perm filename OUTGO.MSG[1,JMC]3 blob
sn#607263 filedate 1981-08-19 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002
C00003 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Apr-81 1424 JMC
To: FFL
Please send Georgia Navarro at SRI a copy of my long biography.
∂01-Apr-81 1425 JMC
To: navarro at SRI-AI
846 Lathrop Dr.
Stanford CA 94305
857-0672 home, 497-4430 Stanford
I worked for Information International at this rate several years
ago, but I haven't been doing consulting work recently.
You can FTP BIOJMC[PAT,JMC] from SAIL, but I'll send you a paper copy.
∂01-Apr-81 2115 JMC
To: RPG
I have to read more of your thesis to tell.
∂02-Apr-81 0045 JMC
To: rosenschein at SRI-KL, nilsson at SRI-KL
Unless I hear otherwise, I'll come next Thursday at 10.
∂02-Apr-81 1906 JMC Tang
To: FFL
Mr. Tang will leave here June 30. However, we should leave open
the date of his ticket since he may visit a few other places before
he goes back to China. There is no harm in finding out whether
the ticket would be cheaper with some specific dates or advanced
purchase, however.
∂02-Apr-81 2200 JMC more arpa prose
To: JK
I have edited your text slightly for style, but it's fine for describing
what you have done. Now I need half a page or a page on what you plan
for the next two years.
∂02-Apr-81 2205 JMC
To: JK
Blank lines between paragraphs and two spaces after periods help TEX or PUB.
∂02-Apr-81 2243 JMC arpa2.doc[doc,jk]
To: JK
Well, I think it needs a bit more. I put the "Ketonen plans ..." in a separate
final paragraph, but the sentence isn't liftable by Engelmore, because it
refers to "these techniques". If you're tired, perhaps you can give it
some more thought tomorrow.
∂02-Apr-81 2308 JMC
To: JK
You were right, and it looks ok now.
∂03-Apr-81 0122 JMC
To: FFL
If you haven't sent Pournelle report to Levinthal yet, please hold it.
∂03-Apr-81 2138 JMC
To: hprintz at BBNE
I didn't continue with the public files, partly from lack of feedback.
∂04-Apr-81 2130 JMC
To: minsky at MIT-ML
thanks
∂04-Apr-81 2146 JMC
To: LLW
Please phone me 857-0672. A moderately urgent idea.
∂04-Apr-81 2204 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
If you get this by 1:30 please phone me at 415 857-0672.
∂06-Apr-81 0119 JMC arpa proposal
To: FFL
Please get me a xerox of the last ARPA proposal and also find out
if the file is in the computer somewhere. If Les is around, you can
ask him.
∂06-Apr-81 0135 JMC arpa proposal
To: LES
CC: FFL
Do you know what file previous ARPA proposal might be?
∂06-Apr-81 1356 JMC
To: ACY
Notice was sent to obsolete list. You aren't on it this time. Sorry.
∂06-Apr-81 1738 JMC
To: FFL
Please retrieve the files that correspond to pp. 1-31 of the 1979 proposal.
∂06-Apr-81 1743 JMC
To: TOB
∂06-Apr-81 1740 CSD.ULLMAN at SU-SCORE binford case
Date: 6 Apr 1981 1737-PST
From: CSD.ULLMAN at SU-SCORE
Subject: binford case
To: jmc at SU-AI
It went through the A&P committee to the provost!
-------
Tom: The A&P committee is the largest single hazard in appointments.
It isn't sure, but it's very probable now barring some effect of
prospective changes in high-level personnel.
∂06-Apr-81 2132 JMC
To: CLT
PUB yourself a copy of conjec[w78,jmc].
∂07-Apr-81 0142 JMC
To: LGC
CC: RPG
I think I can be in at 11:30, and if so, I'll join you.
∂07-Apr-81 1224 JMC travel agent
To: CLT
Call Dina Bolla Travel 329-0950 and ask for Franklin Hersch.
∂08-Apr-81 2011 JMC
CC: DPB at SU-AI
I cannot take King as a student as our interests don't sufficiently overlap.
∂08-Apr-81 2012 JMC
To: FFL
We will hold the meeting Monday anyway. Golub has agreed.
∂08-Apr-81 2223 JMC
CC: csd.dbrown at SU-SCORE
I cannot take King as a student as our interests don't sufficiently overlap.
∂09-Apr-81 1502 JMC
To: stan at SRI-AI
ANSWERS TO STAN ROSENSCHEIN'S QUESTIONS
1. Predicate calculus (presumably with functions) is ok for
the communication language. The LISPish syntax given in my memo
is still desirable since the purpose is machine-machine communication.
2. Q: What soes it mean to be talking about the same thing? Is this a semantic (e.g. model the
theoretic) notion?
A: Yes, it's semantic, assuming you are referring to
the buyer and seller talking about the same thing. The problem of
qualifying a reference enough so that they are talking about
the same thing is central in human business communication, and much
of the back-and-forth is about that. Notice that they negotiators
often have only a tenuous knowledge of the objects they are
dickering about. If SRI buys a D0 from xerox, this will be done with
an incomplete knowledge of exactly what constitutes a D0, and
the D0 may be somewhat different from the one on display. In general,
however, buying and selling is discussed (usually) as though
the objects were natural kinds.
3. Q: What type of conventions could/must be observed for two P-C
speaking machiees to know they are talking about the same thing?
A: This cannot be assured by conventions, if I understand
what is meant. After some dialog about (say) what color pencils,
both sides think they are referring to the same thing. Often it
can then be tied down by referring to a model number or stock number.
Perhaps one can say that dialog often involves approximating
some continuously variable aspect of the world by a discrete model.
4. Q: Is there a "universal protocol" for shipping cognitively-oriented
(belief and desire) self-descriptions among communicating machines?
A: I'm not sure I understand the question. It seems at first glance
that shipping such concepts is not much more problematical than
referring to pencils.
5. Q: Is an initial shared "subtheory" requred? HOw much of a
description of the world (as opposed to a theory of cognitive
agents) need be in such a shared subtheory?
A: It seems to me that a theory of the world is more required
than any theory of cognitive agents. Consider a company
controller dickering with an IBM salesman about the purchase of
a computer. The salesman says that a power conditioning unit is
required in addition to the CPU, etc. Both can be vague about what
it actually is. The controller's question is "What else will cost
me money?". The ability to introduce new entities is required for
a full ability to negotiate. In order to make a valid contract,
model numbers are often sufficient, provided they refer either implicitly
or explicitly to the common practices of the industry.
6. Q: How much proliferation of speech-act types is really required?
For instance, do we need to distinguish "imperative force" of an
utterance from "causing the hearer to believe the speaker desires
that he take some action" (i.e., a special case of informing", which
would be handled by a single, general-purpose "inform" protocol?
A: I think some performatives will be required, and should be set off
syntactically in order to give legal force to the transactions.
Thus a company can commit itself to pay for what is ordered in a
prescribed manner by its purchasing computer program. The
alternative is that it be a tort to lie about one's intentions.
This is too murky to treat generally. Thus if a computer
says, "If 300 gross of pencils are delivered to me by January 1, I
intend to print a check for $1000 made out to your company
and mail it", this seems harder to treat legally in a general
way than "I hereby offer (on authority of xyz) to buy 300 gross
of pencils for $1000 for delivery by January 1".
7. Q: Can we come up with an interesting scenario to actually
implement? Can we do this quickly?
A: In an ideal world, SRI would devise the CBCL and get paid
by its users, perhaps without ever writing a program using the language.
I'm not sure what is meant by a scenario, and can think of
two kinds. First two programs written here communicate in CBCL
playing some kind of Monopoly game. Second, SRI writes a program
for getting reports to people that keeps track of SRI's own reports,
asks similar program over the ARPAnet about reports of
other labs, answers inquiries and accepts orders. People
Programs written elsewhere communicate with the SRI program in CBCL.
∂09-Apr-81 1733 JMC
To: mrc at SU-SCORE
Is there a way in TOPS-20 to make a file FTPable without a password?
∂10-Apr-81 0024 JMC
To: foo at PARC-MAXC
Is there a user called foo?
∂10-Apr-81 0042 JMC Benjamin Cohen thesis
To: cohen at PARC-MAXC
If you are Benjamin Cohen or if you can send me his Arpanet co-ordinates,
I'll mail comments on the thesis.
∂10-Apr-81 1103 JMC
To: SQU at SU-AI
Good luck in the Math Dept., and I look forward to further discussions.
∂10-Apr-81 2004 JMC
To: JD
The file with the old proposal hasn't been restored yet. Perhaps tonight.
∂10-Apr-81 2153 JMC
To: cohen at PARC-MAXC
Comments on "Understanding Natural Kinds: Part I" by Benjamin Cohen draft
of March 1981
1. I find myself more in agreement with what you actually say in the paper
than what your lecture seemed to be saying (as far as you were allowed to
get) and with what the abstract promises. In particular your footnote
interprets the efforts at non-monotonic reasoning as an attempt to treat
typicality withing logical framework. You don't discuss the prospects for
success of such attempts, but what you say doesn't directly argue against
prospects for such success.
2. As a part of a philosophy dissertation, the paper makes a
presupposition common to philosophers. Namely, it presupposes that
counterexamples kill a formalism dead. AI has to be more modest and take
a positive view of formalisms, asking what can be done with it rather than
immediately looking for something it can't do and letting that kill it.
Unfortunately, much AI work, especially AI dissertations, tend to sweep
under the rug everything a formalism won't do.
In the present case, a proper treatment of the "formal semantics" paradigm
would identify the class of problems for which it is likely to succeed in
formalizing some common sense knowledge well enough to be used.
3. Your point that Montague semantics doesn't even begin to express the
real world facts important for understanding sentences is well taken. I
hadn't realized how little interest philosophers had in such questions
till I attended Barwise's lectures on perception, and he eventually told
me that no specific features of vision were to be treated.
4. Bob Moore is right that definability isn't a very live issue. The
"formal semantics" approach will content itself with axiomatizing concepts
without demanding that they be eliminable by definitions.
Of course, ever since I started working on non-monotonic reasoning about
1975, I have agreed that axiomatization itself isn't enough to express our
common sense knowledge without non-monotonic rules of reasoning. Even in
"Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial
Intelligence" which appeared in 1969, Pat Hayes and I recognized that
there were serious difficulties in trying to get correct axiomatizations
of common sense. We called the difficulties the qualification problem.
The current non-monotonic reasoning formalisms are probably still
inadequate.
5. The problem of compositionality has to be redefined to become
meaningful, because it is always possible to give any system a
compositional semantics if one is willing to use suitable function domains
for the domains of meanings of expressions. Thus suppose you have some
rule for assigning meanings to sentences as a whole. Then I can define
the meaning of an arbitrary segment of a sentence as a map from the
Cartesian product of possible preceding segments with the space of
possible following segments to meanings for the sentences.
Compositionality can be made a meaningful restriction of semantic rules
only if we restrict the domain that can serve as meanings. Thus modal
logic is non-compositional if wffs must have truth values as meanings but
becomes compositional if we use suitable functions from possible worlds as
meanings.
6. From the AI point of view the reformulation on page 2 of the problem of
natural kinds as a linguistic problem is dubious. Natural kinds like
biological species are a fact about the world and the ability of men and
machines to acquire information about it. These facts have linguistic
consequences, but they aren't basically linguistic facts.
I don't think that natural kinds occur only in nature, and moreover I
think the concept is a relative one. A small child treats almost all
words as denoting natural kinds, i.e. as having meanings that aren't
merely matters of definition and which depend on facts that he doesn't
know. Discovering that some words have extensions whose boundaries aren't
definite comes at an age of perhaps ten.
The word "hill" should be compared to the word "horse". No-one supposes
that there is something that science will tell us about which eminences
are to be counted as hills. Nor will science tell us which animals are to
be regarded as domestic.
It doesn't seem to me that the notion of "natural kind" should be used to
revive (Aristotelian or Platonic ?) essences.
7. Grumbles and misprints
Using Chang and Keisler as a reference muddles what is important about
Tarskian semantics for philosophy with what is of purely mathematical
interest. Isn't the little bit in Rogers' "Mathematical Logic and
Formalized Theories" enough for your purposes.
Corrected spellings: wierd → weird, curousity → curiosity, a-typical →
atypical, , proto-typical → prototypical, quadraped → quadriped.
8. I hope you will sometime switch to putting your main efforts into
making a formalism you consider adequate. My experience is that one
cannot win methodological arguments against formalisms without having a
competitor and examples that the competitor does better.
∂10-Apr-81 2329 JMC
To: FFL
pereir.1
∂11-Apr-81 1103 JMC
To: JD
The old proposal is FR[s81,jmc].
∂11-Apr-81 1103 JMC
To: LES
Thanks.
∂11-Apr-81 2033 JMC
To: steveh at MIT-MC
Suggest you correct your error giving 2 min 33 sec as result of doubling
1.28 sec.
∂12-Apr-81 0102 JMC paper needed
To: FFL
Please get me a xerox of R. Kowalski, Predicate logic as a programming
language, Proc. IFIP 1974
∂12-Apr-81 1139 JMC
To: CLT
How about 2pm for walk, or ... ?
∂13-Apr-81 0950 JMC proposal
To: JD
It looks like an earlier proposal or an early draft has been restored.
Perhaps we had best mark up a paper copy and have Fran type it in.
I suggest you print fr[s81,jmc], and if Les is around ask him what is
the right file. Otherwise, we can have Fran type the stuff in again.
∂13-Apr-81 1125 JMC
To: LGC, RPG
Yes, let's discuss advice taker at 4:30.
∂13-Apr-81 1444 JMC correction of correction
To: cohen at PARC-MAXC
I corrected "quadraped" to "quadriped". Actually it's "quadruped".
Perhaps something substantive later.
∂13-Apr-81 1617 JMC
To: RWW
Call Anil Jain 202 357-7345.
∂13-Apr-81 1624 JMC
To: JD
No problem about 2 month unpaid leave June and July.
∂13-Apr-81 2047 JMC
To: FFL
Friday is possible. Thursday is not.
∂13-Apr-81 1457 FFL Thesis Committee meeting for Vic Scheinman
To: JMC, FFL
Bernard Roth asks if you can meet on Thursday, Apr. 23, at 2 p.m. with
the thesis committee. If not, can you meet at any other time on Thursday.
If not, can you meet on Friday. He would appreciate a reply as soon as
possible.
∂14-Apr-81 0044 JMC REM
To: ellen at MIT-MC
I know there is a temptation to "do something about REM", but I'm inclined
to suggest resisting it unless there is more of an acute problem for other
people than you have indicated. The last time REM gave suicidal indications
I talked to him on the phone quite a lot, and I have talked to him twice
since. My impression is that REM is not as desperate as he makes out.
I think some expression of displeasure may be called for if it hasn't been
tried already, i.e. a direct request by recipients of messages with unwanted
confidences that he refrain in the future. I think there should be no conerted
campaign to do it, but whoever is most annoyed should do it. Of course, this
may have already been tried. Complete success shouldn't be expected - merely
a reduction in the noise level.
∂14-Apr-81 0054 JMC sharing Dick Gabriel
To: LLW
I would like to support him to work on an Advice Taker, but I expect to have
money enough only for half of his time, and anyway he wants to put much of
his time into LISP. Is there any possibility that S-1 could support him
half time, say through the contract with Stanford to work on LISP?
∂14-Apr-81 0134 JMC
To: ellen at MIT-MC
That's a fine birthday cake, and I'll not worry my head trying to figure
out how REM will take it. I don't see that people being disturbed by
fingering REM is quite reason enough to take action even to replace the
plan by something else. I too find REM's appeals disturbing - comparable
to the continual guilt-mongering begging of the listener supported
radio and TV stations. The remedy is the same in either case - switch
to another channel.
I'm curious about Betsy, however. I don't know if I've met her although
she's a user of SCORE, but REM's last flap was about her. I supposed that
she was an innocent user on whom REM had become fixated, but I gather
from your last message that she is also somewhat of a nuisance. In
what way?
∂14-Apr-81 0156 JMC curiosity
To: ellen at MIT-MC
Thanks. My curiosity is satisfied. I may talk further to REM about how
he is making the fulfillment of his goals unlikely, but I expect more
education than success from the effort. Unless you request it, I won't
delete your messages. I see nothing in them to be ashamed of or likely
to have a harmful effect beyond someone possibly taking it upon himself
to explain to one or both of us how we are mistaken about something.
∂14-Apr-81 1648 JMC visit next fall
To: rms at MIT-AI
I'm budgeting at the moment. Do you want to come again for one
or two months? I said I would pay travel expenses, but I know
I can't afford salary. Do you remember what your travel reimbursement
arrangements were with M.I.T. and roughly what it cost them?
∂14-Apr-81 1649 JMC Gabriel
To: LLW
He will probably accept our offer which will be $27,000 or $30,000 for
12 months depending on Stanford politics. Can you pay half of that with
usual overheads?
∂15-Apr-81 1703 JMC
To: csd.golub at SU-SCORE
got your test message
∂15-Apr-81 1720 JMC parser
To: JK
For reasons I will be glad to enumerate, it would be very helpful if
your parser would allow operators comprising more than one operator
symbol, e.g. ∧' or ∧∧. All it needs to do is to consider a string
of operator symbols as designating a compound operator, there being
no necessary semantic relation between ∧ and ∧', etc. This would
also permit expressing ≤ as =< by people with impoverished character
sets.
∂15-Apr-81 2159 JMC
To: CLT
I forgot that I will be at SRI tomorrow. I'll be at Jacks shortly past 5.
∂15-Apr-81 2203 JMC
To: CLT
Unfortunately, I forgot I'm at SRI. Can you make it 5:15 or after?
∂15-Apr-81 2228 JMC
To: CLT
I've checked. I'll cancel my lunch with Elliott Bloom if necessary to
make this meeting. I prefer tomorrow if JD can do it, because it's sooner.
∂15-Apr-81 2334 JMC
To: CLT
1:30 is ok
∂16-Apr-81 0006 JMC
To: FFL
We have to send NSF a new budget totalling $75,000 for my NSF.
∂16-Apr-81 0032 JMC
To: CLT
Done although the due date is listed as April 28.
∂16-Apr-81 0110 JMC
To: JK
I admit I hadn't thought of this last, and I suppose that any of the
reasonable solutions is acceptable.
(1) it is interpreted as a single symbol so that ∧ ¬p must be so written.
(2) it is interpreted the same as ∧ ¬.
(3) it is interpreted as ∧¬ if this has been defined otherwise as ∧ ¬.
∂16-Apr-81 0939 JMC
To: JK
By the way, likewise with combinations like ∃'.
∂16-Apr-81 0940 JMC
To: FFL
Please tell Bloom's sec'y to remind him to send Dugan lists.
∂16-Apr-81 2328 JMC
To: rem at MIT-MC
Good to hear you're better.
∂17-Apr-81 0058 JMC McDermott paper
To: bmoore at SRI-KL
I don't believe the theorem he states on page 14 and purports to prove
on page 17. A counterexample involves the fact that his axioms don't
exclude the possibility of an interval of states with the same date within
a chronicle. Such an interval can have missing limit points, e.g. can
have the order type of the real numbers without the point 0. An
infinite sequence of days and nights having the limit point 0 is possible
now without violating Adams' axiom, because the state corresponding
to 0 doesn't exist. Have you an opinion?
∂17-Apr-81 0956 JMC
To: FFL
yale.1
∂18-Apr-81 1434 JMC ANALYST
To: JD
It seems to me that the time is ripe to actually do a version of the ANALYST
proposed in our old proposal. I have discussed this with Dick Gabriel and
Lew Creary, and they agree. I would like to solicit your participation in
the project and, if you agree, would like to mention it in the proposal.
ANALYS[S81,JMC] contains a preliminary draft of a section of the proposal,
but it is also a preliminary plan for actually carrying it out. Please
phone when you get this. We may want to get together tomorrow (Sunday)
afternoon as I'll be away from Monday morning till Wednesday evening and
will be at SRI Thursday during the day.
∂18-Apr-81 1616 JMC
To: LGC, RPG, JD, CLT
How about 3pm Sunday for getting together and finishing it off.
∂18-Apr-81 1747 JMC
To: LGC, RPG
Any time you two can agree on is ok with me.
∂18-Apr-81 2207 JMC
To: LLW
Do we need to talk about Dick Gabriel?
∂18-Apr-81 2320 JMC Monday
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
Monday I arrive at Baltimore-Washington airport around 10pm.
My meeting Tuesday is at the National Bureau of Standards. If
these places are close to your place and you have a spare bed,
it would be nice. Otherwise, how about Tuesday evening. I had
to stay for only two days of a three day meeting. I hope you
had a good trip to Boston.
∂18-Apr-81 2326 JMC
To: CLT
The descriptions of other people's work are fine.
∂19-Apr-81 1447 JMC uses of home computer
To: pourne at MIT-MC
Not counting writing or communication, what uses do you get from your
home computer? Consider this as a request for information and not as
a rhetorical question.
It is clear that word-processing by computer is worth the money, and so
is electronic mail and access to data bases when enough cheap enough ones
are available. However, a lot of the proposed uses, such as keeping track
of the pantry fail because they aren't worth the input-output. Others like
closing the window when it rains require standardized sensors and effectors
to be of use to most people. The question of how we get from here to
such applications requires more discussion than I have time for now.
∂19-Apr-81 1602 JMC
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
That will all be lovely. My flight is UA108 which arrives at BWI
at 1035pm. My breakfast tastes are entirely omnivorous. I too
look forward to it.
∂19-Apr-81 1605 JMC
To: CLT
My accomplishments are in ACCOMP[S81,JMC].
∂19-Apr-81 1733 JMC intro
To: CLT
intro[s81,jmc] contains a draft of the sections preceding ANALYST. Please
add a description of the organization of the proposal to the first page
of it.
∂19-Apr-81 1739 JMC
To: JDH
More specifically, Friday at 3:30 would be good.
∂19-Apr-81 1750 JMC
To: CLT
ARPA[s81,jmc] is the section on my own plans.
∂20-Apr-81 0056 JMC
To: RWW
(1) Anil Jain. (2) Can you support Joe Weening this summer?
∂22-Apr-81 2233 JMC tomorrow
To: konolige at SRI-KL
I plan to come to SRI tomorrow assuming you will be available some
time during the day.
∂22-Apr-81 2248 JMC paper copy of our part of proposal
To: FFL
Please xgp fr81.xgp and also a copy of our (formal reasoning) budget.
I think I'll phone Engelmore and see if he wants a copy.
∂22-Apr-81 2249 JMC verification
To: cerf at USC-ISI
I would like to continue our conversation about getting some support
for our verification related work. I'll be going to France for two
months (visiting logic programming center in Marseille), so would it
be possible to talk between now and Wednesday. I cculd also send a
letter outlining what I have in mind.
∂23-Apr-81 0932 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-AI
If you will be further along then, next Tuesday might be better.
∂23-Apr-81 0934 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-KL
What's your phone number at SRI?
∂23-Apr-81 2136 JMC
To: daul at OFFICE-2
Read ARPAnet directory.
∂23-Apr-81 2158 JMC
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
Many thanks for picking and putting me up. A propos of a discussion we
had when you were at Stanford about early work in genetics, Judson on
p. 205 quotes Brenner as saying about Morgan and others "They did what
they were able to do, which was genetics". He points out that most of
them started wanting to study embryology and development.
∂24-Apr-81 0028 JMC
To: LLW
I received the offer today. My main problem is with the dates.
I won't be back from France until early in July, and I'll need to spend
some time at Stanford for a while - probably I should be there the month
of July. My best time would be September. One alternative is to put
this on the form. The other is to formally accept for the latest date,
but then put it off, which I would do only to keep the process going.
I have a question concerning pay, which has been proposed at precisely
my academic rate. Is how LL generally pays, or is it characteristic of
this particular summer program? It isn't an important concern for this
summer.
∂24-Apr-81 0038 JMC
To: daul at OFFICE-2
Inspecting a few random pages gave 19 out of 99. The formula
sigma = sqrt(n*p*q) suggests a standard deviation of 4. Several
of the women were known to me as secretaries. Of course, the
directory is heavily loaded towards officials and their administrative
helpers.
∂24-Apr-81 0108 JMC
To: LLW
OK, I've signed it, but we'll see how far $12 per diem goes.
∂24-Apr-81 0150 JMC
To: LLW
I'll talk to Tom. I've just done something for him, so ...
∂24-Apr-81 1222 JMC
To: ROD
It's all true, so do as you propose.
∂25-Apr-81 1313 JMC
To: BYY
The main reference on my use of situations is:
%3McCarthy, John and P.J. Hayes (1969)%1: "Some Philosophical Problems from
the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence", in D. Michie (ed), %2Machine
Intelligence 4%1, American Elsevier, New York, NY.
∂26-Apr-81 1926 JMC 8th day
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
It's indeed excellent, although I found the parts where I knew
the outcome (as in the existence of mRNA and tRNA) more readable
than the parts for which I didn't (repressors, etc.). It seems
to me that the discoveries were mainly technique-driven - when
the techniques became available the discoveries were made. It also
seems that the Club was trying to be too clever. The fancy ideas
for codes were no more intrinsically plausible than the ultimate
3 base code with redundancy. The one experiment besides that of
Meselson and Stahl that might have been done earlier seems to
be Nirenberg's, although it isn't clear what techniques he used
that might have been newly developed. It occurs to me to ask whether
Jacob and Monod when they observed bacterial "mating" might have
tried to inject some DNA or RNA themselves, e.g. polyA or polyU.
Would that have worked? It could conceivably have been done with
a single bacterium using the radioactive tracer techniques used
by the Berkeley chemists who were discovering new elements and
detecting the decay of single atoms. The idea was to guess the
chemistry and purify the substance blind and they put the hypothetical
substance in a counter and detect the decay. If you guessed that
polyA would produce a certain protein polymer, then it would be
necessary to go through electrophoresis and chromatography to separate out
that and then put the bit of paper in a particle counter.
See you after we return.
John
∂27-Apr-81 0902 JMC
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
leaving for Marseille Thursday and returning around July 1
∂27-Apr-81 1204 JMC
To: CLT
Franklin Hersch 329-0950 needs your passport number by 4:30pm.
∂27-Apr-81 1208 JMC
To: CLT
I found it and called it in. It's B1225574.
∂27-Apr-81 2142 JMC
To: FFL
Please send a copy of the Shapiro paper to Suppes.
∂28-Apr-81 0041 JMC
To: DCL, MAS
I think she has had it for some days. At least Fran isn't asking me
for anything now.
∂28-Apr-81 2323 JMC
To: RWW
∂28-Apr-81 1202 DGCOM at USC-ISIC FOL
Date: 28 Apr 1981 1202-PDT
From: DGCOM at USC-ISIC
Subject: FOL
To: jmc at SU-AI
cc: dgcom
Prof. McCarthy,
We discussed in Washington the possibility of my examining FOL.
If you could send me a manual, open an account, etc. I would
appreciate it. More generally, I am interested in the logical
and epistemological issues in AI. I've spent the last ten years
studying philosophy. I am now preparing to reenter the world of
research and am looking for fruitful things to work on. I've spent
the last eight months working in program verification in order to get
aquainted with computer culture. I'd be interested in any reprints,
advice, etc. that you could pass on.
Richard Platek
-------
∂29-Apr-81 1852 JMC proposal
To: engelmore at USC-ISI
We have made a major modification to the content of what I told you
would be the proposal. Namely, Dick Gabriel and Lew Creary think they
can make a start on implementing the intelligence ANALYST that has
been the focus of the theoretical work. It will be a kind of
Advice Taker. We are terribly squeezed by the budget limitation you
gave us, and I have started to discuss with Vint Cerf the possiblity
that some of our work on mathematical theory of computation may be
appropriate for additional support from the program verification
program.
∂29-Apr-81 1944 JMC
To: FFL
Please put dedije.1 into TEX and print it for me to sign.
∂29-Apr-81 2155 JMC
To: dgcom at USC-ISIC
CC: FFL at SU-AI, JK at SU-AI, RWW at SU-AI
∂28-Apr-81 1202 DGCOM at USC-ISIC FOL
Date: 28 Apr 1981 1202-PDT
From: DGCOM at USC-ISIC
Subject: FOL
To: jmc at SU-AI
cc: dgcom
Prof. McCarthy,
We discussed in Washington the possibility of my examining FOL.
If you could send me a manual, open an account, etc. I would
appreciate it. More generally, I am interested in the logical
and epistemological issues in AI. I've spent the last ten years
studying philosophy. I am now preparing to reenter the world of
research and am looking for fruitful things to work on. I've spent
the last eight months working in program verification in order to get
aquainted with computer culture. I'd be interested in any reprints,
advice, etc. that you could pass on.
Richard Platek
-------
I will have information about both Weyhrauch's FOL and Ketonen's EKL
sent, but please send a U.S. Mail address to my secretary Fran Larson,
FFL@SU-AI.
∂29-Apr-81 2157 JMC
To: FFL
Please send Platek when he supplies an address copies of my AI and
philosophy papers.
∂29-Apr-81 2159 JMC
To: JK
∂25-Apr-81 1112 Susan L. Gerhart <GERHART at USC-ISIF> M. Davis paper
Date: 25 Apr 1981 1105-PST
From: Susan L. Gerhart <GERHART at USC-ISIF>
Subject: M. Davis paper
To: mccarthy at SU-SCORE
cc: gerhart at USC-ISIF
I'd like to follow up on the paper you mentioned at the Verkshop.
If you just have the title our library can chase it down but a copy
of the paper would be appreciated, if it's available.
I have a student down here from Berkeley who's interested in the structure
of proofs for a possible thesis area.
Thanks.
Susan Gerhart
-------
She wants the paper about obvious deductions. I think you have a copy.
∂30-Apr-81 1607 JMC →14367 (1-Jul-81)
To: "#___JMC.PLN[2,2]"
I will be at the University of Aix-Marseilles to June 15 and
back here July 1 approximately. Address:
c/o Prof. A. Colmerauer
Groupe d'Intelligence Artificiel
Universite d'Aix-Marseille
70, Route Leon-Lachamp
13 - Marseille (9 e)
FRANCE
telephone: France + 91 41 32 48
∂30-Apr-81 1634 JMC verification
To: cerf at USC-ISI
I hope to continue discussion of possible ARPA support for our
work in the mathematical theory of program verification after I
return to Stanford around July 1. The numbers I mentioned to you
would support all my group's work in this area. A smaller amount
$50K to $100K is needed just to keep it alive in addition to what
we are getting in Engelmore's program.
∂20-May-81 1439 JMC
To: carl at MIT-AI
∂14-May-81 1318 Randall Davis <KRD at MIT-AI>
Date: 14 May 1981 15:43-EDT
From: Randall Davis <KRD at MIT-AI>
To: konolige at SRI-AI
cc: KRD at MIT-AI, nilsson at SRI-AI, jmc at SU-AI
Kurt:
Read over your TN232 recently and liked it very much (tho I don't
claim to be much of a logic hacker at all). It appears to put down
a very nice foundation for the reasoning about beliefs and actions stuff.
A couple of minor typos that you've probably heard about:
-- on page 27 you say PO1 several times and I suspect you mean LT1.
-- page 35, middle paragraph, after the ref., you seem to have been
trying to make up your mind about how many examples had been done.
A comment about the wise men problem: it seems to involve not only
reasoning about belief, but about capabilities. The difference in
speed of reasoning of the agents is both necessary and closely bounded.
To see this, imagine that the differences in intelligence are in fact
very large. Then consider #1's standard reasoning:
"if mine were black, then #2 would see a black and a
white, and he could say
'if mine were black, then #3 would see two
blacks and he would have responded by now'."
BUT: if #1 is VERY dumb, then #2 can't make that inference. And (much more
plausibly), if #3 is significantly faster than #2, then he can't say "since #2
hasn't responded, mine can't be black, or #2 would have solved his (simpler)
problem already."
The problem itself is made plausible by the fact that each level of
hypothesization reduces the problem complexity (eg, the nth guy is left with
a trivial observation and inference), but the time issue is a tricky one.
In effect, there are hidden assumptions that each agent believes that each
other agent is only a little bit dumber, and hence given the hypothesized
simpler problem to solve, would have solved that simpler problem already.
You get around this in your formalization because you poll the men. But in
principle at least, the problem is insoluble without assumptions about speed of
reasoning. The first guy could be SO dumb that even when seeing 2 black spots
it takes him arbitrarily long to make the obvious inference [maybe he's running
a resolution theorem prover]; my claim gets more plausible as we move up each
level of embedding [the second guy's problem is a little harder, the third more
difficult still, and so forth if there were more people involved.]
Agree, or have I overlooked something?
cheers
Randy
∂20-May-81 1442 JMC
To: engelmore at USC-ISI
I'm in France till July 1.
∂20-May-81 1447 JMC
To: feldman at SUMEX-AIM
Please make sure your application is primarily considered by Jeff Ullman
and Ed Feigenbaum. In any case, I'll be gone till July.
∂20-May-81 1450 JMC
To: FFL
There is a letter on my desk at the left from Donald Perlis asking about a job
in the department. Please write him that I welcome a look at his thesis, but
he should make sure that his application is considered by Ullman and Feigenbaum.
∂20-May-81 1534 JMC →14367 (1-Jul-81) via MIT-AI
To: "#___JMC.PLN[2,2]"
Address till June 19 arrival
John McCarthy
Groupe d'Intelligence Artificielle
Faculte de Sciences Luminy
70 route Leon Lachamp
13288 Marseille Cedex 2
FRANCE
till June 25, ask FFL
Back at Stanford around July 1
∂24-Jun-81 0258 JMC via MIT-AI space and communications
To: OTA at SU-AI, pourne at MIT-MC
I have been abroad for two months, and I am reading
this from Sweden over a kludgy connection. I will be back July 1
and I'll deal with both matters then.
∂24-Jun-81 0308 JMC via MIT-AI Perry use of terminal for now
To: BYY
I'm away till July 1, and I don't know about terminal requirements
within our project. It's ok
for now, but I'll review it when I
come back. I'm eager to to encourage
philosopher use of our machine for
communication reasons, but ultimately John should buy his own
terminal.
∂26-Jun-81 0214 JMC via MIT-AI machado
To: wiederhold at SUMEX-AIM
I'll be back July 1 and prefer to talk to people before
scheduling a meeting, but I'll be at Stanford for all of July.
ges before
I return.
∂26-Jun-81 0224 JMC via MIT-AI
To: mtruro at MIT-AI
thiss is jmc in Sweden. Query KEN at ai for details later.
∂02-Jul-81 1105 JMC
To: RWW
Thanks. Yes, she's back too.
∂02-Jul-81 1107 JMC
To: JRA
July 10 is fine. Is "Proving correctness of LISP programs" a suitable
topic? If so, that's it.
∂02-Jul-81 1116 JMC
To: ken at MIT-AI
Your June 29 note is a bit sketch, because I have forgotten about Omega, but
I get the general idea. I'll send you a note soon about map coloring strategies
as control for the logic of a simple PROLOG program. Also Pereira and Porto
tinkered with my eval, and there are now "official versions" with and without
cut although the version without (by Porto) has some constructs that may
be somewhat impure. More on this later. Regards to Sten-Ake.
∂02-Jul-81 1121 JMC
To: RPG at SU-AI
I'm back. See if the attached note from Betty Scott presents any opportunities.
We can certainly lend the money out of my unrestricted funds. If Engelmore
has already been in touch with you, let me know what was decided or propoed.
∂29-Jun-81 1420 Betty Scott <CSD.BSCOTT at SU-SCORE> ARPA Supplement for LISP Project
Date: 29 Jun 1981 1412-PDT
From: Betty Scott <CSD.BSCOTT at SU-SCORE>
Subject: ARPA Supplement for LISP Project
To: JMC at SU-AI
cc: CSD.BScott at SU-SCORE
Bob Engelmore called me a week or so ago to say that ARPA has no more money
for this year, so it will not be possible to supplement your contract for
work this summer for the LISP Timing Evaluation Project. He did say,
however, that he would have no objection to funding the project after 10/1,
so that if you could (or want to ) do the work this summer, and be funded
"after the fact" for "evaluation of the results," he thought this would be
possible. It's just that there is no more money available to be awarded
in this fiscal year.
Betty
-------
∂02-Jul-81 1127 JMC
To: GIO at SU-AI, FFL at SU-AI
We'll do our show-and-tell as scheduled July 28, 8:30-noon.
∂02-Jul-81 1139 JMC
To: LLW
I have known Bill Gosper for more than ten years, and consider him
the one of the two or three most inventive and dedicated computer mathematicians
around. Indeed it seems that his dedication to always working on
ever new mathematical applications of computers has hindered his pursuing
a conventional academic career. I have no hesitation in recommending him
without qualification.
P.S. to LLW. I have just returned and will call you soon unless you call
me first. If you need a more elaborate version of the Gosper reference,
I will do it.
∂02-Jul-81 1728 JMC
To: gabriel at CMU-20C
There is to be a show-and-tell for the new ARPA AI program manager
on July 28. Can you come for that and add weight to the Advice Taker
implementation plan? As for France, there were several interesting
things including getting introduced to PROLOG and some work on
non-monotonic reasoning. I have become convinced that there is much
that is interesting in logic programming, and I have brought back
PROLOG and LOGLISP systems to play with.
∂02-Jul-81 1905 JMC
To: JD
I guess you should send me a letter of resignation.
∂03-Jul-81 1201 JMC your paper
To: JD
It's Ottawa. I was naturally curious about your reaction to circumscription.
Your reference the paper, but I couldn't find any discussion.
∂03-Jul-81 1309 JMC
To: REG
If needed, Ernie Sibert 315 423-4442 will advise on LOGLISP.
∂03-Jul-81 1314 JMC
To: FFL
ROBINS.2[LET,JMC]
∂03-Jul-81 1322 JMC
To: JD
I found your letter of resignation.
∂03-Jul-81 1323 JMC inquiries about LISP
To: JRA
I often get inquiries about LISPs for various machines. If there is any
way you think you can make money out of it, I would be glad to refer them
to you. I send one as a sample, but you needn't answer it.
∂03-Jul-81 1547 JMC
To: LGC, CG, CLT, JK, RWW
ARPA AI wallah here July 28 for show-and-tell.
∂04-Jul-81 1342 JMC
To: FWH
Is Burstall still around?
∂04-Jul-81 1347 JMC
To: FFL
Chris plans to support himself from other sources for the other half time.
∂04-Jul-81 1355 JMC
To: OTA
If you are still editing my paper, I'll be glad to look at what you have.
∂04-Jul-81 1356 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
Sorry to have missed you in Palo Alto. Just got back from France.
∂05-Jul-81 1232 JMC symposium
To: FFL
Please call Prof. Ralph Hester or secretary 7-4183 to say that I
accept their invitation to take part in the International Symposium
on Order and Disorder.
∂05-Jul-81 1536 JMC Chronicle
To: csl.bkr at SU-SCORE
I believe you are mistaken in your correction. There is a law passed
in the early 70s which permits newspapers to merge for production
purposes under conditions that require them to remain distinct
editorially. The purpose was to reduce the trend to one-newspaper
cities caused by increasing costs of production. The Examiner and
the Chronicle share production and the Sunday paper under the protection
from antitrust of this law. No-one to my knowledge has claimed that
the Chronicle has become a Hearst newspaper in editorial content.
∂05-Jul-81 1634 JMC
To: JPM
Club of Rome
I was surprised at the following remark and especially at the
remark that the study is unchallenged by modellers. The most thorough
refutation is that of the University of Sussex group.
"The Club of Rome study is basically valid. No one with any knowledge
of world modelling disputes this. Many details can be altered, but
basically if we continue to industrialize, expand population, have no
radical breakthroughs in technology, and continue to exploit the
present (and reasonably expected) resource base, the world (i.e. 80%
of the population) will die in 100 to 300 years. That probably would ..."
I find two major faults.
1. The one dimensional model assumes a fixed fraction of
wealth created is reinvested in more factories, etc. This drives
the exponential and the results is the explosion predicted.
However, this completely ignores factors that saturate demand.
Suppose someone in 1875 had commented that the post civil war cattle
boom if continued at the same exponential rate he had observed since
1865 would require every American to eat a cow a day by 1950 and
formed an organization to reduce growth. A more trivial example:
Let me warn you that if you continue sitting at your terminal reading
this you will eventually fall out of your chair from exhaustion,
thirst and starvation.
In short, before one organizes to stop a trend, one has
to be sure it won't stop by itself. The Club of Rome study, because
of its extreme aggregation, neglects the fact that each increment
in production must be justified by demand for the product in
comparison with more leisure.
Remember that the disaster predicted by the Club of Rome
is not the population explosion but a production explosion.
2. The aggregation of all countries together conceals the
fact that some countries have current population problems and
others don't. Bangladesh, India and China have population problems,
and the U.S. doesn't now and won't for at least 100 years and most
likely for several hundred years. A globalist prefers to consider
the problem on a world wide scale, but this neglects the sovereignty
of nations. The U.S. cannot solve Bangladesh's population problem,
and won't even seriously try.
The globalist may prefer a world government, but this would
be a disaster at present, because any one political unit is too
likely to be swept by some ideology into disastrous policies. Political
diversity is necessary until there has been a great advance in
political science and a great advance in its acceptance by the
political process. The only thing that limits persistence in
disastrous policies in many countries is the observation that
other countries with different policies aren't suffering the
disaster. The Chinese Communists are even saying "Learn from
Taiwan?" although out of the other side of their mouths they
are demanding that we let them suppress the embarassing example
of different policies leading to prosperity.
While I favor spending about three times what we do now
on space exploration, I don't believe we can't survive without
it. The breeder reactor can provide sufficient energy for
hundreds of millions of years, and low grade ores can provide
minerals.
My main reasons for wanting more space exploration are:
1. Esthetic. Mankind expanding into space seems beautiful
to me. Also I like great technology for its own sake.
2. I would like to go in space myself. I am somewhat bitter
that environmental and anti-technological sentiment has made it quite
unlikely that I will be able to experience space travel - even a
vacation in a low orbital hotel. I still have some hopes for this
though.
3. Space colonization would disperse the human race sufficiently
so that nuclear war would be less likely to wipe out mankind.
4. Our world would benefit from having a new frontier where
individuals, groups and societies could develop to suit themselves.
5. Eventually, we'll explore the galaxy and beyond.
∂06-Jul-81 1333 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
I don't know enough about it to have an opinion.
∂06-Jul-81 1339 JMC
To: burstall at PARC-MAXC
How about lunch tomorrow or soon. I just got back from two months in
Europe.
∂06-Jul-81 1445 JMC
To: burstall at PARC-MAXC
How about Monday the 13th at the Little Hsi Nan on University and Emerson
at noon? It is the generally favored Chinese place.
∂06-Jul-81 1844 JMC
To: admin.mrc at SU-SCORE
Please phone 7-4430.
∂07-Jul-81 1210 JMC
To: FFL
I'll be here tomorrow to meet the Chinese girl.
∂07-Jul-81 1333 JMC
To: CG
We need to talk about your support for the summer.
∂08-Jul-81 1252 JMC
To: icl.redford at SU-SCORE
Congratulations on your point 3 about preferring not to get up to
fix the windmill.
∂08-Jul-81 1256 JMC
To: CLT
The blind robot puzzle is due to Donald Michie. As I remember it, the robot
was initially not supposed to be blind, and it was to be a more typical
AI problem. It's just that Michie or someone else noticed that it could
be solved even by a blind robot. My suggestion is either to call or
write Michie (possibly at U. Illinois or Edinburgh), ask Harry
Barrow at Fairchild (who probably was in Edinburgh at that time), or
look in my files or the library for a Michie memo.
∂08-Jul-81 1607 JMC
To: csd.tajnai at SU-SCORE
No. I have several papers to write before then, and I haven't
scheduled the time.
∂08-Jul-81 1728 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-KL
9:30 will be fine. See you then.
∂10-Jul-81 1814 JMC
To: FFL
I have informed Davis.
∂11-Jul-81 1426 JMC AI and philosophy meeting
To: CLT
It is now called the "Information and the Mind/Brain Conference" and
will be held Aug 21-23 at U.B.C. in Vancouver. In charge is Steven
Savitt, U. of B.C., Department of Philosophy. His telephone number
is 604-228-2511, and there is a postal strike in Canada.
∂11-Jul-81 1510 JMC
To: FFL
I need to change Bosack's L to A.
∂13-Jul-81 0014 JMC Beckman error
To: REM
I think Beckmann has slipped in omitting California water power, especially
since I believe he has mentioned it in the past. I believe it amounts
to 25 percent in the PG&E area, presumably less in Southern California.
For the "California Scientists' Statement on Nuclear Energy", I tried
to find out how much of our electric power comes from oil. 57 percent
is the figure that sticks in my mind. No coal is burned in California,
but some coal generated power comes from Four Corners.
∂13-Jul-81 1352 JMC
To: bledsoe at SRI-KL
Two numbers m and n are chosen such that 2 lesseq m lesseq n lesseq 99.
Mr. P is told the product, and Mr. S is told the sum. The following
dialog occurs:
Mr. P - I don't know the numbers.
Mr. S - I knew you didn't know them. I don't know them either.
Mr. P - Now I know them.
Mr. S - Now I know them.
What are the numbers?
∂13-Jul-81 1422 JMC
To: JMM
I would like to see you this afternoon or 3pm tomorrow.
∂13-Jul-81 1816 JMC
To: ROY
Thanks for fixing the Imlac.
∂13-Jul-81 2346 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
Thanks for the copy of "The Survival of Freedom".
∂14-Jul-81 1459 JMC vertical hold on my Datadisc
To: DCO at SU-AI
Besides my Datamedia problem, my Datadisc has just lost its vertical hold.
∂14-Jul-81 1513 JMC
To: oppen at PARC-MAXC
Previous message was to Don Coates and typed on moving screen.
∂14-Jul-81 1704 JMC Garland publishing
To: FFL
I want to recommend that Garland Publishing include Chris's thesis
in their series of outstanding computer science theses. For this
I would like to know the full name and address of the man I wrote
to before. It would have been between 1977 and 1979. If you can't
find it, you could phone and find the name of the boss.
∂14-Jul-81 2245 JMC
To: energy at MIT-MC
I think Beckman is right in deriding the idea that utilities should
fund conservation measures. Redford remarks that adding new capacity
is expensive, but it is no more expensive than it has been in the
past. The difference is that regulation drags out construction time
and high interest rates make that extremely expensive. Moreover, and
this is most important, the regulators don't permit amortizing the
real dollars that a plant cost but only the nominal dollars, and we
are in a period of high inflation. For this reason utility stocks
and bonds are not a good investment, and the utilities are constrained
to keep demand down.
A utility like Consolidated Edison that charges ten cents a kilowatt
hour (I think it's reached that), because it imports oil makes a profit,
while a utility like Commonwealth Edison which uses nuclear energy and
charges five cents a kilowatt hour loses money. I don't remember the
exact numbers.
We are paying dearly for this false economy. In the first place
there are oil imports for generating electricity. More important than
that, after we displace the use of oil for generating electricity by
nuclear energy (or less favorably coal), we can start using electricity
to displace other uses of oil and gas such as heating. If we ever develop
good electric cars or hydrogen powered cars, we will need the generating
capacity to charge the batteries or electrolyze the water to produce
hydrogen. (Maybe we can use nuclear energy to split water thermally).
Other countries less rich than the U.S. like France and Taiwan
have no problem in raising the capital for new electric plants. The
utility problem is strictly caused by the populist and environmentalist
regulators.
∂15-Jul-81 0041 JMC
To: csd.malik at SU-SCORE
The weekend will be ok. Call me when you return at home if necessary.
∂15-Jul-81 0100 JMC
To: LLW
When's a good time to phone?
∂15-Jul-81 1755 JMC
To: FFL
Yes, please. I like salmon.
∂15-Jul-81 1758 JMC
To: nilsson at SRI-AI
Yes, without exclusive rights, it's fine as I remember it.
∂16-Jul-81 1149 JMC
To: FFL
Remind me to look for old films for Sosna.
∂16-Jul-81 1600 JMC
To: FFL
CC: TOB
Fran: Please make a letter for my signature to whoever is in charge of
faculty club membership.
∂16-Jul-81 1442 TOB
John
I applied to the faculty club and was turned down. Would you sign
a letter in support of my membership?
Tom
Dear
I write to support Dr. Binford's petition for membership in the faculty club.
Dr. Binford, who has been at Stanford since 1970, is the leader of the Computer
Science Department's large research program in
computer vision and industrial automation. He has been recommended
by the Computer Science Department for promotion to the rank of Adjunct
Professor. He is in every way the kind of person who should be a member
of the Faculty Club.
Moreover, his use
of faculty club facilities would benefit our joint research program.
Sincerely,
∂17-Jul-81 1458 JMC
To: BYY
Any time till 5:30.
∂17-Jul-81 1702 JMC calling Woodward
To: RWF
He is a patent lawyer contacted by Stanford about password protection
for equipment. I talked with him and he thinks we need a bit more
specification. I'm reminding you that you agreed to take the next step
in getting things specified. I suggest you call Hank Woodward 326-0747
and meet with him.
∂18-Jul-81 1432 JMC
To: oaf at MIT-MC
No. I didn't study any Japanese till after my first visit in 1969.
∂18-Jul-81 1712 JMC
To: PJH
Where are you now? Why don't you make a new plan?
∂19-Jul-81 2117 JMC bug in prolog
To: ken at MIT-AI
In the prolog I got from you not doesn't seem to work correctly - always
giving the result NO. In particular, not(fail) and not(not(true)) give
this result. Defining nott in accordance with the definition of not in the
1978 User's Guide gives a predicate with the expected properties. Is
it broken chez vous also?
∂19-Jul-81 2136 JMC
To: LGC
5pm is ok.
∂20-Jul-81 1035 JMC
To: TW at SU-AI, DPB at SU-AI, feigenbaum at SUMEX-AIM,
buchanan at SUMEX-AIM, genesereth at SUMEX-AIM,
lenat at SUMEX-AIM
In principle I agree with having as few as possible items on the reading
list and therefore go along with the proposal. Might it be possible to
reduce the it a bit more?
∂20-Jul-81 1043 JMC
To: JRA
I was afraid things would turn out as you say they are.
∂20-Jul-81 1514 JMC return
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
I'm back now from France. Are you planning to be in the Stanford area
or at IJCAI this summer?
I don't know when I'll next be in the Washington area.
∂21-Jul-81 0006 JMC
To: LGC
Well, this is more comprehensible to me than the paper, so it must be the
terms in which philosophical controversies are couched that baffle me. Did
Cartwright have any reaction - or any of the other local philosophers?
∂21-Jul-81 0009 JMC
To: rms at MIT-AI
OK, but I may ask a similar favor some time.
1. Say again what file it is.
2. Are you coming out this Fall, and if so, can I choose the time?
Probably after October 1 would be best.
3. Are there any prolog hackers at M.I.T.?
∂21-Jul-81 1111 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
How would you like an article advocating one way missions to the moon
and possibly Mars? These aren't suicide missions, because we are
committed to resupply the astronauts, but they are committed to stay
there for a long time - perhaps even the rest of their lives. The point
is that the rocketry required for one way missions plus resupply is
vastly less than that required to return people, and people who are
there permanently can do vastly more exploration. The risks are no
greater than those endured by nineteenth century explorers. The trouble
is the fear of being blamed by the media - so nothing must go wrong.
We need to overcome this fear.
Another possibility is some version of my article on the feasibility
of interstellar travel based on present science.
∂21-Jul-81 1128 JMC
To: human-nets at MIT-AI
The article about Data General's Eagle contributes one amusing fact.
The rush project described was needed, because Data General didn't
realize that 16 bit addresses were becoming obsolete until D.E.C.
came out with VAX. The trade press has been trumpeting the decreasing
cost of memory since the early seventies. Machine designers have
always reserved too few bits for address. I remember arguing with
the designers of Illiac 2 in 1958 that 8192 words was not enough
memory for a number cruncher. The trouble is that the engineers
can find lots of "interesting" uses for the bits in the instruction
word, and using them for mere address is dull. Curiously, while IBM
is generally reactionary, since the IBM 704 came out in 1955, they
have usually (but not always) done better than their competition in
providing large addresses. However, the 704 would have had an 18 bit
address instead of 15 but for 5 cute instructions.
∂21-Jul-81 1450 JMC
To: paul.rosenbloom at CMU-10A
There is no reference. I invented it around 1957 or 1958 and named
it the killer heuristic at that time. It was first used by Paul
Abrahams in a two-move-mate program based on my legal move routines.
Abrahams verified that it did indeed reduce the search required to
do two-move-mate problems, but I'm pretty sure he didn't publish
either. I can't recall if it was used in the kalah programs written
at M.I.T. and Stanford which were described in early Stanford AI
memos.
∂22-Jul-81 0136 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
I remember your citing Frosch as having said that it would
be impossible to return to the moon in the 1980s. Of course, a giant
space program could do it, but there may be a way to do it for a cost
the Reagan administration would pay. The question is whether the
Shuttle could land enough payload on the moon for a one way mission.
Naturally, supply rockets could land first and there would be
additional supply rockets afterwards. Do you know or do you have
a reference to the payload the Shuttle could land on the moon?
While I was thinking about including this in my article, it might
be worthwhile to consider launching the trial balloon in a better
way. Perhaps even the Citizens' Space Council might risk its
prestige by suggesting it first. Or maybe it would be better
for them to support it rather than initiate it. Anyway apart from
the politics, I will work up a draft, but it will be light on
details.
∂22-Jul-81 0357 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-AI
How about 3pm today?
∂22-Jul-81 0738 JMC
To: JRA
No, but I suppose there must be people at SRI in the Computer Science Dept.
∂22-Jul-81 1620 JMC visit
To: stan at SRI-AI, nilsson at SRI-AI, konolige at SRI-AI
Unless you especially want me to, I won't come tomorrow or until the
beginning of August. Nils mentioned starting a new person on CBCL,
so I'll come when and if I could help initiate him. Otherwise, it
may be better to wait till after deduction month.
∂23-Jul-81 0001 JMC
To: FFL
lib.lst[1,jmc] has been renamed LIBRAR[1,JMC].
∂23-Jul-81 0001 JMC
To: ME
Thanks for restoring those files
∂23-Jul-81 1119 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-AI
That's right. They only did the arithmetic.
∂23-Jul-81 1128 JMC
To: FFL
Yes, I'll go to lunch on Monday.
∂23-Jul-81 1350 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
I have Stoyan twice in the Soviet Union and had a considerable correspondence
with him when he was writing about the history of Lisp. I guess I could
match your $500 contribution, but I don't have a job for him. Can you
MAIL me his current address and phone - if you have it. I presume he
is in West Germany now.
∂23-Jul-81 1555 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
I will be at Stanford on the 17th but must leave for Boston on the
18th. Where is Stoyan now?
∂23-Jul-81 1616 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
Let's see the titles, although there may not be many people around at the
time. As you may know, it requires special effort to get a visa that
permits payment of travel expenses and even more effort to be able to
pay an honorarium. I am counting on you to get that disentangled.
What is his actual address and phone number?
∂23-Jul-81 1651 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
Stanford has lately been enforcing the rule against it.
∂23-Jul-81 1923 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
No doubt RAND knows how to do it, but I understand that if he has a letter
of invitation that offers to pay expenses or an honorarium, he can get the
kind of visa that allows him to accept it. Ask your local bureaucrat.
∂23-Jul-81 2129 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
Ok, but what are Stoyan's address and phone.
∂23-Jul-81 2143 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
Thanks for the address and phone.
Are you acquainted with the Charles Babbage Foundation, which is concerned
with the history of computing? It occurs to me that they might be interested
in supporting Stoyan's research in the history of LISP if he wants to
continue it. Do you know his job situation in Germany? Does he have
prospects there and does he want to stay there. By the way, the money
bags on IJCAI is Don Walker at SRI. If you don't know him, I can try
for Stoyan, although I already arranged for a subsidy for someone else
with him. What has been your contacts with him?
∂24-Jul-81 1422 JMC
To: wertz at SRI-KL
If it's you playing HAUNT logged in as PG, give good reason or stop.
∂24-Jul-81 2232 JMC Stoyan books
To: PP
If you still have them, I'd like them back. Stoyan is in West Germany,
and Tony Hearn of RAND is trying to arrange a visit to the U.S. and to
IJCAI. I want to take another look at what he wrote about the history
of Lisp.
∂25-Jul-81 1342 JMC
To: human-nets at MIT-AI
I cannot accept the Mother Jones article as a clerk's view of office
automation without further verification. The problem is that Mother
Jones has a prejudice that new technology introduced in a capitalist
society is more likely than not to be harmful to workers. Therefore,
they encourage writers who look for facts tending to confirm this view
and solicit statements from workers confirming it and to ignore improvements
in working conditions resulting from the new technology. I scanned
the Mother Jones article, but I forget whether it mentions the benefits
of not having typewriters clacking away in an office. I assume that
Barbara Garson is a writer not a clerk.
I have not observed mass clerical work, but I have observed the effect
of the use of text editors (like E and EMACS) and text formatters (like
PUB and TEX and SCRIBE) on secretaries and typists. The effect has been
to differentiate skills. Those who have learned to be at home with
computers and use them in a sophisticated way have a premium skill.
We are allowed to pay them something extra, but not enough. Namely,
they are often hired away from us by companies with less rigid personnel
departments than Stanford University.
Productivity measurement has two sides to it. On the one hand it lends
itself to all kinds of petty tyranny. On the other hand it increases
productivity which makes the company less resistant to wage increases.
A company will take a long strike if the consequences of giving in to
the demands are to put it from a profitable position to a loss, while
it will resist much less if it can do so without reducing its profits
much and can hope to make up the immediate cut in profits by an increase
in volume. Also a productive company will bid higher for skills it
wants and will be more likely to match offers from the outside.
∂25-Jul-81 1439 JMC
To: KDO
326-6065
∂25-Jul-81 1730 JMC
To: TOB
What more would be required for the system to run on the 4331?
∂27-Jul-81 1805 JMC
To: RPG
I don't anticipate that Doyle will be there - 252 I guess.
∂27-Jul-81 1816 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
I think it can be changed and I suspect it must.
∂27-Jul-81 1827 JMC
∂27-Jul-81 1805 JRP forwarding barwise's mail
should barwise's (byy) forwarding address be put on the
list? it is, barwise.uwisc@udel. I would doso if
i knew how. j.perry
∂27-Jul-81 1827 JMC
To: ME
∂27-Jul-81 1805 JRP forwarding barwise's mail
should barwise's (byy) forwarding address be put on the
list? it is, barwise.uwisc@udel. I would doso if
i knew how. j.perry
∂28-Jul-81 1437 JMC
To: PJH
I'm back at Stanford, I will be at IJCAI and also at the logic programming
meeting on the Queen Mary just before. See you.
∂29-Jul-81 1545 JMC visit
To: bledsoe at SRI-AI
Would it be convenient for me to visit you tomorrow AM with Kurt and
exchange views, either in parallel or in sequence about the S and P
and related problems? Friday would also be feasible. I understand
this is your last week at SRI.
∂29-Jul-81 1623 JMC
To: csd.brown at SU-SCORE
I met Fan in Peking and would be glad to see him again. I don't know about
half a day.
∂29-Jul-81 1750 JMC
To: csd.dbrown at SU-SCORE
I met Fan in Peking and would be glad to see him again. I don't know about
half a day.
∂30-Jul-81 1110 JMC
To: schauble.multics at MIT-MULTICS, human-nets at MIT-AI
It would seem that the problem described by Schauble is not with C but
with the 8086. If you must use 20 bit pointers on a machine with
16 bit arithmetic, there will be slowness regardless of language.
Presumably microprocessors with longer words weren't considered to
be available when Bell made its choice.
∂02-Aug-81 1329 JMC
To: energy at MIT-MC
Is Kerns's reference to the actual Edward Teller or some canonical Edward
Teller whose position on all issues is extreme by definition? Edward
Teller's recent book "Energy from Heaven and Earth" takes positions that I
would characterize as intermediate between Kerns's and Pournelle's. If
the real Teller is meant, what positions are regarded as extreme?
∂03-Aug-81 1353 JMC New technical reports
To: admin.librar at SU-SCORE
1. The list of new technical reports looks very useful but also formidable.
How many months does that list cover?
When referring to a file at SAIL it is helpful to keep the reference all
on one line as in NEWTRS[LIB,DOC]. That way the E command XPO allows the
user to switch to that file without retyping its name. You wrote NEWTRS
[LIB,DOC] so the command didn't work till I changed it.
Anyway I think the new system will be very helpful.
∂03-Aug-81 1421 JMC
To: admin.library at SU-SCORE
1. The list of new technical reports looks very useful but also formidable.
How many months does that list cover?
2. When referring to a file at SAIL it is helpful to keep the reference all
on one line as in NEWTRS[LIB,DOC]. That way the E command XPO allows the
user to switch to that file without retyping its name. You wrote NEWTRS
[LIB,DOC] so the command didn't work till I changed it.
Anyway I think the new system will be very helpful.
∂04-Aug-81 0138 JMC Meeting with Martin Marietta that may be worth a grant
To: TOB
Are you available tomorrow at 1 or 2 for this purpose?
∂04-Aug-81 0143 JMC
To: TOB
OK, my office
∂04-Aug-81 0144 JMC
To: pourne at MIT-MC
Certainly. I'll miss Sunday, that's all.
∂04-Aug-81 0145 JMC
To: JMM
CC: JK
Please check promptly whether the new EKL does append properly.
∂04-Aug-81 1048 JMC
To: REM
I don't recall whether it even mentions solar power satellites; it certainly
doesn't emphasize it.
∂04-Aug-81 1256 JMC
To: csd.genesereth at SU-SCORE
Surely you will be criticized for not calling it MS.
∂04-Aug-81 1539 JMC tomorrow
To: LLW
I can come at 10 or at 2 your convenience. Besides seeing the S-1 Project,
I would like to talk with you about a variety of topics.
∂04-Aug-81 2340 JMC
To: LLW
I'll come at 2pm unless I hear otherwise from you.
∂05-Aug-81 0058 JMC
To: ROY
The imlac vertical deflection has conked out.
∂05-Aug-81 0141 JMC
To: ROY
It recovered after a rest.
∂05-Aug-81 1941 JMC
To: csd.tajnai at SU-SCORE
CC: PMF at SU-AI
Yes he did give a seminar and it did meet the requirement.
∂05-Aug-81 1944 JMC
To: JMM
Let's talk about it, but in the meantime, you should prepare versions doing
it both ways. My intuition is that one should be able to have the best of
both worlds - get both from one proof and make the simplification rules do
the verifying.
∂06-Aug-81 1040 JMC
To: CET at SU-AI, DDY at SU-AI, RPG at SU-AI, PAM at SU-AI,
ROD at SU-AI, FFL at SU-AI
Since the issue is important to some people, let me reverse my decision.
We'll continue AI memo numbers for at least another year. Fran will
assign them.
∂06-Aug-81 1350 JMC
To: JMM
It might be best to do the proof of termination first and then use this
to validate a reinterpretation or slight transformation of the function
definition so that it is assumed to be total.
∂06-Aug-81 1355 JMC
To: JMM, JK, CLT, FGA
Meeting Friday at 1pm about program property proving for CS206.
∂06-Aug-81 1614 JMC adjunct
To: TOB
It seems to have fallen into a crack between Ullman and Golub, but
Golub now promises to find out its state and pursue it.
∂08-Aug-81 1046 JMC meeting
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
Will you be in Boston Tuesday evening August 18, and would you like to
get together then? I will come in that day for a meeting on the following
day and go to L.A. Wednesday evening.
∂08-Aug-81 1436 JMC
To: FFL
dreyfu.1
∂08-Aug-81 1556 JMC
To: CLT
∂08-Aug-81 0254 JMM associativity of append
To: JMC, JK
CC: JMM
The proof of assoc of apppend using the approach suggested by Carolyn
is ready - prf3.ppr[ekl,jmm]. It is 55 lines of which the first 30 lines
are general declarations and axioms etc and 25 lines are specific to
append .This proof did not use the more powerful commands like DECSIMP
and can be tightened to about 15 lines( I think !)
-- Jitendra
Please look at his proof. Even 15 lines looks like too much, and I
think you can easily make suggestions either for improving the proof
or EKL.
∂08-Aug-81 1649 JMC
To: CLT
OK, though I think you'd find what JMM has done transparent.
∂08-Aug-81 1702 JMC jmm
To: CLT
He is shy enough already and probably easily discouraged even though quite
smart. He'll soon learn that some regard his efforts as irrelevant and
will stop offering ideas.
∂08-Aug-81 1751 JMC
To: JK
I now recall the meeting was in Tampere. Is there such a place?
∂08-Aug-81 1757 JMC
To: rguest at UTAH-20, hearn at RAND-AI
To Herbert Stoyan:
What dates do you have in mind for Stanford visit? I'll be gone from
August 18 to August 28. John Allen will probably be accessible. Whom
do you wish to visit at Xerox?
∂08-Aug-81 1813 JMC
To: cbf at MIT-MC
Password is 848-0898.
∂09-Aug-81 1437 JMC
To: JMM
The proof seems to be all one line.
∂10-Aug-81 0120 JMC advice request on Chinese inquiry
To: engelmore at SU-SCORE
Included in a letter from Ma Xiwen, who visited here from Peking
University, was the following:
"Recently, I'm trying to set up an AIL in the Beijing Institute
of Computer Science (different from Prof. Tang's Institute). I
want to know if I can get some softwares as FOL or PASCAL verifier
(if we have MACLISP or SAIL or PASCAL or even a computer which is
consistent with PDP-10); I would like to hear any suggestion on it."
I have no idea how he proposes to get a computer "consistent with
PDP-10", and I have no opinion on the desirability of giving him
the programs he is interested in, except to say that
Ma is a basic researcher by background and that the interests
expressed elsewhere in the letter are in basic research topics.
Is anyone in DARPA likely to be interested in this inquiry? Is
there a definite policy or are cases decided individually?
I don't suppose there is any great rush to answer the inquiry. When
I next write, which probably won't be very soon, I am inclined to say
that I am making inquiries about the possibility of giving him FOL
but that the other programs belong to other organizations, which I
would name.
∂10-Aug-81 1122 JMC
To: csd.engelmore at SU-SCORE
Included in a letter from Ma Xiwen, who visited here from Peking
University, was the following:
"Recently, I'm trying to set up an AIL in the Beijing Institute
of Computer Science (different from Prof. Tang's Institute). I
want to know if I can get some softwares as FOL or PASCAL verifier
(if we have MACLISP or SAIL or PASCAL or even a computer which is
consistent with PDP-10); I would like to hear any suggestion on it."
I have no idea how he proposes to get a computer "consistent with
PDP-10", and I have no opinion on the desirability of giving him
the programs he is interested in, except to say that
Ma is a basic researcher by background and that the interests
expressed elsewhere in the letter are in basic research topics.
Is anyone in DARPA likely to be interested in this inquiry? Is
there a definite policy or are cases decided individually?
I don't suppose there is any great rush to answer the inquiry. When
I next write, which probably won't be very soon, I am inclined to say
that I am making inquiries about the possibility of giving him FOL
but that the other programs belong to other organizations, which I
would name.
∂10-Aug-81 1523 JMC
To: FFL
stich.1[let,jmc].
∂10-Aug-81 1839 JMC
To: FFL
Please check that my reservations are all on existent flights.
∂11-Aug-81 1208 JMC
To: rguest at UTAH-20
To: Herbert Stoyan
1. Friedman and Wise are at the University of Indiana in Bloomington,
Friedman, Daniel 812 337-4885
2. I will try to round up some people interested in the history of LISP.
3. Do you need help with travel from the airport, hotel, etc?
4. Where are you at the moment? How can I telephone you?
5. My telephone numbers are: home 415 857-0672, office 415 497-4430.
∂11-Aug-81 1538 JMC
To: darden at SUMEX-AIM
Have a good camping trip. Don't get bitten by too many mosquitoes.
∂11-Aug-81 1732 JMC seminar Friday
To: FFL
Please find a room, say 252, for a seminar.
Special seminar: logic programming
Speaker: Alain Colmerauer, University of Marseilles, France (Professor
Colmerauer is the inventor of PROLOG).
Time: 3pm, Friday, August 14
∂11-Aug-81 1745 JMC
To: FFL
Should Cuthbert Hurd come looking for some books, they're on my file cabinet.
∂12-Aug-81 1514 JMC Poole on file server
To: REG at SU-AI, VRP at SU-AI
1. F5 with 256K and ethernet 55-65K.
2. 20K per 670 megabyte disk
3. 30-35K per 125 in/sec 6250bpi tape drive. He'll look into "streaming mode"
drive.
4. delivery could be 4 months from now
later will be 75 days delivery
5. substituting F4 (about 2060 speed), raises basic cost to 125 to 130K
(F4 with megaword, usual peripherals is 300K)
6. will look into bigger disks, claims all RP drives are CDC. He can get
them but sometimes with longer deliveries.
Therefore if a system with 4 gigabytes, the F4, one 6250 bit drive and
256K main memory will do the job, our cost would be $220K. We might
need more memory, and we might want more disk to start. I would prefer
larger disks, and Poole will look into it, but I think this constitutes
an existence proof, so we should proceed promptly to get a decision to
build a file system.
∂12-Aug-81 1520 JMC
To: GIO at SU-AI
∂12-Aug-81 1514 JMC Poole on file server
To: REG at SU-AI, VRP at SU-AI
1. F5 with 256K and ethernet 55-65K.
2. 20K per 670 megabyte disk
3. 30-35K per 125 in/sec 6250bpi tape drive. He'll look into "streaming mode"
drive.
4. delivery could be 4 months from now
later will be 75 days delivery
5. substituting F4 (about 2060 speed), raises basic cost to 125 to 130K
(F4 with megaword, usual peripherals is 300K)
6. will look into bigger disks, claims all RP drives are CDC. He can get
them but sometimes with longer deliveries.
Therefore if a system with 4 gigabytes, the F4, one 6250 bit drive and
256K main memory will do the job, our cost would be $220K. We might
need more memory, and we might want more disk to start. I would prefer
larger disks, and Poole will look into it, but I think this constitutes
an existence proof, so we should proceed promptly to get a decision to
build a file system.
∂12-Aug-81 1527 JMC
To: FFL
I forgot to ask you to post announcements of Colmerauer seminar.
∂12-Aug-81 1654 JMC
To: GIO at SU-AI
My proposal is for Ralph Gorin to "take on the hardware". I believe we can
pay for it with Computer Facility funds, and I would prefer to proceed
promptly. From my own point of view, which regards purges and the removal
of old reports from the file system as the primary problem to be overcome,
the file computer would be a big improvement at this price even if all
transfers to it were done by explicit FTP by the user.
Brian Reid has software at SCORE and perhaps on the VAXen that permits
a file computer to be treated like a user disk pack. Something similar
can be done at SAIL. No one has automatic migration yet. Your plan
to store information rather than files (if I understand it) would require
further adaptations. The other schemes mentioned are all compatible with
starting with FTP and maintaining that capability while more advanced
facilities are implemented. I believe that you would also have to work
in that mode. There needs to be a meeting to sort out the various ideas
for file service and see which can be implemented.
My understanding is that the IBM 3380 is going to be substantially delayed,
and there is no present sign of cheap imitations.
∂12-Aug-81 1714 JMC
To: csl.bkr at SU-SCORE
∂12-Aug-81 1520 JMC
To: GIO at SU-AI
∂12-Aug-81 1514 JMC Poole on file server
To: REG at SU-AI, VRP at SU-AI
1. F5 with 256K and ethernet 55-65K.
2. 20K per 670 megabyte disk
3. 30-35K per 125 in/sec 6250bpi tape drive. He'll look into "streaming mode"
drive.
4. delivery could be 4 months from now
later will be 75 days delivery
5. substituting F4 (about 2060 speed), raises basic cost to 125 to 130K
(F4 with megaword, usual peripherals is 300K)
6. will look into bigger disks, claims all RP drives are CDC. He can get
them but sometimes with longer deliveries.
Therefore if a system with 4 gigabytes, the F4, one 6250 bit drive and
256K main memory will do the job, our cost would be $220K. We might
need more memory, and we might want more disk to start. I would prefer
larger disks, and Poole will look into it, but I think this constitutes
an existence proof, so we should proceed promptly to get a decision to
build a file system.
∂12-Aug-81 2322 JMC regular expressions formed from rewrite rules
To: JK, JMM, CLT, FGA, RWW
Some useful compound rewrite rules can be expressed by regular expressions
in simpler rules.
1. If r1,...,rk are rules, r1+ ... + rk means apply some ri.
2. r1. ... .rk means apply the ri successively, rk first.
3. r* means apply the rule r as long as possible.
The usual way of combining rules corresponds to the regular
expression (r1+ ... +rk)*. If we want to apply some rule such
as the definition of a LISP function only once, we may want
combinations like (r1+r2)*.recdef.(r1+r2)* which uses the rule
recdef exactly once and the others as much as possible.
So far this seems to me to be only a notational convenience rather
than a relation between the theory of regular expressions and
the theory of rewrite rules. Other operators on rules may also
be wanted. For example, as Jitendra also suggested, we may want
to regard using an equation in the opposite direction as a formal
inverse. Other formal inverses can be written, but probably require
some problem solving capability to be used, but the system can simply
regard an inverse as inapplicable if it is incapable of solving the
problem presented.
We may also want to be able to express control over what parts of
an expression are to be rewritten. Thus in proving the associativity
of append we want to attack only the first *.
Needless to say, we would need to be able to write such definitions as
r4 ← (r1+r2)*.r3.(r1+r2)*
and then be able to use r4. We may even want to parametrize such definitions
so that we can readily use a rule which consists mainly of general lisp
definitions but takes the definition of a function under study as a
parameter. Thus we might write
defsimp(fndef) ← R1.fndef.R2
and then use defsimp(appenddef) when proving facts about append.
We can discuss this today at our 11am meeting.
∂13-Aug-81 1333 JMC
To: sharon.burks at CMU-10A
If Nov. 17 or 19 is feasible, I could combine it with another trip to the
East Coast. Otherwise November 4 is best. The title will be "Non-monotonic
reasoning and ambiguity tolerance".
∂13-Aug-81 1416 JMC
To: JK
I tried to declare car as a prefix so that the number of parentheses
in formulas would be reduced. It didn't work. The declaration was
(DECL (CAR CDR) |GROUND→GROUND| CONSTANT nil prefix 1010)
but (assume |a = car x|) and (assume |a = (car x)) both generated
the message "expected another op before X". Allowing one variable
functions as prefix operators greatly reduces the parenthesis level
and increases the readability of expressions.
∂13-Aug-81 1433 JMC
To: JK
(∀e phi |λv.(v=copy(v))| 19) gets ;UNBOUND ARGUMENT MUST BE PROPER LIST
∂13-Aug-81 1437 JMC
To: JK
The above occurs after dskin of lisp.ax[e81,jmc].
∂13-Aug-81 1659 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-AI
Was it you wanted Sato thesis which is now available.
∂13-Aug-81 1720 JMC
To: konolige at SRI-AI
ok
∂13-Aug-81 2158 JMC
To: JK
Thanks. Perhaps RPG can get something done about the compiler bug.
∂14-Aug-81 1404 JMC
To: bobrow at PARC-MAXC
I agree with all your proposals and plan to be at the meeting.
∂14-Aug-81 1445 JMC
To: JK
Now that I have gotten a bit used to it, I find EKL very pleasant.
∂15-Aug-81 1333 JMC
To: REM
Everyone has been zapped including me. It is being fixed.
∂16-Aug-81 1304 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
What is Stoyan's flight?
∂16-Aug-81 1748 JMC
To: CDR
Are you interested in Paella dinner with me and Colmerauer, etc. 6:30?
∂16-Aug-81 1805 JMC
To: CDR
Too late. I had to get someone else.
∂16-Aug-81 2015 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
I lost the paper, but I found the flight number and will meet him.
∂16-Aug-81 2332 JMC
To: hearn at RAND-AI
Gottim. What's the current financial arrangement?
∂17-Aug-81 0205 JMC se2
To: csd.genesereth at SU-SCORE
I forgot to ask you if you were interested in joining Stanford SE2 (Scientists
and engineers for secure energy or coming to a meeting. We meet rather
rarely, and the next will be late September or early October. I am
chairman, and Professor Elliott Bloom of SLAC is secretary. If you
like, I will ask him to put you on the list to be notified of the next
meeting.
∂17-Aug-81 1156 JMC
To: sharon.burks at CMU-10A
My other commitment in the East is on the 18th, but I could perhaps
come a day early.
∂17-Aug-81 1201 JMC
To: csd.tajnai at SU-SCORE
1:15-2:30 for CS258 is fine.
∂17-Aug-81 1202 JMC
To: csd.tajnai at SU-SCORE
That's what I thought you meant.
∂17-Aug-81 1306 JMC
To: "@SERVER.LIS[E81,JMC]" at SU-AI
I did send my message to Brian Reid and had a long conversation with him.
I think we agree about enough things. In my view it is essential to
subordinate the goal of pursuing research interests with that of relieving
the file crunch and give the latter priority for CCF funds. Of course, if
we can't rais facility money and do get a research contract, then the
reverse priority might be required.
However, I think that so long as we implement FTP to the file server
promptly, we can pursue Brian's goal of allowing page-at-a-time reference
to files which is clearly much better. Moreover, Brian is far enough
advanced in the latter and sufficiently sympathetic to the former that I
think there will be no problem. Gio Wiederhold also has research goals in
this area, but because they involve databases and not merely files, it
isn't so clear that they fit into the file server project itself, though
it might be feasible to put some hooks into the file server for his
benefit.
With regard to the conversation with Poole, I think we need one more
thing than was mentioned in my message. While various disks may be
most cost-effective at present, most likely disks based on the IBM
3380 technology will be most cost-effective fairly soon, and others
beyond that later. Therefore, it is very desirable that the file
server have some reserve in the speed of file transfer that it allows.
I will ask Poole to add this question to those he has promised to
look into.
I believe that it is possible to promptly develop a plan that will meet
the various needs. The big issue is whether it is to be financed by
the CCF borrowing from Stanford and adding the amortization and expenses
to the rate base or whether a proposal to ARPA or NSF is required. I
encountered Bill Massy (Stanford V.P. for finance) at Tressidder and
he is agreeable in principle to Stanford financing it. I favor self-
financing, because getting gov't money will take a relatively long time.
∂17-Aug-81 1339 JMC
To: minsky at MIT-AI
Can I stay at your house Tuesday night before III board meeting.
∂17-Aug-81 1857 JMC directory for Herbert Stoyan
To: csd.hill at SU-SCORE
I have created 1,hxs for a guest Herbert Stoyan. It can be killed
after Aug. 21.
That's right only for 2 days
∂18-Aug-81 0304 JMC transparencies
To: FFL
We need to stock the kind of transparency material on which one writes
with a special pen and also to stock the pens. See you in two weeks.
∂18-Aug-81 1611 JMC via MIT-MC definitions via eval
To: CLT
I worked on compiling function definitions on the
and the arguments inhabiting the initial a-list. Mutual
recursion offers little problem apparently, and LABEL is
unneeded. A lot of simplification is required to get the
recursion equation, and I have some new ideas on how to
control simplification. Maybe more later.
∂18-Aug-81 1636 JMC
To: CLT
If the simplifications are individually legal, no metatheorems
need be proved to justify a control strategy for using them.
The results will be correct, and the only question is whether
they are what the user wants.
∂19-Aug-81 0835 JMC via MIT-AI progress on apply
To: CLT
You may find it interesting to look at apply.ax[e81,jmc] which contains and
incomplete sketch of my present approach. I don't expect another chance
at the ARPAnet before I get back, but I'll phone you soon whether there is anything
more to say or not.
Love,