.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 19:47:08 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 16:45-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 1984 16:27 EST
Message-ID: <LEVITT.12002497377.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
cc: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: What free will is.
In-reply-to: Msg of 26 Mar 1984 15:34-EST from Kenneth Clark <clark at AEROSPACE>
Fortunately, today's students can find "free will" explained clearly
in text books on thought. Winston's "Artificial Intelligence"
includes the following summary of Minsky's explanation, in the
references to chapter 9:
o Marvin Minsky, "Matter, Mind and Models," in Semantic Information
Processing, ...MIT Press ... Minsky argues that free will is a human
device required because each person craves explanations for his own
behavior but must necessarily obtain explanations using an internal
model of himself which is incomplete. Free will is that part of
behavior determined by mechanisms which lie outside of those in the
model.
You should read Minsky's great 6-page paper, which includes a sincere
theory of why you are so determined to "escape from this conclusion"
using quantum theory, etc. But in a way I like Winston's 2-sentence
explanation even better. It seems like the greatest joke, after
millenia of muddled efforts.
∂26-Mar-84 2010 @MIT-MC:ALAN@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 20:10:18 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 17:17-EST
Date: 26 March 1984 15:21-EST
From: Alan Bawden <ALAN @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: RMS.G.DDS @ MIT-OZ
cc: MINSKY @ MIT-MC, PHIL-SCI @ MIT-MC, ZIPPY @ MIT-MC,
mills @ AEROSPACE
In-reply-to: Msg of Mon 26 Mar 84 01:57:57-EST from RMS.G.DDS%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
Date: Mon 26 Mar 84 01:57:57-EST
From: RMS.G.DDS at OZ
What would you call the supposed embodiments ?
I took myself off of Phil-Sci precisely because I found discussions like
the one you are trying to start here less than productive. I only saw the
bogus Zippy's message because he chose to pass his opinions off as wit by
mailing them to Info-COBOL.
Just what are you asking here anyway? You are asking me to tell you what
words \I/ use to refer to the things that \you/ refer to as "Science" and
"Intelligence"? OK. What you call "Science" I shall call "Bozometry" and
what you call "Intelligence" I shall call "Quazidity". Do you feel as if
we are making progess now? (I will not respond to any message on this
matter that is longer than 10 lines.)
[ Whoever it was who threw the stone at KDF for not signing his name should
think again. One can hardly fault Ken for being forced to use
mail-sending programs that are reluctant to automatically include his
full name, and his message did include a return address in the From field
that would reach him. On the other hand the person who logged in to MC
as Zippy was clearly intending to hide his identity. ]
∂26-Mar-84 2010 @MIT-MC:Zdybel.PA@PARC-GW Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 20:10:34 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 17:47-EST
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 26 MAR 84 13:47:09 PST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 84 10:10:42 PST
From: Zdybel.PA@PARC-GW.ARPA
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-Reply-To: <KDF.12001939629.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
To: KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: Zippy the Pinhead <ZIPPY@MIT-MC.ARPA>, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA,
MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA
For that matter, not being myself a network node, I don't regard
KDF%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA as much of an identifier either. What are you
going to do besides reply? Heckle at his next seminar?
FRANK ZDYBEL
∂26-Mar-84 2248 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 22:48:31 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 84 20:46-EST
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 1984 20:45 EST
Message-ID: <GAVAN.12002544311.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Cc: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA, MINSKY@MIT-MC.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: Msg of 26 Mar 1984 01:41-EST from Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Is AI a social science? According to my definition of scientific
method, it doesn't really much matter. ZIPPY evidentially doesn't
like social science. I personally think most social science attempts
the impossible: application of the representations of physics and
chemistry to much more complex phenomena. AI representations have a
better chance of success. Herb Simon would say social science and AI
are both sciences of "the artificial". That sounds like a better
category to me.
Agreed, except I don't think MOST social science tries to emulate the physical
sciences. Most in my experience are historiographers.
∂26-Mar-84 2322 @MIT-MC:ISAACSON@USC-ISI Zapping Zippy
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 84 23:22:33 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 27 Mar 84 02:16-EST
Date: 26 Mar 1984 23:18-PST
Sender: ISAACSON@USC-ISI.ARPA
Subject: Zapping Zippy
From: ISAACSON@USC-ISI.ARPA
To: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Cc: Zippy@MIT-MC, Minsky%mit-oz@MIT-MC
Message-ID: <[USC-ISI.ARPA]26-Mar-84 23:18:45.ISAACSON>
The zap Zippy episode is both amazing and amusing to some of us
bystanders. A few zany cracks from one obscure "Zippy" appear to
have managed to zip open all too many cracks all too close to the
heart of the AI enterprise. It leaves one wondering about the
substance of it all... Can't we do better than that?
∂27-Mar-84 0910 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM [Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>: So you want to criticize? ]
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 09:10:32 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 27 Mar 84 12:05-EST
Date: Tue 27 Mar 84 09:03:30-PST
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: [Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>: So you want to criticize? ]
To: phil-sci@MIT-MC.ARPA
Here is a piece of social science that might shed light on Zippy's motives.
The line about "In some sense you have to be smarter than the
person who did the thing you're evaluating"... is completely false.
It is always easier to be the "test" than to be the "generator".
---------------
Return-Path: <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Tue 27 Mar 84 03:21:36-PST
Date: 27 Mar 84 0320 PST
From: Arthur Keller <ARK@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: So you want to criticize?
To: SU-BBoards@SU-AI.ARPA
a058 0628 24 Mar 84
PM-Nasty People, Adv 26,800
$Adv26
For Release PM Mon March 26
Insecure People Go On the Offensive
By DANIEL Q. HANEY
AP Science Writer
WALTHAM, Mass. (AP) - While still in college, Teresa Amabile noticed
that students and junior professors always asked the most biting,
vicious and obnoxious questions at scholarly conferences.
Now that she is Dr. Amabile, psychologist and Brandeis professor,
she is trying to discover what makes people brutally critical of
others' intelligence. And she believes she has the answer:
People who are insecure about their own intellectual standing go on
the offensive by questioning the brain power of others. And it works.
Supercritical people really do give the impression they're smarter.
In short, nastiness pays.
Ms. Amabile has conducted experiments on college students to test
her theories about ''negativity,'' as she calls it.
''We have evidence that people tend to be more negative in assessing
other people's intelligence if they themselves are intellectually
insecure for some reason,'' she said.
''Does it serve any purpose? Does it convince people that you are
smart? It seems that the answer is 'yes.' A very loud 'yes.' ''
She acknowledged that she had picked an ideal environment to
research backbiting. Universities are, after all, famous for
intellectual hissing. But she thinks her findings also apply to
ordinary life - to any situation where someone feels slightly inferior
in the IQ department.
Those who cast aspersions pay a price, however. They're not viewed
as very nice people.
Ms. Amabile found that ruthless critics are seen as insightful but
mean, brilliant but cruel. On the other hand, those who have something
positive to say are considered to be undiscerning but affable,
plodding but friendly.
Her work, published in the Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, began with an attempt to compare the behavior of students
who felt secure and those who did not.
Forty-four students were paid to serve as ''experts'' to review
essays on social problems. Some were told they would keep jobs no
matter what. The rest were led to believe their future in the program
depended on how impressively they conducted their first analyses.
Half of the students also thought they were working for a graduate
student, while the rest thought the boss was a psychology professor.
When the results were in, those who believed their jobs were in
jeopardy were far more critical of the essays than were their
colleagues. And the professor's students were nastier than the
graduate student's - even though all, in reality, were working for Ms.
Amabile.
Next, 104 students were asked to assess the intellect of an actor
who was being interviewed on videotape. Half thought the experimenter
was a sophomore undergraduate, while the rest thought she was a
graduate student working on a doctorate.
Again, those who thought their opinions would be judged by someone
with high academic credentials were far more scathing.
So it seemed clear that people go for the jugular when they think
their own gray matter is in question.
The third study set out to learn whether this ''impression
management tactic'' really works.
Ms. Amabile found two book reviews - one glowing, the other damning
- written by the same critic and published the same Sunday. To
confuse matters even more, she produced two versions of each review by
changing words like ''inspired'' to ''uninspired'' and ''successful''
to ''unsuccessful.'' Then 55 students assessed the writers'
intellectual and social qualities.
''The negative reviewer was overwhelmingly rated as more
intelligent,'' she said. ''At the same time, he was seen as cruel.''
The students thought the positive reviewer was less intelligent but
''compassionate, forgiving, open-minded and kind.''
When somebody writes a blistering critique, she believes, it may say
as much about the reviewer as about the play, book or movie being
judged. New reviewers, especially, may try to prove their intellectual
muscle by ripping a work to shreds.
Ms. Amabile remembers her own days as a newly minted Ph.D. asked to
review studies submitted to a psychology journal.
''I pored over the first few I got looking for every fault I could,
feeling I had to prove to the editor that I was bright, incisive,
brilliant,'' she said. ''I was much more negative than the manuscript
called for.''
But if the ploy is so obvious, why does it work?
''In some sense, you have to be smarter than the person who did the
thing you're evaluating if you can see what's wrong with it,'' she
said. ''That doesn't necessarily mean you could have done it any
better, but it gives the impression that you could have.''
Yet, there's an irony here, she said. Positive, constructive
criticism is far tougher to offer than condemnation. So the querulous
might actually be stupider, not smarter.
''This tactic may be built on thin air,'' she said. ''There really
is nothing there. But people believe there is.''
End Adv PM Mon March 26
ap-ny-03-24 0927EDT
***************
-------
∂27-Mar-84 0958 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats transportation
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 09:58:38 PST
Date: Tue 27 Mar 84 09:52:56-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: bats transportation
To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
who is interested in carpooling to bats this friday and who will drive?
it's in san jose. i will follow this message with one that contains speakers
and abstracts.
let me know at jf@score or 4940928 if you want a ride or want to drive.
joan
-------
∂27-Mar-84 1004 JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA bats
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 10:04:30 PST
Return-Path: <KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Received: from rand-relay.ARPA (CSNET2.ARPA) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 14 Mar 84 14:21:05-PST
Date: 14 Mar 1984 12:44:13-PST (Wednesday)
From: Maria Klawe <KLAWE%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Return-Path: <KLAWE.SJRLVM1%IBM-SJ@Csnet-Relay>
Subject: bats
To: AFLB.ALL@SU-SCORE
Via: IBM-SJ; 14 Mar 84 13:45-PST
ReSent-date: Tue 27 Mar 84 09:54:11-PST
ReSent-From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-To: aflb.su@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The next BATS meeting will be in the main auditorium of Building 28,
IBM San Jose on Friday March 30.
The schedule is:
10 a.m. Michael Tanner (U.C.S.C.) on:
A FAST TRANSFORM ON FINITE FIELD
11 a.m. Joe Halpern (IBM-SJ) on:
ON THE POSSIBILITY AND IMPOSSIBILITY OF ACHIEVING CLOCK SYNCHRONIZATION
12 a.m. Lunch (Cafeteria Classroom B)
1 p.m. Mike Fredman (U.C.S.D.) on:
FIBONACCI HEAPS
2 p.m. Avi Wigderson (U.C.B.) on:
RECTILINEAR GRAPHS AND THEIR EMBEDDINGS
Recently IBM has closed gate number 3 (the one beside building 28)
so you have to enter by the main gate (number 1). They will ask you
the purpose of your visit (to attend BATS seminar), who you are visiting
(Maria Klawe, 6-1213), and to see identification (so make sure you bring
some with you).
After gaining entrance to the site, make your way to the lobby of
building 28 as usual.
Here are the abstracts of the talks:
ON THE POSSIBILITY AND IMPOSSIBILITY OF ACHIEVING CLOCK SYNCHRONIZATION
Joe Halpern, IBM
It is known that clock synchronization
can be achieved in the presence of faulty
processors as long as the nonfaulty processors are connected,
provided that some authentication technique is used.
Without authentication the number of faults that can
be tolerated has been an open question.
Here we show that
if we restrict logical clocks to running within some linear
function of real time, then clock synchronization is impossible,
without authentication, when
one-third or more of the processors are faulty. However, if there is
a bound on the rate at which a processor can generate messages, then
we show that
clock synchronization is achievable, without authentication, as long as
the faults do not disconnect the network.
Finally, we provide a lower bound on the closeness to which simultaneity
can be achieved in the network
as a function of the transmission and processing
delay properties of the network.
A FAST TRANSFORM ON FINITE FIELD
Michael Tanner, U.C. Santa Cruz
The discrete Fourier transform is central to the understanding of circulant
matrices, matrices that are invariant under the action of an additive
cyclic group.
The columns of the transform matrix are eigenvectors of any circulant matrix,
and two circulant matrices can be multiplied using relatively few
multiplications by using the FFT to change to the diagonalizing basis for
the space.
In this talk we present a transform that yields comparable benefits for
matrices over finite fields that are invariant under a group generated by an
additive subgroup and a multiplicative subgroup (a Frobenius group).
We also describe a fast algorithm for computing the transform that is
closely analogous to the Goode-Thomas FFT and discuss the application
of the transform to the problem of multiplying matrices in this restricted
class.
Title: Rectilinear Graphs and their Embeddings
Speaker: Avi Wigderson (joint work with G. Vijayan)
Abstract:
The following embedding problem, which arises in the context of
VLSI layout design, is studied. A rectilinear graph has no vertex of
degree exceeding four, and the edges incident on each vertex have distinct
labels from the set {Left, Right, Up, Down}. A (planar) embedding of a
rectilinear graph is a mapping of its vertices to grid points of a
rectangular grid, so that each edge is a straight line segment, leaving
each of its endpoints in a direction consistent with its label, and no
two edges cross or overlap.
The main results are recognition and embedding algorithms for
embeddable rectilinear graphs, which run in O(|V|) and O(|V|**2) time
respectively. Related embedding problems and their complexity are
discussed.
To appreciate (or depreciate) the difficulty of the problem,
I strongly recommend that people invest ten minutes in solving a very
special case of this problem - the case when the given graph is a
simple cycle.
Speaker: Michael Fredman, U.C. San Diego
Title: Fibonacci Heaps
Astract:
This talk describes a new method for implementing heaps,
permitting very efficient handling of update operations.
Applications of this new data structure include improved
shortest path and minimum spanning tree algorithms.
(These results were obtained jointly with Robert Tarjan.)
∂27-Mar-84 1242 @MIT-MC:LEVITT@MIT-OZ free will, "Matter, Mind, and Models"
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 12:42:41 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 27 Mar 84 14:50-EST
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 1984 14:47 EST
Message-ID: <LEVITT.12002741413.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: BATALI%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Cc: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA>, minsky%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA,
PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: free will, "Matter, Mind, and Models"
In-reply-to: Msg of 26 Mar 1984 18:14-EST from BATALI%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
From: BATALI%MIT-OZ at MIT-MC.ARPA
Re: What free will isn't.
I don't buy [Winston's summary of Minsky's] argument. For me the
paradigm case of free will is
the case of a choice between two actions, A and B. I am free if I can
choose either, and if the one I choose to do, I do. ...
I wasn't trying to start an extended discussion of free
will, but I guess I asked for it. Obviously Winston's
2-sentence summary isn't completely adequate, and people
should read the paper. Minsky is NOT arguing that there's
no relationship between a machine's subjective impression of
its choices and its subsequent behavior; only that the
impressions and decisions are themselves determined by past
events and factors outside the machine's model; and that
arguments to the contrary seem motivated by something other
than evidence.
As your comment suggests, our subjective impression of
making choices - watching our own computations carried out -
is probably as real a factor as Minsky's rebellion
hypothesis. Our ability to watch ourselves plan, to make
decisions and arguments, makes all this confusing for most
people to think about, but Minsky doesn't address this, as
if taking it for granted.
∂27-Mar-84 1348 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Advisory Panel Visit
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 13:48:02 PST
Date: Tue 27 Mar 84 13:46:25-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Advisory Panel Visit
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear CSLI Researchers,
As you know, our Advisory Panel will be visiting three days next week,
from April 5 through 7. We plan to use this visit to help with our
first year report to SDF. Toward this end, I need each of you to send
me two paragraphs by Monday morning April 2.
The first paragraph should be a short description of what you have
been doing as part of CSLI activities -- working on what, attending
what, talking to whom, etc.
The second paragraph should describe how the things referred to in
the first paragraph have affected your thinking about language and
information.
This is an important task, for among other things your input
will be used to help reorganize the structure of projects, so that
they are more in line with what is actually going on. Any comments
in addition to the ones we are requesting for the first and second
paragraph are of course welcome.
Please send your responses to me with cc's to csli-executives@sri-ai
and to stucky@sri-ai.
B.
-------
∂27-Mar-84 1606 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA corrections to S&A
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 16:05:43 PST
Date: Tue 27 Mar 84 16:05:22-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: corrections to S&A
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Would any of you who have discoevered [correctable] errors
in Situations and Attitudes send me a note. The publisher
wants to include them in a second printing. Thanks. Jon
-------
∂27-Mar-84 1843 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 18:43:07 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 27 Mar 84 21:38-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via umcppo; 27 Mar 84 20:43 EST
Date: 27 Mar 84 09:20:02 EST (Tue)
From: Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH%sumex-aim.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa>,
mills%aerospace.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa,
ZIPPY%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
Cc: PHIL-SCI%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa, MINSKY%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa,
INFO-COBOL%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa,
DIETTERICH%sumex-aim.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Zippy assumed that we all knew what the scientific method was and
stated that AI doesn't follow it. My view of the scientific
method is that it is a very general (and very weak) method followed by
all inquiring systems--from newborn infants to nuclear physicists.
Hence, we in AI are certainly employing the scientific method.
I agree. I also think that the rules for inquiry are fairly straightforward
and easily accomodated by standard formalisms, to wit: A occurs and an
explanantion is wanted; it is noticed that B may serve to explain A; it is
conjectured that indeed B caused (or preceded) A; evidence is sought that
B in fact occurred.
John Anderson has a purported counterexample to the 'logicality' of ordinary
thought, as follows: "If I were dying, the doctor would be frowning. the
doctor is frowning. So I must be dying". However, on my above accounting,
this could be rendered as: "The doctor is frowning. Why? Probably he has
bad news. Gee, maybe I'm dying!" There appears to be nothing in the latter
version that strains the usual reading of standard logic. If in fact people
firmly believed that there was only one possibility when actually there were
many, Anderson might have a better point.
Comments?
--Don Perlis
∂27-Mar-84 2005 @MIT-MC:Info-COBOL-Request@MIT-MC Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 20:05:36 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 27 Mar 84 23:01-EST
Date: 27 March 1984 23:01-EST
From: Info-COBOL-Request @ MIT-MC
Sender: ALAN @ MIT-MC
Subject: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: PHIL-SCI @ MIT-MC, perlis%umcp-cs.csnet @ CSNET-RELAY
cc: MINSKY @ MIT-MC, DIETTERICH @ SUMEX-AIM, mills @ AEROSPACE
In-reply-to: Msg of 27 Mar 84 09:20:02 EST (Tue) from Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet at csnet-relay.arpa>
Please. Let us NOT have this discussion on Info-COBOL! Everybody \please/
be careful and remove Info-COBOL from the header of any replies you
compose. Thank you!
∂27-Mar-84 2131 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 21:31:44 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 00:28-EST
Date: Tue 27 Mar 84 21:28:29-PST
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
cc: DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, phil-sci@MIT-MC.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>" of Tue 27 Mar 84 09:20:02-PST
From Don Perlis:
A occurs and an explanantion is wanted; it is noticed that B may serve
to explain A; it is conjectured that indeed B caused (or preceded) A;
evidence is sought that B in fact occurred.
I would only add: Evidence is also sought that B did not occur. If
there is anything that might separate the scientific method from everyday
methods of inquiry, it is the obligation to search for falsifying
evidence as well as confirming evidence. There is, of course, a fair
amount of research to indicate that real scientists rarely seek to
falsify their own hypotheses. But that is why it is important to have
a community of scientists. The desire to persuade other people that
your theory is correct leads you to attempt to falsify the competing
theories.
RE: The doctor example. I prefer your reading. Have you looked at
any of the Tversky cases to see if they are consistent with this
approach? I suspect that they are.
--Tom
-------
∂27-Mar-84 2313 @MIT-MC:RMS.G.DDS@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 23:13:03 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 02:09-EST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 02:08:33-EST
From: RMS.G.DDS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
In-Reply-To: Message from "LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA" of Mon 26 Mar 84 15:02:01-EST
Does man have unrelated goals ? of course. Zippy doesn't
bother me in the <almost looked for the rubout here, is that
empirical?) quest for a paradigm. A commom nomeclature would
help.
Calculus is emperical and procedural, where as chess is not.
Is thas dificult to understand. Chess tends to be bounded by
strategy and numerous other constraints but is this where we
find the commonality to calcui.
A.I. is a new science regardless of social or physical. IN that
it tends to encompass both. I seem to think that the nitpicking
be left to after discovery which is a bone of contention anyway.
Does this exchange do anything other than divert energy? Perhaps
perhaps not...It's seems that we are to caught up in whether it is
this or that and categorizing rather that doing....!
Fred
-------
∂27-Mar-84 2346 @MIT-MC:RMS.G.DDS@MIT-OZ Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 84 23:46:33 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 02:42-EST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 02:41:36-EST
From: RMS.G.DDS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
To: ALAN@MIT-MC
cc: MINSKY@MIT-MC, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC, ZIPPY@MIT-MC, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Alan Bawden <ALAN @ MIT-MC>" of Mon 26 Mar 84 15:21:00-EST
Perhaps...I think that we deal with trying to describe. In that
is a true problematical. To meta-decsribe what we do not even
begin to have a description for is a fools game. We can take
a domain of knowledge and desrcibe and meta-describe and that
leads us to a goal that is shared in both the epistmology of
what we deal with and the system that we define that epistomolgy
with. I think that rantings tend to take away more than add...
Onthers woulds what do you do...well I dunno...I keep going back
ot beginnings I think or maybe not...or yeah I do. I do have
some clever ways...aaahhh I get it...That is science. Here give
it a name. in 11 lines
-------
∂28-Mar-84 0003 @MIT-MC:DonWinter.pasa@PARC-MAXC Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 00:03:15 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 02:59-EST
Received: from Gamay.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 27 MAR 84 23:45:21 PST
From: DonWinter.pasa@Xerox.ARPA
Date: 27 Mar 84 23:45:23 PST
Subject: Re: Philosophy of Science and Artificial Intelligence
In-reply-to: RMS.G.DDS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA's message of Wed, 28 Mar 84
02:08:33 EST
To: RMS.G.DDS%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: LEVITT%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA, mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA,
PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA
AI would still be able to perform properly at 2 in the morning -- its
ability to type and spell would be as good as ever.
Don
∂28-Mar-84 0227 @MIT-MC:JMC@SU-AI determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 02:27:29 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 05:25-EST
Date: 28 Mar 84 0123 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: determinism and choice
To: phil-sci%oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
I am most in sympathy with the point of view expressed by DAM. It is
expressed more elaborately in McCarthy and Hayes, "Some Philosophical
Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence", Machine
Intelligence 4. The essence is that what a person or machine
CAN DO is determined by its position in the interaction structure
rather than by its internal structure. The latter determines what
it will do. This general idea is variously decorated in the paper.
∂28-Mar-84 0430 @MIT-MC:GUMBY@MIT-MC Phil-sci vs COBOL
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 04:30:28 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 07:27-EST
Date: 28 March 1984 07:21-EST
From: David Vinayak Wallace <GUMBY @ MIT-MC>
Subject: Phil-sci vs COBOL
To: PHIL-SCI @ MIT-OZ
cc: INFO-COBOL @ MIT-MC
In-reply-to: Msg of 27 Mar 84 09:20:02 EST (Tue) from Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet at csnet-relay.arpa>
I would like to point out that this discussion has nothing at all to
do with the implementation of PDP-10 COBOL, except in the most
abstract of senses, and should, therefore, not be on INFO-COBOL.
I'm sure our ARPA COBOL contracts do not fund such frivolous use of
the net.
Thank-you.
∂28-Mar-84 0930 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY Re: determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 09:30:13 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 12:27-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via umcppo; 28 Mar 84 12:11 EST
Date: 28 Mar 84 11:57:52 EST (Wed)
From: Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Re: determinism and choice
To: John McCarthy <JMC%su-ai.arpa%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>,
phil-sci%oz%mit-mc.arpa%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
From: John McCarthy <JMC%su-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.csnet>
Subject: determinism and choice
I am most in sympathy with the point of view expressed by DAM. It is
expressed more elaborately in McCarthy and Hayes, "Some Philosophical
Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence", Machine
Intelligence 4. The essence is that what a person or machine
CAN DO is determined by its position in the interaction structure
rather than by its internal structure. The latter determines what
it will do. This general idea is variously decorated in the paper.
I agree with DAM and with McCarthy on free willl and choice, although I think
DAM's statement (I wish I could excerpt it here, but I let it disappear a few
days ago) while more informal than JMC's also thereby catches a twist that
the McC and Hayes approach may miss, namely, that the internal structure
itself can be a crucial factor in what is a possible choice. For instance,
suppose I have an inherent incapacity to jump higher than 4 feet. This then
is a factor of importance in my deciding whether a plan involving jumping
is feasible. If the jump required is less than 4 feet, I may still consider
it in the realm of things open to me to do; but otherwise not (assuming I
have such knoweledge about my juimpoing limitations). Since it appears that
often we do and often we do not have such knowledge, then the choice set
should perhaps be defined in terms of ones explicit knowledge, in general,
rather than in terms of interanl versus external data. After all, it may
be that in fact I cannot even jump 2 feet due to unknown factors ( I may have
injured may leg and not realize it, or the floor may be to soft to support
a vigorous leap) and still a 3 foot jump may be (appropriately, as far as
I can be expected to know) one of the 'choices' I entertain.
∂28-Mar-84 1041 STUCKY@SRI-AI.ARPA LSA Directory
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 10:40:53 PST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 10:40:41-PST
From: Susan Stucky <Stucky@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: LSA Directory
To: CSLI-principals: ;
We are in the process of completing the CSLI entry for the Linguistic
Society of America handbook. This is a compilation of listings of
linguistics programs in universities and also of non-degree granting
institutions. We would like to include a list of all CSLI researchers
who are part of the "linguistic environment" at Stanford.(This
includes people who are already listed under the Linguistics
Department and anyone who is even remotely related to research
linguistic.) If you would like to be included in this list, then
please send us (to both wunderman@sri-ai and Stucky@sri-ai) a list of
your areas of specialization. Typically the entries include such
generic areas as parsing, natural language generation, syntax,
semantics etc. We need your by THIS MONDAY (April 1, no fooling) at
the latest. I apologize for the short notice.
-Susan
-------
∂28-Mar-84 1118 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:mis%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Seminar announcement
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 11:18:11 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:09:30-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:01:55-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:04:33-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:00:41-PST
Date: 28 Mar 1984 09:25:30-PST
From: mis at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: Seminar announcement
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Seminar in Protocol Analysis - SPECIAL TOPIC ANNOUNCEMENT:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Image-Processing Studies of American Sign Language
George Sperling
New York University and Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
These experiments deal with the practical problem of
squeezing American Sign Language (ASL) through the telephone
network. Historically, an image (e.g., TV @ 4 MHz) has been
valued at more than 1000 speech tokens (e.g., telephone @ 3
kHz). A powerful image-processing system was developed and
used to create low-bandwidth, dynamic, image sequences of ASL
signers. Subsampling in space, time, and intensity was studied
in conjunction with a variety of grey-scale and binary-
intensity image transformations and with some new coding
schemes; and formal intelligibility tests were conducted with
deaf subjects. With image-processed ASL, the word/picture
ratio is shown to be approaching unity, and intelligible,
image-processed ASL is communicable on ordinary, switched
telephone networks. The various image-processed ASL stimuli
provide interesting linguistic, perceptual, and computational
insights. A movie to illustrate image-processed ASL will be
shown.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Place: Jordan Hall, Room 100
Time: 1:00 pm, April 4, 1984
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
∂28-Mar-84 1134 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 3
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 11:33:20 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:23:01-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:17:49-PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:13:17-PST
Received: from ucbkim.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.24/4.25)
id AA26824; Wed, 28 Mar 84 10:09:59 pst
Received: by ucbkim.ARPA (4.24/4.3)
id AA00897; Wed, 28 Mar 84 10:09:15 pst
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 84 10:09:15 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8403281809.AA00897@ucbkim.ARPA>
To: cogsci-friends%ucbkim@Berkeley
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 3
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1984
IDS 237B - Cognitive Science Seminar
Time: Tuesday, April 3, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
***** Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker *****
*** in the IHL Library (Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2 ***
OBJECTS, PARTS AND CATEGORIES
Barbara Tversky, Dept. of Psychology, Stanford
Many psychological, linguistic and anthropological measures
converge to a preferred level of reference, or BASIC LEVEL,
for common categories; for example, TABLE, in lieu of FURNI-
TURE or KITCHEN TABLE. Here we demonstrate that knowledge
of categories at that level (and only that level) of
abstraction is dominated by knowledge of parts. Basic level
categories are perceived to share parts and to differ from
one another on the basis of other features. We argue that
knowledge of part configuration underlies the convergence of
perceptual, behavioral and linguistic measures because part
configuration plays a large role in both appearance and
function. Basic level categories are especially informative
because structure is linked to function via parts at this
level.
**********
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
Date Speaker Affiliation
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI; CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy; CSLI
∂28-Mar-84 1203 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA housing needed 1985
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 12:03:32 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:59:59-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 11:48:20-PST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 11:50:32-PST
From: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: housing needed 1985
To: bboard@SRI-KL.ARPA, bboard@SRI-AI.ARPA, bboard@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
HOUSING NEEDED FOR VISITING PROFESSOR, WINTER/SPRING 84-85
Richard Jeffrey of Princeton University will be visiting the Center for the
Study of Language and Information next (academic) year. He will need a
furnished apartment or small house near Stanford for the months of January
through June, 1985. He has no small children or nasty habits. (An exchange
for a (large) house in Princeton would be possible.)
If you have any leads on rentals for this period, they'd be appreciated.
Contact: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI or John Etchemendy at 497-0855 or Richard
Jeffrey at (609) 924-9139.
Thanks.
-------
∂28-Mar-84 1401 @MIT-MC:JMC@SU-AI determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 14:00:54 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 16:55-EST
Date: 28 Mar 84 1155 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: determinism and choice
To: phil-sci%oz@MIT-MC.ARPA, perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
McC and Hayes suggests treating the phenomenon mentioned by Perlis as follows.
Regard the brain, (or perhaps better the mind, since the form of physical
implementation is not relevant) as composed of interacting parts. What one
part can do depends on its position in the causal structure, and this takes
into account the other parts. For example, the folk psychology decomposition
of the mind into Will and Intellect works pretty well for
Perlis's example of jumping provided we add the Body as a part. Namely,
the Body can jump 4 feet, because it has outputs that would do it. However,
if the Will tells the Intellect to do it, the Intellect won't emit the
required order to the Body, so the Will can't. This may not be quite right,
but we will have to provide our robot programs with some kind of
notion of CAN based on interaction structure so that it will explore its
options and decide what to do in some reasonable way.
∂28-Mar-84 1421 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 14:16:55 PST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 14:13:22-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Meeting
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
The April Senior Faculty meeting will take place on MONDAY April 2 at
2:30 in MJH 252. ( There'll be a general faculty meeting on Tuesday at
2:30.) Please send me any agenda items you may wish to discuss.
GENE
-------
Welcome back. Please put promoting Dick Gabriel to Senior Research
Associate on the agenda. However, it would seem that a PI should be
able just to ask for objections for such a promotion, since it is
possible to appoint to that rank from the outside by such a procedure.
I much prefer resolving the anomaly that way rather than by making
appointments go through a faculty meeting.
∂28-Mar-84 1426 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA FACULTY MEETING
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 14:26:40 PST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 14:17:21-PST
From: Elyse J. Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: FACULTY MEETING
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: bureaucrats@SU-SCORE.ARPA
There will be a FACULTY MEETING on Tuesday, April 3, from 2:30-4:30
in conference room 146
Please send me any agenda items you wish discussed at the meeting.
Also, the regular faculty lunches will resume that day.
-------
∂28-Mar-84 1454 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA paragraphs
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 14:52:56 PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SU-AI.ARPA, the
SRI-AI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 14:51:55-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: paragraphs
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear Folks:
Susan suggested that I send you an example of what we have in mind
about changes due to the interactions here. The following are taken
from the letter I sent to SDF in January. Charlie said that of the
pages and pages we sent, these three paragraphs were the only ones
that showed that anything was really happening. You may well not
agree with the views in the paragraphs. I say that there are personal
views. But at least it should give you an idea of the sort of thing we
hope to find out there.
Jon
Of course it
is too early to judge the research effort, or the extent to which it
is changing as a result of CSLI. However, at a purely subjective
level, I can offer a comment or two.
Methodological assumptions as to what constitutes evidence, theory and
model, and how these are judged, differ radically in philosophy,
mathematics, linguistics, computer science and AI, much more radically
than most of us realized, I think. In all candor, I must say that
having these assumptions challenged has been hard, harder than we
anticipated, I suspect. While the researchers at CSLI shared the
vision of a new study of language, I suspect that each of us thought
that new study would be a little closer to our own cherished approach
than to the others involved. Let me give a couple of examples.
One thing that came out of the Thursday seminars was the vast
difference in attitudes to "formalisms" between those working in
traditional linguistics and some of the rest of us. In linguistics,
it is customary to attempt to develop a formal language that in and of
itself has the predictive power to capture generalizations about human
languages. This is the underlying assumption behind interest in
refinements of the Chomsky hierarchy, for example. In AI and logic,
however, such formal languages are used only as a pragmatic expedient
to state or describe such laws, or to turn into a computer program.
There is no effort to make the very grammar of the formalism have
predictive content. This is a small point, but until both sides
realize what the other is up to, there is enormous potential for
misinterpretation on both sides.
The second example is more personal. This quarter we have had a
seminar at PARC on the semantics of computer languages, as part of the
C1/D1 activities. Probably due to my influence, the seminar
presentations were dominated by mathematicians working on the
semantics of computer languages, but there were always quite a few
people present who work on designing new computer languages. There is
no doubt that the seminar was very successful, in terms of getting
people to know one another and getting certain basic material across.
However, it was not all smooth sailing. Initially, at least, there
was a definite feeling among the non-mathematicians, that once the
mathematician got his hands on a language, whatever it was that was
really interesting and new disappeared.
I think that both groups are coming to appreciate the other more, and
also to change in certain ways. I learned, for example, that most
computer scientists have bought the formalist account of mathematics,
without even realizing it, so they think of the language of
mathematics as distinctly different than other language, even to the
extent of not being about anything. I don't know that I have changed
this completely, but my obvious rejection of this view of mathematics,
and my pointing out that the language of mathematics is itself a
situated language, has had some effect, I can tell. On the other
hand, I have come to realize that this mistaken view is reinforced by
the mathematician's current penchant for formalizing all intuitions
directly in set theory, without ever making those intuitions precise by
making the assumptions that justify the formalization explicit. This
practice certainly contributes to the feeling that the mathematician
has lost track of the real phenomenon. My own work has changed as a
result. I am currently working on setting forth the basics in
situation semantics in a way that avoids this pitfall.
These example are just two of dozens I could give of the way things are
changing as people start working together in new ways. It is not
always a completely enjoyable experience, initially. In these example,
both groups certainly felt somewhat threatened by the attitude of the
other, initially. But things are changing, and the change is
exciting.
-------
∂28-Mar-84 1613 @MIT-MC:Hewitt@MIT-OZ determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 16:13:25 PST
Received: from MIT-APIARY-7 by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 19:10-EST
Date: Wednesday, 28 March 1984, 19:12-EST
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt at MIT-OZ>
Subject: determinism and choice
To: John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI>
Cc: phil-sci at MIT-OZ, Hewitt at MIT-OZ
In-reply-to: The message of 28 Mar 84 04:23-EST from John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI>
Return-path: <Mailer@MIT-XX>
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 05:25-EST
Date: 28 Mar 84 0123 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: determinism and choice
To: phil-sci%oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
I am most in sympathy with the point of view expressed by DAM. It is
expressed more elaborately in McCarthy and Hayes, "Some Philosophical
Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence", Machine
Intelligence 4. The essence is that what a person or machine
CAN DO is determined by its position in the interaction structure
rather than by its internal structure. The latter determines what
it will do. This general idea is variously decorated in the paper.
Good point. However, the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics
would seem to limit the extent to which the interaction structure
determines what a system will do. It may be that the macroscopic behavior
of people is not much affected by quantum level effects. But I don't know any
good arguments why this should be the case.
--Carl
∂28-Mar-84 1623 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA bats direction
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 16:23:31 PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA (PARC-GW.ARPA) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 16:03:38-PST
Received: from Chardonnay.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 28 MAR 84 15:34:10 PST
Date: 28 Mar 84 14:54:08 PST
From: feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: bats direction
To: aflb.su@su-score.ARPA
Cc: clarkson@score.ARPA, rjb@sail.ARPA, mayr@score.ARPA, klc@sail.ARPA,
spencer@score.ARPA, fy@sail.ARPA, patashnik@score.ARPA,
karlin@score.ARPA
i just spoke to maria and got the following directions for driving and
parking on friday.
the cc list for this message is the list of people who said they
probably or definitely will
drive.
as of very recently (more recently than the last time i was at san jose)
ibm has taken to
checking identification of the people who drive through its gates. so
bring some identification,
and i guess that it would be good if the driver had a picture i.d. (i
only mention that because
i don't have one).
take 101 south to the Ford Road exit, which is a left exit.
keep to the right and follow signs to IBM and Cottle Road.
once you get on Cottle Road, stay in the left lane.
go through the main gate to IBM. when you go through this gate, the
guard will ask for i.d.
after you go through the gate, you will be on Poughkeepsie Road. when
you come to a
T-junction, turn right, and you will still be on Poughkeepsie Road. Go
straight past the
intersection with Raleigh Road, and the research building will be on
your right. go past
it and park behind it, because the visitor parking in front of it on
Raleigh will be full.
after you park, walk around to the front of the research building (on
Raleigh), and go in
the lobby. sign in, and maria will collect us and take us to the
auditorium.
maria's office number is 408-256-1213, so if you get to ibm but can't
find the research
building you can probably call her at 6-1213 from one of the "on-campus"
phones on the
building you did find.
i think it would probably be good to leave jacks at 9:15. that will
leave time for getting
stuck in traffic.
please direct questions to jf@score--don't just reply, because i won't
read this parc mail
everyday.
see you all friday, if not before,
joan
∂28-Mar-84 1636 @MIT-MC:Hewitt@MIT-OZ determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 16:36:03 PST
Received: from MIT-APIARY-7 by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 19:10-EST
Date: Wednesday, 28 March 1984, 19:12-EST
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt at MIT-OZ>
Subject: determinism and choice
To: John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI>
Cc: phil-sci at MIT-OZ, Hewitt at MIT-OZ
In-reply-to: The message of 28 Mar 84 04:23-EST from John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI>
Return-path: <Mailer@MIT-XX>
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 84 05:25-EST
Date: 28 Mar 84 0123 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: determinism and choice
To: phil-sci%oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
I am most in sympathy with the point of view expressed by DAM. It is
expressed more elaborately in McCarthy and Hayes, "Some Philosophical
Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence", Machine
Intelligence 4. The essence is that what a person or machine
CAN DO is determined by its position in the interaction structure
rather than by its internal structure. The latter determines what
it will do. This general idea is variously decorated in the paper.
Good point. However, the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics
would seem to limit the extent to which the interaction structure
determines what a system will do. It may be that the macroscopic behavior
of people is not much affected by quantum level effects. But I don't know any
good arguments why this should be the case.
--Carl
∂28-Mar-84 1724 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA oren says
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 17:24:00 PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA (PARC-GW.ARPA) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 17:20:22-PST
Received: from Chardonnay.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 28 MAR 84 17:01:10 PST
Date: 28 Mar 84 16:50:51 PST
From: feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: oren says
To: aflb.su@su-score.ARPA
Cc: feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA
oren suggests that you leave from jacks at 9. he is in general a very trustworthy person
and in particular a careful driver. i plan to take his advice. see you all friday.
joan
∂28-Mar-84 1731 @MIT-MC:DAM@MIT-OZ determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 17:31:24 PST
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 1984 19:19 EST
Message-ID: <DAM.12003053082.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: JMC%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: phil-sci%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: determinism and choice
Date: Wednesday, 28 March 1984 04:23-EST
From: John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI.ARPA>
I am most in sympathy with the point of view expressed by DAM.
It is expressed more elaborately in McCarthy and Hayes, "Some
Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial
Intelligence", Machine Intelligence 4.
Woops, I should have remembered that (I read that one a long
time ago).
∂28-Mar-84 1757 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 25, March 29, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 84 17:57:43 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 17:55:00-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 17:27:16-PST
Date: Wed 28 Mar 84 17:29:42-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 25, March 29, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
! CSLI Newsletter
March 29, 1984 * * * Number 25
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, MARCH 29
Because of the quarter break at Stanford this week, none of the
regular CSLI activities will be held this Thursday except the 3:30
tea. The TINLunch discussion that was to be led by Brian Smith on
March 29 has been postponed until April 5.
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Natural Languages
Ventura Hall "Perspectives on Anaphora"
Conference Room by Phil Cohen
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Information and Association"
Conference Room by Jerry Fodor (author present).
Discussion led by Brian Smith.
2:15 p.m. Seminar on Computer Languages
Ventura Hall "Lisp: Language and Liturature"
Conference Room by Brian Smith (see course description
elsewhere in this Newsletter)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall, "Discourse and Comprehension
Room G-19 During Medical Diagnostic Reasoning"
by Aaron Ciccourel, Department of Sociology,
Cognitive Science Program, and Medical School,
University of California at San Diego.
-----------
AREA CL (FORMERLY C) MEETINGS
The area CL weekly meeting has been moved from Mondays to
Wednesdays, with the meeting still 1-3 and the lunch 12-1. On
Wednesday, March 28, Terry Winograd spoke on the theoretical
implications of computer language design for a new view of
computational semantics. Future meetings will be held at the same
time each Wednesday at a place to be announced. Please notify
CSLI-REQUESTS@SRI-AI if you wish to be on the CL-FRIENDS list, through
which announcements about these meetings will be made.
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
CSLI COLLOQUIUM, SPRING QUARTER
The spring-quarter schedule for the CSLI Colloquium, which is
held each Thursday at 4:15 p.m. in Room G-19 of Redwood Hall, is
beginning to shape up. The following is a partial list of speakers
and dates, to give a hint of what to anticipate for the quarter.
April 5 Aaron Ciccourel, UC San Diego, "Discourse and Comprehension
During Medical Diagnostic Reasoning"
April 12 To be announced
April 19 Jerry Katz
April 26 Dell Hymes
May 3 Alonzo Church, Dept. of Philosophy, UCLA
May 10 John Haugeland
May 17 Elizabeth Bates
May 24 To be announced
May 31 To be announced
June 7 Judith Jarvis Thomson, Dept. of Linguistics & Philosophy, MIT,
"Causal Verbs"
-----------
COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT--"LISP: LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE"
The following course will be the CSLI Seminar on Computer
Languages for the spring quarter. If you are interested in attending,
please read the notes on dates and registration, at the end.
"Lisp: Language and Literature"
A systematic introduction to the concepts and practices of
programming, based on a simple, reconstructed dialect of Lisp. The
aim is both to convey and to make explicit the programming knowledge
that is typically acquired through apprenticeship and practice. The
material will be presented under a linguistic reconstruction, using
vocabulary that should be of use in studying any linguistic system.
Considerable hands-on programming experience will be provided.
Although intended primarily for linguists, philosophers, and
mathematicians, anyone interested in computation is welcome. In
particular, no previous exposure to computation will be assumed.
However, since we will aim for rigorous analyses, some prior
familiarity with formal systems is essential. Also, the course will
be more like a course in literature and creative writing than like a
course in, say, French as a second language. The use of Lisp, in
other words, will be primarily as a vehicle for larger issues, not so
much an object of study in and of itself. Since Lisp (unlike French)
is really very simple, we will be able to teach it in class and lab
sessions. Tutorial instruction and some individual programming
assistance will be provided.
(Lisp course, cont'd on p. 3)
! Page 3
(Lisp course, cont'd from p. 2)
Topics to be covered include:
-- Procedural and data abstraction;
-- Objects, modularity, state, and encapsulation;
-- Input/output, notation, and communication protocols;
-- Metalinguistic abstraction, and problems of intensional grain;
-- Architecture, implementation, and abstract machines;
-- Introspection, self-reference, metacircular interpreters,
and reflection.
Throughout, we will pay particular attention to the following themes:
-- Procedural and declarative notions of semantics;
-- Interpretation, compilation, and other models of processing;
-- Implicit vs. explicit representation of information;
-- Contextual relativity, scoping mechanisms, and locality;
-- Varieties of language: internal, external, theoretical;
-- Syntax and abstract structure: functionalism and
representationalism.
Organizational Details:
Instructor: Brian C. Smith, Xerox PARC/Stanford CSLI;
494-4336 (Xerox); 497-1710 (Stanford),
"BrianSmith@PARC" (Arpanet).
Classes: Tuesdays and Thursdays, 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.,
in Room G19, Redwood Hall, Jordan Quad.
NB: We will be using the computers just now being installed
at CSLI, and there may be some delay in getting access to them.
Registration: Because of the limited number of machines, we
may have to restrict participation somewhat. We would therefore
like anyone who intends to take this course to notify Brian Smith
as soon as possible. Note that the course will be quite demanding:
10 to 20 hours per week will probably be required, depending on
background.
Sections: There will also be section/discussion periods on a regular
basis, at times to be arranged at the beginning of the course.
Reading: The course will be roughly based on the "Structure and
Interpretation of Computer Programs" textbook by Abelson and
Sussman that has been used at M.I.T., although the linguistic
orientation will affect our dialects and terminology.
Laboratory: Xerox 1108s (Dandelions) will be provided by CSLI for
problem sets and programming assignments. Instructors and teaching
assistants will be available for assistance at prearranged times.
Credit: The course may be listed as a special topics course in Computer
Science. However (in case that does not work out) anyone wishing
to take it for credit should get in touch, so that we can arrange
reading course credit.
! Page 4
-----------
COMPUTER FACILITY UPDATE
A myriad of changes has taken place at CSLI's Computer Facility
since January 1.
The Facility's core staff (Eric Ostrom, Bud Spurgeon, and Michele
Leiser) has been augmented by an office assistant, Briget Cook, and a
user-consultant staff of several undergraduates. Our offices are
Rooms 53, 54, and 55 of Casita.
CSLI staff members have attended two training sessions on EMACS
and Scribe and will soon learn "System 1022:"--a database management
system. I will be interviewing management to determine programming
needs through the Center. Top priority will be given to an on-line
events calendar and an accounting/records management system.
We will submit similar articles to the CSLI Newsletter
periodically. Please let the Facility staff know of any suggestions
or questions by sending mail to "Michele@SU-CSLI".
- Michele Leiser
"Turing," our DEC-2060 computer, has now been tested for several
weeks. We have installed a Stanford monitor and several application
packages and help files. Dozens of user accounts have already been
assigned.
January saw the installation of a temporary Ethernet link from
Ventura Hall, Rooms 1 and 6, to the machine room located in Pine Hall.
This was done to establish communication between the Xerox Dandelions
in Ventura and the computers and file servers in Pine in the shortest
time possible. This Ethernet is a temporary kludge intended to serve
until the installation of Ethernet throughout all of our facilities by
professional contractors. Since January, the Ethernet has been tested
and waiting for the installation of the Xerox file server hardware and
software.
In February, the DEC 2060 computer was installed in Pine Hall.
Shortly thereafter, a "MEIS" (Massbus Ethernet Interface Subsytem) was
installed on the DEC which serves to connect us to the campus-wide 3
Megabit Ethernet. This means that the DEC is available on the various
campus networks and that files can be transferred to the DEC and mail
sent and received from the DEC. The DEC is named "Turing" and can be
reached by sending mail or files to "SU-CSLI" or "SU-TURING" from
outside the campus networks and simply "CSLI" or "TURING within the
campus system.
Eight dial-in lines were installed on the DEC, at this time
capable of answering 300 baud and 1200 baud modems using both Bell and
Vadic modem protocols. The phone number for the dial-in modems is
324-3923. The answer modem lines are set up to "auto-baud," which
means that once you have established a connection to the computer's
(Computer Facility, cont'd on p. 5)
! Page 5
(Computer Facility, cont'd from p. 4)
modem you need only hit the "return" key twice for the DEC to figure
out what speed modem you are using and proceed to answer your call.
Eight more dial-in lines are planned for the DEC, and this equipment
is on order.
The DEC has had a series of "break-in period" failures whose
frequency and severity were above average for a computer of this type,
and this has delayed us somewhat. However DEC's service personnel
have been very professional in answering our trouble calls and fixing
the system, and the system is running well now.
Finally, the DEC is presently serving as a site for the
development of a 10 Megabit MEIS. This means that the DEC will be
unavailable after 6 p.m. most weekdays, since the developers need the
resources of the entire system for their work. This should only last
for the next week or so, and the result will be enhanced Ethernet
interfacing for the entire campus community and should be well worth
any minor inconvenience to us at this time.
Xerox technicians and software experts installed the Xerox XNS
(Xerox Network Standard) File Server on Monday, March 19, and at the
same time Xerox software was installed in the laser printer located in
Ventura 1. This allows us to use the XNS file server and begin the
"burning in" process on the Dandelions in Ventura. Extra power and
air-conditioning necessary for running more Dandelions and for running
the laser printers in Ventura 1 and 6 have been installed and the
Dandelions are being moved into that area and will be available for
fully supported research work in Ventura, Rooms 1 and 6, until the
trailers become available for use.
A Xerox Dolphin has also been installed and loaded with special
software to allow it to serve as a gateway between the 10 Megabit
Ethernet in Ventura and the 3 Megabit Ethernet on campus so that the
Dandelions in Ventura will be able to access any host on the Stanford
campus. This will serve as a stopgap device until equipment that was
ordered to do this arrives.
Along with all of this above activity, we are procuring the
necessary items for the installation of full networking and terminal
support in the trailers once they are installed. Also, work is under
way for the installation of two DEC VAX computers in Pine Hall.
It has been a busy first two months for me at my new position
here at CSLI; nevertheless I've been enjoying this opportunity to help
plan and implement what I am sure will be one of the best research and
computing environments on the Stanford campus once it is completed.
- Bud Spurgeon
-----------
! Page 6
SEMINAR IN PROTOCOL ANALYSIS
"Image-Processing Studies of American Sign Language"
George Sperling
New York University and Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
These experiments deal with the practical problem of squeezing
American Sign Language (ASL) through the telephone network.
Historically, an image (e.g., TV @ 4 MHz) has been valued at more than
1000 speech tokens (e.g., telephone @ 3 kHz). A powerful
image-processing system was developed and used to create
low-bandwidth, dynamic, image sequences of ASL signers. Subsampling
in space, time, and intensity was studied in conjunction with a
variety of grey-scale and binary- intensity image transformations and
with some new coding schemes; and formal intelligibility tests were
conducted with deaf subjects. With image-processed ASL, the
word/picture ratio is shown to be approaching unity, and intelligible,
image-processed ASL is communicable on ordinary, switched telephone
networks. The various image-processed ASL stimuli provide interesting
linguistic, perceptual, and computational insights. A movie to
illustrate image-processed ASL will be shown.
Place: Jordan Hall, Room 100
Time: 1:00 pm, April 4, 1984
-----------
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM - IDS 237B
Tuesday, April 3, 1984, 11 a.m. - 12:30 p.m., 240 Bechtel
"Objects, Parts, and Categories"
Barbara Tversky, Dept. of Psychology, Stanford
ABSTRACT: Many psychological, linguistic and anthropological measures
converge to a preferred level of reference, or BASIC LEVEL, for common
categories; for example, TABLE, in lieu of FURNITURE or KITCHEN TABLE.
Here we demonstrate that knowledge of categories at that level (and
only that level) of abstraction is dominated by knowledge of parts.
Basic level categories are perceived to share parts and to differ from
one another on the basis of other features. We argue that knowledge
of part configuration underlies the convergence of perceptual,
behavioral and linguistic measures because part configuration plays a
large role in both appearance and function. Basic level categories
are especially informative because structure is linked to function via
parts at this level.
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
April 10 Roger Shepard Stanford, Psychology
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI; CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy; CSLI
-------
∂29-Mar-84 0044 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 00:44:35 PST
Date: Thu 29 Mar 84 00:40:47-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
The spring is here; bugs are everywhere, including in the AFLB
scheduling. In short there will be no AFLB on April 5 and the grand
opening of the season will be on April 12.
I'll be away till April 7. To get in touch with me leave a msg. on my
home answering machine, at 415-494-8608.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
S P R I N G Q U A R T E R
4/12/84 - Dr. Nimrod Megiddo (XEROX PARC & Stanford)
"Parametric computing, parallel processing and composition."
I will present several applications of parametric computing in which
small depth (in the sense of parallel computation) of an algorithm for
one problem helps design an efficient sequential algorithm for another
problem. The general topic is presented in my paper in the October 83
issue of JACM. I will also discuss some randomizing sequential
algorithms obtained by the method.
******** Time and place: April 12, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year have been filled
so far.
For more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics
you might want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂29-Mar-84 0623 @MIT-MC:ABOULANGER@BBNG Re: determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 06:23:22 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 29 Mar 84 09:20-EST
Date: Thu 29 Mar 84 09:20:32-EST
From: Albert Boulanger <ABOULANGER@BBNG.ARPA>
Subject: Re: determinism and choice
To: hewitt%oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
cc: phil-sci%oz@MIT-MC.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Carl Hewitt <Hewitt at MIT-OZ>" of Wed 28 Mar 84 19:15:33-EST
Good point. However, the uncertainty principle of quantum
mechanics would seem to limit the extent to which the
interaction structure determines what a system will do. It may
be that the macroscopic behavior of people is not much affected
by quantum level effects. But I don't know any good arguments
why this should be the case.
There is a good reason for quantum effects not being present at
the scale we live in. The group statistics washes them out. The
exact behavior of the ensemble depends on the statistics:
Bose-Einstein
Fermi-Dirac
Maxwell-Boltzman
Typical everyday ensembles obey Maxwell-Boltzman (I think) in
which many of the quantum effects are washed out. (However other
ensembles such as super-conducting materials obey other
statistics (Fermi-Dirac?) in which some of the quantum effects
are shown by the ensemble.
Albert Boulanger
-------
∂29-Mar-84 0656 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY Re: determinism and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 06:55:53 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 29 Mar 84 09:45-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via umcppo; 29 Mar 84 9:22 EST
Date: 29 Mar 84 09:11:07 EST (Thu)
From: Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Re: determinism and choice
To: John McCarthy <JMC%su-ai.arpa%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>,
phil-sci%oz%mit-mc.arpa%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa,
perlis%umcp-cs.csnet%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
From: John McCarthy <JMC%su-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.csnet>
Subject: determinism and choice
...Regard the brain... as composed of interacting parts. What one
part can do depends on its position in the causal structure, and
this takes into account the other parts. For example, the folk
psychology decomposition of the mind into Will and Intellect works
pretty well for Perlis's example of jumping provided we add the Body
as a part. Namely, the Body can jump 4 feet, because it has outputs
that would do it. However, if the Will tells the Intellect to do
it, the Intellect won't emit the required order to the Body, so the
Will can't. This may not be quite right, but we will have to
provide our robot programs with some kind of notion of CAN based on
interaction structure so that it will explore its options and decide
what to do in some reasonable way.
I'm not sure I follow this. My point was that the reasoning mechanisms
themselves must be included, in some cases, as part of the 'causal
interaction structure,' and that no part of it is immune from this. As
a consequence, self-reference might be required. This struck me as at
least implicit in DAM's original comments. Self-reference here is not
just of one part to another, but of one part to *itself*, e.g. the
intellect may know its *own* limitations, such as to reason fast enough
to find a solution to a certain kind of problem before its too late.
As for JMC's statement about the body being able to jump 4 feet, even if
the will and the intellect are prepared to emit such orders, the body
still may fail for physical reasons; if the intellect is aware of these
limitations, it (the intellect) may still order the motion (say in
desperation), yet we wouldn't want to say that the body (or the individual)
was then capable of the impossible jump, or even that the individual thought
itself so capable, I think.
I don't believe that this presents insurmountable problems for the McC&Hayes
account; but it does strike me as a point worth separate mention.
--Don Perlis
∂29-Mar-84 0837 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY deliberation and choice
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 08:37:37 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 29 Mar 84 11:32-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via umcppo; 29 Mar 84 11:17 EST
Date: 29 Mar 84 11:03:48 EST (Thu)
From: Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: deliberation and choice
To: phil-sci%mit-oz%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
I think we want to say that the deliberating behavior of an agent *is* what
determines its choices. Without deliberation, we would not make plans,
solve problems, etc. We would be very limited creatures, perhaps at the
level of ants (for it seems intuitively well supported to me that most
mammals are planners), having only 'rote' behavior, not modifiable in the
short run as efforts are in progress or even before.
So although (pace Hewitt and quantum mechanics) our behavior may be
determined, it is so as a complex event that involves deliberating the pros
and cons of things. If there were a faster way to see what to do than to
consider the options (via the incomplete belief set of the agent itself)
then Nature probably would have provided us with it. But it is very hard to
imagine how such a faster way could work in any case. Reason (and therefore
a kind of 'freedom' to consider *real* options--real because without them
the agent indeed behaves differently--) may amount to choosing behavior.
This point has been much debated by philosophers for years, with many going
so far as to argue that, far from denying determinism, free will is
inconceivable without it! This appears to be also in the spirit of DAM's
and JMC's observations.
∂29-Mar-84 0910 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE quantum effects...
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 09:09:55 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 29 Mar 84 12:05-EST
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 84 09:02:39 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
To: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: quantum effects...
↓↓
From: Albert Boulanger
"There is a good reason for quantum effects not being present
at the scale we live in. The group statistics washes them
out. The exact behavior of the ensemble depends on the
statistics:"
Even in conventional computers it is recognized that there is a
class of machine errors (known as "soft errors") that are caused
by single quantum events. For example, cosmic ray interaction with
the molecular structure of the logic elements in VLSI circuitry,
which can change a bit and drop an operating system. In this case
a single quantum event certainly effected the entire causal struc-
ture of the machine.
∂29-Mar-84 1100 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Cannon printer
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 11:00:38 PST
Date: Thu 29 Mar 84 10:59:42-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Cannon printer
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA, <bboard>csli.txt@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: <bboard>bboard.txt@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The Cannon printer or Imagen has been set up to run off either
Turing or sri-ai. Please note that the change from one machine to
another must be done manually. The black box on top of the printer
must be set to A for the Turing machine or B for the sri-ai machine.
Please do not change the switch in the middle of someone's job.
Report any problems to Bud Spurgeon.
Type help cannon on the Turing machine to learn how to use the
cannon printer on Turing.
-------
∂29-Mar-84 1103 WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Rod Burstall's Arrival
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 11:03:49 PST
Date: Thu 29 Mar 84 11:02:36-PST
From: Pat Wunderman <WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Rod Burstall's Arrival
To: CSLI-Folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Rod will be arriving this Sun (April 1) at S.F., PanAm Flt #125,
arriving @ 15:45, in order to participate in the CSLI Advisory
Panel Meetings. I wondered whether anyone would be interested
in meeting him at the airport? He will be staying at the Riviera
Motor Lodge, 15 El Camino Real, at the edge of the STanford Shopping
Center, for 3 nights, then with friends in P.A. He will also spend
time at SRI, visiting with Joe Goguen, and will leave on April 11.
If you would like to meet him at the airport, please contact me asap,
as I will be sending him a netmessage this afternoon. Thank you.
--Pat Wunderman (497-1131)
-------
∂29-Mar-84 1106 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA bats confusion
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 11:06:17 PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA (PARC-GW.ARPA) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 11:01:46-PST
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 29 MAR 84 10:31:37 PST
Date: 29 Mar 84 10:31:29 PST
From: feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: bats confusion
To: aflb.su@score.ARPA
Cc: feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA
there seems to be some confusion about my role in arranging the
carpooling. i intended only
to supply the people who said they needed a ride with the names of
people who said they
could drive and let you all work out among yourselves who was driving
whom. but
apparently people expect me to show up at jacks tomorrow with a list of
passengers and drivers.
i can't guarantee that i will do that, so i am now distributing lists of
people who have told me
they're going:
these people say they are "willing to drive"
tom spencer
oren patashnik
frank yellin
ernst mayr
richard biegel
ken clarkson
these people need rides
alejandro (sp?) schaffer
yoni malachi
vavasis (visiting prospective student)
gabi kuper also says he's probably going, but i'm not sure whether he's
driving or not.
maria seconds oren's suggestion of leaving jacks no later than 9.
if you think it's best for everyone to rendezvous at jacks by no later
than 9 and then
split up all the passengers into available cars, be my guest. but i
can't promise to be
there to arrange it.
is this clear now?
send your repies to jf@score, not to me here at parc.
thanks,
joan
∂29-Mar-84 1228 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar in foundations of mathematics (Professor Kreisel)
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 12:28:49 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:21:11-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:17:13-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:08:19-PST
Date: 29 Mar 84 1157 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar in foundations of mathematics (Professor Kreisel)
To: "@PARA.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Organizational meeting
TIME: Tuesday, Apr. 3, 4:15 PM
PLACE: Philosophy Dept. Room 92 (seminar room)
TOPIC: Logic and parallel computation.
We will begin by examining some recent papers where
parallel computation is used in interesting ways
to obtain better algorithms.
The logical part will be to investigate how efficient
algorithms using parallel computation might be extracted
from infinite proof trees by applying transformations
that use only finite amounts of information.
At the first meeting these ideas will be explained in some more detail.
Ideas and suggestions will be welcome.
The seminar is scheduled to meet Tuesdays at 4:15, but can
be changed if there are conflicts.
∂29-Mar-84 1230 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BrianSmith.PA@Xerox.ARPA T.A. Help?
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 12:30:41 PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA (PARC-GW.ARPA) by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:21:09-PST
Received: from Concord.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 29 MAR 84 12:17:24 PST
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 84 12:11 PST
From: BrianSmith.PA@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: T.A. Help?
To: CSLI-Folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.PA@Xerox.ARPA
Reply-to: BrianSmith.PA@Xerox.ARPA
A long while ago, some of you volunteered to help as T.A.'s with my
upcoming Lisp as Language course. I carefully squirreled your names
away into a file, which seems, unfortunately, to have evaporated into
the ethernet. So: if you are still willing to help in this capacity,
could you send a note asap, please?
(Being a T.A. will primarily involve teaching recitation sections:
working through problems sets, and generally answering questions, about
general material presented in class, and about using 3-LISP on the
Dandelions. I would like have a meeting of potential TA's next week to
go over the initial material, so that they can get a leg up on the
implementation. I would like people who have some familiarity with the
2-LISP/3-LISP type of linguistic reconstruction, on which the course
will be based.)
Thanks very much in advance,
Brian
∂29-Mar-84 1251 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 12:51:49 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:43:23-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:31:20-PST
Date: Thu 29 Mar 84 12:26:37-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
This quarter's first meeting of the Language, Perception and Cognition
seminar will also be the Psychology Department's colloquium.
WHO: Dr. Jerry Fodor, MIT Psychology and Philosophy
TITLE: "Modularity of Mind"
WHEN: April 4, at 3:45
WHERE: Room 050, Jordan Hall.
The next speaker will be:
Dr. Len Talmy, UCB Cognitive Science and German Depts.,
"The Relation Of Grammar to Cognition"
and will be Monday April 9, at 12:00 in room 100, Jordan Hall.
-------
∂29-Mar-84 1253 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PCOHEN@SRI-AI.ARPA COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT -- ASPECTS OF ANAPHORA
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 84 12:53:17 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:44:55-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 29 Mar 84 12:41:02-PST
Date: Thu 29 Mar 84 12:18:16-PST
From: Phil Cohen <PCohen@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT -- ASPECTS OF ANAPHORA
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
ASPECTS OF ANAPHORA
This quarter, Joan Bresnan and I will be hosting the CSLI Thursday
morning seminar on Anaphora. Since the course is covering a
phenomenon rather than one coherent theory, it is important that we
examine the many aspects of the problem before attempting a synthesis.
The lectures will cover syntactic, semantic, representational, and
discourse constraints on the production and resolution of anaphoric
expressions. Ivan Sag will lead off the seminar by introducing these
perspectives.
The course is listed as Linguistics 236. It is appropriate to
advanced graduate students in Linguistics, Philosophy, Psychology, or
Computer Science. Students who wish to receive course credit should
contact Prof. Bresnan to arrange the formalities.
CONTRARY TO ANY PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENTS, THE SEMINAR WILL
MEET IN:
REDWOOD G-19, from 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM.
COURSE OUTLINE
Date Speaker Topic
------- ------- -----
April 5 Ivan Sag Perspectives on anaphora
April 12 Joan Bresnan Syntactic constraints on anaphora
April 19 Joan Bresnan Syntactic constraints on anaphora
April 26 Bonnie Webber What is available for subsequent reference,
(U. of Penn.) Discourse Models
May 3 Barbara Grosz A unified account of Definite NP's in Discourse
May 10 Barbara Grosz A unified account of Definite NP's in Discourse
May 17 Megumi Kameyama Zero-anaphora in Japanese
May 24 Irene Heim (U. of Texas) (Title to be announced)
May 31 Jon Barwise Situation semantics and anaphora
June 7 Tom Wasow Wrap-up and synthesis
Organizers:
Phil Cohen (SRI) 859-4840, Net address: PCOHEN@SRI-AI
Joan Bresnan (Stanford) 497-0144, Net address: BRESNAN@PARC-MAXC
-------
∂30-Mar-84 0007 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 00:07:48 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 30 Mar 84 02:52-EST
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 84 11:19:00 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
To: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Limits of determinism.
The real problem with the deterministic philosophy as applied to
machine intelligence is that it fails to take into account discoveries
about the nature of reality made during the 20th century. Prior to
the concept of the quantum, the universe was thought to be a giant
machine, following deterministic laws. Since the first "computing
machines" were large devices, whose components were macro sized
and did not exhibit quantum effects, it was natural that computer
science did not include quantum mechanics into the list of concepts
needed for the establishment of a new intellectual field.
However, the assumption that counting widgits coming off an
assembly line (which is where computer science began) requires
concepts no different from that of reproducing human consciousness
(which seems to be where it is going) has no foundation. The reason
that quantum theory is important is that it OVERTHREW the idea that
reality is a great deterministic machine. What quantum theory says
is that there is a class of elements of reality whose behavior can
only be predicted statistically because deterministic, analytic
concepts DO NOT APPLY to their behavior. It points to the LIMITS
of (left brain?) analytical thought. As Niels Bohr (one of the
inventors of quantum theory) once said:
"It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to
find out how Nature is. Physics concerns what we can
SAY about Nature."
People came to this conclusion because there simply has never been a
theory that could explain the "random" behavior of quantum processes.
If human consciousness were composed only of deterministic rules and
logic, then how could the "concept" have developed that reality was
composed of more than determinism? Would not a machine continue to
build deterministic concepts to account for experimental results,
which could not be "explained"? Perhaps in human consciousness
there is a way of "conceptulizing" reality that is OUTSIDE of
determinism, which is where the *perspective* that determinism is
limited came from. Einstein's "postulational method" demonstrates
my point:
|--------------------|
+---->| ABSOLUTE POSTULATE |
| |--------------------|
| | | |
| | | |
Intuitive | | | |
Leap | |--| |--| |--| Specific results
| |S1| |S2| |S3| deduced from
| |--| |--| |--| postulate
| ↑ ↑ ↑
+------- | | |
| | |
---------------------------------------------------------
EXPERIENCE AND EXPERIMENT
From Heinz Pagels' book "The Cosmic Code":
"But a strong antipositivist element central to Einstein's
method is the intuitional leap from experience which sets
up the absolute postulate in the first place. The theorist
cannot rationally deduce the absolute postulate from
experience, since it transcends experience. Only intuition,
an inspired guess, can invent the postulate. This is what
Einstein meant when he said, 'For the creation of a theory,
the mere collection of recorded phenomena never suffices-
there must always be added a free invention of the human
mind that attacks the heart of the matter.'"
It would seem that the determinists still have some
"explaining" to do...
∂30-Mar-84 0053 @MIT-MC:JCMA@MIT-OZ Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 00:53:05 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 30 Mar 84 03:50-EST
Received: from MIT-JANIS by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 30 Mar 84 03:34-EST
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 84 03:33 EST
From: JCMA%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Limits of determinism.
To: clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA
Cc: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA
In-reply-to: The message of 29 Mar 84 14:19-EST from Kenneth Clark <clark at AEROSPACE>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 84 11:19:00 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
What quantum theory says is that there is a class of elements of reality
whose behavior can only be predicted statistically because deterministic,
analytic concepts DO NOT APPLY to their behavior. ....
People came to this conclusion because there simply has never been a
theory that could explain the "random" behavior of quantum processes.
As I understand it, statistical prediction is required for quantum phenomena
because of the uncertainty principle (i.e., it isn't possible to get enough
information out of the system to "fully determine" it. This is an issue that
arises at the bottom of our physical frame of reference, and it is not clear
that it comes into play elsewhere in our frame (?).
So, this looks more like a statement that we can prove that we cannot achieve
any better understanding than a probabilistic one, not a statement about what
is actually taking place at the quantum level.
Carrying the "quantum metaphor" over to computer science maybe useful to
explain hardware as designs become more sensitive to quantum phenomena.
However, it would be necessary to establish an uncertainty principle for the
mind in order to carry over the metaphor to the human mind, and computer
models of cognition.
Use of statistical methods to explain "random" behavior usually means that
your theory isn't good enough to do it deterministically, or the requisite
information is to hard to collect or process. Thus, opting for statistical
methods is a sure sign that one doesn't have a theory!
Even if quantum phenomena were involved in cognition, it would seen that
nature would manage to get deterministic results out of the quantum
phenonomena, in order to ensure determinism, increase reliability and
predictability, and therefore, enhance species survivability.
Anyway, why should my AI program use a random method when I have a
deterministic one that works? Why should I prefer a method relying on
randomness to one which is deterministic? How would I ever predict the
performance of a randomized algorithm?
∂30-Mar-84 0238 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V2 #15
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 02:38:40 PST
Date: Thursday, March 29, 1984 8:35PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584 Stanford University, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V2 #15
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Friday, 30 Mar 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 15
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Solutions & Quiz,
Programs - BFS search of SLD-trees,
Query - Inferential and Deductive Processing,
Implementations - "The Bagel" & Benchmarks & Elegance,
& First N Solutions & Speed & Realities
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 22-Mar-84 14:22:13-BST
From: Spacek <Spacek%Essex@UCL-CS>
Subject: Quiz
Answer to Hideyuki Nakashima's simple quiz in Issue 13:
constant(###):- !,fail.
constant(←).
var(X):- constant(X),!,fail.
var(←).
-- Libor Spacek
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 84 09:26:41 pst
From: Cohen%UCBernie@Berkeley (Shimon Cohen)
Subject: var(X) without var(X) ...
Here is a solution to the question posed in the Digest (#13).
Can you define 'var(X)' without using the primitive predicate.
solution:
isvar(X) :- not( X = 1 ) , !, fail.
isvar(X) :- not( X = 2 ) , !, fail.
isvar(X).
The 'logic' behind it is:
If X is a var then you must be able to unify it with anything
including two different numbers.
BUT you can write: isvar(X) :- X=1,X=2.
So you have to do it using not-not
so read the first line: if X is not unifiable with 1 then fail
(double not is because of fail)
-- Shimon Cohen
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 84 16:55 PST
From: Allen VanGelder <AVG@Diablo>
Subject: var(X) Quiz
How about var(X) :- \+ \+ X=0, \+ \+ X=[].
-- Allen Van Gelder
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 84 17:47:33 EST
From: Yoav Shoham <Shoham@YALE>
Subject: BFS search of SLD-trees.
I've lately needed to implement a breadth-first search of the
SLD-tree, that is implement a breadth-first theorem prover in
the depth-first interpreter of Prolog. In principle there is
no difficulty, but in practice there was. I have two versions
- one is pure, but runs out of space very fast. The other uses
ugly side effects (briefly, the queue of execution is kept
global) but is space efficient. I feel that there should be an
elegant 5-liner, but can't come up with one. Can anyone come
up with an elegant solution? To make the discussion more
concrete, and to give a test for proposed solutions, consider
the following definition of f:
f([a|X]) :- g(X).
f([b|X]) :- g(X).
g([k,X]).
g(X) :- f(X).
f is a recognizer of the language (a+b)*.k.sigma*, but a
proof of f(X) will generate the language a*.K.sigma*. A
breadth-first proof of f(X) (in my implementation a proof
of bfs(f(X)) ) will "fairly" generate the first language.
My first implemenation genarates [a,k|←], [b,k|←], [a,b,k|←],
..., [b,b,b,a,k|←] and then runs out of space. My other
implementation generated about 90 strings (also in lexico
graphic order) in about 10 minutes (subjective time) before
I got bored with it.
If you have a solution that you think is elegant, I'd like
to see the code. If you think the code is of little interest
to readers of the Digest, you can send it to me directly
to Shoham@Yale.
Thanks,
-- Yoav.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Mar 84 1744 EST (Tuesday)
From: Vijay.Saraswat@CMU-CS-A
Subject: Concurent Prolog
There's been so much talk lately about array implementations
that perhaps someone should change the topic. Here's something
for a start.
When Ehud Shapiro visited this country in January, he talked
at some places about "The Bagel: A systolic concurrent Prolog
machine". Some of you may have heard the talk. In any case,
here is a bit of code presented during the talk that is supposed
to be the systolic algorithm of Kung, Guibas and Thompson for
the dynamic programming problem, for rectangular arrays:
Input: a list of triples (0,D1, D2) where the D's are matrix
dimensions. Output:(W, D1, D2), where W is the number of
multiplications in optimal parenthesization.
table( W.nil, W).
table( Ws, Min):-
Ws \=←.nil |
row(Ws, Ws1)@right,
table(Ws1?, Min)@forward.
row(A.nil, nil).
row(W1.W2.Ws, W.Ws1? ):-
entry(W1, W2, W),
row( W2.Ws, Ws1)@forward.
entry((W1, L1, R1), (W2, L2, R2), (W, L1, R2)):-
W:=min( W1+L1*R1*R2, W2+L1*L2*R2).
I have serious problems with this program. Not only is it {\it
not} the Kung et al algorithm (which involves a complicated
scheme of four registers at each cell which propogate signals
at diferent speeds) but it is not even correct!
The procedure entry calculates the value of the <i,j>th entry
in the (standard) upper diagonal matrix for this problem in
terms of the <i-1,j> and <i-1, j+1> entries. This is clearly
incorrect.
Does anyone have the correct code for the Kung et al algorithm ?
------------------------------
Date: 24 Mar 1984 00:12:36-PST
From: Hildum%Brandeis.CSNet@csnet-relay
Subject: Inferential and Deductive Processing
I am looking for some information concerning the following:
(1) The use of Prolog and Lisp for deductive and inferential
processing.
(2) Standard methods of handling deductive and inferential
processing in Prolog and Lisp.
(3) Any languages similar or different to Prolog and Lisp that
have been used for deductive and inferential processing.
(4) What types of inferential and deductive processing cannot
be done using Prolog ? Using Lisp ?
Suggestions of applicable articles and research projects, as
well as personal observations would be greatly appreciated. I
am attempting to get a feel for what kinds of things can and
cannot be done to handle deductive and inferential processing
with existing Logic/AI programming languages.
Responses would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
-- David W. Hildum
------------------------------
Date: Fri 23 Mar 84 10:32:55-PST
From: Herm Fischer <HFischer@USC-ECLB>
Subject: IBM PC/XT Prolog Benchmarks
[I retimed the DEC 2040 execution -- I don't know where Pereira
got his timings on, but mine are better...
IBM was kind enough to let us have PC/IX for today, and we
brought up UNSW Prolog. With a minor exception the code
and makefiles were compatible with PC/IX. (They have frustrated
me for a whole year, being incompatible every PCDOS "C" compiler
from Lattice onward.)
PC/IX and Prolog are neatly integrated; all Unix features, and
even shell calls, can be made within the Prolog environment.
Even help files are included. It is kind of nice to be tracing
away and browse and modify your prolog code within the interpretive
environment, using the INed (nee rand) editor and all the other
Unix stuff.
The 64 K limitation of PC/IX bothers me, more emotionally than
factually, because only one of my programs couldn't be run today.
I'm sure I will get really upset unless I find some hack around
this limitation.
A benchmark really surprises me. The Zebra problem (using
Pereira's solution) provides the following statistics:
DEC-2040 6 seconds (if compiled) (Timed on TOPS-20)
42 seconds (if interpreted) ( " " " )
VAX-11/780 204 secs (interpreted) (UNSW) (Timed on Unix Sys III)
IBM PC/XT 544 secs (interpreted) ( " ) (Timed on " " " )
The latter 2 times are wall-clock with no other jobs or users
running, and these two Prologs were compiled from the same source
code and make file! The PC/IX was CPU-bound, and its disk never
blinked during the execution of the test.
-- Herm Fischer
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 26-Mar-84 21:56:31-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10)
Subject: Elegant Interpreters, Benchmarks, First N solutions
I'm afraid I'm on both sides of the recent exchange between
Fernando Pereira and Andrew Taylor.
I believe that elegance and efficiency are correlates, not
opposites, and that it is possible in an academic environment
to write a Prolog interpreter which is both efficient and
elegant. My limited experience of industry suggests that
efficiency and elegance are even less likely to be found there.
But I've seen several Prologs in C (including UNSW but not
including Basser Prolog) and it would be a gross abuse of
language to call any of them elegant. Indeed, I don't think
I've ever seen ANY C program I could call elegant, and that
includes my own, though I try.
Actually, C Prolog is a good deal better than it looks.
The version I've got has a lot more comments, some of the
names have been made more readable (a name change was
necessary to make it work under V7 and I took the opportunity
to make the names clearer [to me]), and about half of the
labels in the main loop have been eliminated. And the built
in predicates live in a separate file from the main loop, so
you can see the main loop structure more clearly. All of
these changes are entirely superficial, yet once I'd made
them I found that C Prolog was quite intelligible.
I estimate that the main loop of C-Prolog could be 30%
shorter and 20% faster without the debugging support.
Typical of the things C-Prolog does is a feature of
1.4d.EDAI. You can hit the UNIX "interrupt" key (↑C here)
and in response to the prompt say "b", whereupon your program
is suspended and a new break is entered. [This is a DEC-10
debugger feature as well, so if Basser Prolog offers DEC-10
features and more, it must offer this.] Since C doesn't allow
local functions, the flag variables that tell the main loop
to enter a break at the next CALL port have to be visible
to the ↑C handler. I don't find that elegant, and neither
I think does Fernando Pereira. There's an amazingly large
number of variables to be saved and restored when you enter
or leave a break, and you either do that with macros, or once
again C forces you to break your structure. An obvious reply
is "why not implement break by a recursive call to the
interpreter?" The answer is that save/1 doesn't save a set of
clauses, it saves a *complete* execution state, so when you
restore a saved state in C Prolog the entire program, whatever
it was, however deeply breaks were nested, is restored and
resumes running. The 1.4*.edai series puts this to good
effect by saving the standard image this way:
:- save(startup),
( exists('~/.prologrc'), !, consult('~/.prologrc')
; true
).
To make that work, either the interpreter has to work by
jumping as much as it can instead of calling, or your "save"
predicate has to know an awful lot about the way UNIX and C
lay C programs out in memory. If C Prolog had a garbage
collector, the argument against having recursive procedures
in the base language (C) would be even stronger.
To change the subject, David Warren's "New Engine"
has a lot of really clever ideas in it, and they ALL
pay off in the naive reverse benchmark. We need a new
benchmark, and if it is to be fair to the few Prolog
systems which contain garbage collectors, it needs to
turn over lots of memory. In fact we need two benchmark
programs, one for clean programming and one which hacks
the database (if people are going to write bad programs,
they should know how slowly they'll run). Has anyone any
suggestions?
To change the subject again, it was me that asked if
anyone had a use for "first N solutions", and yes I knew
about "collect". The 1thing that interests me is that my
question was "have you got a real USE for 'find the first
N solutions'?" and NOBODY has said "yes". The "bagof(Term,
true, [Copy])" trick is (except in LM-Prolog) just a slow
way of doing asserta(.(Term)), retract(.(Term)), !. I'm
sure there is a better way of copying a term in LM-Prolog,
and it would be interesting to see the figures for the
methods I gave, plus "first solution to true", plus direct
copying in Lisp, applied to the examples I gave.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 23-Mar-84 18:55:10-GMT
From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10)
Subject: Another speed comparison.
One hack you sometimes find people using (I have used it myself,
but I now publicly repudiate this error) is having a variable at
the end of a list, and using member or memberchk to stick new
things in the list *if they are not already there*.
Note 1: you should use memberchk rather than member, as member
will run away if you fail into it.
Note 2: the mode declaration in <PROLOG>SETUTL.PL won't let you
use memberchk. DON'T bother "fixing" it, this note will
tell you why.
I wondered what advantage this gave over the obvious clean way of
doing it. So I wrote a wee program and measured it.
The two routines hacky(Multi, Single) and clean(Multi, Single)
both take a list with possibly multiple occrrences of its elements
and construct a list with only single occurrences (list to set, in
other words). It turns out that hacky returns the elements in the
same order that they had in Multi, and clean returns them in the
reverse order.
hacky([], L) :-
append(L, [], L). % fill in the free tail
hack([H|T], L) :-
memberchk1(H, L), % mode memberchk1(+, ?)
hacky(T, L).
clean(Multi, Single) :-
clean(Multi, [], Single).
clean([], L, L).
clean([H|T], L0, L) :-
memberchk2(H, L0), % mode memberchk2(+, +)
!,
clean(T, L0, L).
clean([H|T], L0, L) :-
clean(T, [H|L0], L).
A third method which can be used in this problem only is to
call sort(Multi, Single).
The times I got on the list
[i,w,o,n,d,e,r,w,h,i,c,h,i,s,t,h,e,b,e,s,t,m,e,t,h,o,d]
were Interpreted Compiled
hacky 81 ms 8.1 ms
clean 83 ms 5.5 ms
sort 15 ms 15 ms
For interpreted code, the overhead of the clean method was
negligible. When compiled, the stronger mode declaration
possible for memerchk2 (and that is the mode declaration for
memberchk in SETUTL.PL) means that the clean code is FASTER!
Moral: Cleanliness is next to Logic Programming.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂30-Mar-84 0709 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:cooper%wisc-ai.uwisc@wisc-crys.ARPA Wisconsin downtime
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 07:09:15 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 30 Mar 84 07:06:35-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 30 Mar 84 06:57:55-PST
Received: from wisc-crys.arpa by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 30 Mar 84 07:00:57-PST
Received: from wisc-ai.uwisc by wisc-crys.arpa (4.22/3.7)
id AA18737; Fri, 30 Mar 84 08:59:15 cst
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 84 08:59:11 cst
From: cooper%wisc-ai.uwisc@wisc-crys.ARPA (Robin Cooper)
Message-Id: <8403301459.AA07182@wisc-ai.uwisc>
Received: by wisc-ai.uwisc (4.22/3.7)
id AA07182; Fri, 30 Mar 84 08:59:11 cst
To: csli-friends@sri-ai
Subject: Wisconsin downtime
Our machines will be down Apr 2nd - 5th. If you get mail returned,
please try again.
Robin Cooper
∂30-Mar-84 1111 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA [DISRAEL@BBNG: Re: housing needed 1985]
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 11:10:56 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 30 Mar 84 11:09:44-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 30 Mar 84 10:41:54-PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 10:44:01-PST
From: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: [DISRAEL@BBNG: Re: housing needed 1985]
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Here's another request for housing, this one for the entire 84-85 year:
--------
---------------
Return-Path: <DISRAEL@BBNG.ARPA>
Received: from BBNG.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 28 Mar 84 13:56:41-PST
Date: 28 Mar 1984 16:54-EST
Sender: DISRAEL@BBNG
Subject: Re: housing needed 1985
From: DISRAEL@BBNG
To: ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI
Message-ID: <[BBNG]28-Mar-84 16:54:48.DISRAEL>
In-Reply-To: The message of Wed 28 Mar 84 11:50:32-PST from ETCHEMENDY@SRI-AI.ARPA
David Israel of BBN will be visiting SRI and the Center for the
Study of Language and Information next (academic) year. (App.
8/1/84 - 7/31/85.) He will need a house fit for wife and one
child, somewhere in Palo Alto. We have no pets and whatever
nasty habits we have (smoking not being one of them) are MOSTLY
non-destructive of property. (An exchange for a three bedroom
house near Boston would be possible.)
If you have any leads on rentals for this period, they'd be
appreciated. Contact: DISRAEL@BBNG or David Israel at
(617)497-3890 (office), (617) 696-0559 (home).
Thanks,
-------
∂30-Mar-84 1113 MADSEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Course
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 11:13:41 PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 10:44:46-PST
From: Ole Lehrmann Madsen <MADSEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: New Course
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Please bring this to the notice of your attendees:
The following course will be given in the spring quarter:
CS 249 TOPICS IN PROGRAMMING SYSTEMS:
LANGUAGES FOR SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROGRAMMING
Questions to Ole Lehrmann Madsen, M. Jacks Hall room 214, tlf. 497 - 0364,
net address MADSEN@SU-SCORE.
Listing: CS 249
Instructor: Ole Lehrmann Madsen
Time: Monday 1:00pm - 4:00pm
Room: 352 building 460
Course description
This course will consider tools and concepts for system description and
programming. A number of languages for this purpose will be presented. These
include SIMULA 67, DELTA, EPSILON and BETA, which have been developed as part
of research projects in Norway and Denmark.
SIMULA I was originally developed as a tool for simulation. SIMULA 67 is a
general programming language with simulation as a special application. The
formalization of a system as a SIMULA program often gave a better understanding
of the system than did the actual simulation results.
This was the motivation for designing a special language (DELTA) for making
system descriptions. DELTA is intended for communication about systems. e.g.
data processing, biology, medicine, physics. DELTA among others contains
constructs for describing discrete state changes (by means of algorithms) and
continuous state changes (by means of predicates). The EPSILON language is
the result of an attemp to formalize DELTA by means of Petri Nets.
BETA is a programming language originally intended for implementing DELTA
descriptions of computer systems. However the project turned into a long
term project with the purpose of developing concepts, constucts and tools
in relation to programming. The major results of this projetc is the BETA
language. BETA is an object oriented language like SIMULA and SMALLTALK,
but unlike SMALLTALK, BETA belongs to the ALGOL family with respect to
block structure, scope rules and type checking.
Various other languages and topics may also be covered. Examples of this are:
Petri Nets, environments for system description and programming, alternative
languages like Aleph and Smalltalk, implementation issues. Implementaion issues
could be: transformation of a system description to a program, implementation
of a typed language like BETA obtaining dynamic possibilities like in LISP.
Prerequisites
Students are expected to have a basic knowledge of programming languages.
The course may to some extent depend on the background and interests of the
participating students. Students with a background in simulation or description
of various systems within physics, biology, etc. will be useful participants.
Course work
Students will be expected to read and discuss in class various papers on system
description and programming languges. In addition small excersises may be given.
Each student is supposed to write a short paper about one or more topics covered
by the course and comment on papers by other students.
-------
∂30-Mar-84 1122 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA FACULTY LUNCH
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 11:22:20 PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 10:57:14-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: FACULTY LUNCH
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The first faculty lunch of the quarter will be on Tuesday, April 3 at
12:15. Al Aho who will be visiting will be our guest of honor.
Remember there is a general faculty meeting at 2:30.
GENE
-------
∂30-Mar-84 1325 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA TA meeting next Thursday
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 13:25:34 PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 13:12:51-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: TA meeting next Thursday
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, students@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
There has been a great deal of confusion over departmental policies concerning
TAs recently (offices, copying, obtaining classrooms, etc.), and so Marlie
Yearwood and I have decided to have a meeting for all TAs next Thursday during
the lunch hour in Jacks 252. Marlie and I will start talking at 12:15 and hope
to stop talking at 12:30. Some people from the TV network will be on-hand to
discuss special procedures for TV classes starting at 12:30. When they finish,
I will spend some time explaining how to use 1022 on SCORE to help manage grade
data.
I would like to have all TAs there if possible. I am requiring each class to
send at least one TA to the meeting. Non-TV TA's will not be required to stay
for the presentation from the TV people. Only the TAs for 105 and 106 will be
required to stay for the 1022 presentation (although all are welcome).
If a class absolutely cannot send a representative, the TA(s) should contact me.
-------
∂30-Mar-84 1444 @MIT-MC:MINSKY@MIT-OZ Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 14:43:58 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 30 Mar 84 17:39-EST
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 1984 17:38 EST
Message-ID: <MINSKY.12003558936.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Cc: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Limits of determinism.
In-reply-to: Msg of 29 Mar 1984 14:19-EST from Kenneth Clark <clark at AEROSPACE>
Pls. remove me from PHIL-SCI list
∂30-Mar-84 1507 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 15:07:07 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 30 Mar 84 18:03-EST
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 84 14:48:44 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
To: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
CC: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Limits of determinism.
In-reply-to: <MINSKY.12003558936.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
Don't trouble yourself, please delete me from PHIL-SCI instead...
∂30-Mar-84 1514 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Dinner with Advisory Panel
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 15:14:08 PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 15:13:15-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Dinner with Advisory Panel
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
All,
There will be a dinner for the Advisory Panel next Thursday:
Place: Gypsy Cellar
932 Middlefield Rd
Redwood City
Time: 8:30, April 5
Cost: ~$20/person, total
If you want to come, with our without a friend, reply to Emma@turing since
seating is limited. Ivan assures us that this is a great place.
Jon
-------
∂30-Mar-84 1530 JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA paragraphs
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 15:30:15 PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 15:29:08-PST
From: John Perry <JRP@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: paragraphs
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
This is a little pep talk on your paragraphs.
Please think of the ultimate reader. This person is an SDF Board member
interested in how the research program has changed research in
language and compuation. He will not know off the top of his head
what numbers go with what projects. Lists of meetings, per se, will
not interest him. Approach the task like a letter of recommendation.
First get clear in your mind what you would like to be able to say.
Then focus on the truth. If there is an overlap, great. If not,
stick to the truth, but give it the best interpretation. In any case,
concrete instances of new perspectives, changed minds, new ideas,
additional constraints are more important than specific dates etc.
Some of the paragraphs that have crossed our screens seemed real good.
Others, a tad perfunctory, considering the stakes.
Feel free to try again if you dont think you have done it right.
Thanks,
Barbara Grosz and John Perry
-------
∂30-Mar-84 1555 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Study of University Spinoff Firms
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 84 15:55:35 PST
Date: Fri 30 Mar 84 15:52:31-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Study of University Spinoff Firms
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I am placing in your mailboxes some material concerning university spinoff
firms. Richard Wells of ABT has been contracted by NSF to make a study of such
organizations. If you are interested in talking to Wells next week, please
contact Gerry Lieberman at 7-3903 or Wells at 617/ 492-7100.
GENE
-------
∂31-Mar-84 1421 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tentative Agenda
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 84 14:20:56 PST
Date: Sat 31 Mar 84 14:17:22-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tentative Agenda
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: aho@SU-SCORE.ARPA, bureaucrat@SU-SCORE.ARPA
TENTATIVE AGENDA
FACULTY MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 3
MJH 2:30
1. Presentation of Degree Candidates Walker 10 mins
2. Selected Committee Reports
Admissions Reid 5
Computer Facilities Bosack 5
Computer Forum Tajnai 5
3. Financial Report Scott 5
4. Search Committee: CS/Psych Buchanan 10
5. Promotion of R. Gabriel to
Sr. Research Assoc McCarthy 5
6. Courtesy Appointment of E Levinthal Binford 5
7. Summer Program Reges 5
8. Departmental TV Program Reges 5
9. TA Assignments Cheriton 8
10. Support for First Year Students (Ullman)/Golub 10
11. General Business and Announcements
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
* Written material presented
-------
∂31-Mar-84 2115 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA First Day of Classes
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 84 21:15:38 PST
Date: Sat 31 Mar 84 21:13:05-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: First Day of Classes
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
A faculty member must meet with his class on the first day scheduled at
the time given in the timetable. There should be no exceptions to this.
If a student is unable to attend at that time, he/she can send a message
to the faculty member who should then take the student's request into
consideration. We try to accomodate the faculty at the time of making up
the schedule but this can not always be done. At any rate, the class time
should not be changed for frivolous reasons.
Gene Golub
-------
∂31-Mar-84 2123 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty meeting - April 2
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 84 21:23:06 PST
Date: Sat 31 Mar 84 21:20:38-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty meeting - April 2
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
As I indicated, the Senior Faculty meeting will take place on MONDAY
April 2 at 2:30.This is a change from our usual date because of the need to
schedule the departmental faculty meeting on the Tuesday.
This meeting will be a mixture of formal business and informal discussion.
Items:
1. Change in appointment of Bigelow
2. Possible appointment of Karp
3. Chairman of department
GENE
-------
∂01-Apr-84 1030 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA A talk on ``Subliminal perception: its affect on mood"
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 84 10:30:27 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 1 Apr 84 10:26:44-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 1 Apr 84 10:19:51-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 1 Apr 84 10:22:26-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Sun 1 Apr 84 10:18:37-PST
Date: 1 Apr 1984 10:19:48-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: A talk on ``Subliminal perception: its affect on mood"
Stanford Association of Perception Students (SAPS)
WHO: Mark Reinitz
FROM: University of Washington
WHAT: Subliminal perception: its affects on mood
WHERE: Psychology Department, room 100 Jordan Hall
DATE: Monday, Nov. 21
TIME: noon
Mark is a graduate student working with Geoff Loftus in Seattle. He has
been doing experiments to assess whether the new devices that present
subliminal messages (``You are thin", ``You smell wonderful" ... ) in fact
influence behavior. Come and listen before you plunk your money down.
∂01-Apr-84 1712 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Correction on Subliminal perception seminar.
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 84 17:12:40 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 1 Apr 84 17:07:22-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 1 Apr 84 17:00:01-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 1 Apr 84 17:02:48-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Sun 1 Apr 84 16:54:25-PST
Date: 1 Apr 1984 16:55:32-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: Correction on Subliminal perception seminar.
Stanford Association of Perception Students (SAPS)
WHO: Mark Reinitz
FROM: University of Washington
WHAT: Subliminal perception: its affects on mood
WHERE: Psychology Department, room 100 Jordan Hall
DATE: Tuesday April 4
TIME: noon
The correct date for this seminar is Tuesday, April 4. Thanks to the
approximately 200 people who sent me a note to indicate that I got the date
wrong in the original announcement. My apologies, and you can stop sending
me mail now.
∂02-Apr-84 0805 @SRI-AI.ARPA:KJB@SU-CSLI.ARPA Reminder
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 08:05:18 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 08:05:20-PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 08:00:59-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
Reminder: Your comments on csli activities and how they have effected
your work (a first pass for planning with the Advisory Panel) are due
today: csli-executives and stucky, both @sri-ai. Thanks.
-------
∂02-Apr-84 0846 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:golub@navajo
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 08:45:53 PST
Received: from Navajo by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 08:37:16-PST
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 84 06:12:23 pst
To: faculty@SCORE
Cc: Golub@Score
From: Gene Golub <golub@navajo>
Please let me know if you have any candidates in mind for the
1984 RICHARD LYMAN AWARD FOR FACULTY SERVICE.
Lyman was the previous president and this award is given for
unique and dedicated service to Stanford University.
Nominations are due by April 6.
GENE
∂02-Apr-84 1022 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:brian%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA Psychology: subliminal perception seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 10:19:36 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:15:48-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:04:22-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:06:33-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:02:47-PST
Date: 2 Apr 1984 10:03:52-PST
From: brian at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: Psychology: subliminal perception seminar
Stanford Association of Perception Students (SAPS)
WHO: Mark Reinitz
FROM: University of Washington
WHAT: Subliminal perception: its effects on mood
WHERE: Psychology Department, room 100 Jordan Hall
DATE: TUESDAY April 3
TIME: noon
The correct date for this seminar is TUESDAY, April 3. Thanks to the
approximately 300 people who sent me a note to indicate that I got the date
wrong twice. My apologies, and I await with interest what I did wrong this
time.
∂02-Apr-84 1023 @SRI-AI.ARPA:JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA introduction, summaries, trailers
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 10:23:34 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:21:21-PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 10:16:44-PST
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: introduction, summaries, trailers
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: jamie@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Good morning folks!
I'm Betsy's new assistant. It's good to be here, thanks.
Among my first tasks will be assigning space in the trailers and
helping organize your research summary paragraphs.
If you haven't already sent news about your needs for space in the
trailers, try to let me know today. I should have as much information
as possible for the Building Committee on Tuesday.
If you haven't already mailed your summary, send it to me rather than
Betsy.
Thanks,
Jamie
-------
∂02-Apr-84 1102 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ALMOG@SRI-AI.ARPA Seminar on information content
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 11:02:31 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:51:51-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 10:46:59-PST
Date: 2 Apr 1984 1048-PST
From: Almog at SRI-AI
Subject: Seminar on information content
To: csli-friends at SRI-AI
It turns out that the traditional cognitive science seminar, run
by Julius M., and drawing particpants from Linguistics, Philosophy,
Psychology and C.S. depts in Stanford, is focused this year on
the same topics we thought to cover. Since the seminar has been running
for years and has nice structure, we thought we should cancel ours.
But semantical problems aside, there is a seminar such that information
contents, propositions , etc. and their dual role, qua truth conditions and
qua objects of propositional attitude verbs, will be ITS focus. Its
starting tomorrow. The time is Tuesday evening, Jordan Hall. It was
arranged so that followers of Kreisel's seminar on compuration (earlier
in the afternoon) can come.
Thus, do NOT come to ventura hall on Tuesday afternoon. Do come to Jordan
Hall on Tuesday evening. Any questions to the Philosophy dept chair, Julius.
Pat Suppes, Joseph Almog
-------
∂02-Apr-84 1109 ZAUDERER@SU-SCORE.ARPA AWARDS
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 11:09:13 PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 11:04:09-PST
From: Shanee Zauderer <ZAUDERER@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AWARDS
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-3125
Please let me know if you wish to nominate anyone for the Gores, Dinkelspiel
or Cuthbertson Awards.
I attach a message from Orrin Robinson who is chairman of the subcommittee
on awards.
"At present this committee is canvassing faculty, staff and students for
nominations for the Gores, Dinkelspiel and Cuthbertson Awards to be presented
at Commencement, June 17, 1984. We would especially value your input, however,
as that of someone in a unique position to know potential candidates
among the faculty, TA's staff and students.
In brief, the Gores Awards recognize excellence in teaching and are awarded
each year to one senior faculty member, one junior faculty member and one
TA. The Dinkelspiel Awards recognize exceptional contributions to under-
graduate education and student life, and are awarded each year to four people;
a faculty or staff member with 10 or more years of service; a faculty or
staff member with fewer than 10 years of service; two graduating seniors,
one woman and one man. The Cuthbertson Award, finally, recognizes members of the university community who have made outstanding contributions to the
achievement of the overall goals of the university.
If you know of a likely candidate in your school, department or organization
or even outside of it, please pass the name on to us along with the supporting
materials before the April 13, 1984 deadline. You should be aware that
an informative circumstantial recommendation is likely to be given more
weight than one which has been thrown together in two minutes and contains
little more than a name.While we try our best to do research on each person
whose name is submitted, a large part of our data still comes from the
original nomination forms."
-------
∂02-Apr-84 1134 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DYMETMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA CL
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 11:31:55 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 11:07:17-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 11:02:43-PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 10:58:44-PST
From: DYMETMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: CL
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: DYMETMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
I'ld like to be put on the CL-FRIENDS list.
Thanx
--Marc.
_
-------
∂02-Apr-84 1239 HALPERN.SJRLVM1@csnet-relay.arpa Knowledge seminar on April 6 d
Received: from SU-HNV.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 12:39:12 PST
Received: from csnet-relay by Diablo with TCP; Mon, 2 Apr 84 12:36:43 pst
Received: by csnet-relay via xibm-sj; 2 Apr 84 15:36 EST
Date: 2 Apr 1984 09:41:30-PST (Monday)
From: Joe Halpern <HALPERN%ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
To: KNOWLEDGE%su-hnv.arpa@csnet-relay.ARPA
Subject: Knowledge seminar on April 6 d
The knowledge seminar continues of Friday, April 6, at 10 AM in the
main auditorium of Building 28 at IBM, with talks by Michael Genesereth
and Gio Wiederhod. I've appended the abstracts below. There will not
be a knowledge seminar on April 20, due to the Easter holiday. There
will be one on the following Friday, April 27, with speakers to be
announced.
10 AM: Procedural Hints in the Control of Reasoning
-- Michael R. Genesereth, Stanford University
One of the key problems in automated reasoning is control of
combinatorics. Whether one works forward from given premises or
backward from desired conclusions, it is usually necessary to consider
many inference paths before one succeeds in deriving useful results.
In the absence of advance knowledge as to which path or paths are
likely to succeed, search is the only alternative.
In some situations, however, advance knowledge is available in the
form of procedural hints like those found in math texts. Such hints
differ from facts about the subject of reasoning in that they are
prescriptive rather than descriptive; they say what a reasoner OUGHT
to do rather than what is TRUE.
This talk describes a language for expressing hints to control the
process of reasoning and provides an appropriate semantic account in
the form of an interpreter that behaves in accordance with the hints.
The work is relevant to understanding the phenomenon of introspection
and is of practical value in the construction of expert systems.
-------
11:15 AM: Knowledge and databases -- Gio Wiederhold, Stanford University
We define a knowledge based approach to database problems.
Using a classification of application from the enterprise to
the system level we can give examples of the variety of knowledge
which can be used. Most of the examples are drawn from work at the
KBMS Project in Stanford.
The objective of the presentation is to illustrate the power but
also the high payoff of quite straightforward artificial intelligence
applications in databases. Implementation choices will also
be evaluated.
∂02-Apr-84 1509 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 15:09:33 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 15:07:54-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 14:53:16-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 14:55:27-PST
Date: 02 Apr 84 1445 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
SPEAKER: David Marker, NSF Fellow, UC Berkeley
TITLE: "Primes in models of open induction"
TIME: Wednesday, Apr. 4, 4:15 PM
PLACE: 383-N (Faculty Lounge - Mathematics Building, Stanford)
Lou van den Dries
∂02-Apr-84 1550 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction seminar
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 15:50:10 PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 15:48:21-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Deduction seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
The Automatic Deduction seminar will meet for the first time this quarter on
Monday, April 9th, at 2:30 in MJH 301. I expect this to be the regular time
and place from now on. Our speaker will be Richard Waldinger of SRI; title
and abstract to follow.
- Richard
-------
∂02-Apr-84 1554 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 15:54:36 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 15:53:07-PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 15:48:21-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Deduction seminar
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
The Automatic Deduction seminar will meet for the first time this quarter on
Monday, April 9th, at 2:30 in MJH 301. I expect this to be the regular time
and place from now on. Our speaker will be Richard Waldinger of SRI; title
and abstract to follow.
- Richard
-------
∂02-Apr-84 2128 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New HPP Administrative Assistant
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 84 21:28:29 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 2 Apr 84 21:25:37-PST
Date: Mon 2 Apr 84 21:23:17-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New HPP Administrative Assistant
To: HPP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, SUMEX-Staff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
SU-BBoards@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
I am very pleased to announce that Paulett Banks has joined the HPP as our
Administrative Assistant. She replaces Carole Miller in this role effective
immediately. Before coming to Stanford, Paulett gained extensive experience
as the Administrative Officer in the Engineering Division at the NASA
Goddard Space Flight Center. Paulett's new net address is BANKS@SUMEX-AIM.
Please join me in welcoming her to Stanford.
Tom R.
-------
∂03-Apr-84 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA 03-Apr-84 JMC SAIL and ALTO accounts
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 00:22:15 PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 00:19:09-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: SAIL and ALTO accounts
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
Many of the students supported on the Department's unrestricted funds have
SAIL and ALTO accounts. According to Jeff Ullman's usage policy, students
are not necessarily entitled to these accounts. We guarantee them a SCORE
account, but nothing more. What Gene has asked me to do is to ask students
to apply for SAIL and ALTO accounts. Actually, Gene asked me to do this
months ago, but I am just now getting to it. I have sent out a message to
the students who have such accounts and have told them that they should give
me a short description of what they intend to use the account for SIGNED BY
A FACULTY MEMBER. That means they have to convince one of you that their
usage of SAIL or the ALTOs is worthwhile. I'm sure there are a number of
people who have quite legitimate reasons for using such accounts, but I hope
getting a faculty signature for such an account doesn't become "routine."
Please note that this applies only to unsupported students, not PhD students
or students doing RAships.
-------
faculty@score,reges@score
SAIL accounts
jmc - I haven't got around to arguing about it, but I don't see why students
shouldn't have equal access to SAIL as to SCORE, especially as SCORE is
now said to be fully loaded.
∂03-Apr-84 0757 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Hartmannis
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 07:57:28 PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 07:55:08-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Hartmannis
To: dek@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
The view of Hartmannis is not shared by his younger people. He certainly built
an excellent department but he and his senior staff ran the department in a
very high handed manner. There has been much discontent in the department,
especially among the junior faculty ie persons less than 40. Did you ever
speak to Bengt Aspvall and hear why he left?
GENE
-------
∂03-Apr-84 1052 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:LAURI@SRI-AI.ARPA Morphology!
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 10:50:53 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 10:45:01-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 10:35:46-PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 10:38:10-PST
From: Lauri Karttunen <Lauri@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Morphology!
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
FIRST MEETING: WEDNESDAY, APRIL 4, VENTURA at 12:00
I would like to organize a series of meetings and working sessions on
morphology this quarter. The purpose is to focus on the relationship
between theoretical work in the context of lexical phonology, lexical
functional grammar, and GPSG and computational approaches to
inflectional and derivational morphology. Here are a couple of
questions that I myself would like to see resolved.
-- The use of finite state transducers for generation and recognition,
pioneered by Martin Kay, Ron Kaplan, Kimmo Koskenniemi, and Ken Church,
is not obviously compatible with all of the descriptive devices
permitted by current phonological theory. What are the substantive
differences if any?
-- What is the optimal theoretical framework for describing
morphosyntax, assuming that we would prefer the least powerful
framework?
-- What would be the best approach to the semantics of derivational
morphology?
These are but a few of the topics that I would like to learn more about.
I have reserved the seminar room in Ventura from 12 to 1 on Wednesday
(tomorrow!) for an organization meeting. We could have the room at that
time for the rest of the quarter if it is convenient for most people.
(On Wednesdays the seminar room is reserved for courses from 1:15 on
through the rest of the afternoon.)
If you cannot come to the first meeting tomorrow but would like to
participate, please send me a note about the time you would prefer and
suggestions for topics and speakers. Thanks.
-------
∂03-Apr-84 1318 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:desRivieres.pa@Xerox.ARPA LISP: Language and Literature -- 1st Meeting Thursday
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 13:18:06 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 13:02:24-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 12:52:21-PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA (PARC-GW.ARPA) by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 12:55:53-PST
Received: from Zinfandel.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 03 APR 84 12:46:56 PST
Date: 3 Apr 84 11:16 PST
Sender: desRivieres.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: LISP: Language and Literature -- 1st Meeting Thursday
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
From: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Reply-to: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.ARPA
There will be no meeting today.
The first meeting of the LISP: Language and Literature course will be on
Thursday of this week, April 5, from 2:00 to 3:30 in room G19, Redwood
Hall, Jordan Quad. In general we will meet every Tuesday and Thursday
from 2:00 -- 3:30.
See you on Thursday.
Brian
∂03-Apr-84 1320 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:desRivieres.pa@Xerox.ARPA LISP: Language and Literature -- 1st Meeting Thursday
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 13:20:15 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 13:12:15-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 13:03:01-PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA (PARC-GW.ARPA) by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 12:56:08-PST
Received: from Zinfandel.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 03 APR 84 12:47:01 PST
Date: 3 Apr 84 11:16 PST
Sender: desRivieres.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: LISP: Language and Literature -- 1st Meeting Thursday
To: CSLI-Friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
From: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Reply-to: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.ARPA
There will be no meeting today.
The first meeting of the LISP: Language and Literature course will be on
Thursday of this week, April 5, from 2:00 to 3:30 in room G19, Redwood
Hall, Jordan Quad. In general we will meet every Tuesday and Thursday
from 2:00 -- 3:30.
See you on Thursday.
Brian
∂03-Apr-84 1334 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Time for Faculty meetings
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 13:34:01 PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 13:30:54-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Time for Faculty meetings
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
At today's lunch, it was decided to try to free up the Tuesday period at 2:30
so that courses could be taught on Tuesday-Thursday from 2:30 to 3:45.
We would in the future hold faculty and other departmental meetings at 4:15
on Thursdays and no courses or seminars would be scheduled at that time.
Do I hear any objections to this proposal?
GENE
PS This would be effective immediately. The Senior Faculty meeting would be
held on the first Thursday of each month subsequently.
-------
∂03-Apr-84 1346 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:Kiparsky.PA%xerox.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa Re: Morphology!
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 13:46:50 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 13:37:52-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 13:32:14-PST
Received: from csnet-relay by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 13:36:11-PST
Received: From Parc-Gw.arpa by csnet-relay via smtp; 3 Apr 84 16:31 EST
Received: from Zinfandel.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 03 APR 84 13:22:49 PST
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 84 13:11 PST
From: Kiparsky.PA%xerox.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Re: Morphology!
In-reply-to: "Lauri%sri-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa's message of Tue, 3 Apr
84 10:38:10 PST"
To: Lauri Karttunen <Lauri%sri-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa>
cc: CSLI-Friends%sri-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
I'd like to take part in the morphology seminar. Wednesday noon is
allright for me, but I can't make it this Wednesday. Also, I'll be out
of town the entire week of April 16. Otherwise, I'm free.
Paul
∂03-Apr-84 1534 @MIT-MC:EJS@SU-AI ODing
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 15:33:54 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 3 Apr 84 12:36-EST
Date: 03 Apr 84 0933 PST
From: Ted Selker <EJS@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: ODing
To: clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA
CC: phil-sci@MIT-MC.ARPA
please remove me from the phil-sci mailing list
∂03-Apr-84 1656 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Paragraphs
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 16:56:37 PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 16:55:25-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Paragraphs
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
All (well, most),
Thanks for your paragraphs on your thoughts and work. I know it is
annoying to have to do such things instead of work itself. But it
was really very useful to see them. They give a different sense of
how things are fitting together than I had had.
I plan top spend tomorrow p.m. going over them to extract a cohert
set of actiivities around which we can plan for next year more
rationally. This will be part of the discussion on Friday a.m.
Any thoughts on this general issue are welcome.
Jon
p.s.
1) Don't forget to respond to emma@turing for the dinner on Thur.
2) I just got hardwired to turing. Amazing. Ihave not been at 9600
since I came out in July. What a change. Thanks Eric, Bud, et. al.
-------
∂03-Apr-84 1659 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 16:59:14 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 16:43:44-PST
Date: 03 Apr 84 1644 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI.ARPA>
To: golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The CSLI colloquium is Thursday at 4:15. It would often interfere for me.
∂03-Apr-84 1916 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:GROSOF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ANNOUNCING: NONMONOTONIC REASONING SEMINAR; first meeting is 4/11
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 19:15:54 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 19:04:04-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 18:54:56-PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 18:58:42-PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 18:55:11-PST
From: Benjamin Grosof <GROSOF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ANNOUNCING: NONMONOTONIC REASONING SEMINAR; first meeting is 4/11
To: nonmonotonic-seminar-distribution-list-1: ;
ANNOUNCING: Stanford NONMONOTONIC REASONING SEMINAR for Spring 1984
Organizer: Benjamin Grosof
John McCarthy and I are organizing a nonmonotonic reasoning seminar at
Stanford this spring. The first meeting will be 1:30-3:00pm on Wednesday,
April 11, in Margaret Jacks Hall Room 301. The first half hour will be
devoted to organization of the seminar, i.e. discussion of meeting time,
place, and more importantly, the content of the seminar. Topics to be
covered include current developments in circumscription, default logic,
etc.. Etc. needs to be fleshed out, especially. At 2pm John McCarthy will
speak on "Who's Doing What in Nonmonotonic Reasoning".
Below is the current schedule. Only the first session is definite.
Wednesday afternoons seem a relatively good time; however, the meeting
time slot is flexible. Once a week for an hour seems a reasonable format;
however that too is flexible. Especially we might want to meet for longer,
say an hour and a half, to allow more discussion.
Meeting time and place:
Wednesdays, 2-3 pm Margaret Jacks 301 Stanford University
N.B. The first session will start at 1:30pm for seminar organization
Schedule:
Date Time Topic
---- ---- -----
4/11 1:30-3 seminar organization discussion
John McCarthy "Who's Doing What in Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
4/18 2-3 John McCarthy <something about circumscription>
4/25 2-3 Raymond Reiter
Please respond if you are interested, and indicate what your interests are.
Suggestions (and especially offers) with respect to speakers and topics are
of the highest priority, and are greatly appreciated. Also indicate preference
about meeting time iff you will not be coming at 1:30pm on 4/11; it will be
discussed then.
My address is: grosof@sumex-aim.arpa ; phone is (415)424-8078 (noon-10pm only)
--Benjamin
-------
∂03-Apr-84 2229 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI.ARPA SAIL accounts
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 22:29:09 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 22:25:01-PST
Date: 03 Apr 84 2228 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: SAIL accounts
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
jmc - I haven't got around to arguing about it, but I don't see why students
shouldn't have equal access to SAIL as to SCORE, especially as SCORE is
now said to be fully loaded.
∂03-Apr-84 2235 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: SAIL accounts
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Apr 84 22:35:19 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 3 Apr 84 22:31:12-PST
Date: Tue 3 Apr 84 22:34:25-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: SAIL accounts
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 3 Apr 84 22:28:00-PST
I assume it's an either one or the other situation isn't it? And what about
all those idle Vaxen ... ? Gio
-------
∂04-Apr-84 0830 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FAT.SIGL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Seminar, April 9
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 08:30:44 PST
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 08:27:27-PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 08:27:45-PST
From: Jill Sigl <FAT.SIGL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar, April 9
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sigl@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Monday, April 9, 1984
10:00 AM
Durand Building, Room 450
by
Professor Adrian Segall
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center and Technion, Israel
on
Automatic Update of Replicated Topology Data Base
Abstract
In computer communication networks, routing is often accomplished
by maintaining copies of the network topology and of the link weights in
various network nodes. We describe a distributed algorithm that allows
complete flexibility in the placement of the topology information.
Distributed protocols are defined to allow automatic update of the nodes
that maintain the topology information. In addition, protocols are defined
to allow the other nodes to report their topology data to the major nodes
and to acquire route information from them.
* Work done in collaboration with J. M. Jaffe
-------
If you would like to make an appointment to see Professor Segall
please send me mail or phone 7-0803.
Jill Sigl
-------
∂04-Apr-84 0931 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Name change
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 09:31:09 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 09:29:17-PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 09:23:21-PST
From: BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Subject: Name change
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
My address is now barwise@turing, not kjb. Please send mail here, not
to sri-ai. Thanks.
Jon
-------
∂04-Apr-84 0946 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:TW@SU-AI.ARPA Area CL meeting today - Goguen and Meseguer
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 09:46:39 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 09:36:22-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 09:30:37-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 09:34:11-PST
Date: 04 Apr 84 0930 PST
From: Terry Winograd <TW@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Area CL meeting today - Goguen and Meseguer
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
Joe Goguen and Jose Meseguer will talk on their work on specification,
and its relation to other CSLI projects (both in area CL and in
semantics in general). Lunch 12-1, Talk at 1.
-------
Sorry for the late reminder and wide distribution. I thought I had sent
it out to the CL list a couple of days ago, but I don't have the names
straight yet. --t
∂04-Apr-84 1035 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA test
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 10:34:58 PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 10:29:24-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: test
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I'm testing the new folks list at csli. Please check your
address and report back to csli-requests@csli, if it is wrong.
Don't forget that some of you will not be on the sri-ai system as of the end of the month.
Emma Pease
-------
∂04-Apr-84 1104 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 10
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 11:03:56 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 11:03:02-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 10:29:44-PST
Received: from UCB-VAX.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 10:33:08-PST
Received: from ucbkim.ARPA by UCB-VAX.ARPA (4.24/4.25)
id AA18890; Wed, 4 Apr 84 10:29:09 pst
Received: by ucbkim.ARPA (4.24/4.3)
id AA01859; Wed, 4 Apr 84 10:27:46 pst
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 84 10:27:46 pst
From: chertok%ucbkim@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Message-Id: <8404041827.AA01859@ucbkim.ARPA>
To: cogsci-friends%ucbkim@Berkeley
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 10
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1984
IDS 237B - Cognitive Science Seminar
Time: Tuesday, April 10, 1984, 11-12:30pm
Location: 240 Bechtel
***** Followed by a lunchbag discussion with speaker *****
*** in the IHL Library (Second Floor, Bldg. T-4) from 12:30-2 ***
HOW THE MIND REFLECTS THE WORLD
Roger N. Shepard
Department of Psychology, Stanford University
Through biological evolution, enduring characteristics of
the world would tend to become internalized so that each
individual would not have to learn them de novo, through
trial and possibly fatal error. The most invariant charac-
teristics are quite abstract: (a) Space is locally three-
dimensional, Euclidean, and isotropic except for a gravita-
tionally conferred unique upright direction. (b) For any two
positions of a rigid object, there is a unique axis such
that the object can be most simply carried from the one
position to the other by a rotation around that axis
together with a translation along it. (c) Information avail-
able to us about the external world and about our relation
to it is analyzable into components corresponding to the
invariants of significant objects, spatial layouts, and
events and, also, into components corresponding to whe tran-
sitory dispositions, states, and manners of change of these
and of the self relative to these. Having been internal-
ized, such characteristics manifest themselves as general
laws governing the representation of objects and events when
the relevant information is fully available (normal percep-
tion), when it is only partially available (perceptual fil-
ling in or perceptual interpretation of ambiguous stimuli),
and when it is entirely absent (imagery, dreaming, and
thought). Phenomena of identification, classification,
apparent motion, and imagined transformation illustrate the
precision and generality of the internalized constraints.
**********
Upcoming Talks This Spring Semester
Date Speaker Affiliation
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI; CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy; CSLI
∂04-Apr-84 1129 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:TYSON@SRI-AI.ARPA Mail forwarding from SRI-AI
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 11:29:00 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 11:22:58-PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 11:27:38-PST
From: Mabry Tyson <Tyson@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Mail forwarding from SRI-AI
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
As a number of you have mail addresses on SRI-AI and are now switching
over to using Turing, you probably want your mail forwarded from SRI-AI so
that mail sent to your account on SRI-AI will be sent automatically to
your account on Turing.
I would like to make only one request of the SRI people in charge of the
mail system to set up this forwarding rather than asking them to edit
the appropriate files 50 different times. So, I'd like to gather all
your requests into one batch.
Please send a request to me giving me your SRI-AI address and your
Turing address if you wish to have your mail forwarded. But note that your
mail won't be forwarded until these requests get processed (as a batch).
Also, because of the way the mail system works at SRI, your MAIL.TXT file on
SRI-AI (the file that holds your mail) will need to be protected 770000.
Otherwise, mail from within SRI-AI will automatically append to your mail
file rather than going through the forwarding system. (Incoming Arpanet
mail will still be forwarded.) I will do this when the mail gets forwarded
but you should be aware of it in case you find some mail is not being forwarded.
-------
∂04-Apr-84 1252 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:mis%Psych.#Pup@SU-SCORE.ARPA S.P.A. - Seminar in Protocol Analysis
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 12:52:10 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 12:50:17-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 12:35:15-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 12:39:41-PST
Received: from Psych by Score with Pup; Wed 4 Apr 84 12:34:06-PST
Date: 4 Apr 1984 12:35:50-PST
From: mis at SU-Tahoma
To: bboard@kestrel, csli-friends@sri-ai at score, msgs, su-bboards@score
Subject: S.P.A. - Seminar in Protocol Analysis
M. Pavel & D. Sleeman
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
S.P.A - SEMINAR IN PROTOCOL ANALYSIS
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Introduction to protocol analysis:
an example from developmental psychology.
Jean Gascon
Stuart Card
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
The first of this series of seminars on protocol analysis
will be structured as a tutorial on protocol analysis and comput-
er simulation. Stuart Card will give a brief overview of the
history, motivation and practice of the methodology. Jean Gascon
will then illustrate, with a simple example, how protocol
analysis is performed. The application area will come from
developmental psychology. First, protocols of children of vari-
ous ages performing one of Piaget's "seriation" task will be
shown. We will then explain how one goes from the actual data to
the construction of the "problem space" (a la Newell and Simon).
The next step consists of regrouping the problem spaces of dif-
ferent subjects into a more general psychological model (dubbed
BG in this particular case). We will see how the BG language fa-
cilitates the writing of simulation models. A computer program
that does automatic protocol analysis of the seriation protocols
will then be introduced. This program provides some additional
insights about the process of protocol analysis itself. In the
conclusion we will discuss the advantages and inconveniences of
protocol analysis relative to the other methodologies available
in cognitive psycholgy.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Place: Jordan Hall, Room 100
Time: 1:00 pm, Wednesday April 11, 1984
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Future Speakers: F. Halasz 4-18-84
S. Card 4-25-84
∂04-Apr-84 1252 AHNGER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Special TGIF this week
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 12:52:49 PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 12:43:16-PST
From: Sally P. Ahnger <AHNGER@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Special TGIF this week
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, students@SU-SCORE.ARPA
You are invited to a special TGIF this Friday to meet 20 university
students from Finland, and their professor. Juice, wine, beer, cheese and
crackers will be served. The students are interested in different aspects
of computer science, especially education. Please join us on the 4th floor
patio if good weather or the 3rd floor lounge if bad. That's 4:30 p.m. on
Friday, April 6. See you there!
Sally
-------
∂04-Apr-84 1347 BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Advisory Panel Visit
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 13:47:41 PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 13:47:25-PST
From: BMACKEN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Advisory Panel Visit
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
We thought this message had been mailed to you on Monday afternoon,
but through a series of odd circumstances it wasn't. I'm sorry for
the late notice, and hope the events can still happen as indicated. Let me
know if there are concerns or problems.
The CSLI Advisory Panel will be here this Thrusday through Saturday,
April 5 - 7. They will spend Thursday attending the CSLI seminars and
visiting individuals in the SU departments, SRI, and Xerox; they will
spend Saturday AM with the Executive Committee. They want to spend
Friday with as many of the researchers as possible in both large and
small groups. Jon and I suggest the following schedule, but would
like your input if the sections you want to attend are impossible for
you. You will note that in the afternoon schedule we have designated
someone to be in charge of each section. That individual (or a
designee) should make sure the appropriate people can attend, arrange
for a room (for the meetings held away from Ventura), and chair the
meeting. We hope that the small group meetings will give the panel
some idea of how CSLI is doing from the perspective of the groups that
existed before the center was formed.
Friday AM, 9:00 - 11:30
Principals, Associates, Affiliates, and Postdocs meet with
Advisory in Ventura Hall Seminar room.
We will discuss the project structure for next year. Jon and
I will suggest some alternatives based on ideas from your
paragraphs.
Friday PM
1:30 - 2:30
PANEL MEMBER GROUP CHAIR PLACE
Burstall & Sr. Staff Macken Ventura
Partee
Fodor Philosophers JRP Philosophy Dept.
Miller Psychologists Ford Ventura
Nilsson Xerox researchers Kay Xerox
Ritchie SRI researchers Grosz SRI
3:00 - 4:00
Burstall & CL BSmith Ventura
Nilsson &
Ritchie
Fodor & Perception Pentland Ventura
Miller
Partee Linguists Sag Linguistics Dept
4:00 to 4:30 TEA
4:30 to 5:30 Tour of Computer Facilities and Trailers
Please let Pat Wunderman know which sessions you plan to attend so
we can plan the meeting rooms. We encourage graduate students to
participate in the small group sessions, so please let them know about
the meetings.
B.
-------
∂04-Apr-84 1513 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Emma and Mail
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 15:11:59 PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 15:11:36-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Emma and Mail
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
I have moved to Turing and hence will not bechecking my mail on
SRI-AI that often. For quick response send mail to Emma@csli.
Emma Pease
-------
∂04-Apr-84 1838 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA Newsletter No. 26, April 5, 1984
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 18:37:48 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 18:35:16-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 17:18:21-PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 17:22:09-PST
From: DKANERVA@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Newsletter No. 26, April 5, 1984
To: csli-friends@SRI-AI.ARPA
! CSLI Newsletter
April 5, 1984 * * * Number 26
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, APRIL 5, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Natural Languages
*REDWOOD HALL* "Perspectives on Anaphora"
*ROOM G-19* by Ivan Sag.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall "Information and Association"
Conference Room by Jerry Fodor (author present).
Discussion led by Brian Smith.
2:00 p.m. Seminar on Computer Languages
*REDWOOD HALL* "Lisp: Language and Liturature"
*ROOM G-19* by Brian Smith.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Discourse and Comprehension
Room G-19 During Medical Diagnostic Reasoning"
by Aaron Ciccourel, Department of Sociology,
Cognitive Science Program, and Medical School,
University of California at San Diego.
-----------
SCHEDULE FOR *NEXT* THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 1984
10:00 a.m. Seminar on Natural Languages
Redwood Hall "Syntactic Constraints on Anaphora"
Room G-19 by Joan Bresnan.
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Paper and discussion leader to be announced.
2:00 p.m. Seminar on Computer Languages
Place to be "Lisp: Language and Literature"
announced by Brian Smith.
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Redwood Hall "Modeling Knowledge"
Room G-19 by Moshe Vardi, IBM
-----------
! Page 2
-----------
ADVISORY PANEL AT CSLI TODAY THROUGH SATURDAY, APRIL 5-7
The CSLI Advisory Panel will be taking part in the Center's
activities today and tomorrow and will meet with the Executive
Committee Saturday morning for final discussions before returning
home. All six of the Panel members have been able to attend: Rod
Burstall, Jerry Fodor, George Miller, Nils Nilsson, Barbara Partee,
and Bob Ritchie.
-----------
AREA CL MEETING
On Wednesday, April 4, Joe Goguen and Jose Meseguer talked on
their work on specification and its relation to other CSLI projects
(both in area CL and in semantics in general). Reminder: Area CL
meets for lunch 12-1, talk at 1.
-----------
MORPHOLOGY MEETINGS
On Wednesday, April 4, Lauri Karttunen called a meeting to
organize a series of meetings and working sessions on morphology this
quarter. The purpose is to focus on the relationship between
theoretical work in the context of lexical phonology, lexical
functional grammar, and GPSG and computational approaches to
inflectional and derivational morphology. Some of the questions hoped
to be resolved through such discussion are the following:
-- The use of finite-state transducers for generation and recognition,
pioneered by Martin Kay, Ron Kaplan, Kimmo Koskenniemi, and Ken
Church, is not obviously compatible with all of the descriptive
devices permitted by current phonological theory. What are the
substantive differences, if any?
-- What is the optimal theoretical framework for describing morpho-
syntax, assuming that we would prefer the least powerful framework?
-- What would be the best approach to the semantics of derivational
morphology?
These are but a few of the topics that would be interesting to pursue.
Karttunen has reserved the seminar room in Ventura from 12 to 1
on Wednesdays for the rest of the quarter and will schedule the
morphology meetings for that time if it is convenient for most people.
(On Wednesdays the seminar room is reserved for courses from 1:15 on
through the rest of the afternoon.)
If you could not make it to the organizational meeting but would
like to participate, please send Karttunen (Lauri@SRI-AI) a note about
the time you would prefer and suggestions for topics and speakers.
-----------
! Page 3
-----------
SEMINAR ON NATURAL LANGUAGE--ASPECTS OF ANAPHORA
Linguistics 236
This quarter, Joan Bresnan and Phil Cohen will be hosting the
CSLI Thursday morning seminar on anaphora. Since the course is
covering a phenomenon rather than one coherent theory, it is important
that the many aspects of the problem are examined before any synthesis
is attempted. The lectures will cover syntactic, semantic,
representational, and discourse constraints on the production and
resolution of anaphoric expressions. Ivan Sag will lead off the
seminar by introducing these perspectives.
The course is listed as Linguistics 236. It is appropriate to
advanced graduate students in the Linguistics, Philosophy, Psychology,
or Computer Science Departments. Students who wish to receive course
credit should contact Professor Bresnan to arrange the formalities.
CONTRARY TO ANY PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENTS, THE SEMINAR WILL MEET IN:
REDWOOD G-19, from 10:00 to 11:30 a.m.
Course outline:
April 5 Ivan Sag Perspectives on anaphora
April 12 Joan Bresnan Syntactic constraints on anaphora
April 19 Joan Bresnan Syntactic constraints on anaphora
April 26 Bonnie Webber What is available for subsequent reference,
(U. of Penn.) Discourse Models
May 3 Barbara Grosz A unified account of Definite NP's in Discourse
May 10 Barbara Grosz A unified account of Definite NP's in Discourse
May 17 Megumi Kameyama Zero-anaphora in Japanese
May 24 Irene Heim (U. of Texas) (Title to be announced)
May 31 Jon Barwise Situation semantics and anaphora
June 7 Tom Wasow Wrap-up and synthesis
Organizers:
Phil Cohen (SRI) 859-4840, Net address: PCOHEN@SRI-AI
Joan Bresnan (Stanford) 497-0144, Net address: BRESNAN@PARC-MAXC
-----------
COMPUTER LANGUAGES SEMINAR--LISP: LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
The first meeting of the "LISP: Language and Literature" course
will be on Thursday of this week, April 5, from 2:00 to 3:30 p.m., in
room G-19, Redwood Hall, Jordan Quad. In general, we will meet every
Tuesday and Thursday from 2:00 to 3:30 p.m.
- Brian Smith
-----------
! Page 4
CSLI COLLOQUIUM FOR APRIL 12
On Thursday, April 12, Moshe Vardi of IBM will speak on "Modeling
Knowledge." The seminar will be held, as usual, at 4:15 p.m. in Room
G-19 of Redwood Hall. The abstract of Vardi's talk is given below.
"Modeling Knowledge," by Moshe Vardi
ABSTRACT: Understanding knowledge is a fundamental issue in computer
science and in many other disciplines as well. We want to be able to
reason about statements such as "He knows that I know whether or not
she knows whether it is raining in Spain." We propose a general
semantic model of knowledge. I seems to model a state of knowledge
more naturally than any previous proposal (including Kripke
structures). It is easy to extend the model to incorporate time,
belief, and ignorance. The talk will be completely self-contained.
-----------
SEMINAR ON INFORMATION CONTENT
It turns out that the traditional cognitive science seminar, run
by Julius Moravcsik, and drawing particpants from the Linguistics,
Philosophy, Psychology and Computer Science Departments at Stanford,
is focused this year on the same topics we thought to cover. Since
the seminar has been running for years and has nice structure, we
thought we should cancel ours.
Semantical problems aside, however, there is a seminar such that
information contents, propositions, etc., and their dual role, qua
truth conditions and qua objects of propositional attitude verbs, will
be ITS focus. This seminar is starting tomorrow. The time is Tuesday
evening, and the place is Room 100 in Jordan Hall. The time was
arranged so that followers of Kreisel's seminar on computation
(earlier in the afternoon; information given elsewhere in this
Newsletter) can come.
Thus, do NOT come to Ventura Hall on Tuesday afternoon. Do come
to Jordan Hall, Room 100, on Tuesday evenings. Please direct any
questions to the Chairman of the Philosophy Department, Julius
Moravcsik.
- Pat Suppes, Joseph Almog
[Editor's note: See next page for announcement of Moravcsik seminar.]
-----------
! Page 5
-----------
SEMINAR IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE--MEANING AND COGNITION
Philosophy 285, Linguistics 203, Psychology 237
This seminar concerns itself with theories about the expressive
power of natural languages and theories of language understanding. We
shall work on new theories of semantics and attempt to relate these to
questions about language understanding.
The seminar will meet on Tuesdays, 7:00-9:00 p.m., in Jordan 100,
the Psychology Conference Room, off the administrative offices on the
first floor of the Psychology Building.
Though the seminar is listed under Julius Moravcsik's name, it
will be conducted together with Joseph Almog (CSLI) and contributions
will be made also by Professor Scott Soames (Princeton University).
Technical material will be explained as we go along, but some
acquaintance with symbolic logic and formal semantics is desirable;
some knowledge of psychological work on language comprehension would
also be helpful (e.g., Quine, Carnap, H. and E. Clark, and J. Fodor).
April 3 - General introduction (Why theories of reference and
meaning? Why formal? Meaning and understanding)
April 10 - Discussion of the first few sections of Saul Kripke's
"Puzzles About Belief"
April 17 - Arguments showing limitations on the adequacy of model-
theoretic semantics for natural languages--Scott Soames
April 24 - Review of the semantics of Carnap, Montague, Kripke--
Joseph Almog
May 1 - Outline of Russelian semantics--Joseph Almog
May 8 - Applications of the theory of structured propositions
to metaphysics and epistemology--Joseph Almog
May 15 - Reference to objects, events, and stages of objects and
events--Julius Moravcsik
May 22 - Stage-semantics and some puzzles about demonstratives,
identity, and persistence--Julius Moravcsik
May 29 - Stage-semantics, structured propositions, and theories
of language understanding--Julius Moravcsik
June 5 - Left open. If there is a guest speaker in April, the whole
schedule after April 24 will be moved back by one week.
Discussion will be greatly encouraged. Those taking this course
for credit should write a paper of about 15 double-spaced pages; they
should consult with the instructor concerning suitable topics.
-----------
! Page 6
-----------
SEMINAR IN FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
On Tuesday, April 3, Professor G. Kreisel held an organizational
meeting for a seminar in the foundations of mathematics. The
intention is to study logic and parallel computation, beginning with
an examination of some recent papers where parallel computation is
used in interesting ways to obtain better algorithms. The logical
part will be to investigate how efficient algorithms using parallel
computation might be extracted from infinite proof trees by applying
transformations that use only finite amounts of information. At the
first meeting, these ideas were explained in some more detail. Ideas
and suggestions will be welcome.
The seminar is scheduled to meet Tuesdays at 4:15 p.m., but can
be changed if there are conflicts. It will be held in Room 92 (the
seminar room) of the Philosophy Department.
-----------
STANFORD LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM
Ray Jackendoff, Brandeis University and CASBS
"The Semantics of Spatial Expressions and Some Extensions"
3:15-5:05 p.m., Tuesday, April 10
Building 200 (History Corner), Room 217
Refreshments will be served afterwards in the Linguistics Department
Reading Room, Building 100 on the Inner Quad.
Future Colloquia:
April 17 - George Lakoff, UCB: "The Role of Prototype Theory in Syntax:
The Case of There-Constructions"
May 1 - Victoria Fromkin, UCLA: "Evidence for a Linguistic Performance
Model: A Case Study of a Surface Dyslexic"
-----------
ISSUES IN LANGUAGE, PERCEPTION, AND COGNITION
On Wednesday, April 4, Dr. Jerry Fodor, of the MIT Psychology and
Philosophy Departments, spoke on "Modularity of Mind," in a combined
meeting with the Psychology Department's colloquium.
The next speaker will be Dr. Len Talmy, of the UCB Cognitive
Science and German Departments, on "The Relation Of Grammar to
Cognition" and will be on Monday, April 9, at 12:00 in room 100,
Jordan Hall.
-----------
! Page 7
-----------
AUTOMATIC DEDUCTION SEMINAR
The Automatic Deduction seminar will meet for the first time this
quarter on Monday, April 9, at 2:30 p.m., in Jacks Hall, Room 301. I
expect this to be the regular time and place from now on. Our speaker
will be Richard Waldinger of SRI; title and abstract to follow.
- Richard Treitel <Treitel@Sumex>
-----------
Stanford NONMONOTONIC REASONING SEMINAR, Spring 1984
Organizer: Benjamin Grosof
John McCarthy and I are organizing a nonmonotonic reasoning
seminar at Stanford this spring. The first meeting will be 1:30-3:00
p.m. on Wednesday, April 11, in Margaret Jacks Hall, Room 301. The
first half hour will be devoted to organization of the seminar, i.e.,
discussion of meeting time, place, and, most importantly, the content
of the seminar. Topics to be covered include current developments in
circumscription, default logic, etc.. Etc. needs to be fleshed out,
especially. At 2 p.m., John McCarthy will speak on "Who's Doing What
in Nonmonotonic Reasoning."
Below is the current schedule. Only the first session is
definite. Wednesday afternoons seem a relatively good time; however,
the meeting time slot is flexible. Once a week for an hour seems a
reasonable format; however, that too is flexible. Especially we might
want to meet for longer, say, an hour and a half, to allow more
discussion.
Meeting time and place: Wednesdays, 2-3 p.m., Jacks Hall, Room 301.
N.B. The first session will start at 1:30pm for seminar organization.
4/11 1:30-3 seminar organization discussion
John McCarthy "Who's Doing What in Nonmonotonic Reasoning"
4/18 2-3 John McCarthy <something about circumscription>
4/25 2-3 Raymond Reiter
Please respond if you are interested, and indicate what your
interests are. Suggestions (and especially offers) with respect to
speakers and topics are of the highest priority, and are greatly
appreciated. Also indicate preference about meeting time iff you will
not be coming at 1:30 p.m. on 4/11; it will be discussed then.
My address is: grosof@sumex-aim.arpa ; phone is (415)424-8078
(noon-10 p.m. only)
-----------
! Page 8
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEMINAR - IDS 237B
Tuesday, April 10, 1984, 11 a.m. -12:30 p.m., 240 Bechtel
HOW THE MIND REFLECTS THE WORLD
Roger N. Shepard, Psychology, Stanford
Through biological evolution, enduring characteristics of the
world would tend to become internalized so that each individual would
not have to learn them de novo, through trial and possibly fatal
error. The most invariant characteristics are quite abstract: (a)
Space is locally three-dimensional, Euclidean, and isotropic except
for a gravitationally conferred unique upright direction. (b) For any
two positions of a rigid object, there is a unique axis such that the
object can be most simply carried from the one position to the other
by a rotation around that axis together with a translation along it.
(c) Information available to us about the external world and about our
relation to it is analyzable into components corresponding to the
invariants of significant objects, spatial layouts, and events and,
also, into components corresponding to the transitory dispositions,
states, and manners of change of these and of the self relative to
these. Having been internalized, such characteristics manifest
themselves as general laws governing the representation of objects and
events when the relevant information is fully available (normal
perception), when it is only partially available (perceptual filling
in or perceptual interpretation of ambiguous stimuli), and when it is
entirely absent (imagery, dreaming, and thought). Phenomena of
identification, classification, apparent motion, and imagined
transformation illustrate the precision and generality of the
internalized constraints.
April l7 Katherine Demuth UCB, Psychology
April 24 Barbara Grosz SRI; CSLI
April 26 Barry Schein UCB/MIT, Linguistics
May 1 John Perry Stanford, Philosophy; CSLI
-----------
COMPETITION ANNOUNCEMENT: THE METAPHILOSOPHY PRIZE
METAPHILOSOPHY will award a prize of $500 to the author who
submits the best essay in computer ethics between January 1, 1984, and
December 31, 1984. The prize-winning essay will be published as the
lead article in the April 1985 issue of METAPHILOSOPHY, which will be
devoted entirely to computer ethics. Other high-quality essays in
computer ethics will be accepted for publication in the same issue. A
panel of experts in computer ethics will select the winners. To enter
the competition, send four copies of your essay to:
Terrell Ward Bynum
Editor, Metaphilosophy
Metaphilosophy Foundation
Box 32
Hyde Park, NY 12538
Readers unfamiliar with the field of computer ethics should
consult the January 1984 issue of METAPHILOSOPHY. Those unfamiliar
with specifications for manuscript preparation should consult any
recent issue.
! Page 9
-----------
S.P.A - SEMINAR IN PROTOCOL ANALYSIS (Pavel & Sleeman)
1:00 p.m., Wednesday, April 11, Jordan Hall, Room 100
INTRODUCTION TO PROTOCOL ANALYSIS: AN EXAMPLE
FROM DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
Jean Gascon and Stuart Card, Xerox PARC
The first of this series of seminars on protocol analysis will be
structured as a tutorial on protocol analysis and computer simulation.
Stuart Card will give a brief overview of the history, motivation and
practice of the methodology. Jean Gascon will then illustrate, with a
simple example, how protocol analysis is performed. The application
area will come from developmental psychology. First, protocols of
children of various ages performing one of Piaget's "seriation" task
will be shown. We will then explain how one goes from the actual data
to the construction of the "problem space" (a la Newell and Simon).
The next step consists of regrouping the problem spaces of different
subjects into a more general psychological model (dubbed BG in this
particular case). We will see how the BG language facilitates the
writing of simulation models. A computer program that does automatic
protocol analysis of the seriation protocols will then be introduced.
This program provides some additional insights about the process of
protocol analysis itself. In the conclusion we will discuss the
advantages and inconveniences of protocol analysis relative to the
other methodologies available in cognitive psycholgy.
Future Speakers: F. Halasz April 18
S. Card April 25
-----------
-------
∂04-Apr-84 1859 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 18:59:44 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 18:58:25-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 18:47:34-PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 18:49:45-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues In Language, Perception and Cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
WHO: Len Talmy, Cognitive Science Program and German Dept., UC Berkeley
WHAT: How Language Structures its Concepts
WHEN: Monday April 9, 12:00 noon
WHERE: Room 100, Psychology
How Language Structures its Concepts
ABSTRACT
Languages have two kinds of elements: open-class, comprising the roots
of nouns, verbs, and adjectives, and closed-class, comprising all in-
flections, particle words, grammatical categories, and the like. Exami-
nation of a range of languages reveals that closed-class elements refer
exclusively to certain concepts, and seemingly never to concepts outside
those (e.g., inflection on nouns may indicate number, but never color).
My idea is that all closed-class elements taken together consistute a
very special group: they code for a fundamental set of notions that
serve to structure the conceptual material expressed by language. More
particularly, their references constitute a basic notional framework,
or scaffolding, around which is organized the more contentful conceptual
material represented by open-class (i.e., lexical) elements. The ques-
tions to be addressed are: a) Which exactly are the notions specified by
closed-class elements, and which notions are excluded? b) What proper-
ties are shared by the included notions and absent from the excluded
ones? c) What functions are served by this design feature of language,
i.e., the existence in the first place of a division into open- and
closed-class subsystems, and then the particular character that these
have? d) How does this structuring system specific to language compare
with those in other cognitive subsystems, e.g. in visual perception or
memory? With question (d), this linguistic investigation opens out into
the issue of structuring within cognitive contents in general, across
cognitive domains.
-------
∂04-Apr-84 2353 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Winter/Spring potluck
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Apr 84 23:53:37 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 4 Apr 84 23:50:15-PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 23:52:50-PST
From: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Winter/Spring potluck
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Well, the Social Committee has decided that it really is time to have
the Winter potluck. Thus I ask that some among you volunteer your
home to help further this festive CSD tradition. Since the Spring
Picnic will be held later this quarter I would like to have the
potluck as soon as possible, i.e., the evening of April 21st (preferably)
or 28th.
Potlucks usually attract 75-100 students, faculty, staff, spouses,
children, etc. However it is unlikely your house is too small as
we've had several very cosy gatherings in the past. Volunteers will be
provided for set-up and clean-up so this shouldn't require tremendous
effort on your part.
So, please volunteer!!
Peter
-------
∂05-Apr-84 0334 @MIT-MC:bts%unc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY forwarded from USENET
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 03:32:56 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 06:30-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via uncpob; 5 Apr 84 6:17 EST
Received: by unc (4.12/4.7) id AA24281; Thu, 5 Apr 84 00:30:33 est
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 84 00:30:33 est
From: Bruce Smith <bts%unc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Message-Id: <8404050530.AA24281@unc>
To: PHIL-SCI%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: forwarded from USENET
Strange, isn't it, how the obvious answer seems to elude everyone.
AI isn't a science, or a social science, or an art. It's simply a
branch of *engineering*--the *application* of science in service of
creation of a useful *technology*. But I guess that's a little too
short on prestige to please the practitioners.
Yours for clearer concepts, --Jay Rosenberg
Dept. of Philosophy
...decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!unbent Univ. of North Carolina
(USENET) Chapel Hill, NC 27514
∂05-Apr-84 0730 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY AI: science or engineering?
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 07:21:19 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 10:13-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via umcppo; 5 Apr 84 9:24 EST
Date: 5 Apr 84 09:13:31 EST (Thu)
From: Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: AI: science or engineering?
To: Bruce Smith <bts%unc.csnet%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>,
PHIL-SCI%mit-mc.arpa%csnet-relay.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
From: Bruce Smith <bts%unc.csnet@csnet-relay.csnet>
Strange, isn't it, how the obvious answer seems to elude everyone.
AI isn't a science, or a social science, or an art. It's simply a
branch of *engineering*--the *application* of science in service of
creation of a useful *technology*. But I guess that's a little too
short on prestige to please the practitioners.
Yours for clearer concepts, --Jay Rosenberg
Them's fightin' words!
Have you considered that some aspects of AI (e.g., expert systems)
may be reasonably so characterized, while others, such as commonsense
reasoning and cognitive modelling are sciences in the sense that they
aim at attaining genuinely new knowledge about existing but
ill-understood phenomena?
∂05-Apr-84 0736 @MIT-MC:perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@CSNET-RELAY nonmonotonic reference request
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 07:35:52 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 10:13-EST
Received: by csnet-relay via umcppo; 5 Apr 84 9:25 EST
Date: 5 Apr 84 09:16:40 EST (Thu)
From: Don Perlis <perlis%umcp-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: nonmonotonic reference request
To: jmc%su-ai.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
Cc: phil-sci%mit-oz%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
BIBLIOGRAPHY ON NON-MONOTONIC LOGIC
I am compiling a bibliography of literature on nonmonotonic logic, to be
made available to the AI community, and in particular to the workshop on
non-monotonic reasoning that will take place in October in New Paltz, New
York.
I would greatly appreciate references from the AI community, both to
published and unpublished material (the latter as long as it is in
relatively completed form and copies are available on request). Material
can be sent to me at perlis@umcp-cs and also by post to D. Perlis, Computer
Science Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
--Don Perlis
∂05-Apr-84 0759 @MIT-MC:steve%brl-bmd.arpa@CSNET-RELAY Re: forwarded from USENET
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 07:59:27 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 10:50-EST
Received: From brl-bmd.arpa.arpa by csnet-relay via smtp; 5 Apr 84 10:37 EST
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 84 10:22:12 EST
From: Stephen Wolff <steve%brl-bmd.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa>
To: Bruce Smith <bts%unc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
cc: PHIL-SCI%mit-mc.arpa@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Re: forwarded from USENET
For the benefit of those of us who thought engineering was (and is) nifty
enough to devote our professional lives to it, perhaps you might explain
in what ways you believe the field lacks prestige? Or how (better: why)
you believe others believe that? Is `knowledge engineer' a pejorative?
∂05-Apr-84 0838 KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA Bloom county
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 08:38:20 PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 08:38:17-PST
From: Jon Barwise <KJB@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Bloom county
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Did you all see it today? If not, there is a copy of
office 25. It is great for Brian's first class.
-------
∂05-Apr-84 0904 EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA Thursday Dinner
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 09:04:27 PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 09:02:53-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Thursday Dinner
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
Turing went down late last night and has not come up. Please send
any replies on the Dinner invitation to Emma@sri-ai. Please remember that
I must know by 9:30 today (April 5), if you want to come tonight.
Emma
ps. call me at 497-0939, if you have any questions
-------
∂05-Apr-84 0925 @MIT-MC:crummer@AEROSPACE AI Revealed
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 09:24:57 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 12:16-EST
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 84 09:13:08 PST
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer@AEROSPACE>
To: Bruce Smith <bts%unc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
CC: phil-sci@mit-mc
Subject: AI Revealed
In-reply-to: <8404050530.AA24281@unc>
Hooray for clarity. Now the injuneers can get down to the business of
injuneering.
--Charlie
∂05-Apr-84 1105 @MIT-MC:v.dimare@UCLA-LOCUS Why a Computer Scientist is not an Engineer?
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 11:04:54 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 13:49-EST
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 84 10:41:34 PST
From: Adolfo Di-Mare <v.dimare@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
To: PHIL-SCI@mit-mc.arpa
Subject: Why a Computer Scientist is not an Engineer?
The other day somebody defined science in the following way:
1- Science is what a scientist does.
2- A Scientist is a VIP that does Science.
I've heard this same story from mathematicians: Math is what I do!
I think it is just normal for a computer science student to ask this very
question. After all, I'm spending a lot of life on this subject.
I just want to feel comfortable when I say that I'm scientist. I have always
felt that I'm an engineer. I keep packing computer tricks together. The final
product is 'techonology'. And there are a lot of examples of technology created
by Computer Scientist: High Tech is how the media calls it.
Of course, a very important question also is whether an engineer is somehow
'better' than a scientist. Who is more important: a lawyer, a doctor, a
scientist, or an engineer? Who defines who is important (it's not me, because
otherwise I would be important!).
Adolfo
///
∂05-Apr-84 1122 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Message of 4-Apr-84 16:12:47
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 11:22:02 PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 16:12:55-PST
From: The Mailer Daemon <Mailer@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
To: EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Subject: Message of 4-Apr-84 16:12:47
ReSent-date: Thu 5 Apr 84 11:12:32-PST
ReSent-from: Emma Pease <EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
ReSent-to: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message failed for the following:
csli-folk@SRI-AI.ARPA: 550 No such local mailbox as "csli-folk", recipient rejected
------------
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 16:12:47-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Thursday dinner
To: csli-folk@SRI-AI.ARPA
The dinner at the Gypsy Cellar has been moved up to 7:00 instead of
the 8:30 originally announced. Please remember that if you don't send
a message to me (or call) by 9:30 Thursday morning, you will not get
a place.
Emma Pease (Emma@turing)
497-0939
-------
-------
∂05-Apr-84 1121 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Awards
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 11:20:31 PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 11:14:02-PST
From: Elyse J. Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Awards
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
We received a memo from ORrin Robinson, C-AAA Subcommittee on Univ. and Dept.
Awards. Re: Gores, Dinkelspiel and Cuthbertson Awards.
The committee is canvassing faculty, staff and students for nominations for
the above awards to be presented at Commencement on June 17. The would like
your input on potential candidates.
The Gores award for excellence in teachiang to one senior faculty member,
one junior faculty member and one TA.
The Dinkelspiel for exceptional contributions to undergraduate education and
student life.
The Cuthbertson to members of the univ. community who have made outstanding
contributions to the achievement of the overall goals of the univ.
Please pass any names to them along with supporting materials. Deadline is
April 13.
-------
∂05-Apr-84 1421 @MIT-MC:mills@AEROSPACE artificial intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 14:21:38 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 17:08-EST
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 84 14:05:38 PST
From: Dale A. Mills <mills@AEROSPACE>
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Subject: artificial intelligence
Are artificial intelligence systems an establishment of a level/kind of
intelligence which is subconsciously desired or merely the reflection of
our own intellect within a cleaner (i.e. free of emotional relations, other
outside stimuli, etc.), more controllable environment?
∂05-Apr-84 1429 ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rhodes and Marshall Scholarships
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 14:29:25 PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 14:22:56-PST
From: Elyse J. Krupnick <ELYSE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rhodes and Marshall Scholarships
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Memo from Stephen Ferruolo, Chrmn, Rhodles-Marshall Panel
They are asking you help in identifying undergraduates who might be
qualified for these scholarships. If you do have anyone in mind, you
can send me the name and I will send it in to them.
Elyse
-------
∂05-Apr-84 1623 @MIT-MC:Tong.PA@XEROX Re: artificial intelligence
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 16:23:21 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 5 Apr 84 19:14-EST
Received: from Chardonnay.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 05 APR 84 15:25:06 PST
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 84 15:07 PST
From: Tong.PA@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Re: artificial intelligence
In-reply-to: "mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA's message of Thu, 5 Apr 84 14:05:38
PST"
To: Dale A. Mills <mills@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
cc: phil-sci@mit-mc.ARPA
"Are artificial intelligence systems an establishment of a level/kind of
intelligence which is subconsciously desired or merely the reflection of
our own intellect within a cleaner (i.e. free of emotional relations,
other
outside stimuli, etc.), more controllable environment?"
On the face of it, you seem to be asking for the psychological
motivations of AI researchers. Then what is more relevant is what AI
researchers see as long-term goals, and not their current achievements.
That extant AI programs are fairly simple, emotion-free, etc. probably
does not so much reflect what we desire in a program so much as what
we've been able to achieve thus far. I think you'll have to wait a while
before a program can really be analyzed as an "alter-ego" for its
creator.
Chris
∂05-Apr-84 1704 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction talk
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 17:04:05 PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 17:02:34-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Deduction talk
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Monday, April 9th in MJH 301 at 2:30.
THE ORIGIN OF BINARY-SEARCH ALGORITHMS
Richard Waldinger
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
Many of the most efficient numerical algorithms employ a binary search, in
which the number we are looking for belongs to an interval that is divided in
half at each iteration. We consider how such algorithms might be derived from
their specifications.
We follow a deductive approach, in which programming is regarded as a kind
of theorem proving. By systematic application of this approach, several
integer and real-number algorithms for such functions as the square root and
quotient have been derived. Some of these derivations have been carried out on
an interactive program-synthesis system. The programs we obtained are
different from what we originally expected.
-------
-------
∂05-Apr-84 1718 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 17:13:04 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:07:23-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:00:32-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:04:30-PST
Date: 05 Apr 84 1654 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: SEMINAR IN LOGIC AND FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
SPEAKER: Lou van den Dries
TITLE: Tarski's Problem -
Exponentially definable sets and Pfaffian functions - I
TIME: Wednesday, Apr. 11, 4:15-5:30 pm
PLACE: 383-N (Faculty Lounge - Mathematics Building, Stanford)
Coming events:
Apr. 18 - Lou van den Dries - Part II
∂05-Apr-84 1719 WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Schedule for Advisory Panel Meetings on Friday
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 17:17:19 PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 17:04:43-PST
From: Pat Wunderman <WUNDERMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Schedule for Advisory Panel Meetings on Friday
To: CSLI-FOLKS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dear Friends,
Thanks for your patience with our many changes and mail slip-ups. Some
of you did not select any particular group to attend--if you still wish
to do so, just reply back to this message, and assume you may attend.
Hard copies of this schedule will be distributed at the 9:00 general
meeting, and any changes announced at that time. Hope to see you then.
Below is a revised schedule for meetings on Friday 3/6 with the
CSLI Advisory Panel:
FRIDAY AM 9:00 - 11:30 GENERAL MEETING - Ventura Seminar Room
FRIDAY 11:30 - ON SMALL GROUP MEETINGS:
TIME PANEL MEMBER GROUP CHAIR PLACE
11:30 Miller, Fodor Psychologists Ford Ventura 26
1:30 Burstall, Partee Sr. Staff Macken Ventura Seminar
1:30 Fodor Philosophers Perry Phil.Dept.Conf.Rm.
1:30 Ritchie SRI Researchers Grosz SRI Bldg E
2:45 Fodor, Miller Perception Pentland Ventura 29
3:00 Burstall, Nilsson, CL BSmith Ventura Seminar
Ritchie
3:15 Partee Linguists Wasow Ventura 20
4:00 TEA All Ventura Lounge
4:30 Nilsson Xerox Researchers Kay Ventura Seminar
4:30 All - Tour Computer Facilities, Trailers
-------
∂05-Apr-84 1720 @SRI-AI.ARPA:TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Automatic Deduction talk
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 17:14:53 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:07:55-PST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 17:02:34-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Automatic Deduction talk
To: "@<treitel>auto.dis"@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Monday, April 9th in MJH 301 at 2:30.
THE ORIGIN OF BINARY-SEARCH ALGORITHMS
Richard Waldinger
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
Many of the most efficient numerical algorithms employ a binary search, in
which the number we are looking for belongs to an interval that is divided in
half at each iteration. We consider how such algorithms might be derived from
their specifications.
We follow a deductive approach, in which programming is regarded as a kind
of theorem proving. By systematic application of this approach, several
integer and real-number algorithms for such functions as the square root and
quotient have been derived. Some of these derivations have been carried out on
an interactive program-synthesis system. The programs we obtained are
different from what we originally expected.
-------
-------
∂05-Apr-84 1741 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar on Logic an Parallel Computation
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 17:40:56 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:30:26-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:24:43-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 17:29:09-PST
Date: 05 Apr 84 1711 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar on Logic an Parallel Computation
To: "@PARA.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
INSTRUCTOR: Professor G. Kreisel
TIME: Monday 4:15-6pm
PLACE: 252 Margaret Jacks Hall
(Stanford Computer Science Department)
TOPIC: Logic and parallel computation.
At the organizational meeting it was decided to move the
meeting time from Tuesday at 4:15 to Monday at 4:15.
Below is following is a reading list that was
compiled from discussion at the organizational meeting.
At the first regular meeting Professor Kreisel
will discuss the his ideas relating logic and parallel
computation.
------------------------------------------------------------
Reading List
------------------------------------------------------------
[Carolyn Talcott - 362 Margaret Jacks - CLT@SU-AI - has copies
of all the references]
Parallel Computation
---------------------
Fortune,S. and Wyllie,J. [1978]
Parallelism in random access machines
Proc. 10th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computation (STOC)
pp.114-118.
Valiant,L. Skyum,S.[1981]
Fast parallel computation of polynomials using few processors
Proc. 10th Somposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science
LNCS 118, pp. 132-139.
von zur Gathen,J.[1983]
Parallel algorithms for algebraic problems
Proc. 15th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computation (STOC)
pp. 17-23.
Mayr,E.[1984], Fast selection on para-computers (slides )
Karp,R.M. Wigderson,A.[1984?]
A Fast Parallel Algorithm for the Maximal Independent Set Problem
- Extended Abstract (manuscript)
Continuous operations on Infinitary Proof Trees, etc.
----------------------------------------------------
Rabin,M.O.[1969]
Decidability of 2nd Order Theories and Automata on Infinite Trees,
TransAMS 141, pp.58-68.
Kreisel,G. Mints,G.E. Simpson,S.G.[1975]
The Use of Abstract Language in Elementary Metamathematics;
Some Pedagogic Examples,
in Logic Colloquium72, LNM 453, pp.38-131.
Mints,G.E.[1975] Finite Investigations of Transfinite Derivations,
J.Soviet Math. 10 (1978) pp. 548-596. (Eng.)
Sundholm,B.G.[1978] The Omega Rule: A Survey,
Bachelors Thesis, University of Oxford
∂05-Apr-84 2121 @MIT-MC:DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM Re: Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 21:20:55 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 00:12-EST
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 20:46:01-PST
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Limits of determinism.
To: clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA
cc: DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, phil-sci@MIT-MC.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>" of Fri 30 Mar 84 05:58:21-PST
From Einstein (via Clark):
'For the creation of a theory,
the mere collection of recorded phenomena never suffices-
there must always be added a free invention of the human
mind that attacks the heart of the matter.'
It's really not fair to quote Einstein in this context. He was
fighting a different battle with the logical empiricists who claimed
that somehow TRUTH could be obtained without any prior knowledge or
belief. Certainly the empiricists have long ago been defeated
(although AI did have a damaging bout with logical empiricism in its
early days). People who work on AI learning systems have recognized
the role that prior knowledge (and a priori biases such as Occam's
razor) play in guiding theory formation. Einstein was right that mere
collections of data do not permit a theory to be deduced. But this
doesn't mean that something "non-deterministic" is required. It means
merely that the learner has some prior biases and beliefs. A fond
hope of learning research is that we can eventually reduce this set of
fundamental biases to a small set of metaphysical beliefs about the
simplicity of the world. But we are a long way from such a reduction.
Existing theory-formation programs contain vast quantities of
domain-specific knowledge.
--Tom
-------
∂05-Apr-84 2317 @MIT-MC:JCMA@MIT-OZ Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 23:16:55 PST
Received: from MIT-JANIS by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 02:12-EST
Date: Friday, 6 April 1984, 02:11-EST
From: JCMA@MIT-OZ
Subject: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
To: phil-sci@MIT-OZ
The other day and interesting question came to mind. It was:
* How can one tell the difference between an AI program and a servo-mechanism?
The answer that came to me was that a servo-mechanism can't exhibit adaptive
behavior and remember that behavior for future use. While this answer seemed
good to me at the time, someone pointed out that servo-mechanisms can get
arbitrarily complex.
Comments?
∂05-Apr-84 2317 @SRI-AI.ARPA:PETERS@SU-CSLI.ARPA Progress on additions to Ventura Hall
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Apr 84 23:17:16 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 5 Apr 84 23:17:07-PST
Delivery-Notice: While sending this message to SRI-AI.ARPA, the
SU-CSLI.ARPA mailer was obliged to send this message in 50-byte
individually Pushed segments because normal TCP stream transmission
timed out. This probably indicates a problem with the receiving TCP
or SMTP server. See your site's software support if you have any questions.
Date: Thu 5 Apr 84 18:16:50-PST
From: Stanley Peters <PETERS@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Progress on additions to Ventura Hall
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA
The Center now has collection of trailers going up in front of
Ventura Hall, as all of you who have been here in the last week
will have seen. These facilities house a classroom, several
Dandelion workstations, and a number of badly needed offices.
The trailers may be the first fruit visible to every one of us
resulting from the enormous amount of thought, energy, and time
Dr. Betsy Macken has been devoting to the task of improving
CSLI's physical facilities.
The intention is that the trailers should be only a first step in
this direction. Architects have been engaged to design a
permanent extension of Ventura Hall, to replace the trailers and
provide much more space for the Center. Yesterday Dr. Macken
obtained approval from the university's administrative council
for the design our architects are developing. If all goes well,
complete plans will be finished by summer and our hoped-for donor
will then approve a gift of the needed funds to finance
construction and completion of the building project. Some of us
dare to dream that by the summer of 1985 CSLI will have the kind
and size of physical facilities that it needs to perform at its
best in this multi-displinary and multi-institutional research
project.
Dr. Macken deserves tremendous gratitude from us all for her
untiring efforts toward this end. She has been working very hard
on our behalf and has suffered many bruises in the process.
President Kennedy said yesterday that he will award her a purple
heart when all is done, in recognition of how much she has been
through. We in the Center should award her a medal of honor.
-------
∂06-Apr-84 0217 @MIT-MC:steve@BRL-BMD Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 02:17:32 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 05:15-EST
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 84 5:11:22 EST
From: Stephen Wolff <steve@Brl-Bmd.ARPA>
To: JCMA%mit-oz@Mit-Mc.ARPA
cc: phil-sci@Mit-Mc.ARPA
Subject: Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
What difference? Or have you begged the question by a deliberate use of the
obsolete glyph "servo-mechanism"?
∂06-Apr-84 0719 @MIT-MC:JCMA@MIT-OZ Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 07:19:21 PST
Received: from MIT-JANIS by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 10:15-EST
Date: Friday, 6 April 1984, 10:15-EST
From: JCMA@MIT-OZ
Subject: Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
To: steve@BRL-BMD
Cc: phil-sci@MIT-OZ
In-reply-to: The message of 6 Apr 84 05:11-EST from Stephen Wolff <steve at Brl-Bmd.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 84 5:11:22 EST
From: Stephen Wolff <steve@Brl-Bmd.ARPA>
What difference? Or have you begged the question by a deliberate use of the
obsolete glyph "servo-mechanism"?
The point is whether there is a difference between a thermostat and an AI
program. Read this difference for increasing complexities of "thermostats."
One answer is, as you have suggested, no difference.
Another answer is there is only a difference when the number components
exceeds some number, such as a million.
I suppose another answer is: what is cybernetics?
What I was looking for is some discussion of deeper distinctions.
∂06-Apr-84 0818 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Reminder
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 08:18:07 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 6 Apr 84 08:19:32-PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 07:56:08-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
Don't forget this mornings "Annual Meeting", 9-11:30. It is intended
as a report to you as well as to the Advisory Panel, and to generate
a discussion of ways we might do things better.
Jon
-------
∂06-Apr-84 0916 @MIT-MC:steve@BRL-BMD Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 09:15:59 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 12:02-EST
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 84 11:43:44 EST
From: Stephen Wolff <steve@Brl-Bmd.ARPA>
To: JCMA%MIT-OZ@mit-mc.arpa
cc: steve@brl-bmd.arpa, phil-sci%MIT-OZ@mit-mc.arpa
Subject: Re: Differentiating AI From Cybernetics
The raw etymology of each term suggests that cybernetics has a human
component while AI does not.
That is neither a serious answer nor a deep comment. I think I haven't
either for this topic.
∂06-Apr-84 0933 @MIT-MC:clark@AEROSPACE Re: Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 09:32:58 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 12:14-EST
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 84 09:00:44 PST
From: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE>
To: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
CC: clark@AEROSPACE, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Re: Limits of determinism.
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu 5 Apr 84 20:46:01-PST
From Tom Dietterich:
"People who work on AI learning systems have recognized
the role that prior knowledge (and a priori biases such
as Occam's razor) play in guiding theory formation.
Einstein was right that mere collections of data do not
permit a theory to be deduced. But this doesn't mean
that something "non-deterministic" is required. It means
merely that the learner has some prior biases and beliefs.
A fond hope of learning research is that we can eventually
reduce this set of fundamental biases to a small set of
metaphysical beliefs about the simplicity of the world.
But we are a long way from such a reduction."
You talk of metaphysical beliefs and yet still put quotation marks
around the term "non-deterministic"? This is exactly my point, that
the TRUTH about the relationship between human consciousness and
physical reality perhaps cannot be deduced from experience. But
where will these a priori beliefs come from? To label them as
being "a priori" does not seem to save you from carrying excess
epistemological baggage.
∂06-Apr-84 0946 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 09:46:40 PST
Date: Wed 4 Apr 84 15:57:33-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
To: finterest@SU-CSLI.ARPA, nlinterest@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The mailing lists have been set up for the Foundation and the Natural
Language areas.
They are named as below:
F1 through F4 > For the specific areas
NL1 through NL9 > " "
Finterest and NLinterest >for the entire area and friends
All mailing lists are at Turing and so for those outside turing please
remember to write Finterest@turing (or Finterest@csli).
The Computer Language area lists are also ready (except for CLinterest
which should be ready by the end of the day).
Please send any problems to csli-requests.
Emma Pease (csli-requests)
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1017 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Mathematical Sciences Research Institute--Future Program-Computational Complexity.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 10:17:09 PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 10:06:17-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Mathematical Sciences Research Institute--Future Program-Computational Complexity.
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
On of the primary programs for the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute
located on the UC-Berkeley campus for 1984-85 is computational complexity.
For information concerning fellowships contact Calvin C. Moore, MSRI,
2223 Fulton Stree, Room 603, Berkeley, Ca. 94720. For more information
on this new institute, its purpose, organizational structure, future plans
and buildings see The Mathematical Intelligencer vol. 6 no. 1 1984, pp.59-
64.
HL
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1058 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA test
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 10:57:53 PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 10:53:51-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: test
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Ignore this message. I am only testing the mail file.
Emma Pease
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1213 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 12:13:24 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 6 Apr 84 11:59:43-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 6 Apr 84 11:50:10-PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 11:52:17-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1221 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 12:20:04 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 6 Apr 84 12:10:36-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 6 Apr 84 11:59:56-PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 11:57:07-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
**** Due to a scheduling conflict, there has been a room change, to 050 ****
WHO: Len Talmy, Cognitive Science Program and German Dept., UC Berkeley
WHAT: How Language Structures its Concepts
WHEN: Monday April 9 12:00 noon
WHERE: Room 380-50
No speaker next monday.
Next speaker:
Stan Rosenchien, SRI and CSLI, Monday April 23 12:00, noon
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1222 BRODER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next AFLB talk(s)
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 12:22:05 PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 12:17:43-PST
From: Andrei Broder <Broder@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB talk(s)
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sharon@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Office: MJH 325, Tel. (415) 497-1787
S P R I N G Q U A R T E R
4/12/84 - Dr. Nimrod Megiddo (XEROX PARC & Stanford)
"Parametric computing, parallel processing and composition."
I will present several applications of parametric computing in which
small depth (in the sense of parallel computation) of an algorithm for
one problem helps design an efficient sequential algorithm for another
problem. The general topic is presented in my paper in the October 83
issue of JACM. I will also discuss some randomizing sequential
algorithms obtained by the method.
******** Time and place: April 12, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
4/19/84 - Ken Clarkson (Stanford)
"Algorithms for Geometric Minimum Spanning Trees"
I will present algorithms for solving the geometric minimum spanning
tree problem:
Given a set of n points in d-dimensional space, find a minimum
spanning tree for the complete weighted graph G defined by these
points.
The graph G has n vertices, each vertex identified with a point, with the
weight of an edge given by the L←p distance between the two points
defining that edge.
The obvious algorithm for this problem looks at all edges, and so has
a running time worse than quadratic in n. I'll describe a nearly
linear (in n) approximation algorithm for the L←1 (Manhattan) case,
that finds a spanning tree with weight no more than 1+epsilon of the
minimum. The running time is proportional to log↑(d-1)epsilon. I'll
also discuss related results for the d=3, p=2 case, and for the d=2,
p=1 expected-time case.
******** Time and place: April 19, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) *******
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352 (Bldg.
460).
If you have a topic you would like to talk about in the AFLB seminar
please tell me. (Electronic mail: broder@su-score.arpa, Office: CSD,
Margaret Jacks Hall 325, (415) 497-1787) Contributions are wanted and
welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year have been filled
so far.
For more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics
you might want to look at the file [SCORE]<broder>aflb.bboard .
- Andrei Broder
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1317 AHNGER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Special TGIF today!
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 13:16:53 PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 13:07:57-PST
From: Sally P. Ahnger <AHNGER@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Special TGIF today!
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA, students@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Don't forget the TGIF at 4:30 today on the 4th floor patio to welcome
20 university students from Finland. Please come and show them
a friendly welcome.
Sally
-------
∂06-Apr-84 1828 @MIT-MC:GAVAN@MIT-OZ Limits of determinism.
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 18:27:50 PST
Received: from MIT-MC by MIT-OZ via Chaosnet; 6 Apr 84 21:23-EST
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 1984 21:22 EST
Message-ID: <GAVAN.12005434679.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: GAVAN%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA
To: Kenneth Clark <clark@AEROSPACE.ARPA>
Cc: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC
Subject: Limits of determinism.
In-reply-to: Msg of 6 Apr 1984 12:00-EST from Kenneth Clark <clark at AEROSPACE>
From: Kenneth Clark <clark at AEROSPACE>
You [Tom Dietterich] talk of metaphysical beliefs and yet still
put quotation marks around the term "non-deterministic"? This is
exactly my point, that the TRUTH about the relationship between
human consciousness and physical reality perhaps cannot be deduced
from experience. But where will these a priori beliefs come from?
To label them as being "a priori" does not seem to save you from
carrying excess epistemological baggage.
I have no idea what you mean by TRUTH (capitalized), but I know what
you mean by belief, I believe. "A priori" refers to those beliefs you
assume beforehand in order to believe some other belief. These "a
priori beliefs" may be "synthetic", derived from empirical experience.
But reading between your lines, I get the feeling you're objecting to
the idea that some other of these a priori beliefs may be "pure" or
non-empirical. Is that the case?
If so, I agree with your complaint. Kant's dualism, his distinction
between a noumenal world of pure ideas and a phenomenal world of
empirical ideas is no longer widely accepted. But the ideas that Kant
classed as pure and a priori need only be innately specified for much
of what he says to be of interest. You don't have to buy into his
dualism.
Weldon, I believe, claims Kant had been unduly influenced by Tetens, a
student of John Locke, to present a dualist explanation in
contradiction to the his monist, Leibnizian training. Strawson points
to Kant's treatment of substance as the place where his system breaks
down. This is interesting if you believe that some ideas are innate.
∂06-Apr-84 2240 GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA cl1 burstall lecture
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Apr 84 22:40:02 PST
Date: Fri 6 Apr 84 22:37:04-PST
From: Joseph A. Goguen <GOGUEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: cl1 burstall lecture
To: csli-folks@SRI-AI.ARPA, csli-c1@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: goguen@SRI-AI.ARPA
CL1 SEMINAR
Tuesday, April 10, 9:30 -11:00 am
Ventura Hall Seminar Room
The Cl1 seminar will go out with a bang! as Rod Burstall lectures on joint
work with Butler Lampson. This will be our first and last meeting of the
quarter. Those who are interested in following area CL should consider our
meetings on Wednesday afternoons. -- Joseph Goguen
-------------------
A Kernal Language for Abstract Data Types and Modules
R. M. Burstall, University of Edinburgh
Abstract: A small set of constructs can simulate a wide variety of apparently
distinct features in modern programming languages. Using typed lambda calculus
with bindings, declarations, and types as first-class values, we show how to
build modules, interfaces and implementations, abstract data types, generic
types, recursive types, and unions. The language has a concise operational
semantics given by inference rules.
-------
∂07-Apr-84 2314 @SRI-AI.ARPA:BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Advisory Panel Visit
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Apr 84 23:14:06 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 7 Apr 84 23:13:21-PST
Date: Sat 7 Apr 84 17:58:58-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Advisory Panel Visit
To: csli-principals@SRI-AI.ARPA
Saturday
All,
The Advisory Panel ended about 2 today. I thought I would
share my thoughts on things with you while they are fresh.
First the good news, as JRP would say. They think things are going
very well, that a lot of the problems they saw before seem to have
gone away, and that the new ways of managing the budget and research
activities was clearly in the right direction.
Our current plan is to use the existing Executive committee as a
budget committee, and to expand it to a larger Research Committee.
This committee would be responsible for setting the long term research
directions of the Center. It is clear that this needs to be set up
right away in connection with the new activity/area matrix plan (as
discussed on Friday, for those of you who missed that meeting), and to
review the perception proposal and the phonetics/phonology proposal.
I will appoint the members of this committee this week, with the
approval of the executive committee, and welcome suggestions as to its
members right away.
The Advisory Panel met with Charlie Smith for an hour alone, just
before lunch. They left Charlie with a good feeling for how well CSLI
si coming, and they came away from their meeting with him with a very
positive feeling about the outcome of the year one review. We will
have to work hard to get a good report in shape, but if it reflects
what is going on here, I think there will be no problem with the
review.
Now for the bad news. There are some problems. Some very specific
problems did come to light. Betsy will be visiting PARC and SRI early
this week to discuss them, and get more details, and to make some
specific changes in the coming weeks.
One problem that emerged was a lack of clarity, especially among the
staff, but also among some of you, as to just what Betsy's role is. I
think this stems from the fact that that role has been changing, and I
have not kept you posted on it. Initially, her position was seen as
my assistant and manager of project SL. However, given her
qualifications and my own inclinations to stay out of day to day
decisions, I made her Assistant Director. Initially, I imagined that
her power would stem from being in charge of the budget, which she is.
However, as things turned out, her time has been consumed by the
budget and the building, and a whole set of problems and issues arose
that I had not foreseen. Joyce is now taking care of the budget
details, and Jamie Marks is taking over much of the work on the
building. Susan is doing a wonderful job on helping Betsy and I on
the research administration end. With all of this help, Betsy can
devote more time to truly running the day to day operations of CSLI as
a whole. She has already begun this in connection with getting the
Dandelions ready for Brian's course (which is an enormous task, bigger
than you can imagine, no matter how wild your imagination).
At the risk of embarrassing her, I want to get something off my chest
and finally acknowledge the contribution Betsy has made this year. I
have never known anyone to work as hard or with such dedication to a
project in my life, though there are a number of close seconds around
here. We would not be anywhere near where we are today without her.
A large part of what she has done is invisible to most of you, but it
is astonishing. President Kennedy was not completely joking when he
awarded her a purple heart. In the building thing alone, she has
gotten the university administration to do things I never thought they
would agree to, and has gained a lot of respect along the way. She has
stood up to a lot of pressure from very high places, pressure which it
would have been easy to give in to to make things go more smoothly,
but which would ultimately have hurt us. She is quiet, but she is in
fact a person of great strength and integrity. I have come to admire
and depend on her completely. I am sure that as she becomes more
involved in aspects of the Center that touch you more visibly, you
will all come to share my feelings, if you don't already.
Another personal note. I am so close to what is going on here, that I
sometimes lose sight of the whole thing. I suspect we all do. It
took Advisory Panel's visit to convince me that you are all turning
CSLI into a terrific place, or frame of mind, or whatever it is that
it is, something that is absolutely unique and a wonderful adventure
for all of us. So many of you have put so much into this endeavor this
year. I wish you could have shared with me in their enthusiasm. As
they said in leaving:
"Full steam ahead".
Jon
-------
∂09-Apr-84 0716 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA Schedule of meetings
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 07:15:57 PST
Date: Mon 9 Apr 84 07:12:55-PST
From: Gene Golub <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Schedule of meetings
To: "CSD Senior Faculty": ;
Several of our senior faculty are not always available on Thursdays at 4:15.
Since none of our senior faculty our teaching at 2:30, let's continue our
SENIOR FACULTY MEETINGS on Tuesday at 4:15. That means we have a meeting
on Tuesday May 1 and Tuesday June 5 at 2:30.
GENE
-------
∂09-Apr-84 0916 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Mailing lists
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 09:16:23 PST
Date: Mon 9 Apr 84 09:09:00-PST
From: Emma Pease <EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Mailing lists
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Please use the new lists located in <csli-lists>@SU-CSLI and not
in the sri-ai system. A few changes have happened. Except for csli-requests,
all names have dropped csli (for instance folks instead of csli-folks).
A and B area mailing lists are now NL1 through NL9. C area mailing lists are
now CL1 through CL3. D mailing lists are now F1 through F4. The general lists
for each of these areas are labeled NLinterest, Clinterest, and Finterest.
Remember, if you are not on the csli system, you must use @su-csli or
@su-turing.
Any problems send a message to csli-requests.
Emma Pease
ps. please don't cc me on these messages; sending them to csli-requests
insures that I get a copy.
-------
∂09-Apr-84 0956 @SRI-AI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 09:56:44 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 9 Apr 84 09:29:59-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 9 Apr 84 09:19:00-PST
Date: Mon 9 Apr 84 09:19:46-PST
From: PENTLAND@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Issues in Language, Perception and Cognition
To: Seminar-List: ;
** Just a reminder ***
WHO: Len Talmy, Cognitive Science Program and German Dept., UC Berkeley
WHAT: How Language Structures its Concepts
WHEN: TODAY, Monday April 9 12:00 noon
WHERE: Room 380-050 *** Note room change ***
No speaker next monday.
Next speaker:
Stan Rosenschein, SRI and CSLI, Monday April 23 12:00, noon
-------
∂09-Apr-84 1022 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:PCOHEN@SRI-AI.ARPA Aspects of Anaphora
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 10:21:59 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 9 Apr 84 09:31:46-PST
Date: Mon 9 Apr 84 09:27:43-PST
From: Phil Cohen <PCOHEN@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Aspects of Anaphora
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
ASPECTS OF ANAPHORA
Who: Prof. Joan Bresnan
What: Syntactic Constraints on Anaphora
When: Thurs, April 12, 10:00 AM -- 11:30 AM
Where: VENTURA SEMINAR ROOM (!!)
See you there...
-------
∂09-Apr-84 MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA 09-Apr-84 JMC Undergraduates, and CS
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 13:15:14 PST
Date: Mon 9 Apr 84 12:58:21-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Undergraduates, and CS
To: golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The following seems to be an interesting topic for some Tuesday lunch
discussion (maybe again!), and of course it's a recurring theme.
Last week, an undergraduate student came to see me to ask about advise
concerning making up his individually designed undergraduate major. What
he had in mind turned out to be plain vanilla computer science (if that's
possible here; forgive me) and not any combination of different areas for
which there is no comprehensive program available.
I talked to Bob Floyd about this, and we agreed that, granting this student's
request, might be an undergraduate computer science program through the
back door. On the other hand, I've heard (rumours) that requests like the
above have been granted before.
I think it might be worth some discussion to come up with some kind of
guidelines (or maybe even common opinion) on this and related issues.
-ernst
-------
jmc - The Math Sciences program lets a student go pretty far in the
direction of a CS major - perhaps far enough. A student would need
fairly special circumstances to convince me that an individually
designed program - lots of trouble for all concerned - was warranted
in such a case.
[JMC - Forwarded to OTHER-SU-BBOARDS from line 27]
∂09-Apr-84 1421 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:Feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA bats on april 20
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 14:21:14 PST
Received: from Xerox.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 9 Apr 84 14:14:38-PST
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 09 APR 84 13:42:08 PST
Date: 9 Apr 84 13:14:29 PST
From: Feigenbaum.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: bats on april 20
To: bats@su-score.ARPA
Cc:
the next bats meeting will be on friday, april 20th at stanford,
in the CERAS LGI (same room as last time).
manuel blum, christos papadimitriou, dorite hochbaum, and at
least one other person (as yet unchosen) will speak. i will send
abstracts as soon as i receive them.
see you all there.
joan
∂09-Apr-84 1931 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@Glacier Re: Undergraduates, and CS
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Apr 84 19:31:36 PST
Received: from Glacier by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 9 Apr 84 19:27:56-PST
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 84 19:27:44 pst
To: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Cc: golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: Undergraduates, and CS
In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon 9 Apr 84 12:58:21-PST.
From: Brian Reid <reid@Glacier>
I estimate that Stanford graduates 40 students a year, perhaps more
than that, whose transcript is nearly indistinguishable from what would
be on a Computer Science major's transcript. I steer about 5 advisees a
year into self-defined majors in computer science, and I know many more
who major in linguistics or philosophy but fill their schedules with
computer science courses. The brightest undergrad that I have met at
Stanford, who got A+'s in my CS142 and CS242 classes, is majoring in
linguistics because he is not interested in all the Stat and OR that
fill up the schedule of a Math Sciences major.
EE is also thinking hard about an undergraduate major in Computer
Systems Engineering; this major would have the usual School of
Engineering breadth requirements, full of math and physics and
flavored with distribution requirements in thermodynamics and ecology.
Like all undergraduate Engineering majors, such a CSE major would
specify 36 units of "depth" courses, many of which could be CS courses.
Brian