perm filename S87.IN[LET,JMC] blob
sn#842594 filedate 1987-07-01 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00596 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00068 00002 ∂01-Apr-87 0815 RA flight reservation for Lawrence Kensas
C00069 00003 ∂01-Apr-87 1203 PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU '87-April-tecrpts-mailinglist
C00073 00004 ∂01-Apr-87 1701 VAL Charles M. Pigott circumscription
C00074 00005 ∂02-Apr-87 1250 ME Prancing Pony Bill
C00076 00006 ∂02-Apr-87 2359 JJW Meeting
C00077 00007 ∂03-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00078 00008 ∂03-Apr-87 1121 RA Dr. Brown, Univ. of Kensas
C00079 00009 ∂03-Apr-87 1534 RA Frank Harary
C00080 00010 ∂03-Apr-87 2342 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU do you mind?
C00081 00011 ∂04-Apr-87 0345 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU scheduling message #1
C00085 00012 ∂04-Apr-87 0417 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Scheduling message #2
C00087 00013 ∂04-Apr-87 0444 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Scheduling message #3
C00101 00014 ∂05-Apr-87 1011 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK AAAI workshop proposal
C00107 00015 ∂06-Apr-87 0951 guibas@navajo.stanford.edu meeting on foundations candidates, 4/7, 2:30 pm, MJH 146
C00109 00016 ∂06-Apr-87 1339 binford@whitney.stanford.edu congratulations
C00110 00017 ∂06-Apr-87 1546 @Score.Stanford.EDU:AIMAG@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Party for Bob Engelmore
C00113 00018 ∂06-Apr-87 1737 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU EES285 as an elective
C00118 00019 ∂07-Apr-87 1503 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu help
C00157 00020 ∂07-Apr-87 1726 PAPA@score.stanford.edu Friedman
C00159 00021 ∂07-Apr-87 1740 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu repeat message
C00198 00022 ∂07-Apr-87 1846 daniel@mojave.stanford.edu David McAllester
C00202 00023 ∂08-Apr-87 0826 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: Friedman
C00204 00024 ∂08-Apr-87 1014 RA John Nafeh
C00205 00025 ∂08-Apr-87 1102 CLT darpa
C00206 00026 ∂08-Apr-87 2116 forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
C00208 00027 ∂09-Apr-87 1104 mcdermott-drew@yale.ARPA Hopcroft report
C00251 00028 ∂09-Apr-87 1112 RA Pam Widrin, Alliant
C00252 00029 ∂09-Apr-87 1120 RA Sarah
C00253 00030 ∂09-Apr-87 1325 @RELAY.CS.NET,@ai.toronto.edu,@utterly.ai.toronto.edu:hector@mc.lcs.mit.edu Mcdermott critique
C00259 00031 ∂09-Apr-87 1343 VAL re: Mcdermott critique
C00260 00032 ∂09-Apr-87 1417 PERLAKI@Score.Stanford.EDU airline ticket
C00261 00033 ∂09-Apr-87 2038 AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU AI
C00263 00034 ∂10-Apr-87 1343 JJW Alliant
C00264 00035 ∂10-Apr-87 1349 JJW Qlisp meeting time
C00265 00036 ∂10-Apr-87 1524 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Friedman
C00267 00037 ∂10-Apr-87 1641 CHEESEMAN%PLU@ames-io.ARPA Uncertainty in AI workshop
C00270 00038 ∂10-Apr-87 1733 LES re: Programming and math
C00272 00039 ∂10-Apr-87 1911 POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: booby trapped nuclear weapons?
C00274 00040 ∂10-Apr-87 1941 JK
C00275 00041 ∂10-Apr-87 2318 TRACZ@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Programming and math
C00276 00042 ∂11-Apr-87 0936 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: Re: Hopcroft Report]
C00282 00043 ∂11-Apr-87 1019 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu your papers
C00284 00044 ∂11-Apr-87 1057 CLT Okner
C00285 00045 ∂11-Apr-87 1101 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: vis comm
C00287 00046 ∂11-Apr-87 1121 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: vis comm
C00289 00047 ∂11-Apr-87 1358 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Mitchell
C00291 00048 ∂11-Apr-87 2147 forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu re: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
C00293 00049 ∂11-Apr-87 2235 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Marines
C00294 00050 ∂11-Apr-87 2238 LES re: reges@score
C00295 00051 ∂12-Apr-87 0800 JMC
C00296 00052 ∂13-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00297 00053 ∂13-Apr-87 1000 JMC
C00298 00054 ∂14-Apr-87 0842 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU chandra's request
C00299 00055 ∂14-Apr-87 1040 jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu NSF Report
C00301 00056 ∂14-Apr-87 1200 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU re: do you mind?
C00302 00057 ∂14-Apr-87 1200 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Igor Rivin course on algebraic computation.
C00303 00058 ∂14-Apr-87 1940 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Computer Go Journal
C00305 00059 ∂14-Apr-87 1953 JK EKL (Thank you)
C00308 00060 ∂14-Apr-87 1956 JK
C00314 00061 ∂15-Apr-87 0629 darden@mimsy.umd.edu history
C00316 00062 ∂15-Apr-87 1449 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU Please Call Mike Hirsch of AP
C00317 00063 ∂15-Apr-87 1546 CLT Qlisp meetings this quarter
C00318 00064 ∂16-Apr-87 0000 JMC
C00319 00065 ∂16-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00320 00066 ∂16-Apr-87 1031 guibas@src.dec.com foundations appointments
C00322 00067 ∂16-Apr-87 1052 PAPA@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00324 00068 ∂16-Apr-87 1058 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00326 00069 ∂16-Apr-87 1131 SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00328 00070 ∂16-Apr-87 1135 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00331 00071 ∂16-Apr-87 1139 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00333 00072 ∂16-Apr-87 1449 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM jmc talk
C00334 00073 ∂16-Apr-87 1509 PAPA@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00336 00074 ∂16-Apr-87 1516 SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
C00338 00075 ∂16-Apr-87 1602 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU Mike Hirsch called again just now
C00339 00076 ∂16-Apr-87 1750 RPG Lisp Pointers
C00340 00077 ∂16-Apr-87 2305 RWF re: The necessity defense
C00341 00078 ∂17-Apr-87 0700 JMC
C00342 00079 ∂17-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00343 00080 ∂17-Apr-87 0930 JMC
C00344 00081 ∂17-Apr-87 0958 guibas@src.dec.com Komlos
C00346 00082 ∂17-Apr-87 0959 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: The necessity defense
C00348 00083 ∂17-Apr-87 1045 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU SPEAKER ON THE 28TH.
C00351 00084 ∂17-Apr-87 1058 CLT
C00357 00085 ∂17-Apr-87 1106 GCOLE@Sushi.Stanford.EDU The "Cabin Boy" Case Reference
C00358 00086 ∂17-Apr-87 1108 CLT
C00359 00087 ∂17-Apr-87 1256 AI.PETRIE@MCC.COM Failed Demonstrations
C00361 00088 ∂17-Apr-87 1300 JMC
C00362 00089 ∂17-Apr-87 1348 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: News?]
C00367 00090 ∂17-Apr-87 1421 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: March 13 message
C00368 00091 ∂17-Apr-87 1510 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00371 00092 ∂17-Apr-87 1626 acken@sonoma.stanford.edu The History of Vietnam, a question.
C00373 00093 ∂17-Apr-87 1714 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: The necessity defense
C00375 00094 ∂17-Apr-87 1732 hafner%corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu@RELAY.CS.NET Banquet Speech at the AI and Law conference
C00379 00095 ∂17-Apr-87 1746 acken@sonoma.stanford.edu re: The History of Vietnam, a question.
C00381 00096 ∂17-Apr-87 2121 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu Notes on Improving Lisp
C00383 00097 ∂18-Apr-87 1700 JMC
C00384 00098 ∂18-Apr-87 2329 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
C00387 00099 ∂18-Apr-87 2351 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
C00389 00100 ∂18-Apr-87 2351 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
C00390 00101 ∂19-Apr-87 0006 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
C00392 00102 ∂19-Apr-87 0009 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: These two are all from Uttar Pradesh in last two weeks
C00393 00103 ∂19-Apr-87 0141 TERP@Score.Stanford.EDU re: antifreeze(?) in soft drinks
C00395 00104 ∂19-Apr-87 1254 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Thanks!
C00396 00105 ∂19-Apr-87 1533 VAL Arima's paper
C00400 00106 ∂19-Apr-87 1551 JK proposal
C00401 00107 ∂20-Apr-87 1006 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WALESON@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU AI qualifying exam
C00404 00108 ∂20-Apr-87 1125 RA John Hopcroft
C00405 00109 ∂20-Apr-87 2148 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C00406 00110 ∂20-Apr-87 2212 wiley!joe@lll-lcc.ARPA Workshop proposal
C00419 00111 ∂21-Apr-87 0615 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu some thoughts
C00429 00112 ∂21-Apr-87 0713 AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM hotel/May 5-6
C00430 00113 ∂21-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00431 00114 ∂21-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00432 00115 ∂21-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00433 00116 ∂21-Apr-87 1000 JMC
C00434 00117 ∂21-Apr-87 1100 JMC
C00435 00118 ∂21-Apr-87 1139 RA call for reference
C00436 00119 ∂21-Apr-87 1405 RA Re: Paul Haley
C00437 00120 ∂21-Apr-87 1631 guibas@navajo.stanford.edu Komlos and Goldberg
C00439 00121 ∂21-Apr-87 1824 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: EDR
C00443 00122 ∂21-Apr-87 1845 Phelps%csvax.cs.ukans.edu@RELAY.CS.NET 3 Wisemen Puzzle from Frank Brown
C00445 00123 ∂21-Apr-87 1952 @Score.Stanford.EDU:D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU cs326
C00451 00124 ∂22-Apr-87 0732 CLT reminder
C00452 00125 ∂22-Apr-87 1051 JMC
C00453 00126 ∂22-Apr-87 1051 JMC
C00454 00127 ∂22-Apr-87 1051 JMC
C00455 00128 ∂22-Apr-87 1220 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Support Requested for Workshop
C00457 00129 ∂22-Apr-87 1405 RA leaving early?
C00458 00130 ∂22-Apr-87 1417 RA
C00459 00131 ∂22-Apr-87 1556 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00462 00132 ∂22-Apr-87 1604 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Linnas' deportation
C00465 00133 ∂22-Apr-87 1652 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA re: Support Requested for Workshop
C00467 00134 ∂22-Apr-87 1719 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA re: Support Requested for Workshop
C00469 00135 ∂23-Apr-87 0418 NSH logic, methodology, phil. of science
C00470 00136 ∂23-Apr-87 0800 JMC
C00471 00137 ∂23-Apr-87 0944 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: soviet courts & re: JMC, re: w.wroth, re Linnas
C00474 00138 ∂23-Apr-87 1158 MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU PhD admittee, Sherry Listgarten
C00476 00139 ∂23-Apr-87 1242 RA
C00477 00140 ∂23-Apr-87 1348 JJW Special Qlisp meeting
C00478 00141 ∂23-Apr-87 1430 MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: PhD admittee, Sherry Listgarten
C00479 00142 ∂23-Apr-87 1442 RA leaving early
C00480 00143 ∂23-Apr-87 1700 JJW Halstead
C00481 00144 ∂23-Apr-87 1906 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: Liam Peyton on vet pref
C00482 00145 ∂23-Apr-87 2017 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: No motorcycles
C00483 00146 ∂24-Apr-87 0005 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: No motorcycles
C00485 00147 ∂24-Apr-87 0820 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK my proposal
C00491 00148 ∂24-Apr-87 0919 SJG re: your talk
C00492 00149 ∂24-Apr-87 0926 RA Martin Greenberger, UCLA
C00493 00150 ∂24-Apr-87 1007 CLT shopping list
C00494 00151 ∂24-Apr-87 1113 RA leaving
C00496 00152 ∂24-Apr-87 1224 LUNT@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: departure of Reagan Library
C00497 00153 ∂24-Apr-87 1728 @Score.Stanford.EDU:REIS@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
C00500 00154 ∂24-Apr-87 2253 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU lunch?
C00502 00155 ∂25-Apr-87 0949 CLT beeson
C00503 00156 ∂25-Apr-87 1300 JMC
C00504 00157 ∂25-Apr-87 1648 JK ps
C00505 00158 ∂25-Apr-87 1651 LES Jussi Salary
C00506 00159 ∂26-Apr-87 0024 NSH
C00507 00160 ∂26-Apr-87 1029 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK workshop at MIT 25-27th June
C00510 00161 ∂26-Apr-87 1352 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Progress Report
C00512 00162 ∂26-Apr-87 2000 JMC
C00513 00163 ∂26-Apr-87 2115 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU comment?
C00515 00164 ∂27-Apr-87 0700 JMC
C00516 00165 ∂27-Apr-87 0900 RA expense report
C00517 00166 ∂27-Apr-87 0900 JMC
C00518 00167 ∂27-Apr-87 1000 JMC
C00519 00168 ∂27-Apr-87 1002 AIR re: Stallman
C00520 00169 ∂27-Apr-87 1101 JMC
C00521 00170 ∂27-Apr-87 1106 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM re: JPL visit
C00523 00171 ∂27-Apr-87 1111 AIR alexanjan
C00524 00172 ∂27-Apr-87 1318 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00526 00173 ∂27-Apr-87 1319 RA [Reply to message recvd: 27 Apr 87 12:26 Pacific Time]
C00527 00174 ∂27-Apr-87 1337 RA John Nafeh
C00528 00175 ∂27-Apr-87 1338 VAL
C00529 00176 ∂27-Apr-87 1340 RA Richard Schroeppel
C00530 00177 ∂27-Apr-87 1430 jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu net address
C00532 00178 ∂27-Apr-87 1519 CLT calendar item
C00533 00179 ∂27-Apr-87 1521 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C00534 00180 ∂27-Apr-87 1632 LES Ketonen
C00535 00181 ∂27-Apr-87 2012 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU thermostats
C00536 00182 ∂27-Apr-87 2015 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
C00537 00183 ∂27-Apr-87 2205 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU thanks
C00539 00184 ∂28-Apr-87 0204 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:GOTO@NTT-20 Common Business Language (Received)
C00541 00185 ∂28-Apr-87 0700 JMC
C00542 00186 ∂28-Apr-87 0830 JMC
C00543 00187 ∂28-Apr-87 1008 RA picture taking
C00544 00188 ∂28-Apr-87 1101 VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
C00552 00189 ∂28-Apr-87 1105 RA John Browning
C00553 00190 ∂28-Apr-87 1215 RA Allstate insurance
C00554 00191 ∂28-Apr-87 1352 RA picture taking
C00555 00192 ∂28-Apr-87 1418 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: thermostats
C00557 00193 ∂28-Apr-87 1525 RA Re: picture taking
C00558 00194 ∂28-Apr-87 1709 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: thermostats
C00561 00195 ∂29-Apr-87 0700 JMC
C00562 00196 ∂29-Apr-87 0800 JMC
C00563 00197 ∂29-Apr-87 0800 JMC
C00564 00198 ∂29-Apr-87 0810 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Rutie
C00565 00199 ∂29-Apr-87 1100 JMC
C00566 00200 ∂29-Apr-87 1100 JMC
C00567 00201 ∂29-Apr-87 1423 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU next Thursday
C00568 00202 ∂29-Apr-87 1610 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00570 00203 ∂30-Apr-87 0000 JMC
C00571 00204 ∂30-Apr-87 0700 JMC
C00572 00205 ∂30-Apr-87 0700 JMC
C00573 00206 ∂30-Apr-87 0734 unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV
C00578 00207 ∂30-Apr-87 0800 JMC
C00579 00208 ∂30-Apr-87 0830 JMC
C00580 00209 ∂30-Apr-87 1152 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU delivery
C00581 00210 ∂30-Apr-87 1505 RA industrial lectureship
C00582 00211 ∂30-Apr-87 1516 SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu Joel Friedman
C00584 00212 ∂30-Apr-87 1558 RPG Personal Advice
C00586 00213 ∂30-Apr-87 1559 RA leaving
C00587 00214 ∂30-Apr-87 2004 MANDEL@KL.SRI.COM Re: aids
C00595 00215 ∂01-May-87 0000 JMC
C00596 00216 ∂01-May-87 0019 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
C00598 00217 ∂01-May-87 1145 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Vote Needed
C00600 00218 ∂01-May-87 1254 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu a request
C00602 00219 ∂01-May-87 1401 RA ACM
C00603 00220 ∂01-May-87 1441 manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu Housing Information
C00606 00221 ∂01-May-87 1441 AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Visit
C00608 00222 ∂01-May-87 1708 RA ACM
C00610 00223 ∂02-May-87 0917 MDD Roger Schank
C00611 00224 ∂02-May-87 1304 ME mail forwarding
C00612 00225 ∂02-May-87 1318 JJW Shigeki Goto
C00613 00226 ∂03-May-87 1643 @Score.Stanford.EDU:walker@flash.bellcore.com proposal for AAAI funding
C00623 00227 ∂04-May-87 1002 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C00624 00228 ∂04-May-87 1323 RA biographical sketch
C00625 00229 ∂05-May-87 0903 CLT
C00626 00230 ∂05-May-87 1452 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00628 00231 ∂05-May-87 1504 AI.JMC@MCC.COM
C00629 00232 ∂06-May-87 1025 AI.JMC@MCC.COM next mcc visit
C00630 00233 ∂06-May-87 1115 RA John Nafeh
C00631 00234 ∂06-May-87 1122 AI.JMC@MCC.COM quote for Nafeh
C00632 00235 ∂06-May-87 1235 RA Sarah's trip
C00633 00236 ∂06-May-87 1331 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU visit from John Pucci
C00635 00237 ∂06-May-87 1353 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Pucci
C00636 00238 ∂06-May-87 1354 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU suppes
C00637 00239 ∂06-May-87 1432 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: news!]
C00640 00240 ∂06-May-87 1507 CLT Pucci
C00641 00241 ∂06-May-87 1514 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Pucci meeting
C00642 00242 ∂06-May-87 1519 RA meeting with Pucci
C00643 00243 ∂07-May-87 0902 CLT msg
C00644 00244 ∂07-May-87 0935 RA photograph
C00645 00245 ∂07-May-87 0938 RA photograph
C00646 00246 ∂07-May-87 1018 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00648 00247 ∂07-May-87 1121 CLT ito
C00649 00248 ∂07-May-87 1453 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu more goldberg
C00652 00249 ∂08-May-87 0453 ito%aoba.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET IBM Seminar
C00655 00250 ∂08-May-87 1422 RA Scientific and Engineering Advisory Board for SDI
C00656 00251 ∂09-May-87 1644 RA Re: buslet
C00657 00252 ∂09-May-87 1648 RA Re: buslet
C00658 00253 ∂09-May-87 1721 CLT
C00659 00254 ∂09-May-87 1740 JJW Meeting
C00660 00255 ∂10-May-87 0900 JMC
C00661 00256 ∂10-May-87 0938 JK postponement
C00662 00257 ∂10-May-87 1247 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU re: suppes
C00663 00258 ∂10-May-87 1615 SJG my talk about you and Feigenbaum
C00664 00259 ∂10-May-87 1902 BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: old parking tickets:SIGNATURE collection time CANCELLED.
C00666 00260 ∂10-May-87 1916 BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re:old parking tickets, improvement?
C00668 00261 ∂10-May-87 2056 BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: re:old parking tickets, improvement?
C00669 00262 ∂11-May-87 0800 JMC
C00670 00263 ∂11-May-87 0810 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Tuesday Lunch
C00671 00264 ∂11-May-87 0945 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu LUNCH
C00673 00265 ∂11-May-87 0959 VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: TARK II
C00674 00266 ∂11-May-87 0959 RA This afternoon
C00675 00267 ∂11-May-87 1112 RPG Cons Professor
C00676 00268 ∂11-May-87 1140 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Cons Professor
C00678 00269 ∂11-May-87 1307 ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Possible Sloan post-doc
C00682 00270 ∂11-May-87 1339 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Faculty Reports]
C00687 00271 ∂11-May-87 1422 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU John Pucci
C00688 00272 ∂11-May-87 1534 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Keith Clark
C00689 00273 ∂11-May-87 1614 ibuki!rww@labrea.stanford.edu free KCL
C00692 00274 ∂11-May-87 1633 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00695 00275 ∂11-May-87 2214 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C00696 00276 ∂12-May-87 0603 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Vladimir
C00699 00277 ∂12-May-87 0652 walker@flash.bellcore.com Lexicon Workshop Proposal for AAAI funding
C00709 00278 ∂12-May-87 0947 RA Keith Clark
C00710 00279 ∂12-May-87 1229 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Vladimir
C00712 00280 ∂12-May-87 1411 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU list of workshops that I know of
C00715 00281 ∂12-May-87 1422 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM visits
C00716 00282 ∂12-May-87 1448 RA visa
C00717 00283 ∂13-May-87 0800 JMC
C00718 00284 ∂13-May-87 0820 RA a reminder
C00719 00285 ∂13-May-87 0912 RA picture
C00720 00286 ∂13-May-87 0917 RA vacation
C00721 00287 ∂13-May-87 0923 RA picture
C00722 00288 ∂13-May-87 0958 RA
C00723 00289 ∂13-May-87 1001 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: vacation
C00725 00290 ∂13-May-87 1440 @Score.Stanford.EDU:shoham@jerry-lee-lewis next meeting
C00727 00291 ∂13-May-87 1507 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Moon and Sun
C00729 00292 ∂13-May-87 1511 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU More sunrise
C00730 00293 ∂13-May-87 1601 RA leaving
C00731 00294 ∂13-May-87 1624 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu Re: bibliography to Prof. Paris
C00736 00295 ∂13-May-87 1629 MARTIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU A prospective student,
C00742 00296 ∂14-May-87 0836 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab transcript of your talk
C00744 00297 ∂14-May-87 0911 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu reference
C00745 00298 ∂14-May-87 0934 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU AAAI Housing
C00746 00299 ∂14-May-87 1015 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00749 00300 ∂14-May-87 1039 JJW FUNCTION and FUNCALL
C00753 00301 ∂14-May-87 1040 VAL the title of the book
C00754 00302 ∂14-May-87 1051 SJG play readings
C00756 00303 ∂14-May-87 1100 JMC
C00757 00304 ∂14-May-87 1100 VAL re: the title of the book
C00758 00305 ∂14-May-87 1059 RA photographer
C00759 00306 ∂14-May-87 1124 RA Re: photographer
C00760 00307 ∂14-May-87 1507 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu FUNCTION and FUNCALL
C00762 00308 ∂14-May-87 1543 JJW Monday's meeting
C00763 00309 ∂14-May-87 1556 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU next meeting
C00764 00310 ∂14-May-87 1654 JJW Monday Meeting
C00765 00311 ∂15-May-87 0827 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
C00768 00312 ∂15-May-87 0900 JMC
C00769 00313 ∂15-May-87 0900 JMC
C00770 00314 ∂15-May-87 0914 JJW Another parallel Lisp project
C00775 00315 ∂15-May-87 1050 RLG summer
C00776 00316 ∂15-May-87 1051 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
C00779 00317 ∂15-May-87 1127 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: FUNCTION and FUNCALL
C00782 00318 ∂15-May-87 1206 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
C00785 00319 ∂15-May-87 1232 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
C00787 00320 ∂15-May-87 1305 JJW Page deleting
C00788 00321 ∂15-May-87 1324 VAL Might as well
C00790 00322 ∂15-May-87 1448 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00793 00323 ∂15-May-87 1620 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu FUNCTION AND FUNCALL
C00795 00324 ∂15-May-87 1643 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU re: MS Program Committee Meeting
C00796 00325 ∂16-May-87 0051 marum@amadeus.stanford.edu re: Alternative Political Party
C00810 00326 ∂16-May-87 1735 CLT reminder
C00811 00327 ∂16-May-87 1810 W.WROTH@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: "But if you kick him ..."
C00813 00328 ∂17-May-87 1114 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Goldberg
C00816 00329 ∂17-May-87 1243 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: Goldberg
C00818 00330 ∂17-May-87 2318 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Goetz should be convicted
C00820 00331 ∂17-May-87 2325 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Goetz should be convicted
C00823 00332 ∂18-May-87 0135 unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV Re: reply to message
C00825 00333 ∂18-May-87 0900 JMC
C00826 00334 ∂18-May-87 0939 L.LILITH@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU Bad guys practice karate more
C00828 00335 ∂18-May-87 1020 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU next meeting fo cs525
C00829 00336 ∂18-May-87 1118 amdcad!bandy@decwrl.DEC.COM goetz should be convicted // you think that mrc might be from nj
C00831 00337 ∂18-May-87 1149 RA Harvey Friedman
C00832 00338 ∂18-May-87 1155 VAL reply to message
C00833 00339 ∂18-May-87 1302 RA leaving
C00834 00340 ∂18-May-87 1353 JJW Using Concert
C00836 00341 ∂18-May-87 1400 JMC
C00837 00342 ∂18-May-87 1517 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C00838 00343 ∂18-May-87 1651 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU [Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>: Memo to Charles Junkerman]
C00840 00344 ∂18-May-87 1700 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU re: [Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>: Memo to Charles Junkerman]
C00842 00345 ∂18-May-87 2000 JMC
C00843 00346 ∂18-May-87 2215 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU meeting
C00845 00347 ∂19-May-87 0150 A.ERIC@GSB-HOW.Stanford.EDU Parking Meeting TODAY !!!
C00848 00348 ∂19-May-87 0900 JMC
C00849 00349 ∂19-May-87 0946 RA Harvey Friedman
C00850 00350 ∂19-May-87 1138 RA lunch
C00851 00351 ∂19-May-87 1434 RA reservation
C00852 00352 ∂19-May-87 1556 RA photographer
C00853 00353 ∂19-May-87 1556 forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu re: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
C00855 00354 ∂19-May-87 1928 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU latex draft of foundations contribution
C00857 00355 ∂20-May-87 0844 ROSENBLUM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
C00859 00356 ∂20-May-87 0907 danny@cappuccino.stanford.edu.STANFORD.EDU A couple of questions for JMC:
C00861 00357 ∂20-May-87 1920 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu 4 for 4
C00864 00358 ∂21-May-87 0743 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Classes
C00866 00359 ∂21-May-87 0807 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
C00869 00360 ∂21-May-87 0930 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00872 00361 ∂21-May-87 1126 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
C00874 00362 ∂21-May-87 1549 JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU E-School annual report
C00876 00363 ∂21-May-87 1800 ULLMAN@score.stanford.edu [Andrew V. Goldberg <AVG@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>: I'm comming...]
C00879 00364 ∂22-May-87 0914 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU message from Yoav Shoham
C00880 00365 ∂22-May-87 1723 RA Virginia Mann
C00881 00366 ∂23-May-87 1048 RPG Qlisp Progress
C00882 00367 ∂24-May-87 1020 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Advising
C00884 00368 ∂26-May-87 0708 JJW Fibonnaci
C00886 00369 ∂26-May-87 1105 simpson@vax.darpa.mil Re: status of proposal
C00889 00370 ∂26-May-87 1118 VAL Non-monotonic seminar: no meeting this week
C00890 00371 ∂26-May-87 1430 D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU causality paper
C00895 00372 ∂26-May-87 1553 ME Pony bike locker removal
C00897 00373 ∂27-May-87 1119 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU next meeting
C00899 00374 ∂27-May-87 1123 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Lunch
C00901 00375 ∂27-May-87 1201 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Black Friday
C00904 00376 ∂27-May-87 1203 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Black Friday
C00908 00377 ∂27-May-87 1313 RA jury duty
C00909 00378 ∂27-May-87 1315 RA Tom Burns
C00910 00379 ∂27-May-87 1319 RA Charles Moore
C00911 00380 ∂28-May-87 1028 SJG who wants to read a play this Sunday evening?
C00912 00381 ∂28-May-87 1727 MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM [Mimi Gardner <MGardner.pa>: [Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa>: message
C00915 00382 ∂28-May-87 2153 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C00916 00383 ∂29-May-87 1103 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Today
C00917 00384 ∂29-May-87 1103 RA Thelma, Inference
C00918 00385 ∂29-May-87 1143 JSW Visitors
C00919 00386 ∂29-May-87 1354 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU the latest version
C00921 00387 ∂29-May-87 1650 RA String tie
C00922 00388 ∂29-May-87 2310 RPG Gang of 4 usage
C00924 00389 ∂30-May-87 0937 BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU re: Advising
C00925 00390 ∂30-May-87 1117 BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU Cognition, Connectionism and me
C00927 00391 ∂30-May-87 1123 BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU Triage
C00933 00392 ∂30-May-87 1304 RPG JJW
C00934 00393 ∂30-May-87 1402 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: Lunch
C00936 00394 ∂30-May-87 1413 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
C00937 00395 ∂30-May-87 1416 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
C00948 00396 ∂30-May-87 2244 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Hewitt's Paper
C00949 00397 ∂31-May-87 1127 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU this and other weeks
C00951 00398 ∂31-May-87 1623 AIR reply to message
C00952 00399 ∂31-May-87 1628 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
C00953 00400 ∂31-May-87 1639 AIR re: arbitrary characters in Lisp
C00958 00401 ∂01-Jun-87 0834 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Rutie
C00961 00402 ∂01-Jun-87 0853 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Reminder of Vote Needed
C00964 00403 ∂01-Jun-87 1000 JMC
C00965 00404 ∂01-Jun-87 1000 JMC
C00966 00405 ∂01-Jun-87 1054 VAL re: Visit to Austin in Fall of '87
C00967 00406 ∂01-Jun-87 1112 JMC
C00968 00407 ∂01-Jun-87 1143 CLT flight plan
C00969 00408 ∂01-Jun-87 1228 danny@Think.COM paper on non-monotonic logic
C00971 00409 ∂01-Jun-87 1251 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: paper
C00973 00410 ∂01-Jun-87 1345 VAL re: paper on non-monotonic logic
C00974 00411 ∂01-Jun-87 1518 RLG summer
C00975 00412 ∂01-Jun-87 1605 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00978 00413 ∂01-Jun-87 1725 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Rosemary
C00980 00414 ∂01-Jun-87 1957 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
C00982 00415 ∂02-Jun-87 0917 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com Re: Boland amendment, etc.
C00986 00416 ∂02-Jun-87 1412 JJW System uptime
C00987 00417 ∂02-Jun-87 1421 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com re: Boland amendment, etc.
C00997 00418 ∂02-Jun-87 1451 JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU follow-up conversation
C00999 00419 ∂02-Jun-87 1451 LEWIS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Boland amendment, etc.
C01002 00420 ∂02-Jun-87 1652 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Boland amendment, etc.
C01006 00421 ∂02-Jun-87 1548 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Boland amendment, etc.
C01012 00422 ∂02-Jun-87 1743 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Boland amendment, etc.
C01015 00423 ∂02-Jun-87 2044 JK NSF proposal
C01016 00424 ∂03-Jun-87 0112 POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU crime
C01018 00425 ∂03-Jun-87 1253 ROBERTS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Yosemite: how are snow conditions these days ?
C01019 00426 ∂03-Jun-87 1450 D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU Causality
C01022 00427 ∂03-Jun-87 1752 CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU meeting
C01024 00428 ∂04-Jun-87 0856 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com Re: request for repeat
C01026 00429 ∂04-Jun-87 1023 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C01028 00430 ∂04-Jun-87 1108 SUBRAMANIAN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: summer job
C01029 00431 ∂04-Jun-87 1139 MAZZETTI@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU liability statement
C01031 00432 ∂04-Jun-87 1207 RA lunch
C01032 00433 ∂04-Jun-87 1302 VAL Ksenia Velikanova
C01033 00434 ∂04-Jun-87 2044 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Advice
C01036 00435 ∂04-Jun-87 2320 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C01038 00436 ∂05-Jun-87 0228 J.JBRENNER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: Political primaries
C01040 00437 ∂05-Jun-87 0942 RA Nils Reimers
C01041 00438 ∂05-Jun-87 0950 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com Re: Soviet Politics
C01045 00439 ∂05-Jun-87 1202 RA lunch
C01046 00440 ∂05-Jun-87 1550 RA reminder
C01047 00441 ∂05-Jun-87 2211 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Free Distribution of Kyoto Common Lisp
C01060 00442 ∂06-Jun-87 0805 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab Re: Please pass on a request
C01063 00443 ∂06-Jun-87 0804 CLT
C01064 00444 ∂06-Jun-87 1426 SJG "hypothetical" question
C01065 00445 ∂06-Jun-87 1438 SJG re: "hypothetical" question
C01066 00446 ∂07-Jun-87 1113 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Vietnam
C01070 00447 ∂07-Jun-87 1646 SSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU BBOARD
C01071 00448 ∂07-Jun-87 1853 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: One more thing re JMC
C01075 00449 ∂07-Jun-87 2217 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Russia, feudalism and academia
C01077 00450 ∂07-Jun-87 2313 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Russia, feudalism and academia
C01081 00451 ∂08-Jun-87 0852 @RELAY.CS.NET,@ai.toronto.edu,@utterly.ai.toronto.edu:hector@ai McDermott critique update
C01086 00452 ∂08-Jun-87 0857 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU A new mailing list
C01089 00453 ∂08-Jun-87 0900 JMC
C01090 00454 ∂08-Jun-87 1016 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU deadline
C01092 00455 ∂08-Jun-87 1053 K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: What is meant by "Finlandlization" (sic) of the west? Jim?
C01094 00456 ∂08-Jun-87 1109 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU deadline
C01095 00457 ∂08-Jun-87 1200 JMC
C01096 00458 ∂08-Jun-87 1215 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
C01097 00459 ∂08-Jun-87 1323 gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu Teaching Assistant
C01099 00460 ∂08-Jun-87 1412 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: urgent grade
C01101 00461 ∂08-Jun-87 1541 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
C01104 00462 ∂08-Jun-87 1600 JMC
C01105 00463 ∂08-Jun-87 2000 JMC
C01106 00464 ∂08-Jun-87 2051 B.BCPLAYR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU Re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
C01111 00465 ∂08-Jun-87 2129 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu lunch
C01112 00466 ∂08-Jun-87 2151 quintus!qed!watson@Sun.COM CS522 -- Heuristic Programming Seminar
C01114 00467 ∂08-Jun-87 2353 berglund@navajo.stanford.edu Foreign Policy, Republicans, Generation Gaps, Etc.
C01118 00468 ∂09-Jun-87 0004 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: talkin bout my ge-ge-generation
C01119 00469 ∂09-Jun-87 0630 gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu re: Teaching Assistant
C01121 00470 ∂09-Jun-87 1036 CLT in case
C01122 00471 ∂09-Jun-87 1100 gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu re: Teaching Assistant
C01124 00472 ∂09-Jun-87 1310 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Stone Representation Theorem
C01136 00473 ∂09-Jun-87 1403 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU membership list
C01140 00474 ∂09-Jun-87 1425 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com re: "Largest Peacetime...
C01145 00475 ∂09-Jun-87 1507 RA John Nafeh
C01146 00476 ∂09-Jun-87 2034 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU stanford vs ussr
C01148 00477 ∂09-Jun-87 2128 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Paper on Computer Chess
C01161 00478 ∂09-Jun-87 2204 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Gorbachev and peace
C01164 00479 ∂09-Jun-87 2226 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: lunch
C01166 00480 ∂10-Jun-87 0846 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:AI.WOODY@MCC.COM Re: Stone Representation Theorem
C01170 00481 ∂10-Jun-87 0915 @Score.Stanford.EDU:danny@cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
C01172 00482 ∂10-Jun-87 0947 Mailer failed mail returned
C01175 00483 ∂10-Jun-87 0952 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Advising
C01177 00484 ∂10-Jun-87 1000 JMC
C01178 00485 ∂10-Jun-87 1015 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Advising
C01181 00486 ∂10-Jun-87 1024 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Advising
C01182 00487 ∂10-Jun-87 1046 KANAKIA@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Question for Helen and maybe Richard Steinberger
C01185 00488 ∂10-Jun-87 1128 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
C01188 00489 ∂10-Jun-87 1201 @Score.Stanford.EDU:danny@cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU Re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
C01191 00490 ∂10-Jun-87 1307 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU A response by Boyer
C01195 00491 ∂10-Jun-87 2210 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: re: lunch
C01197 00492 ∂11-Jun-87 0700 JMC
C01198 00493 ∂11-Jun-87 0800 JMC
C01199 00494 ∂11-Jun-87 0838 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK workshop on 24th- 27th
C01202 00495 ∂11-Jun-87 0900 JMC
C01203 00496 ∂11-Jun-87 0920 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU References
C01205 00497 ∂11-Jun-87 1017 RA quitting date
C01206 00498 ∂11-Jun-87 1126 RA letter to ACM
C01207 00499 ∂11-Jun-87 1152 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: References
C01209 00500 ∂11-Jun-87 1359 RA Re: quitting date
C01210 00501 ∂11-Jun-87 1452 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU message
C01211 00502 ∂11-Jun-87 1656 SJG absurd claim?
C01212 00503 ∂11-Jun-87 1806 SJG circ. thm prover
C01215 00504 ∂11-Jun-87 1812 SJG
C01216 00505 ∂11-Jun-87 2015 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: References
C01218 00506 ∂11-Jun-87 2131 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: US/USSR/Vietnam/60s Radicalism
C01220 00507 ∂12-Jun-87 0845 RA
C01222 00508 ∂12-Jun-87 0900 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: US/USSR/Vietnam/60s Radicalism
C01224 00509 ∂12-Jun-87 0942 RA
C01225 00510 ∂12-Jun-87 1014 RA Tom Burns
C01226 00511 ∂12-Jun-87 1111 RA John Sowa
C01227 00512 ∂12-Jun-87 1122 RA leaving
C01228 00513 ∂12-Jun-87 1343 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU CS143A
C01230 00514 ∂12-Jun-87 1512 SJG
C01231 00515 ∂12-Jun-87 1904 Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM The 30th anniversary of Lisp
C01236 00516 ∂12-Jun-87 2003 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab Re: red and black
C01239 00517 ∂13-Jun-87 2125 SJG re: another way of putting it
C01240 00518 ∂13-Jun-87 2135 SJG re: another way of putting it
C01241 00519 ∂13-Jun-87 2147 SJG re: another way of putting it
C01242 00520 ∂13-Jun-87 2208 SJG re: another way of putting it
C01243 00521 ∂13-Jun-87 2216 SJG re: another way of putting it
C01244 00522 ∂14-Jun-87 1359 B.BCPLAYR@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
C01246 00523 ∂14-Jun-87 2337 SJG information
C01247 00524 ∂15-Jun-87 0833 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Bledsoe's List and Automated Proving vs. Verification
C01250 00525 ∂15-Jun-87 0859 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Constructive Validity
C01253 00526 ∂15-Jun-87 0900 JMC
C01254 00527 ∂15-Jun-87 0914 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU message from Ernie Cohen (forwarded with permission)
C01257 00528 ∂15-Jun-87 0944 SJG reply to message
C01258 00529 ∂15-Jun-87 1339 RA [Reply to message recvd: 14 Jun 87 20:01 Pacific Time]
C01259 00530 ∂15-Jun-87 1415 @RELAY.CS.NET:ito%aoba.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET Elis Loop Tie
C01263 00531 ∂15-Jun-87 1549 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Summer Project
C01265 00532 ∂15-Jun-87 1611 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Summer Project cont'd
C01268 00533 ∂15-Jun-87 1651 VAL Organizational semantics
C01270 00534 ∂15-Jun-87 2006 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab [ito@aoba.tohoku.junet: Elis Loop Tie]
C01274 00535 ∂16-Jun-87 0900 JMC
C01275 00536 ∂16-Jun-87 1008 RA [Reply to message recvd: 14 Jun 87 20:01 Pacific Time]
C01276 00537 ∂16-Jun-87 1027 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Summer Project
C01278 00538 ∂16-Jun-87 1044 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Gentzen and Shoenfield
C01280 00539 ∂16-Jun-87 1101 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Memory
C01282 00540 ∂16-Jun-87 1204 RA Mr. Reimers
C01283 00541 ∂16-Jun-87 1300 JMC
C01284 00542 ∂16-Jun-87 1403 RA hotels confirmation
C01285 00543 ∂16-Jun-87 1447 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:RDZ@AI.AI.MIT.EDU MIT Article on Lisp
C01287 00544 ∂16-Jun-87 1656 RA hoter[w76,jmc]
C01288 00545 ∂16-Jun-87 1657 RA correction of formaer msg.
C01289 00546 ∂16-Jun-87 1720 OLIPHANT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Mid-Peninsula Free University
C01291 00547 ∂16-Jun-87 1849 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU incompleteness theorem
C01296 00548 ∂16-Jun-87 2110 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Summer Project
C01297 00549 ∂17-Jun-87 0700 JMC
C01298 00550 ∂17-Jun-87 0958 RA hoter
C01299 00551 ∂17-Jun-87 1309 RA
C01300 00552 ∂17-Jun-87 1453 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Publications Committee Meeting
C01302 00553 ∂17-Jun-87 1534 LES Secretary
C01304 00554 ∂17-Jun-87 1642 RA leaving
C01305 00555 ∂17-Jun-87 1850 LES LLL Final Report
C01306 00556 ∂17-Jun-87 2336 SJG Cheeseman paper
C01307 00557 ∂18-Jun-87 0700 JMC
C01308 00558 ∂18-Jun-87 0800 JMC
C01309 00559 ∂18-Jun-87 1102 SJG Cheeseman review
C01310 00560 ∂18-Jun-87 1145 RA John Nafeh
C01311 00561 ∂18-Jun-87 1153 RA Dan Dennet
C01312 00562 ∂18-Jun-87 1500 JMC
C01313 00563 ∂18-Jun-87 1455 VAL workshop on the foundations of AI
C01314 00564 ∂18-Jun-87 1519 D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU re: Causality
C01317 00565 ∂19-Jun-87 0059 JUSTESON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU tiling problem
C01318 00566 ∂19-Jun-87 0657 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:KIRSH@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU papers mailed
C01320 00567 ∂19-Jun-87 1110 AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Your fall grad course
C01322 00568 ∂19-Jun-87 1134 SJG
C01327 00569 ∂19-Jun-87 1413 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Rowland Glowinski
C01329 00570 ∂19-Jun-87 1415 danny@Think.COM Hopper award
C01337 00571 ∂19-Jun-87 1911 RWF re: certificates of respectability
C01339 00572 ∂21-Jun-87 2032 GOLDBERG@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: Tom Hayden
C01344 00573 ∂21-Jun-87 2106 CLT
C01345 00574 ∂21-Jun-87 2157 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method
C01347 00575 ∂22-Jun-87 0701 AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM Re: reservations
C01348 00576 ∂22-Jun-87 0941 RPG Proposal
C01352 00577 ∂22-Jun-87 1106 RA John Nafeh
C01353 00578 ∂22-Jun-87 1553 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Logic in Leningrad
C01356 00579 ∂22-Jun-87 1605 JJW SYMPAL report 1
C01359 00580 ∂22-Jun-87 1606 JJW SYMPAL report 2
C01363 00581 ∂22-Jun-87 2123 CLT Real Estate Lady
C01364 00582 ∂23-Jun-87 1255 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Lunch
C01366 00583 ∂23-Jun-87 1420 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU account end
C01368 00584 ∂24-Jun-87 1940 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Project
C01370 00585 ∂25-Jun-87 1322 BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU SOE Faculty Directory
C01374 00586 ∂25-Jun-87 1356 RQ.AAA@forsythe.stanford.edu v
C01375 00587 ∂25-Jun-87 1403 RQ.AAA@forsythe.stanford.edu
C01386 00588 ∂26-Jun-87 0811 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: cat recipe
C01387 00589 ∂26-Jun-87 0822 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU [PUCCI@A.ISI.EDU: Spread the good news!]
C01389 00590 ∂26-Jun-87 1332 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU [Mike Gordon <mjcg%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>: NSF Proposal]
C01394 00591 ∂29-Jun-87 0304 TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU connectionist models summer school
C01399 00592 ∂29-Jun-87 1006 manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu 87-88 parking permit
C01402 00593
C01403 00594 ∂29-Jun-87 1514 RA hotel Cosmos
C01404 00595 ∂29-Jun-87 1754 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method
C01408 00596 ∂30-Jun-87 1011 VAL reply to message
C01409 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Apr-87 0815 RA flight reservation for Lawrence Kensas
You will have to fly to Kensas city. Since there are no flights into Lawrence,
I rented a compact car for you with Hertz. It is a 30 mile drive.
SF-Kensas City, April 12, Eastern 200 7:34am arr. 12:35pm (later flights
will get you into Kensas after 5:00pm).
Kensas City-SF, April 15, Continental 4439 4:20pm (via Denver), arr. 7:17pm.
Dina Bolla will deliver the tickets next week.
∂01-Apr-87 1203 PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU '87-April-tecrpts-mailinglist
Received: from RED.RUTGERS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Apr 87 12:03:05 PST
Date: 1 Apr 87 14:47:54 EST
From: PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: '87-April-tecrpts-mailinglist
To: arpanet.mail: ;
cc: petty@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Message-ID: <12291099834.15.PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
@make(text)
@begin(description)
Below is a list of our newest technical reports.
The abstracts for these are available for access via FTP with user account
<anonymous> with any password. The file name is:
<library>tecrpts-online.doc
If you wish to order copies of any of these reports please send mail via the
ARPANET to PETTY@RUTGERS. Thank you!!
[ ] CBM-TR-148 - "AUTOMATIC KNOWLEDGE BASE REFINEMENT FOR
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS," A. Ginsberg, S.M. Weiss and P. Politakis.
[ ] CBM-TR-149 - "AN EXPERT SYSTEMS METHODOLOGY FOR CONTROL AND
INTERPRETATION OF APPLICATIONS SOFTWARE," C.V.
Apte and S.M. Weiss.
[ ] DCS-TR-201 - "SOME FORMAL PROPERTIES OF VERSION SPACES," A.
Van der Mude.
[ ] DCS-TR-202 - "ON THE SUPERMODULAR KNAPSACK PROBLEM," G. Gallo
and B. Simeone.
[ ] DCS-TR-205 - "RELATIVE KNOWLEDGE IN A DISTRIBUTED DATABASE,"
T. Imielinski.
[ ] DCS-TR-206 - "COMPLEXITY OF QUERY PROCESSING IN THE DEDUCTIVE
DATABASES WITH INCOMPLETE INFORMATION," T. Imielinski.
[ ] DCS-TR-207 - "DOMAIN ABSTRACTION AND LIMITED REASONING," T.
Imielinski.
[ ] DCS-TR-208 - "REPRESENTATION SELECTION FOR CONSTRAINT
SATISFACTION PROBLEMS: A CASE STUDY USING n-QUEENS," B.A. Nadel.
[ ] LCSR-TR-86 - "APPROXIMATING THE DIAMETER OF A SET OF POINTS IN
THE EUCLIDEAN SPACE," O. Egecioglu and B. Kalantari.
[ ] LCSR-TR-87 - "MINIMUM COST NETWORK FLOW PROBLEM ON SPANNING
TREES AND 1-TREES," B. Kalantari and I. Kalantari.
[ ] LCSR-TR-88 - "NYSTROM'S ITERATIVE VARIANT METHODS FOR THE
SOLUTION OF CAUCHY SINGULAR INTEGRAL EQUATIONS," A. Gerasoulis.
[ ] ML-TR-7 - "(THESIS) - (If you wish to order this thesis, a
prepayment of $15.00 is required.) "THE ROLE OF EXPLICIT CONTEXTUAL
KNOWLEDGE IN LEARNING CONCEPTS TO IMPROVE PERFORMANCE," R.M. Keller.
@end(description)
-------
∂01-Apr-87 1701 VAL Charles M. Pigott circumscription
Benjamin came up with some ideas that vaguely reminded me of CMP circ'n, and
I showed him your definition. I hope you don't mind.
∂02-Apr-87 1250 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 2 April 1987
Previous Balance 10.65
Payment(s) 10.65 (check 3/4/87)
-------
Current Charges 0.30 (coffee, tea and hot chocolate)
4.00 (bicycle lockers)
1.00 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 5.30
NEW PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
∂02-Apr-87 2359 JJW Meeting
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
Ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I'd like to arrange a meeting to discuss my thesis, as described in the
PhD program requirements. Some time in May would be best for me. Can you
let me know when you are available for this? (JMC is out of town until
about April 10 so it will be a while before I can reply to your reply.)
Joe
∂03-Apr-87 0900 JMC
qlisp
∂03-Apr-87 1121 RA Dr. Brown, Univ. of Kensas
Brown wanted to ask you whether you'd be willing to serve on a panel during
the conference. His tel. (913) 864 4482. He said you can think about it and
let him know when you get there.
∂03-Apr-87 1534 RA Frank Harary
Harary (MCC) came by to say hello. His tel. (512) 338-3493.
∂03-Apr-87 2342 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU do you mind?
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Apr 87 23:42:28 PST
Date: Fri 3 Apr 87 23:40:06-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: do you mind?
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12291753774.19.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I have CS101 down for TTh 4:15-5:30 for next winter in order to get it in a TV
classroom. If you don't like this time, we can choose something more civilized
by moving it off of TV. Please advise.
-------
∂04-Apr-87 0345 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU scheduling message #1
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Apr 87 03:45:35 PST
Date: Sat 4 Apr 87 03:41:59-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: scheduling message #1
To: "Possible instructors": ;
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12291797807.19.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Many of you already know that I'm trying to work up a schedule of courses for
CS for '87-88. If you are receiving this mail, then you have been identified
as someone who might be teaching a CS course next year. I have worked with the
TV people to choose courses and times for next year's televised offerings. For
other courses I have used traditional times or requested times, unless I saw a
conflict with other courses, in which case I tried to slightly alter the time.
I am asking your help in checking over this schedule. If you plan to teach a
course, it should be listed in my master schedule and you should check its time
to make sure it is acceptable to you. If you see your name by courses you don't
plan to teach or if courses you plan to teach are missing, please send me mail
immediately and give me the details.
I will carry out the checking process with three messages: this first message
to introduce the process; a second individualized message showing all courses
you appear to be teaching next year; and a third monster message with the
entire schedule.
Please at least check over the second individualized message. If you get no
second message, then I have no indication that you are teaching next year. If
you also have time to look over the monster message and help me to identify
problems/conflicts, I would greatly appreciate it. You should at least look
at the other courses taught at the same time as your course to identify
conflicts for your classes.
As always, this is just a draft. But perhaps we can spend enough time now to
make it a fairly accurate draft. Thanks in advance for the help.
-------
∂04-Apr-87 0417 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Scheduling message #2
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Apr 87 04:16:52 PST
Date: Sat 4 Apr 87 04:13:28-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Scheduling message #2
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12291803540.10.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Below is a list of the CS courses you are scheduled to teach in '87-88 and
the time (if any) that has been established for it. Please contact me if:
you aren't planning to teach one of the listed courses; you are planning to
teach a course in addition to the listed courses; or you can't accept the
scheduled time for your course. Your prompt reply will be greatly
appreciated.
Win CS101 McCarthy TTh 4:15-5:30 on the TV network
-------
∂04-Apr-87 0444 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Scheduling message #3
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Apr 87 04:44:44 PST
Date: Sat 4 Apr 87 04:39:18-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Scheduling message #3
To: "Possible instructors": ;
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12291808241.19.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Now that you've (hopefully) received your individual message, please glance over
the following lengthy list to locate your courses and see if there are other
courses taught at the same time that seem to conflict. If you can take some
time to help me identify other problems, please do so.
Autumn '88-89
Days Time Course Instructor TV? Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MWF 9:00-9:50 022 Schoen yes
MWF 9:00-9:50 106B Staff no
MWF 9:00-9:50 106X Gorin yes
MWF 9:00-9:50 260 Wilf no
MWF 9:00-9:50 312A Flynn yes enroll in EE382A
MWF 10:00-10:50 106A Staff no
MWF 10:00-10:50 106H Floyd no
MWF 10:00-10:50 143A Linton yes
MWF 11:00-11:50 108A Rogers yes
MWF 11:00-11:50 112 Weise yes enroll in EE182
MWF 11:00-11:50 237A Staff no
MWF 11:00-11:50 242 Ungar no
F 12:05-1:30 522 Staff no SigLunch, Chem Gazebo
MWF 1:15-2:05 108B Wilson no
MWF 1:15-2:05 209 Knuth yes (1-time writing course)
MWF 2:15-3:05 003 Reges yes/no taped but no broadcast
MWF 2:15-3:05 105A Jones no
MWF 2:15-3:05 140 Rogers yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 040 Wilson yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 161 Staff yes new combo of 260/261
M 4:15-5:05 510 McCluskey no enroll in EE385A
M 4:15-5:05 527 Binford no Cedar conference
M 4:15-5:05 530 Golub no MJH 352
W 4:15-5:30 540 Staff yes enroll in EE380
MW 7:00-7:50 197 Reges/Staff no LOTS consulting
TTh 9:30-10:45 157 Manna yes new logic course
TTh 9:30-10:45 353 Pratt no
TTh 9:30-10:45 409 Green/Smith no
T 11:00-12:15 151 Reges yes
TTh 11:00-12:15 244 Cheriton yes
TTh 11:00-12:15 367A Mayr no alternate years
TTh 12:15-1:05 270 Fagn/Short/Wied no same as MIS 210
TTh 1:15-2:30 240A Staff yes
TTh 1:15-2:30 212 Hennessy yes enroll in EE282
TTh 1:15-2:30 327C Roth no enroll in ME219A
TTh 2:45-4:00 110 Chou yes
TTh 2:45-4:00 137 Staff yes
TTh 2:45-4:00 211 Staff yes enroll in EE381
TTh 2:45-4:00 306 Shankar no
T 4:15-5:30 500 Staff yes
Th 4:15-5:30 300 Earnest no
Th 4:15-5:05 548 Cheriton no MJH 352
TTh 4:15-5:05 198H Smith/McGrory no
TTh 7:00-7:50 196 Reges/Staff no consulting for micros
TBA 001C Reges/Staff no
TBA 309A Sowa no Industrial Lecturship
TBA 328A Pavel no same as Psych187
TBA 366 Staff no
by arrangement 001A Reges/Staff no dorm based
by arrangement 001D Reges/Staff no dorm based
by arrangement 191 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 192 Reuling no
by arrangement 199 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 199P Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 393 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 399 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 499 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 801 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 802 Multiple Staff no
Winter '87-88
Days Time Course Instructor TV Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MWF 9:00-9:50 108A Rogers no
MWF 10:00-10:50 106B Staff no
MWF 10:00-10:50 247 Allison no
MWF 10:00-10:50 275 Kay no
MWF 11:00-11:50 108B Wilson yes
MWF 11:00-11:50 112 Staff no enroll in EE182
MWF 11:00-11:50 237B Staff no
MWF 11:00-11:50 245 Wiederhold yes
F 12:05-1:30 522 Staff no SigLunch, Chem Gazebo
MWF 12:50-2:05 223 Genes./Nilsson yes
MWF 1:15-2:05 105A Jones no
MWF 1:15-2:05 106A Reges yes
MWF 1:15-2:05 106X Staff no
MWF 1:15-2:05 360 Knuth no alternate years
MF 2:15-3:05 241 Wilson yes
F 2:15-4:05 356 Halpern yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 021 Rogers yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 149 Bryan yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 154 Ullman yes new formal lang course
MWF 3:15-4:05 154N Ullman yes just 154's NP-Cmpletnss
MWF 3:15-4:05 262 Floyd no
MW 3:15-4:30 364 Papadimitriou no
M 4:15-5:05 510 McCluskey no enroll in EE385A
M 4:15-5:05 527 Binford no Cedar conference
M 4:15-5:05 530 Golub no MJH 352
W 4:15-5:30 540 Staff yes enroll in EE380
MW 7:00-7:50 197 Reges/Staff no LOTS consulting
TTh 8:00-9:15 329 LaTombe yes (new Planning course)
TTh 9:30-10:45 110 Gill yes
TTh 9:30-10:45 248A Guibas yes
TTh 9:30-10:45 257 Waldinger no
TTh 9:30-10:45 264 Dantzig no
TTh 9:30-10:45 265 Tobagi no enroll in EE284
TTh 9:30-10:45 358 Floyd no alternate years
TTh 11:00-12:15 224 Rosenbloom yes
TTh 11:00-12:15 367B Mayr no alternate years
TTh 12:15-1:05 271A Shortliffe no same as MIS 211A
TTh 1:15-2:30 157 Jones yes new logic course
TTh 1:15-2:30 243 Weise yes
TTh 1:15-2:30 327B Binford yes
TTh 2:45-4:00 211 Staff yes enroll in EE381
TTh 2:45-4:00 240A Linton yes
TTh 2:45-4:00 244 Staff no enroll in EE384
TTh 2:45-4:00 304 Staff no
TTh 2:45-4:00 326 Lifschitz no
TTh 4:15-5:30 101 McCarthy yes
TTh 4:15-5:05 198H Smith/McGrory no
T 4:15-5:30 500 Staff yes
Th 4:15-5:05 548 Cheriton no MJH 352
TTh 7:00-7:50 196 Reges/Staff no consulting for micros
TBA 001C Reges/Staff no
TBA 309B Dwork no Industrial Lecturship
TBA 523 Buchanan/Staff no AI qual course
by arrangement 001A Reges/Staff no dorm based
by arrangement 001D Reges/Staff no dorm based
by arrangement 191 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 192 Reuling no
by arrangement 199 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 199P Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 393 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 399 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 499 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 801 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 802 Multiple Staff no
Spring '87-88
Days Time Course Instructor TV Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MWF 9:00-9:50 106A Staff no
MWF 9:00-9:50 108B Wilson no
MWF 9:00-9:50 140 Wilson yes
MWF 10:00-10:50 075 Kay no
MWF 10:00-10:50 105A Rogers no
MWF 10:00-10:50 106X Gorin yes
MWF 10:00-10:50 161 Staff yes new combo of 260/261
MWF 10:00-10:50 254 Floyd no
MWF 11:00-11:50 237C Staff no
MWF 11:00-11:50 323 Nilsson/Genes. yes
F 12:05-1:30 522 Staff no SigLunch, Chem Gazebo
MW 12:50-2:05 110 Chou yes
MW 12:50-2:05 357 Manna yes
MWF 1:15-2:05 106B Reges yes
MWF 1:15-2:05 108A Ullman no
MWF 1:15-2:05 154 Rogers yes new formal lang course
MWF 1:15-2:05 154N Rogers yes just 154's NP-Cmpletnss
MWF 2:15-3:05 345 Staff yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 143A Staff yes
MWF 3:15-4:05 242 Ungar yes
MWF 3:15-4:30 371 Holtzman no same as MIS235, EES235
M 4:15-5:05 510 McCluskey no enroll in EE381
M 4:15-5:05 527 Binford no Cedar conference
M 4:15-5:05 530 Golub no MJH 352
W 4:15-5:30 540 Staff yes enroll in EE380
MW 7:00-7:50 197 Reges/Staff no LOTS consulting
TTh 8:00-9:15 014 Buneman no
TTh 9:30-10:45 344 Tobagi no enroll in EE484
TTh 9:30-10:45 225A Genesereth yes
TTh 9:30-10:45 273 Bigelow no
TTh 9:30-10:45 340 Cheriton yes
TTh 11:00-12:15 277 Perrault/Cohen no
TTh 11:00-12:15 335 Staff no
T 11:00-12:15 520 Nilsson yes
TTh 12:15-1:05 271B Fagn/Coop/Buch no same as MIS 211B
Th 1:15-4:15 368 Guibas no
TTh 1:15-2:30 123 Feigenbaum yes
TTh 1:15-2:30 212 Gupta yes enroll in EE282
TTh 1:15-2:30 327C LaTombe yes
TTh 1:15-2:30 441 Luckham yes
TTh 1:15-2:30 429 Rosenbloom no same as Psych292
TTh 2:45-4:00 240B Staff yes
TTh 2:45-4:00 224 Jones yes
TTh 4:15-5:05 198H Smith/McGrory no
T 4:15-5:30 500 Staff yes
Th 4:15-5:05 548 Cheriton no MJH 352
TTh 7:00-7:50 196 Reges/Staff no consulting for micros
T 7:00-9:00 225B Jones no parallels 225A
TBA 001C Reges/Staff no
TBA 309C Haley no Industrial Lecturship
TBA 328C Pavel no same as Psych289A
by arrangement 001A Reges/Staff no dorm based
by arrangement 001D Reges/Staff no dorm based
by arrangement 191 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 192 Reuling no
by arrangement 199 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 199P Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 393 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 399 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 499 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 801 Multiple Staff no
by arrangement 802 Multiple Staff no
-------
∂05-Apr-87 1011 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK AAAI workshop proposal
Received: from TUNNEL.CS.UCL.AC.UK by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Apr 87 10:11:06 PDT
Received: from cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk by mv1.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id aa04767; 5 Apr 87 17:02 WET
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 87 17:59:13 GMT
Message-Id: <18499.8704051759@tsuna.cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk>
To: phayes <@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK:phayes@sri-kl.arpa>, woods@g.bbn.com,
rjb <@att.arpa:rjb@allegra>, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: AAAI workshop proposal
Hi Pat, Bill, Ron, John,
Since you are all listed in the AAAI87 Conference brochure I thought
I'd send you a copy of this message to Joseph Katz suggesting a
workshop on Philosophical foundations. I'd be interested to know what
you think of the idea and whether any of you would wish to join in.
Best wishes,
Aaron
PS, Pat
Alas I shall not be at AISB so won't be able to see you there.
>From Aaron Sloman Sun Apr 5 17:29:40 GMT 1987
To: katz%mitre.arpa@uk.ac.ucl.cs
Subject: AAAI Workshop on Philosophical Foundations of AI
Hi,
I've just noticed your invitation to submit workshop proposals for
AAAI.
I am not sure what the required format is, but if you thought it
appropriate I would be willing to lead a workshop on philosophical
foundations of computing and AI, if that is an acceptable field.
I would like to address questions about the sense in which machines
themselves can use symbols which THEY understand, have goals which
THEY want to achieve, etc. as opposed to merely being tools for human
beings. There are also many other philosophical issues worth raising
which, I believe, have not yet been addressed adequately by either
philosophical proponents or opponents of AI, including questions about
the nature of representations in connectionist models.
I've discussed some of these issues in various publications, e.g.
The computer revolution in philosophy,
Harvester Press and Humanities Press, 1978 (now out of print)
'Why robots will have emotions' (With Monica Croucher)
in IJCAI 1981
'What enables a machine to understand'
in IJCAI 1985
'Reference without causal links'
in ECAI (European Conference on AI) in 1986
and a book I am writing on philosophical foundations of computing
and AI.
I also led a panel on meaning at IJCAI-83, with Bill Woods, Pat Hayes,
Drew McDermott.
If you wish to consult others as to my suitability for this purpose
several members of the AAAI committee and the conference committee
know or know of me, some well and some not so well, including Woody
Bledsoe, John McCarthy, Pat Hayes, Nils Nilsson, Ron Brachman, John
Seely Brown, Bill Woods, Bonnie Webber, Jerry de Jong, and several
others.
I don't know which of them would be willing to comment. The ones I
have talked to most about these issues are John McCarthy, Pat Hayes,
Ron Brachman and especially Bill Woods.
Please could you let me know whether this message gets to you. ARPA
mail is very uncertain from here. Also let me know if you would like
me to send copies of the above papers.
When would you expect to take a decision? If you accept this proposal
I'll need time to apply for travel funds.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Aaron Sloman
School of Cognitive Sciences,
University of Sussex,
Brighton, BN1 9QN, England
phone: 044 (273) 678294 (University)
044 (273) 506532 (Home).
Email:
UUCP: ...mcvax!ukc!cvaxa!aarons
ARPANET : aarons%uk.ac.sussex.cvaxa@cs.ucl.ac.uk
or aarons@cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk
∂06-Apr-87 0951 guibas@navajo.stanford.edu meeting on foundations candidates, 4/7, 2:30 pm, MJH 146
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 87 09:51:09 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 6 Apr 87 09:49:41 PST
Date: 6 Apr 1987 0949-PST (Monday)
From: Leonidas Guibas <guibas@navajo.stanford.edu>
To: faculty@score.stanford.edu
Cc: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Subject: meeting on foundations candidates, 4/7, 2:30 pm, MJH 146
There will be a faculty meeting to discuss and vote on the
recommendations of the foundations search committee tomorrow, Tuesday,
April 7, at 2:30 pm in MJH 146. This is an important meeting affecting
a vital area of the department, so please plan on attending.
In the meantime, please stop by Phyllis Winkler' office (MJH 330) to
browse through the resumes and letters of the candidates to be
discussed. These are:
Joel Friedman of UC Berkeley
John Mitchell of ATT Bell Labs
Andrew Goldberg of MIT, and
Subhash Suri of Johns Hopkins.
LG
∂06-Apr-87 1339 binford@whitney.stanford.edu congratulations
Received: from WHITNEY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 87 13:38:55 PDT
Received: by whitney.stanford.edu; Mon, 6 Apr 87 13:41:11 PST
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 87 13:41:11 PST
From: Tom Binford <binford@whitney.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: congratulations
John
Congratulations on your chair.
I would have gone to the ceremony but I was out of
town at an ARPA workshop.
Best Regards
Tom
∂06-Apr-87 1546 @Score.Stanford.EDU:AIMAG@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Party for Bob Engelmore
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 87 15:46:47 PDT
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 6 Apr 87 15:44:18-PDT
Date: Mon 6 Apr 87 15:45:35-PDT
From: Mike Hamilton, AI Magazine <AIMAG@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Party for Bob Engelmore
To: mccarthy@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123 or (415) 853-0197
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12292442900.94.AIMAG@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
The Fall 1987 issue of AI Magazine marks the twenty-fifth issue under
Bob Engelmore's editorship. Claudia and I thought it would be nice to
commemorate this event with a surprise dinner for Bob (perhaps at
AAAI-87 in Seattle) and a short lampoon 25th issue (for private
distribution, of course!) of about 16 pages, with short, hopefully
humourous paragraphs and/or anecdotes. The publication could be done
quite inexpensively, and I think we could have some fun with it.
We would like to know if you have any thoughts, ideas, or suggestions
along this line; perhaps even a contribution to the publication!
Thanks for your help.
--Mike Hamilton
-------
∂06-Apr-87 1737 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU EES285 as an elective
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 87 17:37:09 PDT
Date: Mon 6 Apr 87 17:33:24-PDT
From: David Teich <TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: EES285 as an elective
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jutta@Score.Stanford.EDU,
: ;
Message-ID: <12292462528.14.TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Would you be willing to sign for EES285, "Intelligent Management Systems,"
as an elective for my degree program. It would replace one of the electives
listed as options for Symbolic and Heuristic Computation majors.
The course is a new project course taught by Prof. Edison Tse. We will
be analyzing and designing a knowledge system for managers, to aid in
decisions to place companies in a competitive market strategy.
I'm not positive I can fit it into my schedule, but if I can I feel it
will directly involve me in my area of interest. I am interested in seeing
how AI can be used to aid business decisions.
If you agree with me, and I can fit the course into my schedule, I will
get my degree plan check sheet from Jutta and bring it to you for your
signature.
thank you,
david
-------
∂07-Apr-87 1503 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu help
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 87 15:03:10 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA17121; Tue, 7 Apr 87 18:00:48 EST
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (1.1/3.14)
id AA00760; Tue, 7 Apr 87 17:03:17 EST
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 87 17:03:17 EST
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8704072203.AA00760@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: ether.allegra%btl.csnet@relay.cs.net, grosof@sumex-aim,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu, jmc@su-ai, reiter%utai.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net,
val@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: help
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
I am updating my bibliography of non-monotonic reasoning literature, for
inclusion in a forthcoming volume on that topic. I include its current
status below. Please suggest any favorite papers that I may have left out,
whether your own or those of others. Thanks!
P.S. I would like to send this to the Editor in a few days, so a prompt
response would be appreciated.
--Don Perlis
(1) K. Apt, H. Blair, and A. Walker. Towards a theory of
declarative knowledge. In Proceedings of the 1986
Workshop on Foundations of deductive Databases and
Logic Programming, 1986.
(2) Besnard, Ph., Quiniou, R., and Quinton, P. [1983] A
theorem-prover for a decidable subset of default logic.
Proc. AAAI-83, pp. 27-30.
(3) D. G. Bobrow and P. J. Hayes, Artificial intelligence
- where are we? Artificial Intelligence, 24:375-415,
1985.
(4) G. Bossu and P. Siegel. Saturation, nonmonotonic rea-
soning and the closed-world assumption. Artificial
Intelligence, 25:13-63, 1985.
(5) R. J. Brachman. I lied about the trees or, defaults
and definitions in knowledge representation. AI Maga-
zine, 6(3):80-93, 1985.
(6) Clark, K. [1978] Negation as failure. In: Logic and
Databases, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J. (eds.). Plenum
Press, New York, pp. 293-322.
(7) Davis, M. [1980] The mathematics of non-monotonic rea-
soning. Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2), pp. 73-80.
(8) Dempster, A. [1967] Upper and lower probabilities
induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann. Math. Statis-
tics, 38, pp. 325-339.
(9) Doyle, J. [1977] Truth maintenance systems for problem
solving. Proc. 5th IJCAI, p. 247.
(10) Doyle, J. [1979] A glimpse of truth maintenance. Proc.
6th IJCAI, pp. 232-237.
(11) Doyle, J. [1979] A truth maintenance system. Artificial
Intelligence, 12. 231-272.
(12) Doyle, J. [1983] The ins and outs of reason mainte-
nance. Proc. 8th IJCAI, pp. 349-351.
(13) Doyle, J. [1984] Circumscription and implicit defina-
bility. In Proceedings 1984 Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Workshop, pages 57-69, American Association for Artifi-
cial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY.
(14) Doyle, J. [1985] Reasoned assumptions and Pareto
optimality. In Proceedings of the Ninth International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 87-
90.
(15) Doyle, J. [1982]. Some Theories of Reasoned Assump-
tions: An Essay in Rational Psychology. Technical
Report, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie- Mel-
lon University.
(16) Etherington, D. [1982] Finite default theories. MSc
Thesis, University of British Columbia.
(17) Etherington, D. and Reiter, R. [1983] On inheritance
hierarchies with exceptions. Proc. AAAI-83, pp. 104-
108.
(18) D. W. Etherington. Formalizing nonmonotonic reasoning
systems. Artificial Intelligence, 31:41-85, 1987.
(19) D. W. Etherington. Reasoning with Incomplete Informa-
tion: Investigations of Non-Monotonic Reasoning. PhD
thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada, 1986.
(20) Etherington, D.W., Mercer, R. E., and Reiter, R. [1985]
On the adequacy of predicate circumscription for
closed-world reasoning. Comp. Intelligence, 1:11-15.
(21) S. E. Fahlman. NETL: A System for Representing and
Using Real-World Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA,
1979.
(22) Fahlman, S., Touretzky, D., and Van Roggen, W. [1981]
Cancellation in a parallel semantic network. Proc. 7th
IJCAI, pp. 257-263.
(23) R. Fikes an N. J. Nilsson. STRIPS: a new approach to
the application of theorem proving to problem solving.
Artificial Intelligence, 2:189-208, 1971.
(24) J. J. Finger. Exploiting Constraints in Design Syn-
thesis. PhD thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA,
1987.
(25) Gabbay, D. [1982] Intuitionistic basis for non-
monotonic logic. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
Vol. 139, Springer.
(26) M. Gelfond. On Stratified Autoepistemic Theories.
Technical Report, University of Texas at El Paso, 1986.
(27) M. Gelfond and H. Przymusinska. Negation as failure:
Careful closure procedure. Artificial Intelligence,
1987.
(28) M. Gelfond and H. Przymusinska. On the Relationship
between Autoepistemic Logic and Parallel Circumscrip-
tion. Technical Report, University of Texas at El
Paso, 1986.
(29) M. Gelfond, H. Przymusinska, and T. Przymusinski. The
extended closed world assumption and its relationship
to parallel circumscription. In Proceedings of ACM
SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Sys-
tems, pages 133-139, 1986.
(30) M. R. Genesereth. An overview of meta-level architec-
ture. In Proceedings of the Third National Conference
on Artificial Intelligence, pages 119- 124, 1983.
(31) M. R. Genesereth. The use of design descriptions in
automated diagnosis. Artificial Intelligence, 24:411-
436, 1985.
(32) M. R. Genesereth and M. L. Ginsberg. Logic program-
ming. Commun. ACM, 28:933-941, 1985.
(33) M. R. Genesereth and N. J. Nilsson. Logical Founda-
tions of Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann,
1987.
(34) M. P. Georgeff. Many agents are better than one. In
Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions
to the Frame Problem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(35) M. L. Ginsberg. Counterfactuals. Artificial Intelli-
gence, 30:35-80, 1986.
(36) M. L. Ginsberg. Does probability have a place in non-
monotonic reasoning? In Proceedings of the Ninth
International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 107-110, 1985.
(37) M. L. Ginsberg. Multi-valued Inference. Technical
Report 86-73, KSL, Stanford University, 1986.
(38) M. L. Ginsberg. Multi-valued Logics. Technical Report
86-29, KSL, Stanford University, 1986.
(39) M. L. Ginsberg. Multi-valued logics. In Proceedings
of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 243-247, 1986.
(40) M. L. Ginsberg. Non-monotonic reasoning using
Dempster's rule. In Proceedings of the Fourth National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 126-129,
1984.
(41) M. L. Ginsberg. Steps toward a general-purpose infer-
ence engine. In Proceedings of the Sixth National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1987.
(42) M. L. Ginsberg and D. E. Smith. Reasoning about action
I: A possible worlds approach. In Proceedings of the
1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions to the Frame Prob-
lem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(43) M. L. Ginsberg and D. E. Smith. Reasoning about action
II: The qualification problem. In Proceedings of the
1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions to the Frame
Problem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(44) Grant, J. and Minker, J. [1984] Answering queries in
indefinite databases and the null value problem. Tech.
Report 1374, University of Maryland.
(45) B. N. Grosof. Non-monotonicity in probabilistic rea-
soning. In Proceedings 1986 Workshop on Uncertainty in
Artificial Intelligence, pages 91-98, Philadelphia, PA,
1986.
(46) Grosof, B. Default Reasoning as Circumscription,
Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, NY,
sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(47) Haas, A. [1981] Reasoning about deduction with unknown
constants. Proc. 7th IJCAI, pp. 382-384.
(48) J. Y. Halpern and Y. Moses. Towards a theory of
knowledge and ignorance. In Proceedings 1984 Non-
monotonic Reasoning Workshop, pages 165-193, American
Association for Artificial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY,
1984.
(49) S. Hanks and D. McDermott. Default reasning, nonmono-
tonic logics and the frame problem. In Proceedings of
the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 328-333, 1986.
(50) Israel, D. [1980] What's wrong with non-monotonic
logic? Proc. AAAI-80, pp. 99-101.
(51) D. J. Israel. What's wrong with non-monotonic logic?
In Proceedings of the First National Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, pages 99-101, 1980.
(52) H. A. Kautz. The logic of persistence. In Proceedings
of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 401-405, 1986.
(53) J. de Kleer. An assumption-based truth maintenance
system. Artificial Intelligence, 28:127-162, 1986.
(54) J. de Kleer. Choices without backtracking. In
Proceedings of the Fourth National Conference on Artif-
icial Intelligence, pages 79-85, 1984.
(55) J. de Kleer. Extending the ATMS. Artificial Intelli-
gence, 28:163-196, 1986.
(56) J. de Kleer. Problem solving with the ATMS. Artifi-
cial Intelligence, 28:197-224, 1986.
(57) J. de Kleer and B. C. Williams. Diagnosing multiple
faults. Artificial Intelligence, 31, 1987.
(58) Konolige, K. [1982] Circumscriptive ignorance. Proc.
AAAI-82, pp. 202-204.
(59) Konolige, K. [1984] Belief and incompleteness. SRI
Tech. Note 319.
(60) K. Konolige. On the relation between default theories
and autoepistemic logic. In M. L. Ginsberg, editor,
Readings in Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann,
Los Altos, CA, 1987.
(61) K. Konolige and K. L. Myers. Representing defaults
with epistemic concepts. In Proceedings of the Sixth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1987.
(62) Kowalski, R. [1978] Logic for data description. In:
Logic and Databases, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J.
(eds.). Plenum Press, New York, pp. 77-103.
(63) Kowalski, R. [1979] Logic for Problem Solving. North-
Holland, New York.
(64) R. Kowalski and M. Sergot. A logic-based calculus of
events. New Generation Computing, 4:67-95, 1986.
(65) I. Kramosil. A note on deduction rules with negative
premises. In Proceedings of the Fourth International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 53-
56, 1975.
(66) Kramosil, I. [1975] A note on deduction rules with
negative premises. Proc. 4th IJCAI, pp. 53-56.
(67) Kueker, D. Another Failure of Completeness for Cir-
cumscription, Week on Logic and Artificial Intelli-
gence, Univ. of Maryland, Oct. 22-26, 1984.
(68) Levesque, H. [1981] Incompleteness in knowledge bases.
SIGART Newsletter 74, p. 150ff.
(69) Levesque, H. [1981] The interaction with incomplete
knowledge bases: a formal treatment. Proc. 7th IJCAI,
pp. 240-245.
(70) Levesque, H.J. [1982] A formal treatment of incomplete
knowledge. Fairchild Lab for AI Research, Tech. Report
3.
(71) Lifschitz, V. [1984] Some Results on Circumscription,
Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, NY,
sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(72) V. Lifschitz. Closed-world databases and circumscrip-
tion. Artificial Intelligence, 27:229-235, 1985.
(73) V. Lifschitz. Computing circumscription. In Proceed-
ings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, pages 121-127, 1985.
(74) V. Lifschitz. On the declarative semantics of logic
programs with negation. In Proceedings of the 1986
Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases and
Logic Programming, 1986.
(75) V. Lifschitz. On the satisfiability of circumscrip-
tion. Artificial Intelligence, 28:17-27, 1986.
(76) V. Lifschitz. Pointwise circumscription. In M. L.
Ginsberg, editor, Readings in Non-Monotonic Reasoning,
Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1987.
(77) V. Lifschitz. Pointwise circumscription: preliminary
report. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Confer-
ence on Artificial Intelligence, pages 406-410, 1986.
(78) Lipski, W. [1977] On the logic of incomplete informa-
tion. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, v.53,
Springer, pp. 374-381. (6th Symposium on Mathematical
Foundations of Computer Science)
(79) V. Lukaszewicz. Considerations on default logic. In
Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning Workshop,
pages 165-193, American Association for Artificial
Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(80) Lukaszewicz, W. [1983] General approach to nonmonotonic
logics. Proc. 8th IJCAI, pp. 352-354.
(81) J. P. Martins and S. C. Shapiro. A model for belief
revision. In Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning
Workshop, pages 241-294, American Association for
Artificial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(82) J. P. Martins and S. C. Shapiro. Reasoning in multiple
belief spaces. In Proceedings of the Eigth Interna-
tional Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence,
pages 370-373, 1983.
(83) McCarthy, J. [1980] Circumscription--a form of non-
monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2),
pp. 27-39.
(84) McCarthy, J. [1980] Addendum: circumscription and other
non-monotonic formalisms. Artificial Intelligence, 13
(1,2), pp. 171-172.
(85) McCarthy, J. [1984] Applications of Circumscription to
Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge, Workshop on Non-
monotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, NY, sponsored by AAAI,
Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(86) J. McCarthy. Applictions of circumscription to formal-
izing common sense knowledge. Artificial Intelligence,
28:89-116, 1986.
(87) J. McCarthy. Circumscription - a form of non-monotonic
reasoning. Artificial intelligence, 13:27-39, 1980.
(88) J. McCarthy. Epistemological problems of artificial
intelligence. In Proceedings of the Fifth Interna-
tional Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence,
pages 1038-1044, Cambridge, MA, 1977.
(89) McCarthy, J. and Hayes, P. [1969] Some philosophical
problems from the standpoint of artificial intelli-
gence. In Machine Intelligence 4, Meltzer, B. and
Michie, D. (eds.), Edinburgh University Press.
(90) McDermott, D. [1982] Non-monotonic logic II: non-
monotonic modal theories. Journal of the ACM, 29 (1),
pp. 33-57.
(91) McDermott, D. and Doyle, J. [1980] Non-monotonic logic
I. Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2), pp. 41-72.
(92) D. McDermott. AI, logic, and the frame problem. In
Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions
to the Frame Problem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(93) D. McDermott. A critique of pure reason. To appear.
(94) Mercer, R. and Rosenberg, R.S. [1984] Generating
corrective answers by computing presuppositions of
answers, not questions, or Mind your P's, not Q's. Proc
CSCSI-84, pp16-18.
(95) J. Minker and D. Perlis. Protected circumscription.
In Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning Workshop,
pages 337-343, American Association for Artificial
Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(96) Minker, J. [1982] On indefinite databases and the
closed-world assumption. Lecture Notes in Computer Sci-
ence, v. 138, pp. 292-308, Springer. (6th Conference on
Automated Deduction).
(97) Minker, J. and Perlis, D. [1984b] Applications of pro-
tected circumscription. Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, v. 170, pp. 414-425, Springer. (7th Conference
on Automated Deduction).
(98) M. Minsky. A framework for representing knowledge. In
P. Winston, editor, The Psychology of Computer Vision,
pages 211-277, McGraw-Hill, 1975.
(99) R. Moore. Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic
logic. Artificial Intelligence, 25:75-94, 1985.
(100)
Moore, R. [1975] Reasoning from incomplete knowledge in
a procedural deduction system. MIT AI Lab Memo 347.
(101)
Moore, R. [1983] Semantical considerations on non-
monotonic logic. Proc. 8th IJCAI, pp. 272-279.
(102)
J. Nutter. Default reasoning using monotonic logic: A
modest proposal. In Proceedings of the Third National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 297-300,
1983.
(103)
Nutter, J. [1983] Default reasoning in AI systems. MSc
Thesis, SUNY at Buffalo, Computer Science Tech. Report
204.
(104)
Nutter, J. [1983] What else is wrong with nonmonotonic
logics? Representational and informational shortcom-
ings. Proc. 5th Cognitive Science Conference, Roches-
ter.
(105)
Papalaskaris, M. A. and Bundy, A. [1984] Topics for
Circumscription. Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning,
New Paltz, NY, sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(106)
Pena, L. [1980] The philosophical relevance of a con-
tradictorial system of logic. Proc. 10th Int'l Sympo-
sium on Multiple-valued Logic, pp. 238-252.
(107)
D. Perlis. Bibliography of literature on non-monotonic
reasoning. In Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning
Workshop, pages 396-401, American Association for
Artificial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(108)
D. Perlis. On the consistency of commonsense reason-
ing. Computational Intelligence, 1987, pp??
(109)
Perlis, D. [1984] Non-monotonicity and real-time rea-
soning. Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, New Paltz,
NY, sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(110)
Perlis, D. [1987] Circumscribing with sets. Artificial
Intelligence.??
(111)
Perlis, D. [1987] Auto-circumscription. Draft??
(112)
D. Perlis and J. Minker. Completeness results for cir-
cumscription. Artificial Intelligence, 28:29-42, 1986.
(113)
R. Perrault. An Application of Default Logic to Speech
Act Theory. Technical Report, SRI International, 1987.
(114)
T. C. Przymusinski. Query-answering in circumscriptive
and closed-world theories. In Proceedings of the Fifth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages
186-190, 1986.
(115)
R. Reiter. Nonmonotonic reasoning. Annual Reviews of
Computer Science, 1987.
(116)
R. Reiter. On closed world data bases. In H. Gallaire
and J. Minker, editors, Logic and Data Bases, pages
119-140, Plenum, New York, 1978.
(117)
R. Reiter. A Theory of Diagnosis from First Princi-
ples. Technical Report 187/86, Computer Science
Department, University of Toronto, 1985.
(118)
Reiter, R. [1978] On closed world databases. In:
Logic and Databases, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J.
(eds.), Plenum, pp. 55-76.
(119)
Reiter, R. [1978] On reasoning by default. Proc
TINLAP-2, Urbanna, Ill.
(120)
Reiter, R. [1980] Equality and domain closure
in first-order databases. Journal of the ACM 27
(2), pp. 235-249.
(121)
Reiter, R. [1980] A logic for default reasoning, Artif-
icial Intelligence 13 (1,2), pp. 81-132.
(122)
Reiter, R. [1982] circumscription implies predi-
cate completion (sometimes). Proc. AAAI-82, pp.
418-420.
(123)
R. Reiter and G. Criscuolo. On interacting defaults.
In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 270-276,
1981.
(124)
Reiter, R. and Criscuolo, G. [1983] Some representa-
tional issues in default reasoning. Int. J. Computers
and Mathematics (special issue on computational
linguistics).
(125)
Rescher, N. [1976] Plausible Inference. Van Gorcum,
Assen, The Netherlands.(126)
E. Rich. Default reasoning as likelihood reasoning.
In Proceedings of the Third National Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, pages 348-351, 1983.
(127)
S. Russell. The Compleat Guide to MRS. Technical
Report STAN-CS-85-1080, Stanford University, June 1985.
(128)
Sandewall, E. [1972] An approach to the frame problem
and its implementation. Machine Intelligence 7.
(129)
Sandewall, E. [1983] Partial models, attribute propoga-
tion systems, and non-monotonic semantics. Linkoping
University. LITH-IDA-R-83-01.
(130)
Shafer, G. [1976] A Mathematical Theory of Evidence.
Princeton Univ. Press.
(131)
J. C. Shepherdson. Negation as failure: A comparison
of Clark's completed data base and Reiter's closed
world assumption. J. Logic Programming, 1:51-79, 1984.
(132)
J. C. Shepherdson. Negation as failure II. J. Logic
Programming, 3:185- 202, 1985.
(133)
Y. Shoham. Chronological ignorance. In Proceedings of
the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 389-393, 1986.
(134)
Y. Shoham. Non-monotonic logics. In M. L. Ginsberg,
editor, Readings in Non_Monotonic Reasoning, Morgan
Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1987.
(135)
E. H. Shortliffe. Computer-based Medical Consulta-
tions: MYCIN, American Elsevier, New York, 1976.
(136)
Stalnaker, R. [1980] A note on non-monotonic modal
logic. Dept. of Philosophy, Cornell University.
(137)
Touretzky, D. [1984] The mathematics of inheritance
systems. Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie-Mellon University.
(138)
D. S. Touretzky. Implicit ordering of defaults in
inheritance systems. In Proceedings of the Fifth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages
322-325, 1984.
(139)
Vere, S. [1980] Multi-level counterfactuals for gen-
eralizations of relational concepts and productions.
Artificial Intelligence, 14 (2), pp. 139-164.
(140)
A. Van Gelder. Negation as failure using tight deriva-
tions for general logic programs. In Proceedings of
the 1986 Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases
and Logic Programming, 1986.
(141)
Weyhrauch, R. [1980] Prolegomena to a theory of mechan-
ized formal reasoning Artificial Intelligence, 13
(1,2), pp. 133-170.
(142)
Winograd, T. [1980] Extended inference modes in reason-
ing by computer systems. Artificial Intelligence 13
(1,2), pp. 5-26.
(143)
A. Yahya and L. J. Henschen. Deduction in non-Horn
databases. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 1:141-160,
1985.
(144)
Non-Monotonic Reasoning Workshop, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(145)
Workshop on Logical Solutions to the Frame Problem,
Morgan Kaufmann, Lawrence, KS, 1987.
(146)
Workshop on Uncertainty and Probability in Artificial
Intelligence, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, 1985.
(147)
Workshop on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 1986.
~h
∂07-Apr-87 1726 PAPA@score.stanford.edu Friedman
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 87 17:26:42 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Tue, 7 Apr 87 17:25:30 PST
Date: Tue 7 Apr 87 17:21:28-PDT
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Friedman
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12292722500.20.PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Peter Sarnak knocked on my door to discuss Friedman. He feels that we have
a good chance to get him. One new piece of information was that it would
not be automatic, or easy, to have Math offer Joel a half tenure-track
position, even if the Deans threw in one. This would go against tradition
and recently establish policy. However, they would be prepared to consider
him in three years fro a second-term Assistant Professor. This makes this
look like an exercise in titles and names, but maybe Gibbons does not feel
this way.
Sarnak wants one of us to meet with his Chairman tomorrow at 1:30. Leo, can
you make it? Also, some of us to be involved in Joel's visit Thursday.
---Christos.
-------
∂07-Apr-87 1740 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu repeat message
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 87 17:39:36 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA21863; Tue, 7 Apr 87 20:39:12 EST
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (1.1/3.14)
id AA01070; Tue, 7 Apr 87 19:41:44 EST
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 87 19:41:44 EST
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8704080041.AA01070@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: ether.allegra%btl.csnet@relay.cs.net, grosof@sail.stanford.edu,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu, reiter%utai.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net,
val@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: repeat message
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
There was a mailer error reported in my previous attempt to send this,
so you may or may not get two copies...
I am updating my bibliography of non-monotonic reasoning literature, for
inclusion in a forthcoming volume on that topic. I include its current
status below. Please suggest any favorite papers that I may have left out,
whether your own or those of others. Thanks!
P.S. I would like to send this to the Editor in a few days, so a prompt
response would be appreciated.
--Don Perlis
(1) K. Apt, H. Blair, and A. Walker. Towards a theory of
declarative knowledge. In Proceedings of the 1986
Workshop on Foundations of deductive Databases and
Logic Programming, 1986.
(2) Besnard, Ph., Quiniou, R., and Quinton, P. [1983] A
theorem-prover for a decidable subset of default logic.
Proc. AAAI-83, pp. 27-30.
(3) D. G. Bobrow and P. J. Hayes, Artificial intelligence
- where are we? Artificial Intelligence, 24:375-415,
1985.
(4) G. Bossu and P. Siegel. Saturation, nonmonotonic rea-
soning and the closed-world assumption. Artificial
Intelligence, 25:13-63, 1985.
(5) R. J. Brachman. I lied about the trees or, defaults
and definitions in knowledge representation. AI Maga-
zine, 6(3):80-93, 1985.
(6) Clark, K. [1978] Negation as failure. In: Logic and
Databases, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J. (eds.). Plenum
Press, New York, pp. 293-322.
(7) Davis, M. [1980] The mathematics of non-monotonic rea-
soning. Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2), pp. 73-80.
(8) Dempster, A. [1967] Upper and lower probabilities
induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann. Math. Statis-
tics, 38, pp. 325-339.
(9) Doyle, J. [1977] Truth maintenance systems for problem
solving. Proc. 5th IJCAI, p. 247.
(10) Doyle, J. [1979] A glimpse of truth maintenance. Proc.
6th IJCAI, pp. 232-237.
(11) Doyle, J. [1979] A truth maintenance system. Artificial
Intelligence, 12. 231-272.
(12) Doyle, J. [1983] The ins and outs of reason mainte-
nance. Proc. 8th IJCAI, pp. 349-351.
(13) Doyle, J. [1984] Circumscription and implicit defina-
bility. In Proceedings 1984 Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Workshop, pages 57-69, American Association for Artifi-
cial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY.
(14) Doyle, J. [1985] Reasoned assumptions and Pareto
optimality. In Proceedings of the Ninth International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 87-
90.
(15) Doyle, J. [1982]. Some Theories of Reasoned Assump-
tions: An Essay in Rational Psychology. Technical
Report, Department of Computer Science, Carnegie- Mel-
lon University.
(16) Etherington, D. [1982] Finite default theories. MSc
Thesis, University of British Columbia.
(17) Etherington, D. and Reiter, R. [1983] On inheritance
hierarchies with exceptions. Proc. AAAI-83, pp. 104-
108.
(18) D. W. Etherington. Formalizing nonmonotonic reasoning
systems. Artificial Intelligence, 31:41-85, 1987.
(19) D. W. Etherington. Reasoning with Incomplete Informa-
tion: Investigations of Non-Monotonic Reasoning. PhD
thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,
Canada, 1986.
(20) Etherington, D.W., Mercer, R. E., and Reiter, R. [1985]
On the adequacy of predicate circumscription for
closed-world reasoning. Comp. Intelligence, 1:11-15.
(21) S. E. Fahlman. NETL: A System for Representing and
Using Real-World Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA,
1979.
(22) Fahlman, S., Touretzky, D., and Van Roggen, W. [1981]
Cancellation in a parallel semantic network. Proc. 7th
IJCAI, pp. 257-263.
(23) R. Fikes an N. J. Nilsson. STRIPS: a new approach to
the application of theorem proving to problem solving.
Artificial Intelligence, 2:189-208, 1971.
(24) J. J. Finger. Exploiting Constraints in Design Syn-
thesis. PhD thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA,
1987.
(25) Gabbay, D. [1982] Intuitionistic basis for non-
monotonic logic. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
Vol. 139, Springer.
(26) M. Gelfond. On Stratified Autoepistemic Theories.
Technical Report, University of Texas at El Paso, 1986.
(27) M. Gelfond and H. Przymusinska. Negation as failure:
Careful closure procedure. Artificial Intelligence,
1987.
(28) M. Gelfond and H. Przymusinska. On the Relationship
between Autoepistemic Logic and Parallel Circumscrip-
tion. Technical Report, University of Texas at El
Paso, 1986.
(29) M. Gelfond, H. Przymusinska, and T. Przymusinski. The
extended closed world assumption and its relationship
to parallel circumscription. In Proceedings of ACM
SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Sys-
tems, pages 133-139, 1986.
(30) M. R. Genesereth. An overview of meta-level architec-
ture. In Proceedings of the Third National Conference
on Artificial Intelligence, pages 119- 124, 1983.
(31) M. R. Genesereth. The use of design descriptions in
automated diagnosis. Artificial Intelligence, 24:411-
436, 1985.
(32) M. R. Genesereth and M. L. Ginsberg. Logic program-
ming. Commun. ACM, 28:933-941, 1985.
(33) M. R. Genesereth and N. J. Nilsson. Logical Founda-
tions of Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann,
1987.
(34) M. P. Georgeff. Many agents are better than one. In
Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions
to the Frame Problem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(35) M. L. Ginsberg. Counterfactuals. Artificial Intelli-
gence, 30:35-80, 1986.
(36) M. L. Ginsberg. Does probability have a place in non-
monotonic reasoning? In Proceedings of the Ninth
International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 107-110, 1985.
(37) M. L. Ginsberg. Multi-valued Inference. Technical
Report 86-73, KSL, Stanford University, 1986.
(38) M. L. Ginsberg. Multi-valued Logics. Technical Report
86-29, KSL, Stanford University, 1986.
(39) M. L. Ginsberg. Multi-valued logics. In Proceedings
of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 243-247, 1986.
(40) M. L. Ginsberg. Non-monotonic reasoning using
Dempster's rule. In Proceedings of the Fourth National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 126-129,
1984.
(41) M. L. Ginsberg. Steps toward a general-purpose infer-
ence engine. In Proceedings of the Sixth National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1987.
(42) M. L. Ginsberg and D. E. Smith. Reasoning about action
I: A possible worlds approach. In Proceedings of the
1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions to the Frame Prob-
lem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(43) M. L. Ginsberg and D. E. Smith. Reasoning about action
II: The qualification problem. In Proceedings of the
1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions to the Frame
Problem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(44) Grant, J. and Minker, J. [1984] Answering queries in
indefinite databases and the null value problem. Tech.
Report 1374, University of Maryland.
(45) B. N. Grosof. Non-monotonicity in probabilistic rea-
soning. In Proceedings 1986 Workshop on Uncertainty in
Artificial Intelligence, pages 91-98, Philadelphia, PA,
1986.
(46) Grosof, B. Default Reasoning as Circumscription,
Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, NY,
sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(47) Haas, A. [1981] Reasoning about deduction with unknown
constants. Proc. 7th IJCAI, pp. 382-384.
(48) J. Y. Halpern and Y. Moses. Towards a theory of
knowledge and ignorance. In Proceedings 1984 Non-
monotonic Reasoning Workshop, pages 165-193, American
Association for Artificial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY,
1984.
(49) S. Hanks and D. McDermott. Default reasning, nonmono-
tonic logics and the frame problem. In Proceedings of
the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 328-333, 1986.
(50) Israel, D. [1980] What's wrong with non-monotonic
logic? Proc. AAAI-80, pp. 99-101.
(51) D. J. Israel. What's wrong with non-monotonic logic?
In Proceedings of the First National Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, pages 99-101, 1980.
(52) H. A. Kautz. The logic of persistence. In Proceedings
of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 401-405, 1986.
(53) J. de Kleer. An assumption-based truth maintenance
system. Artificial Intelligence, 28:127-162, 1986.
(54) J. de Kleer. Choices without backtracking. In
Proceedings of the Fourth National Conference on Artif-
icial Intelligence, pages 79-85, 1984.
(55) J. de Kleer. Extending the ATMS. Artificial Intelli-
gence, 28:163-196, 1986.
(56) J. de Kleer. Problem solving with the ATMS. Artifi-
cial Intelligence, 28:197-224, 1986.
(57) J. de Kleer and B. C. Williams. Diagnosing multiple
faults. Artificial Intelligence, 31, 1987.
(58) Konolige, K. [1982] Circumscriptive ignorance. Proc.
AAAI-82, pp. 202-204.
(59) Konolige, K. [1984] Belief and incompleteness. SRI
Tech. Note 319.
(60) K. Konolige. On the relation between default theories
and autoepistemic logic. In M. L. Ginsberg, editor,
Readings in Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann,
Los Altos, CA, 1987.
(61) K. Konolige and K. L. Myers. Representing defaults
with epistemic concepts. In Proceedings of the Sixth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1987.
(62) Kowalski, R. [1978] Logic for data description. In:
Logic and Databases, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J.
(eds.). Plenum Press, New York, pp. 77-103.
(63) Kowalski, R. [1979] Logic for Problem Solving. North-
Holland, New York.
(64) R. Kowalski and M. Sergot. A logic-based calculus of
events. New Generation Computing, 4:67-95, 1986.
(65) I. Kramosil. A note on deduction rules with negative
premises. In Proceedings of the Fourth International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 53-
56, 1975.
(66) Kramosil, I. [1975] A note on deduction rules with
negative premises. Proc. 4th IJCAI, pp. 53-56.
(67) Kueker, D. Another Failure of Completeness for Cir-
cumscription, Week on Logic and Artificial Intelli-
gence, Univ. of Maryland, Oct. 22-26, 1984.
(68) Levesque, H. [1981] Incompleteness in knowledge bases.
SIGART Newsletter 74, p. 150ff.
(69) Levesque, H. [1981] The interaction with incomplete
knowledge bases: a formal treatment. Proc. 7th IJCAI,
pp. 240-245.
(70) Levesque, H.J. [1982] A formal treatment of incomplete
knowledge. Fairchild Lab for AI Research, Tech. Report
3.
(71) Lifschitz, V. [1984] Some Results on Circumscription,
Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, NY,
sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(72) V. Lifschitz. Closed-world databases and circumscrip-
tion. Artificial Intelligence, 27:229-235, 1985.
(73) V. Lifschitz. Computing circumscription. In Proceed-
ings of the Ninth International Joint Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, pages 121-127, 1985.
(74) V. Lifschitz. On the declarative semantics of logic
programs with negation. In Proceedings of the 1986
Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases and
Logic Programming, 1986.
(75) V. Lifschitz. On the satisfiability of circumscrip-
tion. Artificial Intelligence, 28:17-27, 1986.
(76) V. Lifschitz. Pointwise circumscription. In M. L.
Ginsberg, editor, Readings in Non-Monotonic Reasoning,
Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1987.
(77) V. Lifschitz. Pointwise circumscription: preliminary
report. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Confer-
ence on Artificial Intelligence, pages 406-410, 1986.
(78) Lipski, W. [1977] On the logic of incomplete informa-
tion. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, v.53,
Springer, pp. 374-381. (6th Symposium on Mathematical
Foundations of Computer Science)
(79) V. Lukaszewicz. Considerations on default logic. In
Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning Workshop,
pages 165-193, American Association for Artificial
Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(80) Lukaszewicz, W. [1983] General approach to nonmonotonic
logics. Proc. 8th IJCAI, pp. 352-354.
(81) J. P. Martins and S. C. Shapiro. A model for belief
revision. In Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning
Workshop, pages 241-294, American Association for
Artificial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(82) J. P. Martins and S. C. Shapiro. Reasoning in multiple
belief spaces. In Proceedings of the Eigth Interna-
tional Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence,
pages 370-373, 1983.
(83) McCarthy, J. [1980] Circumscription--a form of non-
monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2),
pp. 27-39.
(84) McCarthy, J. [1980] Addendum: circumscription and other
non-monotonic formalisms. Artificial Intelligence, 13
(1,2), pp. 171-172.
(85) McCarthy, J. [1984] Applications of Circumscription to
Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge, Workshop on Non-
monotonic Reasoning, New Paltz, NY, sponsored by AAAI,
Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(86) J. McCarthy. Applictions of circumscription to formal-
izing common sense knowledge. Artificial Intelligence,
28:89-116, 1986.
(87) J. McCarthy. Circumscription - a form of non-monotonic
reasoning. Artificial intelligence, 13:27-39, 1980.
(88) J. McCarthy. Epistemological problems of artificial
intelligence. In Proceedings of the Fifth Interna-
tional Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence,
pages 1038-1044, Cambridge, MA, 1977.
(89) McCarthy, J. and Hayes, P. [1969] Some philosophical
problems from the standpoint of artificial intelli-
gence. In Machine Intelligence 4, Meltzer, B. and
Michie, D. (eds.), Edinburgh University Press.
(90) McDermott, D. [1982] Non-monotonic logic II: non-
monotonic modal theories. Journal of the ACM, 29 (1),
pp. 33-57.
(91) McDermott, D. and Doyle, J. [1980] Non-monotonic logic
I. Artificial Intelligence, 13 (1,2), pp. 41-72.
(92) D. McDermott. AI, logic, and the frame problem. In
Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop on Logical Solutions
to the Frame Problem, Lawrence, Kansas, 1987.
(93) D. McDermott. A critique of pure reason. To appear.
(94) Mercer, R. and Rosenberg, R.S. [1984] Generating
corrective answers by computing presuppositions of
answers, not questions, or Mind your P's, not Q's. Proc
CSCSI-84, pp16-18.
(95) J. Minker and D. Perlis. Protected circumscription.
In Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning Workshop,
pages 337-343, American Association for Artificial
Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(96) Minker, J. [1982] On indefinite databases and the
closed-world assumption. Lecture Notes in Computer Sci-
ence, v. 138, pp. 292-308, Springer. (6th Conference on
Automated Deduction).
(97) Minker, J. and Perlis, D. [1984b] Applications of pro-
tected circumscription. Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, v. 170, pp. 414-425, Springer. (7th Conference
on Automated Deduction).
(98) M. Minsky. A framework for representing knowledge. In
P. Winston, editor, The Psychology of Computer Vision,
pages 211-277, McGraw-Hill, 1975.
(99) R. Moore. Semantical considerations on nonmonotonic
logic. Artificial Intelligence, 25:75-94, 1985.
(100)
Moore, R. [1975] Reasoning from incomplete knowledge in
a procedural deduction system. MIT AI Lab Memo 347.
(101)
Moore, R. [1983] Semantical considerations on non-
monotonic logic. Proc. 8th IJCAI, pp. 272-279.
(102)
J. Nutter. Default reasoning using monotonic logic: A
modest proposal. In Proceedings of the Third National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 297-300,
1983.
(103)
Nutter, J. [1983] Default reasoning in AI systems. MSc
Thesis, SUNY at Buffalo, Computer Science Tech. Report
204.
(104)
Nutter, J. [1983] What else is wrong with nonmonotonic
logics? Representational and informational shortcom-
ings. Proc. 5th Cognitive Science Conference, Roches-
ter.
(105)
Papalaskaris, M. A. and Bundy, A. [1984] Topics for
Circumscription. Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning,
New Paltz, NY, sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(106)
Pena, L. [1980] The philosophical relevance of a con-
tradictorial system of logic. Proc. 10th Int'l Sympo-
sium on Multiple-valued Logic, pp. 238-252.
(107)
D. Perlis. Bibliography of literature on non-monotonic
reasoning. In Proceedings 1984 Non-monotonic Reasoning
Workshop, pages 396-401, American Association for
Artificial Intelligence, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(108)
D. Perlis. On the consistency of commonsense reason-
ing. Computational Intelligence, 1987, pp??
(109)
Perlis, D. [1984] Non-monotonicity and real-time rea-
soning. Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, New Paltz,
NY, sponsored by AAAI, Oct. 17-19, 1984.
(110)
Perlis, D. [1987] Circumscribing with sets. Artificial
Intelligence.??
(111)
Perlis, D. [1987] Auto-circumscription. Draft??
(112)
D. Perlis and J. Minker. Completeness results for cir-
cumscription. Artificial Intelligence, 28:29-42, 1986.
(113)
R. Perrault. An Application of Default Logic to Speech
Act Theory. Technical Report, SRI International, 1987.
(114)
T. C. Przymusinski. Query-answering in circumscriptive
and closed-world theories. In Proceedings of the Fifth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages
186-190, 1986.
(115)
R. Reiter. Nonmonotonic reasoning. Annual Reviews of
Computer Science, 1987.
(116)
R. Reiter. On closed world data bases. In H. Gallaire
and J. Minker, editors, Logic and Data Bases, pages
119-140, Plenum, New York, 1978.
(117)
R. Reiter. A Theory of Diagnosis from First Princi-
ples. Technical Report 187/86, Computer Science
Department, University of Toronto, 1985.
(118)
Reiter, R. [1978] On closed world databases. In:
Logic and Databases, Gallaire, H. and Minker, J.
(eds.), Plenum, pp. 55-76.
(119)
Reiter, R. [1978] On reasoning by default. Proc
TINLAP-2, Urbanna, Ill.
(120)
Reiter, R. [1980] Equality and domain closure
in first-order databases. Journal of the ACM 27
(2), pp. 235-249.
(121)
Reiter, R. [1980] A logic for default reasoning, Artif-
icial Intelligence 13 (1,2), pp. 81-132.
(122)
Reiter, R. [1982] circumscription implies predi-
cate completion (sometimes). Proc. AAAI-82, pp.
418-420.
(123)
R. Reiter and G. Criscuolo. On interacting defaults.
In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 270-276,
1981.
(124)
Reiter, R. and Criscuolo, G. [1983] Some representa-
tional issues in default reasoning. Int. J. Computers
and Mathematics (special issue on computational
linguistics).
(125)
Rescher, N. [1976] Plausible Inference. Van Gorcum,
Assen, The Netherlands.(126)
E. Rich. Default reasoning as likelihood reasoning.
In Proceedings of the Third National Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, pages 348-351, 1983.
(127)
S. Russell. The Compleat Guide to MRS. Technical
Report STAN-CS-85-1080, Stanford University, June 1985.
(128)
Sandewall, E. [1972] An approach to the frame problem
and its implementation. Machine Intelligence 7.
(129)
Sandewall, E. [1983] Partial models, attribute propoga-
tion systems, and non-monotonic semantics. Linkoping
University. LITH-IDA-R-83-01.
(130)
Shafer, G. [1976] A Mathematical Theory of Evidence.
Princeton Univ. Press.
(131)
J. C. Shepherdson. Negation as failure: A comparison
of Clark's completed data base and Reiter's closed
world assumption. J. Logic Programming, 1:51-79, 1984.
(132)
J. C. Shepherdson. Negation as failure II. J. Logic
Programming, 3:185- 202, 1985.
(133)
Y. Shoham. Chronological ignorance. In Proceedings of
the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence, pages 389-393, 1986.
(134)
Y. Shoham. Non-monotonic logics. In M. L. Ginsberg,
editor, Readings in Non_Monotonic Reasoning, Morgan
Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1987.
(135)
E. H. Shortliffe. Computer-based Medical Consulta-
tions: MYCIN, American Elsevier, New York, 1976.
(136)
Stalnaker, R. [1980] A note on non-monotonic modal
logic. Dept. of Philosophy, Cornell University.
(137)
Touretzky, D. [1984] The mathematics of inheritance
systems. Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie-Mellon University.
(138)
D. S. Touretzky. Implicit ordering of defaults in
inheritance systems. In Proceedings of the Fifth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages
322-325, 1984.
(139)
Vere, S. [1980] Multi-level counterfactuals for gen-
eralizations of relational concepts and productions.
Artificial Intelligence, 14 (2), pp. 139-164.
(140)
A. Van Gelder. Negation as failure using tight deriva-
tions for general logic programs. In Proceedings of
the 1986 Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases
and Logic Programming, 1986.
(141)
Weyhrauch, R. [1980] Prolegomena to a theory of mechan-
ized formal reasoning Artificial Intelligence, 13
(1,2), pp. 133-170.
(142)
Winograd, T. [1980] Extended inference modes in reason-
ing by computer systems. Artificial Intelligence 13
(1,2), pp. 5-26.
(143)
A. Yahya and L. J. Henschen. Deduction in non-Horn
databases. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 1:141-160,
1985.
(144)
Non-Monotonic Reasoning Workshop, New Paltz, NY, 1984.
(145)
Workshop on Logical Solutions to the Frame Problem,
Morgan Kaufmann, Lawrence, KS, 1987.
(146)
Workshop on Uncertainty and Probability in Artificial
Intelligence, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, 1985.
(147)
Workshop on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 1986.
∂07-Apr-87 1846 daniel@mojave.stanford.edu David McAllester
Received: from MOJAVE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 87 18:46:06 PDT
Received: by mojave.stanford.edu; Tue, 7 Apr 87 18:47:01 PST
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 87 18:47:01 PST
From: Daniel Weise <daniel@mojave.stanford.edu>
To: nilsson@score.stanford.edu, manna@score.stanford.edu,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu, pratt@score.stanford.edu
To: genesereth@sumex-aim.stanford.edu, shoham@score.stanford.edu,
waldinger@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: daniel@mojave.stanford.edu
Subject: David McAllester
Are any of you interested in talking with, or having
dinner with, David McAllester from MIT? Can you think
of others who might be interested in talking with him?
He is giving the colloquiem talk next tuesday.
Ontic:
A Knowledge Representation Language
for Mathematics
Ontic is an interactive system for developing and verifying
mathematics. The system appears to be able to verify "proofs" that
are only one to three times longer than corresponding previously
published English arguments. Furthermore, the structure of the
machine readable proofs closely matches the structure of the English
arguments. Ontic's ability to read concise proofs is based on a
mechanism for automatically finding and applying information from a
lemma library containing hundreds of mathematical facts. Starting
with only the axioms of Zermello Fraenkel set theory, the Ontic system
has been used to build a data base of definitions and lemmas
culminating in a proof of the Stone representation theorem for Boolean
lattices. This proof involves an ultrafilter construction and is
similar in complexity to the Tychonoff theorem that an arbitrary
product of compact spaces is compact. This talk will discuss the
structure of Ontic's machine readable proofs, the automatic theorem
proving mechanisms used, and the empirically observed differences
between Ontic's proofs and English arguments.
∂08-Apr-87 0826 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: Friedman
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Apr 87 08:26:50 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Wed, 8 Apr 87 08:25:57 PST
Date: Wed 8 Apr 87 08:24:00-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Friedman
To: PAPA@score.stanford.edu
Cc: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu, NILSSON@score.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <12292722500.20.PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <12292886800.27.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Pls keep me posted on progress with Math. Should I come to the mtg
tomorrow with Sarnak and Royden? Also, we should coordinate the
phoning about offers. We should call Friedman/Mitchell/Goldberg
right away, I think, with some report of progress, to make sure they
don't precipitously make some non-Stanford decision. Should I do that?
In the meantime, I'll be having my mtg with the Deanery. -Nils
-------
∂08-Apr-87 1014 RA John Nafeh
Please call John Nafeh.
∂08-Apr-87 1102 CLT darpa
To: JMC, LES
I talked to Scherlis this morning.
He said he had seen a work order for the MTC part
cross his desk and that we should have funding
(at the level requested) soon (assuming no unforseen glitches).
He checked with Simpson and said that the AI part
would likely not get funding til October.
∂08-Apr-87 2116 forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
Received: from A.CS.UIUC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Apr 87 21:16:31 PDT
Received: from p.cs.uiuc.edu by a.cs.uiuc.edu with SMTP (UIUC-5.52/9.7)
id AA15732; Wed, 8 Apr 87 22:17:00 CST
Received: by p.cs.uiuc.edu (UIUC-5.52/9.7)
id AA13414; Wed, 8 Apr 87 22:17:59 CST
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 87 22:17:59 CST
From: forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Forbus)
Message-Id: <8704090417.AA13414@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
Cc: forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu
We discussed this in person the night before the AAAI-87 program
committee meeting, this is a reminder:
You are cordially invited to be an "honored guest" at the Qualitative
Physics Workshop, sponsored by AAAI, being held at Urbana this May.
It will run from May 27 through May 29th, inclusive. We do not expect
you to give a talk, although if you come we may dragoon you and/or Pat
Hayes into giving an after-dinner speech. Please let me know if you
can attend. Take care.
Ken Forbus
∂09-Apr-87 1104 mcdermott-drew@yale.ARPA Hopcroft report
Received: from YALE-ENG-VENUS.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 87 11:02:07 PDT
Date: 9 APR 1987 13:58:57 EST
From: <MCDERMOTT-DREW@YALE.ARPA>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,NILSSON@Score.Stanford. EDU,POGGIO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Hopcroft report
Reply-To: <MCDERMOTT-DREW@YALE.ARPA>
John Hopcroft asked me to massage the three pieces of report that you guys
wrote into a coherent blurb about AI. He has seen the result, and liked it,
and I wanted to make sure I hadn't distorted what you wrote too badly.
Send comments to me.
-- Drew McD
\documentstyle [11pt]{article}
\begin{document}
\begin{center}
AI is a Science \\
\bigskip
Drew McDermott \\
Yale University \\
\bigskip
John McCarthy \\
Nils Nilsson \\
Stanford University \\
\bigskip
Tomaso Poggio \\
MIT
\end{center}
\bigskip
In some European countries, computer science is called ``informatics,'' and
that's a better name for it than ``computer science.'' The invention of the
computer coincided with the discovery of information, or, more precisely,
the ``objectification'' of information.
Before the invention of the computer, information was
something that was transmitted and stored, but could be processed only
when examined by a human being. The human was what made it
information, by giving it meaning. The computer made it obvious how one
could build autonomous, formal agents that could process and condense
information while respecting its meaning. A payroll program
performs a long serious of uninspired actions, and the {\it right answer}
pops out.
With this idea, it became conceivable that our original picture of the
relationship between humans and information processing could be stood on
its head. Instead of humans making information processing possible,
perhaps information processing makes humans possible. That is, perhaps
the operation of the mind is to be understood in terms of many small acts
of computing going on in one's brain. This idea has captured the
imagination of an entire generation of researchers since it was first
proposed by Alan Turing. It has changed the way many psychologists and
philosophers think about the mind. Not everyone agrees that all mental
activity can be explained in terms of computation. But it is obvious by
now that large parts of what the brain does, in vision and natural-language
processing, for instance, can be analyzed as symbolic or
numerical computing, and it seems pointless to draw a boundary line
around other parts of the mind where computing must not trespass. We can
then define AI as the science that studies mental faculties with
computational models. How much of the mind can ultimately be accounted for
this way is as yet unknown.
Many are perhaps unaware of the impact AI is having on attitudes toward
the mind. A new branch of psychology, cognitive psychology, came into
being in the late fifties, inspired by the work of Newell and Simon in
AI. The work of
the cognitive psychologists has revivified psychology in many ways. If it
has had no other effect, it has helped to sweep away the cobwebs of
behaviorism, whose models of man are absurdly simple. For example, work
on visual imagery, which had all but died out during the dark ages of
behaviorism, is now alive and well.
Philosophy has been influenced by AI as well. One of the most debated
questions in the philosophy of mind is the status of ``functionalism,''
which explains mental states as analogues of the states of computers.
Many philosophers believe that this kind of model explains much of
psychology; the debate is whether it is compatible with the facts of
consciousness and intentionality. This debate could not be held without
the production of actual models of mind by AI researchers.
It is not easy to describe AI tidily. At this early stage,
it is not yet clear whether AI is based on a few fundamental
principles, or is a loose affiliation of several different subfields,
each concentrating on a different part of the mind, or on different
applications.
One candidate for unifying principle is the idea of
{\it knowledge representation.} Although in some sense any computer
program embodies knowledge (if only of what to do next), AI programs are
unique in that they
often make inferences from complex pieces of knowledge
expressed in general notations.
The knowledge implicit in a procedure
is made manifest only by executing that procedure, whereas
knowledge represented {\it declaratively} --- as a set of neutral facts ---
is explicit from the start, and accessible in more than one way.
Indeed, it can be assembled, analyzed, and debugged before we have decided
upon {\it any} particular way of using it,
just as the laws of Newtonian mechanics can be
expressed in relatively use-independent, mathematical equations and then
later applied for many purposes.
An important
requirement for a useful representation language is that the meaning of
sentences in the language should depend {\it compositionally} only on
the meanings of the constituent structures of the sentence and not on
the meanings of other sentences or on other surrounding context.
Hence, we are naturally led to the use of logic-based notations,
in particular, various versions of the
first-order predicate calculus (with occasional non-classical
extensions, such as modal operators). Curiously, AI is in a way the {\it
first} user of these notations, at least the first since Bertrand Russell.
Logicians invented predicate calculus as an actual notation, but
their attention soon wandered to
metaquestions about the power of such systems.
No one needed the sharp formality of such notations until,
starting in the late sixties, AI researchers came to realize that computers
could not achieve sophistication in various reasoning tasks unless they had
formal encodings of
large quantities of information about their problem domains.
This realization soon led
to the elaboration of new problems:
\begin{enumerate}
\item What can be expressed in formal languages?
\item How is the knowledge to be embodied in computer data structures?
\item What reasoning algorithms can be brought to bear?
\item How is new knowledge acquired?
\end{enumerate}
Many of these problems now have at least partial solutions.
The most basic question is, What can be expressed in formal languages?
So far, no fundamental obstacle has been found to expressing almost anything.
There are by now several detailed frameworks for representing
general facts about time, physics, and the mental states of agents,
as well as more specific facts about
medicine, business,
geology and other subjects (the territory of ``expert systems'').
It remains to be seen whether these pieces can be put together
into a whole that covers a large chunk of human knowledge.
It is worthwhile studying formal languages in isolation, but for the computer
to make use of them they must be embodied in data structures. There are now
several knowns ways of doing this, depending on the application. Many of them
involve translating logical assertions into systems of nodes, with links between
them that can be followed by computer programs to perform inferences
efficiently.
The study of reasoning algorithms has a somewhat different flavor. The initial
focus of work in this area was on making deduction more efficient. The
result was the discovery of elegant algorithms, based on Robinson's {\it
resolution} principle, and employing the {\it unification} algorithm to
deal with variables. Our understanding of how to carry out deduction has
been revolutionized by discoveries like this.
But for
any given application there are many nondeductive components. Hence there has
been a blossoming of several different reasoning algorithms, and an undermining
of the notion of a general foundational principle for AI. In practice, each
reasoning algorithm follows its own domain-dependent strategies, and tends
to demand somewhat different knowledge-representation techniques.
Since it would be nice to have a general theory of reasoning, this state of
affairs has exerted a pull on AI theory to come up with broader reasoning
algorithms. One result has been the study of {\it nonmonotonic logics}, or
pseudo-deductive systems in which conclusions are ``defeasible,'' that is,
revokable given more information. There are several paradigms for accomplishing
this extension of traditional deduction. Most of the results are in
McCarthy's {\it circumscription} framework. {\it Circumscribing} a predicate
$P$ in a theory means adding an axiom schema or second-order axiom to the
effect that, ``Any predicate $P'$ that satisfied the same laws as $P$ and is
as strong as $P$ is no stronger.'' In symbols,
\begin{displaymath}
{\rm Laws}[P'/P]\supset (\forall x (P'(x)\supset P(x)))\supset (\forall x (P(x)\supset P'(x))))
\end{displaymath}
This new axiom allows us to
conclude $\neg P(\ldots)$ in more circumstances; in semantic terms, it
rules out all models of the original facts about $P$ except the {\it minimal
models}, those in which $P$'s extension is as small as possible. (Different
versions of the circumscription axiom yield different kinds of minimality.)
Circumscription is nonmonotonic because adding more facts about $P$ and
recircumscribing can eliminate conclusions.
Many of the new reasoning patterns discovered by AI researchers have not
been reduced to deduction (and it is not clear whether deduction can be
extended to capture them). Hence they must be taken on their own terms.
One example is the work on {\it qualitative
physics} by DeKleer and Brown, Forbus, and Kuipers. Quantitative simulation
is in the domain of scientific computing; but human engineers can often
predict or explain the behavior of a system without needing detailed
numbers describing its components. Elegant methods now exist for predicting
as specifically as possible the behavior of a system,
starting from a qualitative
description of how its parts interact. One can think of these descriptions
as ``qualitative differential equations,'' which specify the directions in
which state variables influence each other without specifying the magnitudes.
The prediction algorithms note the directions in which quantities are
changing, and the interesting thresholds towards which they are heading.
If just one quantity can reach its threshold next, that tells the program
unambiguously what the next ``qualitative state'' of the system will be.
{\it Qualitative states} can be defined technically as regions in state
space where all quantity-influence relations remain the same. In many
cases, the behavior of
the system is underspecified, and more than one qualitative state
is a possible successor to the current one; the system pursues all
possibilities. The ultimate result is a finite graph of qualitative states,
showing all possible behaviors of the system.
An investigation of the AI literature reveals a multiplicity of
reasoning methods like this. It is not yet clear what unifying principles
underlie them, if indeed any do. Our situation is like that of the physicists
in the fifties, before the proposal of quarks: we have too many results, as
it were.
If knowledge, its representations, and reasoning algorithms to manipulate it
are indeed central to AI, then the problem of machine learning --- the
automatic acquisition of new
facts and reasoning methods --- is crucial.
Here, too, various powerful techniques have been discovered, but no unifying
principles. In fact, the absence of unifying principles may be counted as
a major scientific discovery of AI. The idea that all mental activity might
be explainable in terms of learning, in an organism that starts as a {\it
tabula rasa}, has been discredited by the discovery that certain apparently
plausible unifying mechanisms are in fact meaningless. For hundreds of years,
psychologists and philosophers have thought that the basic mechanism of
learning was the transference of successful behavior in a situation to
novel but similar situations. When one attempts to
computationalize this idea, one discovers that there is no such thing as
intrinsic similarity. Two situations are similar if some algorithm says
they are, and any algorithm must neglect some differences. Hence for any
two situations some algorithm will say they are similar, and we are left with
the problem of devising algorithms for particular domains. It is now clear
that an algorithm for, say, learning cognitive maps will have little to do
with one for learning language. There is no choice but to study such problems
on their own terms. As a result, in learning as elsewhere, we now know a little
bit about a profusion of learning tasks.
Some general principles have emerged. We can make a distinction between
{\it internal} and {\it external} learning. The former is learning
consequences of what you already in some sense knew, as when you improve
your skill at applying methods of symbolic integration.
External learning is acquisition of genuinely new facts, as when you
learn physical laws. The former can profit from the powerful technique
known as {\it explanation-based learning}, investigated by Sussman, DeJong,
Mitchell,
and others. This method consists of extracting from a particular
problem-solving session a general principle that will allow similar problems
to be solved faster later, by skipping over intermediate steps. Essentially
the method operates by explaining success on this problem
in terms that can be applied quickly
to later episodes.
For external learning, guaranteed explanations are not obtainable.
When learning a new law,
a learning
program must search through the space of possible versions of the law,
trying experiments or making observations to rule incorrect versions out.
When the language of the law is simple enough that all possible versions
can be expressed as a lattice of more general and less general candidates,
then one can keep track of exactly which versions are still viable by
keeping track of the upper and lower bounds in the lattice within which
the correct version lies. As more observations come in, they can be used
to narrow the bounds. When applicable, this idea (due to Mitchell)
allows a ``binary search''
through the set of candidate laws.
Not all subfields of AI are oriented around knowledge representation.
{\it Computer vision},
the attempt to understand how information can be
extracted from the light bouncing off objects, is a good example.
As we will discuss below, vision algorithms must embody a lot of knowledge
about optics, but they do not need to represent it declaratively.
This distinction has not prevented it from developing
some of the most satisfying results in AI.
Before computational
methods were used, vision theory had progressed only a little way beyond
optics. Electrodes could be stuck into cells in visual cortex, but their
signals were a mystery. Since 1970 or thereabouts, vision researchers
have produced a plethora of detailed models of different aspects of vision.
Many (if not all) workers believe that the job of the visual system is to
build a symbolic description of what it is looking at. Computer science
tells us what sort of thing a symbolic description is; we don't know where
to locate it in the brain, but we know we're looking for it.
Problems in vision are usually classified as part of low-level (or
``early'') vision or part of high-level vision. Early vision performs
the first steps in processing images through the operation of a set of
visual modules such as edge detection, motion, shape-from-contours,
shape-from-texture, shape-from-shading, binocular stereo, surface
reconstruction, and surface color; its goal is to yield a map of the
physical surfaces around the viewer. High-level vision can be
identified with the ``later'' problems of object recognition and shape
representation.
The problem of vision begins with a large array of numbers recording an
intensity value for each pixel (picture element) in the image. The
precise value at each pixel depends not only on the color and texture
of the 3-D surface that is reflecting the light but also on the
orientation and distance of the surface with respect to the viewer, on
the intensity, color and geometry of the illumination, on the shadows
cast by other objects, and so on. The goal of early vision is to
unscramble the information about the physical properties of the
surfaces -- distance, orientation, and material properties -- from the
image data. Early vision is therefore the science of inverse optics. In
classical optics or computer graphics the basic problem is to
determine the 2-D images of 3-D objects, whereas vision (whether biological
or artificial) is confronted with the inverse problem of recovering
3-D surface from 2-D images. In color, for instance, the goal of
vision is to decode the measured lights in terms of the reflectance of
the surfaces and the spectral power distribution of the illuminant.
This inverse problem is very difficult to solve, despite the apparent
ease and reliability with which {\it our} visual system gives
meaningful descriptions of the world around us. The difficulty is at
least twofold. First, the amount of information to be processed is
staggering: a high resolution TV frame is equivalent to one million
pixels, each containing 8 bits of information about light intensity,
making a total of $8 x 10↑6$ bits. The image captured by the human eye
is even more densely sampled (in the human eye there are in excess of
100 million photoreceptors). Real-time visual processing must be able
to deal with many such frames per second. It is therefore not
surprising that even the simplest operations on the flow of images ---
such as filtering --- require billions of multiplications and additions
per second. Second and more importantly, the images are highly
ambiguous: despite the huge number of bits it turns out that they do
not contain {\it enough} information about the 3-D world. During the
imaging step that projects 3-D surfaces into 2-D images, much
information is lost. The inverse transformation, from the 2-D image
to the 3-D object that produced it, is therefore underdetermined.
The natural way to approach this problem is to exploit {\it a priori}
knowledge about our 3-D world to remove the ambiguities of the inverse
mapping. One of the major achievements of computer vision work in the
last decade is the demonstration that {\it generic} natural
constraints, that is, general assumptions about the physical world
that are correct in almost all situations,\footnote{The term
{\it generic} is used here in the same sense as in the mathematical
theory of dynamical systems.} are sufficient to solve the problems of
early vision. Very specific, high-level, domain-dependent knowledge
is not needed.
Two main themes are therefore intertwined at the heart of the main
achievement of early vision research. They are: a) the identification
and characterization of generic constraints for each problem and
b) their use in an algorithm to solve the problem.
Some of the most powerful constraints reflect generic
properties of 3-D surfaces. One of the best examples is the recovery of
structure from motion. Perceptual studies show that a temporal sequence
of images of an object in motion yields information about its 3-D
structure. Consider for instance a rotating cylinder with a textured
surface: its 3-D shape becomes immediately evident as soon as rotation
begins. It has been proved that 3-D shape can be computed from a small
number of identified points across a small number of frames {\it if} one
assumes that the surface is {\it rigid}. Various theorems characterize
almost completely the minimum number of points and frames that are
required. {\it Continuity} of surfaces is another useful assumption:
surfaces are typically regions of coherent aggregates of matter, do not
consist of scattered points at different spatial locations and are
usually smooth. This constraint is very powerful for solving the
correspondence problem in stereo and motion and for reconstructing
surfaces from sparse depth points. \footnote{Of course,
constraints of this type are occasionally violated. In these cases
algorithms that strictly enforce them will suffer from ``visual
illusions''.}
It is natural to ask whether a general method exists for formalizing
these constraints in each specific case and translating them into
algorithms. An answer to this question has emerged in the last two
years. We will describe it as a representative point of view, though
by no means the only possible one.
This unifying theoretical framework is based on the recognition that
most early vision problems are mathematically ill-posed problems (in the
sense of Hadamard). A problem is well posed when its solution exists,
is unique, and depends continuously on the initial data. Ill-posed
problems fail to satisfy one or more of these criteria. In vision, edge
detection -- the detection and localization of sharp intensity changes
-- is ill posed when considered as a problem of numerical
differentiation, because the result does not depend continuously on the
data. Another example is the reconstruction of 3-D surfaces from sparse
data points, which is ill posed for a different reason: the data alone,
without further constraints, allow an infinite number of solutions, so
that uniqueness is not guaranteed without further assumptions.
The main idea in mathematics for ``solving'' ill-posed problems --
that is, for restoring well-posedness -- is to restrict the space of
admissible solutions by introducing suitable {\it a priori} knowledge.
In vision, this is identical to exploiting the natural constraints
described earlier. Mathematicians have developed several formal
techniques for achieving this goal that go under the name of
regularization theory.
In standard regularization the solution is found as the function that
minimizes a certain convex functional. This functional can be regarded
as an ``energy'' or a ``cost'' that measures how close the solution is
to the data and how well it respects the a priori knowledge about its
properties. Consider the direct problem of finding $y$, given $z$ and
the mapping $A$:
$$Az = y.$$
The inverse and usually ill-posed problem is to find $z$ from $y$.
Standard regularization suggests transforming Equation (1) into a
variational problem by writing a cost functional consisting of two
terms. The first term measures the distance between the data and the
desired solution $z$; the second term measure the cost associated
with a functional of the solution $\|Pz\|$ that embeds the {\it a
priori} information on $z$. In summary, the problem is reduced to
finding $z$ that minimizes
$${\|Az-y\|}↑2 + \lambda\|Pz\|$$
where $\lambda$, the regularization parameter, controls the compromise
between the degree of regularization of the solution and its closeness
to the data. Mathematical results characterize various properties of
this method such as uniqueness and behavior of the solution.
Solutions of this type have been obtained for several early vision
problems: edge detection, optical flow, surface reconstruction,
spatiotemporal approximation, color, shape from shading, stereo.
Computer vision has always had a special two-way
relationship with brain sciences: suggestions from visual physiology and
psychophysics have played a role in many developments of computer
vision. For instance, discoveries of neurons that seem to behave as edge
detectors in the visual cortex of primates had a significant influence
in the development of early computer vision programs. In turn,
computational theories of vision are now influencing the psychophysics
and the physiology of vision. It is very likely that this trend will
grow more important for both fields.
Mainly because of the theoretical advances of the last decade, it
seems that early vision is now on its way to a systematic solution.
Much less has been accomplished in high-level vision. At the level
of object recognition and scene description, the vision system begins
to blend with the rest of the mind, about which elegant unifying theories
do not yet exist.
In summary, AI is in a way the branch of computer science that is most
nearly a classical empirical science. It studies the world at the
computational level, in much the same way that chemistry studies the world
at the chemical level. It is not {\it a priori} obvious that there {\it is}
a chemical level; in principle, everything is just physics. But in many
situations it is possible --- and necessary --- to ignore the details of
elementary-particle interactions, and focus on interactions in terms of
{\it molecular bonds}, {\it valence}, {\it stoichiometry},
{\it reaction rates}, etc.
Similarly, in principle the brain's functioning can be explained in terms
of the behavior of its neurons and their membranes. But it appears, and
this is definitely a falsifiable claim, that many of these details can
be neglected, and attention focused on the {\it information} that the neurons
are transmitting, and the {\it computations} they are doing. If this is
approximately correct, then it may be just as necessary to focus on this
higher level in understanding the brain as it is to focus on the chemical
level in understanding chemical systems.
The nervous system is not the only place in the universe where nature has
exploited computation. Another good candidate is the operation of the
cells of organisms. Although in principle the behavior of DNA
is describable chemically, the important thing about a particular DNA
molecule is the message encoded in its nucleotides, and this message is
completely {\it arbitrary} from a chemical point of view. In many cases
the only reasonable way to describe the operation of a cell is at
a computational level in which genes are thought of as
switching each other on and off, so that the set of active genes behaves like
the state of a computing device, the next state and the outputs (proteins)
being functions of the current
inputs and the previous state.
The study of such molecular computers --- if they really do exist --- might
or might not be assimilated to artificial intelligence. Indeed, it is not
clear whether in the long run AI will be stable as a single discipline, or split up
along mental-module boundaries that are yet to be discovered. The point
to absorb is that computation does exist in nature as well as in artifacts;
its study is now emerging as a new empirical science.
\end{document}
-------
∂09-Apr-87 1112 RA Pam Widrin, Alliant
Widrin called re customer reference; her tel. (408) 295 7222.
∂09-Apr-87 1120 RA Sarah
Sarah would like you to call her.
∂09-Apr-87 1325 @RELAY.CS.NET,@ai.toronto.edu,@utterly.ai.toronto.edu:hector@mc.lcs.mit.edu Mcdermott critique
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 87 13:25:19 PDT
Received: from ai.toronto.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa23333; 9 Apr 87 16:05 EDT
Received: from utterly.ai.toronto.edu by ai.toronto.edu via ETHER with SMTP id AA19116; Thu, 9 Apr 87 15:54:37 EDT
Received: from ai by utterly.ai.toronto.edu via ETHER with SMTP id AA00843; Thu, 9 Apr 87 14:59:49 EST
Message-Id: <8704091959.AA00843@utterly.ai.toronto.edu>
Date: 09 Apr 87 14:59:35 EST (Thu)
From: Hector Levesque <hector%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
To: james%rochester.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, bobrow@XEROX.COM, stefik@XEROX.COM,
kabowen%syr.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET, rjb%allegra.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET,
ec%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, dekleer.pa@XEROX.COM,
jon.doyle@C.CS.CMU.EDU, forbus@P.CS.UIUC.EDU,
phayes%kl.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET, hayes@SPAR-20.ARPA, hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU,
hinton@C.CS.CMU.EDU, hobbs%warbucks.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET,
israel%warbucks.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
val@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, bmoore%ai.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET,
nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, pentland%ai.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET,
watdaisy!dlpoole%watmath.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET,
reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, stan%ai.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET,
alberta!lksc%ubc-vision.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET, briansmith@XEROX.COM,
stickel%ai.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET, tyson%ai.sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET,
waldinger%sri.com@RELAY.CS.NET, tw@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, wwoods@BBN.COM
Subject: Mcdermott critique
Cc: mcdermott-drew%yale.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
Dear Contributor,
Yes, the issue is still alive! McDermott has all commentaries in hand, and I
almost have his reply in hand. (A draft in hand is easily worth two final
versions in the bush.) The plan is to ship everything to COMPUTATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE (including a short introduction by me) on the weekend after
Easter. Then, to keep things moving along and except for a few long
submissions, I will proofread the galleys and fix the typos. If all goes well
and with some luck, the issue will appear sometime between AAAI and IJCAI.
So what do I need from you?? Just acknowledge this message (so I won't have
to contact you by phone or snail mail) and either tell me that you're going
with what you sent me, or that you'll send me an update by April 24th. Also,
if you would much prefer to see the galleys afterwards, let me know and I will
send them to you for proofreading (but, nota bene, time pressure will be on).
By the way, the issue should be quite good! To remind you, I have
commentaries from: James Allen and Henry Kautz, Danny Bobrow and Mark Stefik,
Ken Bowen, Ron Brachman, Eugene Charniak, Johan deKleer, Jon Doyle, Ken
Forbus, Pat Hayes, Carl Hewitt, Robert Kowalski, Robert Moore, Geoff Hinton,
Jerry Hobbs, David Israel, John McCarthy and Vladimir Lifschitz, Nils Nilsson,
Sandy Pentland, David Poole, Ray Reiter, Stan Rosenschein, Len Schubert, Brian
Smith, Mark Stickel and Mabry Tyson, Richard Waldinger, Terry Winograd, and
Bill Woods. A nice mix, I hope you agree.
Please answer this message immediately!!!
Hector Levesque
New-fangled Internet: hector@ai.toronto.edu
Old-style ARPA: hector%toronto.csnet@CSNET-RELAY
Old-style CSNET: hector@toronto
UUCP: ...{utai,utcsri}!hector
REGULAR: Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ont. M5S 1A4
CANADA.
PHONE: (416) 978-3618
P.S. Sorry if you already received this message. I'm struggling with new
Internet formats and UNIX 4.3.
∂09-Apr-87 1343 VAL re: Mcdermott critique
To: hector%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from hector%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET sent 09 Apr 87 14:59:35 EST.]
John is in Japan now, but my understanding is that we won't be sending you any
updates, and it's not necessary to send us the galleys.
Regards,
Vladimir
∂09-Apr-87 1417 PERLAKI@Score.Stanford.EDU airline ticket
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 87 14:17:03 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Apr 87 14:11:58-PDT
From: Agnes M. Perlaki <PERLAKI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: airline ticket
To: ra@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12293212290.42.PERLAKI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I received Professor McCarthy's ticket in your absense. I will keep
it here at the desk untill you return.
-Agi
-------
∂09-Apr-87 2038 AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU AI
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 87 20:38:20 PDT
Date: Thu 9 Apr 87 22:39:00-CDT
From: Gordon Novak Jr. <AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: AI
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, clt@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12293282748.38.AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
I am delighted to hear of your plans. If there is anything that I can
do to help out in any way, please don't hesitate to ask.
Regards, Gordon
-------
∂10-Apr-87 1343 JJW Alliant
∂09-Apr-87 1112 RA Pam Widrin, Alliant
To: JMC
Widrin called re customer reference; her tel. (408) 295 7222.
JJW - She called me yesterday afternoon. They have a potential
customer in Texas who's interested in running Lisp. That person
might call me but hasn't yet.
Apparently Alliant and Lucid have worked out their differences
and are once again planning to sell Common Lisp as a product.
Jack Test did some negotiating with them while he was here to
make this happen.
∂10-Apr-87 1349 JJW Qlisp meeting time
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I'd like to propose changing the Qlisp meeting date for this quarter.
Is Wednesday at 11:00 a bad time for anyone?
∂10-Apr-87 1524 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Friedman
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 87 15:24:13 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Fri, 10 Apr 87 15:23:05 PST
Date: Fri 10 Apr 87 15:21:00-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Friedman
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12293487003.50.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I just talked with Joel Friedman by phone to tell him that we and the
Math Dept. want him to come to Stanford. He seemed pls by the offers and
said that he is thinking hard about where to go and that he would have
more to say to me on Monday. Sensing that he might be in the throes of
a final decision to go somewhere else and that he wanted to wait
'til Monday to tell us, I tried to solicit from him any requests that he
might have of us that would make our offers irresistably attractive. He
refrained from getting more involved in the conversation although he
sounded friendly, etc. -Nils
-------
∂10-Apr-87 1641 CHEESEMAN%PLU@ames-io.ARPA Uncertainty in AI workshop
Received: from AMES-IO.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 87 16:41:05 PDT
Received: from PLU by IO with VMS ;
Fri, 10 Apr 87 16:40:41 PST
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 87 16:40:41 PST
From: CHEESEMAN%PLU@ames-io.ARPA
Subject: Uncertainty in AI workshop
To: jmc@su-ai
Hi John,
This note is the annual request for funding for the
``Uncertainty in AI'' (3rd.) workshop, to be held on July 10-12, 1987,
(preceding AAAI conf.), Seattle Washington. The proceedings
of the first workshop (1985) are now out as a book (``Uncertainty in
AI''---North Holland, Eds. Kanal and Lemmer) and the second workshop
proceedings are available and about to be reprinted as a book (also
Nth. Holland). If you would like a copy the proceedings of the last
(1986) workshop, I will send one, but I need a regular mail address
to do so. Many of the topics covered may be of interest to you. We
are expecting about 100 people this year, and have already received
about 60 papers for review. The quality of these papers is generally
very high. The chairman of the this years workshop is Peter Cheeseman,
(NASA) and the program chair is Tod Levitt (ADS), and the arrangements
chair is J. Mead (KSC). The program committee includes P. Bonissone,
P. Cheeseman, D. Heckerman, J. Lemmer, T. Levitt, J. Pearl, R. Yager,
and L. Zadeh.
We expect that this year, there will be less emphasis on new
representations of uncertainty (and their corresponding calcuii), and
more emphasis on the application of uncertainty methods to real problems.
Because of a surplus from the previous workshops, we are only requesting
the same amount as previous years---$5,000.
Yours in Anticipation,
Peter Cheeseman
---------------
∂10-Apr-87 1733 LES re: Programming and math
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Apr-87 13:33-PT.]
The distinction between "cookbook programmers" and what are today called
"computer scientists" (even though they are actually engineers) was widely
recognized at the beginning of the computer era, but with different
nomenclature. At that time the higher-level people were called
"programmers" and the lower-level ones were called "coders."
Over time, title inflation set in, all computerniks became "programmers,"
and "coder" disappeared from the vocabulary. This is not unlike what
happens to terms like "madam." In most languages, any term describing an
elegant lady transforms within a few generations into a euphamism for
someone working as, or dealing with, prostitutes.
Les
∂10-Apr-87 1911 POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU re: booby trapped nuclear weapons?
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 87 19:11:39 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Apr 87 19:11:52-PDT
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: booby trapped nuclear weapons?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 10 Apr 87 13:56:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12293529030.20.POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
That makes sense to me; I didn't think that nuclear weapons designers
were crazy. But it does raise an interesting question as to why this is
considered plausible in movies of the James Bond type. Not that there
aren't lots of crazy things in such movies, but most of them involve
extensions of present technology or wish fulfillment, not this sort of
insanity.
Bill
-------
∂10-Apr-87 1941 JK
John ---
Looks like I can finally start shedding my responsibilities
at Lucid --- though I would like to keep this for time being confidential,
I would like to talk with you soon about possibilities at Stanford.
JK
∂10-Apr-87 2318 TRACZ@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Programming and math
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 87 23:18:50 PDT
Date: Fri 10 Apr 87 23:15:32-PDT
From: Will Tracz <TRACZ@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Programming and math
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: TRACZ@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 10 Apr 87 13:33:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12293573389.9.TRACZ@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Well said, but what was the motivation? I am curious what prompted your
remarks? Fred Brooks article in COMPUTER?
-------
∂11-Apr-87 0936 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: Re: Hopcroft Report]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 09:36:30 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Apr 87 09:32:32-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: Re: Hopcroft Report]
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, hopcroft@CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU
Message-ID: <12293685710.9.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is a copy of a msg I just sent Drew McDermott in response to
his sending me a copy of his re-drafted NSF article. -Nils
---------------
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 11-Apr-87 09:29:07
Date: Sat 11 Apr 87 09:29:07-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hopcroft Report
To: MCDERMOTT-DREW@YALE.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "<MCDERMOTT-DREW@YALE.ARPA>" of Fri 10 Apr 87 11:46:42-PDT
Message-ID: <12293685086.9.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Drew, Thanks for the copy of the report. I think it is very good and
have no major comments for changes except:
1) The title "AI is a Science" sounds "whiney" (if you have to say
you are a science, you aren't). How about merely "Artificial Intelligence" ?
2) Although I think your piece is very good, it's your piece. It
represents your point of view more than mine. I have no quibble with
your point of view being represented. It may even turn out to be the
point of view that will carry the day. But it's not my point of view,
and therefore I shouldn't be a co-author! For example, I'm not
as pessimistic (or even as agnostic) as you about there not being
unifying themes in AI. I wouldn't describe circumscription as a
type of deduction (reserving that word for sound logical deduction).
(I would describe the circumscription formula as a type of inference
from a set of formulas--a nonsound inference.) So, I'm not worried about
reducing reasoning patterns to deduction, and I am optimistic about
explaining reasoning patterns as some type or other of inference---inference
about which reasonably general properties can be stated. Some (but just
some) of these properties involve minimal models and there may be other
useful properties. I'm not impressed at all with the suggestion that
the reasoning going on in qualitative physics lies somehow outside what
can be described by inference. I see no reason to include material about
vision in an article on AI; I think they should be two separate articles.
Finally, I don't see AI as "an empirical science." In fact, I don't see
it as a science (in the sense that physics is a science). I see it
as a branch of engineering---just as aeronautical engineering is. Our
goal is to build things. Along the way we will discover key (probably
THE key) insights about how animals can be intelligent, but I think
that's a byproduct and that an overconcentration on that goal will hamper
more than aid our success in building machines. So, I think we have
sufficient differences that I wouldn't want to appear as endorsing
the tone nor content of the piece you wrote----although, as I said,
I feel all right about it being the NSF statement.
I've just finished a draft of a piece I'm writing for the MIT
"foundations of AI workshop." I'll send a copy of it along to you
in the next msg.
Best wishes, -Nils
-------
-------
∂11-Apr-87 1019 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu your papers
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 10:19:31 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA04868; Sat, 11 Apr 87 13:17:46 EST
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA05644; Sat, 11 Apr 87 13:20:34 EDT
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 87 13:20:34 EDT
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8704111720.AA05644@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: your papers
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
John, I received your two papers. Thanks. I will revise my statements
about your position on attributing beliefs to machines accordingly.
As for your Individual Concepts paper, I know of your work on this quite
well. I should have mentioned it in my Self-reference II paper, and will
make sure it is referenced in the final version.
I'll be seeing you in Kansas in a few days, I imagine.
Regards,
Don
∂11-Apr-87 1057 CLT Okner
ok, I'll do it
∂11-Apr-87 1101 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: vis comm
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 11:01:11 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Apr 87 10:57:34-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: vis comm
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Apr 87 10:58:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12293701188.9.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
That's a problem. How about if he doesn't chair the committee? (I'm
afraid we are committed to his being on the committee at least
because he is on the SOE advisory committee---making him ex officio
being on the Dean's committee for CS.)
-------
∂11-Apr-87 1121 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU re: vis comm
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 11:21:24 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Apr 87 11:17:45-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: vis comm
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Apr 87 11:10:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12293704864.9.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
It may be appropriate to state your Moses problem to Gibbons in
any case since he is already on the SOE advisory board and would
be in a position to give advice about CS regardless of whether we
have a vis comm or not (or whether he is on it or not).
-------
∂11-Apr-87 1358 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Mitchell
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 13:58:33 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Sat, 11 Apr 87 13:55:59 PST
Date: Sat 11 Apr 87 13:54:00-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Mitchell
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12293733309.9.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I just talked with John Mitchell. He "is inclined to accept" our
offer. (By copy of this msg, Anne Richardson will send him
a description of benefits, housing plan, day/care-preschool
facilities, etc.) He may have more questions for us as time goes on.
He's not quite sure whether he'll be ready to come in Sept or wait
until next January, but my assessment of the situation is that I'd
give 10 to 1 odds that he'll accept. We should get the papers to
SOE asap. -Nils
-------
∂11-Apr-87 2147 forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu re: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
Received: from A.CS.UIUC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 21:46:45 PDT
Received: from p.cs.uiuc.edu by a.cs.uiuc.edu with SMTP (UIUC-5.52/9.7)
id AA14921; Sat, 11 Apr 87 21:27:27 CST
Received: by p.cs.uiuc.edu (UIUC-5.52/9.7)
id AA07400; Sat, 11 Apr 87 21:28:25 CST
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 87 21:28:25 CST
From: forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Forbus)
Message-Id: <8704120328.AA07400@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, forbus@P.cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: re: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
Okay. I'll send you a schedule when we've consed it up.
If you'll tell me when you are coming we'll make the hotel
bookings.
∂11-Apr-87 2235 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Marines
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 87 22:35:05 PDT
Date: Sat 11 Apr 87 22:31:21-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Marines
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Apr 87 16:53:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12293827488.13.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
What about the commander in chief?
-------
∂11-Apr-87 2238 LES re: reges@score
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Apr-87 12:34-PT.]
It could and we have been discussing this. One problem is that Sushi
has been grossly overloaded some of the time, but I have not heard
complaints recently.
∂12-Apr-87 0800 JMC
united baggage
∂13-Apr-87 0900 JMC
Gibbons
∂13-Apr-87 1000 JMC
Nafeh
∂14-Apr-87 0842 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU chandra's request
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 08:42:08 PDT
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 87 08:41:05 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: chandra's request
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: aaai-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12294462774.37.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
John,
I don't have any record on Chandra's request.
CCM
-------
∂14-Apr-87 1040 jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu NSF Report
Received: from CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 10:39:53 PDT
Received: by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA15755; Tue, 14 Apr 87 13:39:31 EDT
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 87 13:39:26 EDT
From: jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft)
Message-Id: <8704141739.AA17882@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA17882; Tue, 14 Apr 87 13:39:26 EDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: NSF Report
--------
John:
Since you are on the subcommittee that will endorse the NSF Report,
I hope you will play a leadership role. At least read McDermott's piece
and let me know what you think. I don't want to send out the Report to
the rest of the subcommittee until I am sure that it is acceptable to you.
Personally, I think McDermott did an excellent job and that he made
it an excellent piece. It is unfortunate that the AI community has not
pulled together and volunteered to do this section. It is the best I can
do with the help I've gotten.
I propose that we use McDermotts piece with the authors being
McDermott and Poggio.
Please confirm that this is acceptable.
John
∂14-Apr-87 1200 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU re: do you mind?
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 12:00:13 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Apr 87 11:57:29-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: do you mind?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Apr 87 12:31:00-PDT
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12294498530.21.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This time will decrease undegrad enrollment but increase TV enrollment. It's
hard to know which is more important. What do you think?
-------
∂14-Apr-87 1200 REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Igor Rivin course on algebraic computation.
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 12:00:31 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Apr 87 11:57:48-PDT
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Igor Rivin course on algebraic computation.
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 11 Apr 87 12:36:00-PDT
Office: CS-TAC 22, 723-9798
Message-ID: <12294498585.21.REGES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Yes, Rivin's course is in the catalogue, but I don't have a time.
-------
∂14-Apr-87 1940 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Computer Go Journal
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 19:40:30 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Apr 87 19:37:45-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Computer Go Journal
To: su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: ilan@Score.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, bchen@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12294582317.15.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
For people interested in computer GO, I just read the following in
the American Go Journal:
COMPUTER GO
An international bulletin devoted to the genration and exchange of
ideas about computer go:
a) software
b) player's aids
c) algorithms
d) protocol
e) AI research
Send your submission or inquiry to:
David Ehrbach, 71 Crescent, Winnipeg, Manitoba R2N 1E1, Canada
(204) 256-2537
-------
∂14-Apr-87 1953 JK EKL (Thank you)
FYI------
----------------------
∂14-Apr-87 0204 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:GOTO@NTT-20 EKL (Thank you)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 02:04:40 PDT
Received: from NTT-20 by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Tue, 14 Apr 87 02:02:22 PDT
Date: Tue 14 Apr 87 14:34:27
From: Shigeki Goto <Goto@NTT-20>
Subject: EKL (Thank you)
To: JK%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM
cc: goto@NTT-20
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jussi Ketonen <JK%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU@sumex-aim>" of Mon 13 Apr 87 07:08:00
Message-ID: <12294352341.36.GOTO@NTT-20.NTT.JUNET>
Dear JK,
Thank you for your mail.
Up to now, I myself have used EKL only for short examples. My goal is
to write a program synthesizer on top of some prover or proof checker.
My plan is to adopt Boyer-Moore heuristics to induct on data
structures. So, I got interested in your new EKL in Common Lisp.
Actually I have Lucid Common Lisp as well as Kyoto Common Lisp on
our SUN workstation.
Should I send you a blank tape for the new EKL?
I will forward your message to Prof. Susumu Hayashi at Kyoto
University who has used EKL. I also heard that one of his students
already modified the original (Maclisp) EKL to run on Common Lisp. I
will also forward your message to ICOT where they have EKL on their
ICOT-20 machine.
-- Shigeki (SG@Sail)
-------
∂14-Apr-87 1956 JK
More ----
----------------
∂14-Apr-87 1109 hayashi%kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 87 11:09:01 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id ab25990; 14 Apr 87 13:50 EDT
Received: from utokyo-relay by RELAY.CS.NET id ad01648; 14 Apr 87 13:47 AST
Received: by u-tokyo.junet (4.12/4.9J-1[JUNET-CSNET])
id AA07474; Wed, 15 Apr 87 02:21:33 jst
From: hayashi%kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Received: by titcca.cc.titech.junet (4.12/6.2Junet)
id AA02419; Wed, 15 Apr 87 01:52:58 jst
Received: by nttlab.ntt.junet (4.12/5.0N) with TCP; Wed, 15 Apr 87 01:27:20 jst
Received: by kuis.kuis.kyoto-u.junet (2.0/6.2Junet)
id AA09729; Tue, 14 Apr 87 18:16:25 jst
Received: by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet (3.2/6.2Junet)
id AA00868; Mon, 14 Apr 86 18:04:30 JST
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 86 18:04:30 JST
Return-Path: <hayashi@kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet>
Message-Id: <8604140904.AA00868@kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet>
To: JK@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Dear Dr. Ketonen,
Goto of NTT forwarded your mail to me.
Since I handed our ICOT report with Hagiya on experiments on EKL
in Stanford in summer of 85,
I think you know about how we are using EKL at Kyoto University.
But I have one thing to say. I and Hiroshi Nakano are using EKL
as a servant proof checker of our system PX. PX is a system of
constructive logic based on Feferman's theory T_0 and extract
Lisp programs from proofs. In the course of the program extraction,
we may leave many hypotheses unproved, if they are irrelevant to program
extraction. PX can report what hypotheses are used in a proof
and can transform them to EKL-terms of the type truthval.
It also transform theories built in PX into theories in EKL.
By these transformation, we can verify the hypotheses
by the powerfull EKL rewriters. Actually,
I have extracted proof-refutation constructor of classical
propositional logic from its completness theorem
and Naknao checked many hypotheses used in the proof by EKL.
(By "proof-refutation constructor", I mean a program returns
a proof of Gentzen's sequent caluculus of a formula,
if it is tautological, and, otherwise, returns an assignment
which refutes it as a function closure.)
Although he has not finished a proof of the termination
of the program, according to him EKL does the job very well.
Actually, lemmas except the termination condition
could be proved only by 20-30 lines for each.
One line is just one step in his experiment.
We are going to finish a monograph on PX, whose one section
is devoted to the EKL-translator. When we finish it I would like to send it.
So please tell me your current address.
By the way, in the course of the proof of hypotheses, Nakano
found a wired bug. He could derive false from simple consistent
axioms by an application of "derive". It might be a bug crept into
EKL, when Hagiya and I ported it to Kyoto Common Lisp.
So we are eager to have the Common Lisp version of EKL you mentioned.
I will be in US from June 8-25. I will give a guest lecture at Huet's
seminor at Austin, and will attend a meeting of AMS at Polder, Corolado,
and also attend IEEE meeting at Ithaca. Do you plan to come one of them?
If so and you have time, I would like to see you again.
Yours sincerely,
Susumu Hayashi
∂15-Apr-87 0629 darden@mimsy.umd.edu history
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Apr 87 06:28:47 PDT
Received: by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA16855; Wed, 15 Apr 87 09:26:23 EST
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 87 09:26:23 EST
From: Prof. Lindley Darden <darden@mimsy.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8704151426.AA16855@mimsy.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: history
Hi John,
How are you?
I am serving as a volunteer consultant to the computer museum
in Boston on their AI and Robots exhibit. They are working on
a "time line" on the history of AI. If you were listing
milestones, what would you list? Is 1958 the correct date
for "McCarthy invents LISP"? When was the Stanford AI Lab
started? I would appreciate receiving a reprint of you r
article on the history of LISP and anything else you have
written about the history. Pamela Mc's book is the only one
I know on the history. Are there others?
I've been busy implementing a small "toy" system in LISP
that simulated the discovery of the chromosome theory of
heredity (genes are parts of chromosomes) and have been
thinking a lot about rules for part-wholes hierarchies.
Thanks for any help you can be.
Bye, Lindley
∂15-Apr-87 1449 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU Please Call Mike Hirsch of AP
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Apr 87 14:49:28 PDT
Date: Wed 15 Apr 87 14:46:48-PDT
From: Taleen Marashian <TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Please Call Mike Hirsch of AP
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12294791497.37.TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
MIKE HIRSCH of ASSOCIATED PRESS called this afternoon and would like you to
get back to him at:
(412) 281-3747.
-Taleen
-------
∂15-Apr-87 1546 CLT Qlisp meetings this quarter
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
We will meet Wednesday's at 11am in 252Mjax.
The first meeting of the quarter will be Wednesday April 22.
∂16-Apr-87 0000 JMC
graubar.5
∂16-Apr-87 0900 JMC
planlunch
∂16-Apr-87 1031 guibas@src.dec.com foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 10:31:26 PDT
Received: from src.dec.com by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 10:30:17 PST
Received: by src.dec.com (5.54.3/4.7.34)
id AA07836; Thu, 16 Apr 87 10:31:04 PDT
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 87 10:31:04 PDT
From: guibas@src.dec.com (Leonidas Guibas)
Message-Id: <8704161731.AA07836@src.dec.com>
To: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Cc: guibas@src.dec.com, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Subject: foundations appointments
Nils,
I have spoken with Mitchell and (as you noted) indeed he seems very likely
to accept our offer. This is exciting!
I have repeatedly tried to get in touch with Friedman but have not
succeeded.
Any news from the Deans about the Goldberg position? I'd like to be able
to tell him something soon.
L.
∂16-Apr-87 1052 PAPA@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 10:51:21 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 10:50:09 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 10:32:48-PDT
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: guibas@src.dec.com
Cc: nilsson@score.stanford.edu, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <8704161731.AA07836@src.dec.com>
Message-Id: <12295007400.43.PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I had an electronic chat from Goldberg. He expects to hear from his
top choices (which definitely include Stanford) in a week or two.
I told him that he should get SOME sort of feedback from us soon.
---Christos.
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1058 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 10:56:52 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 10:55:49 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 10:40:08-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: guibas@src.dec.com
Cc: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu, NILSSON@score.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <8704161731.AA07836@src.dec.com>
Message-Id: <12295008736.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I have been trading phone call attempts with Goldberg. (We now have
an appointment for a phone call!) I'm going to tell him that
we have decided that we want him. The Deans are sympathetic to our
needs, but I suspect they will wait to do anything definite until
we have at least our first round of responses from the 3 candidates.
They certainly backed me up in our plan to call all of them, tell them
all that we want them---pending approval from SOE---and then see what
happens. -Nils
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1131 SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 11:31:24 PDT
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 11:30:00 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 11:27:12-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: guibas@src.dec.com
Cc: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <8704161731.AA07836@src.dec.com>
Message-Id: <12295017304.24.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I was at Berkeley yesterday to give a seminar and saw Joel. I gathered that
he is trying to finish his writing before the end of the semester. This
means that he's probably in his office most of the time, but I suppose
he, like other Berkeley math students, doesn't have a phone in his office.
Seems like the most efficient solution is to drive up to Berkeley and
talk to him.
Alex
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1135 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 11:33:51 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 11:32:38 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 11:26:13-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: guibas@src.dec.com
Cc: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu, NILSSON@score.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <8704161731.AA07836@src.dec.com>
Message-Id: <12295017125.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I've just had my phone call with Goldberg! I told him that we would not
know for a couple of weeks whether the dean's office would be approving
the offers that csd wants to make. That seemed fine with him. He said
he prefers Stanford to some other potential offers he is considering; some
of which he will have to decide on by around May 1. We agreed to keep
in very close touch as May 1 approaches.
I think a lot now depends on what Friedman decides to do. If he is
about to turn us down, I don't want to get the dean's office to
go to great lengths to use up points with the provost in getting him
to approve an extra billet right now. If Friedman does turn us
down, we'll still need an extra 1/2 billet. Getting 1/2 billet is
a somewhat different task than getting 1 billet. If Friedman accepts,
we need a whole extra billet, and I'll work hard on getting that.
I have left several msgs for Friedman without response.
-Nils
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1139 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 11:38:51 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 11:37:39 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 11:35:05-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu
Cc: guibas@src.dec.com, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu, NILSSON@score.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <12295017304.24.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <12295018738.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I just called Friedman's office number. It turns out that the phone
number he gave us for his office is really in another office and that
his office doesn't have a phone. The person who answers the phone
we thought was his is quite cheerful about giving msgs to Joel but
always says he isn't in. She gave me Joel's net address
friedman@brahms.berkeley.edu, and I just sent him a msg at that
address. -Nils
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1449 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM jmc talk
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 14:48:57 PDT
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 16:49:32-CDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Subject: jmc talk
To: ai.ellie@MCC.COM
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12295054136.22.AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Please reserve a place for John McCarthy to give a talk on May 7,
but do not announce the talk until you hear from John whether the
talk is definite and what the title will be.
Thanks,
Bob
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1509 PAPA@score.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 15:09:16 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 15:08:16 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 15:05:50-PDT
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: NILSSON@score.stanford.edu
Cc: guibas@src.dec.com, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <12295008736.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <12295057106.39.PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I am now talking to Umesh V. He seems to be inclived to go to Berkeley.
---C
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1516 SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu Re: foundations appointments
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 15:16:27 PDT
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 15:15:20 PST
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 15:12:41-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: foundations appointments
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <12295057106.39.PAPA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <12295058353.44.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
This is good in the sense that the more inclined U. Vazirani is to go
to Berkeley, the less inclined Berkeley will be to go after Goldberg.
Alex
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1602 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU Mike Hirsch called again just now
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 87 16:01:58 PDT
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 15:55:44-PDT
From: Taleen Marashian <TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Mike Hirsch called again just now
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12295066190.19.TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Mike Hirsch would like you to call him COLLECT (he emphasized that) at:
(412) 281-3747.
Taleen
-------
∂16-Apr-87 1750 RPG Lisp Pointers
John, you promised a short article recounting your comments
at the X3J13 meeting to Lisp Pointers. The deadline is tomorrow.
Could you either mail me a pointer to it or let me know you can't
do it? I can do some editing to turn it into english if you need.
-rpg-
∂16-Apr-87 2305 RWF re: The necessity defense
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 16-Apr-87 21:25-PT.]
That's odd; there is a case in Prof. John Kaplan's book on the criminal
justice system a case, early 19th century I think, British, where two
sailors were hanged for eating the cabin boy while adrift for a long period.
When did the necessity defense start to work?
∂17-Apr-87 0700 JMC
Cate
∂17-Apr-87 0900 JMC
floor outfit
∂17-Apr-87 0930 JMC
trip to L.A.
∂17-Apr-87 0958 guibas@src.dec.com Komlos
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 09:58:34 PDT
Received: from src.dec.com by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Fri, 17 Apr 87 09:57:28 PST
Received: by src.dec.com (5.54.3/4.7.34)
id AA03945; Fri, 17 Apr 87 09:58:03 PDT
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 09:58:03 PDT
From: guibas@src.dec.com (Leonidas Guibas)
Message-Id: <8704171658.AA03945@src.dec.com>
To: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Cc: guibas@src.dec.com, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Subject: Komlos
I just spent some time talking to Janos on the phone. He was up here for
the last three days looking at Palo Alto housing. He sounded disheartened
by the housing prices.
He said that he did not think a formal offer from Stanford would have an
adverse effect on his US residence application through UC San Diego. He
would like us to proceed and make the offer happen this spring.
L.
∂17-Apr-87 0959 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: The necessity defense
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 09:59:33 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Apr 87 09:56:22-PDT
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: The necessity defense
To: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 16 Apr 87 21:25:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295262912.26.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Lately I've noticed a disturbing trend in some conservative writing:
it just doesn't make sense. Perhaps JMC wasn't in top form when he
wrote his commentary linking the necessity defense to the burning of
abortion clinics and from there somehow leaping to civil rights.
Of course, a clear and reasoned rendering of JMC's response would have
to recognize two facts that most conservatives would rather not admit:
that the CIA has violated both US and international law, and that
abortion is legal in the US.
It's much easier to practice a little ``intellectual gerrymandering''
(to use JMC's phrase) and pretend that the issue is the protection of
civil rights.
joe
-------
∂17-Apr-87 1045 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU SPEAKER ON THE 28TH.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 10:44:58 PDT
Mail-From: ENGELMORE created at 16-Apr-87 14:45:27
Return-Path: <@Score.Stanford.EDU:tanya@mojave.stanford.edu>
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu, 16 Apr 87 14:28:43 PDT
Received: from mojave.stanford.edu by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 16 Apr 87 14:23:09-PDT
Received: by mojave.stanford.edu; Thu, 16 Apr 87 13:42:40 PST
Date: 16 Apr 1987 1342-PST (Thursday)
From: Tanya Walker <tanya@mojave.stanford.edu>
To: colloq@score.stanford.edu, cis-people@glacier.stanford.edu
Cc: tanya@mojave.stanford.edu
Subject: SPEAKER ON THE 28TH.
ReSent-Date: Thu, 16 Apr 87 14:45:24 PDT
ReSent-From: Bob Engelmore <Engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
ReSent-To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
ReSent-Message-ID: <12295053384.45.ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
ReSent-Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 10:39:23 PDT
ReSent-From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
ReSent-To: qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
ReSent-Message-ID: <12295270744.53.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Robert Halstead from MIT will be here the morning of the 28th for the
Computer Science Colloquium. If you are interested in talking with
Prof. Halstead please send e-mail to tanya@mojave. The topic for the
Colloquium will be Parallel Symbolic Computing Using Multilisp,in
Terman Auditorium 4:15-5:15.
∂17-Apr-87 1058 CLT
Kathy Berg asked me to write a page about your group for the CSD brochure.
Here is what I propose. Any complaints?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Professor McCarthy's group there are three main research projects.
Formal reasoning, the Qlisp project and the EBOS project.
The formal reasoning project is an ongoing project for
basic research in artificial intelligence and theory of computation.
John McCarthy and Vladimir Lifschitz are investigating non-monotonic
theories and their applications, concentrating on the representation of
knowledge about the effects of actions. They are also working on methods
for the formal treatment of contexts. All these problems and more come
together in the task of creating a database for common sense reasoning.
Two key ideas for representing knowledge about the effects of actions are:
the use of {\it situation calculus} which allows one to describe the
changing world by means of explicit references to ``situations'', or
states of the world and the use of {\it circumscription} for telling the
system when it is allowed to derive a conclusion ``by default''.
Carolyn Talcott is working on programming language theory and its
applications. The basic theoretical work is the study of mathematical
properties of computation mechanisms and the computation structures needed
to support them. Of particular interest are languages with function and
control abstractions, objects with state, and concurrency. An important
application is proving that computer programs and satisfy their
specifications. This includes both extensional and intensional properties
as well as properties of programs that operate on other programs. Further
applications are formalizing existing programming paradigms; to developing
flexible and robust programming methodologies; and design and
implementation of programming languages and environments.
Natarajan Shankar is interested in the applications of logic to AI and
computing, especially in automatic theorem-proving and program
verification. His current research is directed at designing a usable
logic which embeds its own metatheory and an accompanying proof-checker
which can verify extensions to itself.
The Qlisp project is a project to implement and test a parallel extension
to Common Lisp called Qlisp. McCarthy, Rivin, and Talcott are
participating in this project. The Qlisp language was developed by
Gabriel and McCarthy. In Qlisp parallelism is specified by the Qlisp
programmer (using QLET and other constructs) and the number of tasks is
determined at runtime. Tasks are placed on a queue and removed by
processors when they become free. There is a global shared memory. Igor
Rivin is developing parallel algorithms for symbolic algebra to test the
Qlisp paradigm and implementation.
The EBOS project is a project for implementing some operating system ideas.
EBOS stands for editor based operating system where
`editor based' refers to interacting with the operating
system via a screen editor. One goal is to have a richer language for
communication with the operating system, for example going beyond the Unix
command interpreter to have a Lisp like language with command and
expression modes of interaction (ala Lisp machines). Another goal is for
the editor to be able to handle arbitrary character sets.
Arkady Rabinov is working on the EBOS project.
∂17-Apr-87 1106 GCOLE@Sushi.Stanford.EDU The "Cabin Boy" Case Reference
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 11:06:29 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Apr 87 11:02:44-PDT
From: George S. Cole <GCOLE@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: The "Cabin Boy" Case Reference
To: rwf@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12295274993.23.GCOLE@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
If either of you are interested, I will find the exact cite and get a copy.
I believe it is "Regina v. Cox", and dates to 1915, but do not have my law
books handy (or access to LEXIS).
George
-------
∂17-Apr-87 1108 CLT
we should do the japan expenses - do you have all the data at school?
∂17-Apr-87 1256 AI.PETRIE@MCC.COM Failed Demonstrations
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 12:56:25 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Apr 87 14:56:25-CDT
From: Charles Petrie <AI.PETRIE@MCC.COM>
Subject: Failed Demonstrations
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: boyer@MCC.COM, steiner@MCC.COM
Reply-To: Petrie@MCC
Message-ID: <12295295689.24.AI.PETRIE@MCC.COM>
Yesterday, Bob Boyer sent me a note that you would be visiting here
in May. That afternoon, I attempted a demonstration of a program to
visitors and it failed. Donald Steiner next door had the same experience.
Both demonstrations had succeeded many times previously. Today, they
worked again. Obviously, you have achieved such capacity as a theoretician
that your physical presence is no longer necessary to prevent programs
from running: the mere potential of your visit is sufficient.
Regards,
Charles Petrie
-------
∂17-Apr-87 1300 JMC
Rao
∂17-Apr-87 1348 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: News?]
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 13:48:13 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Fri, 17 Apr 87 12:47:13 PST
Date: Fri 17 Apr 87 13:44:43-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: News?]
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12295304482.35.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Here is some disappointing correspondence with Friedman. (We haven't
been able to connect by phone yet, but I left a msg on his answer
phone encouraging him to call if he thinks there are ways that Stanford
can get back into the competition.) Assuming Friedman says "no" we need
to find 1/2 additional slot for Goldberg. My proposed strategy now is
to ask for this extra billet in a way that does not foreclose our asking
for additional increments in case the Friedman situation changes.
-Nils
---------------
1) 16-Apr To: friedman@brahms. News?
2) 17-Apr friedman@brahms.Berk Decisions ....
Message 1 -- ************************
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 16-Apr-87 11:32:42
Date: Thu 16 Apr 87 11:32:40-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: News?
To: friedman@brahms.Berkeley.EDU
cc: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12295018300.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Joel, Any progress on your decision? I want to make sure that
you know that Stanford will be anxious to discuss any special
arrangements that might maximize the chances of your coming here.
-Nils Nilsson
-------
Message 2 -- ************************
Return-Path: <friedman@brahms.Berkeley.EDU>
Received: from brahms.Berkeley.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 17 Apr 87 11:22:03-PDT
Received: by brahms.Berkeley.EDU (5.57/1.18)
id AA04622; Fri, 17 Apr 87 11:27:17 PDT
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 11:27:17 PDT
From: friedman@brahms.Berkeley.EDU (Joel Friedman)
Message-Id: <8704171827.AA04622@brahms.Berkeley.EDU>
To: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Subject: Decisions ....
Nils,
At present, I must regrettably say that Stanford is an unlikely prospect
for next year.
For better or for worse, I have decided to limit my decision to
Princeton CS, MIT Math, UCLA Math, and IBM Yorktown or Almaden.
If I choose IBM Almaden, it is likely that at some point I would like
to teach/interact with Stanford, if possible. I don't know if I would
want to do so next year as opposed to later.
Thank you for your consideration and time.
-Joel
P.S. I have tried calling, left a message.
-------
∂17-Apr-87 1421 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: March 13 message
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 14:21:50 PDT
Date: Fri 17 Apr 87 14:19:08-PDT
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: March 13 message
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 17 Apr 87 14:12:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295310746.13.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks for checking on that message. Betty will stop up to see you.
LaDonna
-------
∂17-Apr-87 1510 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
SHOULD JOHN MCCARTHY AND ED FEIGENBAUM
TALK TO EACH OTHER?
Thursday, April 23, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
Matt Ginsberg
In this talk, I discuss one possible way to bridge the apparently
widening gap between the "neats" and the "scruffies" in AI. According
to Kuhn, a necessary step in resolving the differences between the
two camps is that one attack problems of interest to the other.
I attempt to do this by suggesting that the scruffy programs
are doing essentialy two things: a recognizable approximation
to first-order inference (such as MYCIN's backward chaining), and
some sort of bookkeeping with the results returned (e.g., manipulation
of certainty factors).
Formalizing this bookkeeping is attractive for a variety of reasons:
it will allow precise statements to be made about what the scruffies'
programs are doing, and may lead to more effective implementations of
their ideas. There are also advantages for the neats, since understanding
some of the proposed extensions to first-order inference in this fashion
appears to lead to computationally tractable algorithms for some simple
non-mononotonic logics.
If time permits, I will present a formalization which appears to
have the properties described in the previous paragraph.
∂17-Apr-87 1626 acken@sonoma.stanford.edu The History of Vietnam, a question.
Received: from SONOMA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 16:26:01 PDT
Received: by sonoma.stanford.edu; Fri, 17 Apr 87 16:27:06 MST
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 16:27:06 MST
From: John Acken <acken@sonoma.stanford.edu>
Subject: The History of Vietnam, a question.
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Prof McCarthy:
I have just finished reading "VIETNAM A History"
by Stanley Karnow. Do you know much about this book or Author.
He was a news correspondent through much of the war. The account
seems ok, that is some of the biases are traded off by presenting
a see-saw view ( particularly saying in some places that the
military effort was doomed and in other places pointing out the
successes of the military effort). In any event I am interested
in what is known about this author and this book. Also, if
you can suggest other books I would be interested.
By the way, I was in the service during the later stages of the
war. Although I was never assigned to Vietnam, I spent a year
in Thailand in 1971-1972.
.
. ... .
.......
................. SINCERELY,
... ... JOHN M. ACKEN
. .
∂17-Apr-87 1714 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: The necessity defense
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 17:14:37 PDT
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 17:15:07 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: The necessity defense
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu, 16 Apr 87 21:25:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12295342784.30.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
One might note that the jury was composed of older, relatively conservative
individuals. Both the DA and the defense agreed before the trial that a
guilty verdict was almost a certainty with that jury, and the defense was
prepared for an appeal. Instead, to everybody's surprise, Carter and Hoffman
won. Either the DA was extraordinarily incompetant or there was more to
the defense than JMC acknowledges...
-------
∂17-Apr-87 1732 hafner%corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu@RELAY.CS.NET Banquet Speech at the AI and Law conference
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 17:32:39 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id ab19878; 17 Apr 87 20:26 EDT
Received: from northeastern.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id ak02244; 17 Apr 87 20:19 AST
Received: from corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu by
nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu; Fri, 17 Apr 87 10:16 EST
Received: by corwin.CCS.Northeastern.EDU (5.51/5.17)
id AA22936; Fri, 17 Apr 87 10:04:10 AST
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 10:04:10 AST
From: hafner%corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Banquet Speech at the AI and Law conference
Cc: hafner%corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
Dear Prof. McCarthy,
I am delighted that you are going to be the banquet speaker for the
First International Conference on AI and Law. Just to remind you
of the details: the conference is Wednesday - Friday, May 27-29.
The banquet will be Thursday evening, May 28 at the Colonnade Hotel, which
is on Huntington Ave. near the Christian Science center.
I will send you a free registration and a schedule of events within
the next 10 days.
I am just in the process of preparing the proceedings and program for
the printer. If you would like to have a title other than "Non-monotonic
reasoning" please let me know.
Would you like me to make a reservation for you at the Colonnade or
some other hotel? (The Colonnade is near the conference and it's very
nice.) If so, please tell me your arrival and departure dates.
Otherwise, I assume you will handle your own travel arrangements and
submit an expense report for reimbursement. I trust that a $500 honorarium
will be satisfactory.
I am looking forward to meeting you and hearing your talk.
Carole Hafner
hafner@northeastern.edu
(617) 437-5116
∂17-Apr-87 1746 acken@sonoma.stanford.edu re: The History of Vietnam, a question.
Received: from SONOMA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 17:46:45 PDT
Received: by sonoma.stanford.edu; Fri, 17 Apr 87 17:47:51 MST
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 17:47:51 MST
From: John Acken <acken@sonoma.stanford.edu>
Subject: re: The History of Vietnam, a question.
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, acken@sonoma.stanford.edu
Prof. McCarthy:
You shouldn't feel flattered. I will explain why I asked you:
in many of your messages you cite references, and explain the authors
political bias if readily identifiable. So I used that experience to
check whether you immediately recognized this particular author or book
as a particularly biased person or account. Thank you for responding.
.
. ... .
.......
................. SINCERELY,
... ... JOHN M. ACKEN
. .
∂17-Apr-87 2121 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu Notes on Improving Lisp
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 87 21:21:03 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 17 Apr 87 20:20:36 PST
Received: from bhopal.edsel.com by edsel.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA01124; Fri, 17 Apr 87 19:32:29 pst
Received: by bhopal.edsel.com (3.2/SMI-3.2)
id AA00735; Fri, 17 Apr 87 20:30:09 PDT
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 87 20:30:09 PDT
From: edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu (Jon L White)
Message-Id: <8704180330.AA00735@bhopal.edsel.com>
To: navajo!jmc%sail@navajo.stanford.edu
Subject: Notes on Improving Lisp
Thanks. Got it over here at Lucid, and have Tex'd it off. Makes about
a page and a half.
-- JonL --
∂18-Apr-87 1700 JMC
home
∂18-Apr-87 2329 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 87 23:29:09 PDT
Date: Sat 18 Apr 87 23:25:57-PDT
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Attn: Students from India
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 18 Apr 87 23:14:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295672435.8.FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks for checking. Since I don't have a SAIL account, I'm not sure
how the A.P. query program there works. First, how far into the past does
the database extend? Does it just retain the last two days stories, for
example?
Second, how exactly did you phrase your query? You mentioned that no
tourists had been killed (yet), but if there is violence between the
Sikhs and Hindus, this might later affect innocent bystanders,
especially during the summer when tempers tend to get hotter. Is
there ANY excessive violence in the region or at the city of Srinagar?
I wish I had a SAIL account so I could check these things myself. I
worry that you may have used the 'tourist' keyword in your query and
that stories relating to a virtual civil war in which there were no
tourist casualties may have been ommitted.
Third, what about India as a whole, not just Kashmir? Is there growing
violence which might later spread to Kashmir? --David
-------
∂18-Apr-87 2351 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 87 23:51:32 PDT
Date: Sat 18 Apr 87 23:46:17-PDT
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Attn: Students from India
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 18 Apr 87 23:44:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295676139.8.FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
It's probably the Uttar Pradesh riot that my parents picked up on.
Uttar Pradesh is in northern India but is separated from Kashmir by Himachal
Pradesh. Could you forward me the stories about Uttar Pradesh?
-------
∂18-Apr-87 2351 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 87 23:51:49 PDT
Date: Sat 18 Apr 87 23:48:37-PDT
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Attn: Students from India
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 18 Apr 87 23:44:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295676563.8.FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I don't think my parent's fears are totally without basis. USNWR recently
ran an article about the growing instability of India. --David
-------
∂19-Apr-87 0006 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Attn: Students from India
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 87 00:06:12 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Apr 87 00:02:59-PDT
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Attn: Students from India
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 19 Apr 87 00:00:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295679178.8.FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Is there some way I can make use of the A.P. program you are using in
the 2 months I have remaining at Stanford? I'd like to place a deamon
on India and Kashmir. Or is there some way you can do this for me and have
all relevant articles automatically forwarded to me?
Does MIT have a similar program? --David
-------
∂19-Apr-87 0009 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: These two are all from Uttar Pradesh in last two weeks
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 87 00:09:22 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Apr 87 00:06:07-PDT
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: These two are all from Uttar Pradesh in last two weeks
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 19 Apr 87 00:05:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295679747.8.FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Interesting. Perhaps you could forward me the Sri Lanka stories as well?
-------
∂19-Apr-87 0141 TERP@Score.Stanford.EDU re: antifreeze(?) in soft drinks
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 87 01:41:07 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Apr 87 01:38:25-PDT
From: Brian Hunt <TERP@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: antifreeze(?) in soft drinks
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 18 Apr 87 23:10:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295696550.13.TERP@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I think Jolt is becoming fairly widely available now. I've bought it
for some time at Lucky on Embarcadero, where it used to be about $2.50
a six-pack, though I think the price is down quite a bit now. I
definitely saw it at the Co-op in Menlo Park for $1.69 a few days ago.
I would bet it's at most places that sell soda nowadays. Look for the
red can with the lightning bolt on it.
The "twice the caffeine" claim is slightly exaggerated but basically
true with respect to other colas. It only has 1/3 more caffeine than
Mountain Dew, though...
Brian
-------
∂19-Apr-87 1254 FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Thanks!
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 87 12:54:00 PDT
Date: Sun 19 Apr 87 12:50:45-PDT
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Thanks!
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 19 Apr 87 11:15:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12295818946.15.FOGELSONG@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
John, you've been very helpful! I really appreciate your scanning
the news stories for me. --David
-------
∂19-Apr-87 1533 VAL Arima's paper
Here is my reaction to an earlier draft of Arima's paper:
∂19-Feb-87 1211 VAL re: ICOT work on nm reasoning
To: rggoebel%watdragon.waterloo.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
[In reply to message sent Mon, 10 Nov 86 21:39:14 est.]
Randy,
I read Arima's ascription paper you sent me a couple of months ago.
It's an interesting paper, but I don't think he describes the relation of
his work to circumscription correctly. Here is how I see the situation.
First, what he's doing in Example 1 can be easily done using circumscription,
contrary to his claim on p. 4. To check whether "mammal" can be
identified with "homoiothermal", we add the axiom
not ab(x) implies (mam(x) equiv hom(x)),
and then circumscribe ab with hom allowed to vary. This expresses our
desire to choose the extension of hom so that the set of exceptions to
the equivalence (mam(x) equiv hom(x)) will be minimal. The result
will be that ab is identically false, so that mam and hom are equivalent.
This approach exibits the same kind of non-monotonic behavior as Arima's
method: if we add an axiom which implies the negation of this equivalence
then the equivalence will be no longer provable.
Second, it seems to me that ascription doesn't include predicate circumscription
as a special case, contrary to what Arima apparently is trying to show in
Section 5.1. The problem is that in each particular example of ascription we
apply its definition (p. 2) to one particular predicate Psi, whereas
in McCarthy's 1980 circumscription each particular example gives a schema.
(In the 1986 version this schema even became a formula with a universally
quantified predicate variable.) With ascription, such a "schematic" approach
will apparently cause problems. Imagine, for instance, that there are 2
predicates, mam1 and mam2, which are known to be not equivalent to each other,
but which are both identifiable with hom using ascription. If we are allowed
to apply ascription both to mam1 and mam2 then we'll conclude that they are both
equivalent to hom, which contradicts the assumption that they are not
equivalent to each other.
What do you think?
Vladimir
∂19-Apr-87 1551 JK proposal
To: NSH, JMC
I talked to Keenan friday; he said there is not much need to call him
back again except for some budget info --- he did not sound very hopeful
about a very large grant. Anyhow, I hacked up a first draft of my parts
--- check it out as baz[ekl,jk]. Comments?
∂20-Apr-87 1006 @Score.Stanford.EDU:WALESON@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU AI qualifying exam
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 87 10:06:43 PDT
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 20 Apr 87 10:02:41-PDT
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 87 09:59:51 PDT
From: Anthea Waleson <WALESON@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: AI qualifying exam
To: Gupta@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, Weiss@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
Shoham@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, McCarthy@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
Nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, Genesereth@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
Winograd@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: waleson@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12296049978.26.WALESON@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
We are preparing to schedule the AI qualifying exam. The tentative dates
are Monday and Tuesday, May 18th and 19th. We may have sessions during the
mornings and afternoons of both days, depending upon demand for the exam.
Would you please send a message to my secretary, WALESON@SCORE, letting her know whether you will be available to assist with the exam this year? Please
indicate which of the possible sessions (May 18/19, morning/afternoon) you
will be able to attend.
The reading list for the qualifying exam is contained in Report. No.
STAN-CS-86-1093, also KSL-85-54, authored by Subramanian and Buchanan.
If you like, we can send you a copy.
Please let us know as soon as possible whether you will be available
to assist with the Quals on May 18 and 19. Your help is much appreciated.
Bruce Buchanan
-------
∂20-Apr-87 1125 RA John Hopcroft
John called re NSF report he wanted to know whether it's ok to distribute the
portion on AI. He would like you to either call him (607) 255 7416 or send
him electronic mail.
∂20-Apr-87 2148 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: Wednesday Apr 22, 11:00
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
Topic: Taking stock
∂20-Apr-87 2212 wiley!joe@lll-lcc.ARPA Workshop proposal
Received: from LLL-LCC.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 87 22:12:36 PDT
Received: Mon, 20 Apr 87 22:12:13 PST by lll-lcc.ARPA (5.51/)
id AA02734; Mon, 20 Apr 87 22:12:13 PST
Received: by wiley.LAIC.uucp (1.1/SMI-3.0DEV3)
id AA09351; Mon, 20 Apr 87 16:55:42 PST
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 87 16:55:42 PST
From: wiley!joe@lll-lcc.ARPA (Joseph Sullivan)
Message-Id: <8704210055.AA09351@wiley.LAIC.uucp>
To: lll-lcc!su-ai.arpa!jmc@lll-lcc.ARPA
Subject: Workshop proposal
Cc: wiley!joe@lll-lcc.arpa
Dr. McCarthy,
As per the instructions in AI Magazine, I am submitting a request for
AAAI sponsorship of a workshop entitled "Architectures for Intelligent
Interfaces: Elements and Prototypes." Attached below is a description of
the workshop and a draft budget. Should you require additional
information please contact me. My address, etc. is as follows:
Joseph W. Sullivan, Ph.D.
Lockheed AI Center
O/90-06 B/259
3251 Hanover St.
Palo Alto, CA 94304
(415)354-5213
wiley!joe@lll-lcc.arpa
Thanking you in advance for your consideration of this proposal,
Joseph
----------
Architectures for Intelligent Interfaces:
Elements and Prototypes
Proposal for AAAI Sponsored Workshop
RATIONALE
The increasing sophistication of computer based systems coupled
with the expanding number of users with diverse educational and
technical backgrounds is focusing critical attention on the need
to enhance the functionality of the interface between human and
computer. The Computer-Human Interface has become, by the nature
of its complex and varied requirements, a multidisciplinary
scientific area; with significant contributions being made by
Psychology, Cognitive Science, Computer Science, Linguistics, and
Interactive Graphics. The success of these disciplines in
developing computer systems which are cognitively compatible has
been limited by the lack of a computational environment which
supports the adaptability and reasoning capability required to
implement a truly useable and adaptive computer-human interface.
The primary premise of the Workshop is that the field of
Artificial Intelligence can provide the computational environment
that is needed. The representational and inferential facilities
fundamental to AI systems are necessary to implement an
intelligent computer-human interface, that is, an interface which
can understand the intentions of a user, communicate to the user,
advise the user, and adapt its interaction with the user based
upon the results of previous interactions. AI may provide the
glue that binds the various facets of the interface into a
working whole.
Simply embracing AI and building prototype systems, however, will
not be enough; we must also begin the difficult task of
developing a nomothetic base to guide intra- and
inter-disciplinary research in the area of Intelligent Interfaces
and provide a framework against which to measure our success.
The purpose of the workshop is to serve as a forum in which these
issues can be discussed.
Page 2
WORKSHOP CO-CHAIRS
Joseph W. Sullivan, Ph.D. Sherman W. Tyler, Ph.D.
Lockheed AI Center Lockheed AI Center
O/90-06 B/259 O/90-06 B/259
3251 Hanover St. 3251 Hanover St.
Palo Alto, CA 94304 Palo Alto, CA 94304
(415)354-5213 (415)354-5214
wiley!joe@lll-lcc.arpa wiley!sherman@lll-lcc.arpa
WORKSHOP COMMITTEE
Jock Mackinlay, Ph.D. Edwina Rissland, Ph.D.
Xerox PARC Dept. Computer Science
Palo Alto, CA University of Massachusetts
Mackinlay.pa@xerox.com Rissland%umass.csnet@relay.net.cs
Norm Sondheimer, Ph.D. Robert Neches, Ph.D.
Inst. for Information Sciences ISI
Univ. Southern California Univ. of Southern California
Sondheimer@vaxa.isi.edu Neches@vaxa.isi.edu
ORGANIZATION
The scope of the workshop is approximately 30-35 attendees. Four
of these would be invited keynote speakers and several would be
invited representatives from various government agencies (e.g.,
ONR, DARPA, NSF). The remaining 25 attendees would be selected
on the basis of an 8 page abstract and 1 page description of
current theoretical or research work submitted in response to an
open call for papers announcement. The announcements will be
placed in AI Magazine, SIGCHI Bulletin, SIGART Newsletter, and
the AI-MAIL & AI-CHI mailing lists (over the ARPANET). The
selection will be via a blind, peer-review process.
We are also exploring possible co-sponsorship or co-operation by
SIGCHI (Special Interest Group on Computer & Human Interaction of
ACM.) The co-sponsorship by AAAI and SIGCHI is in the spirit of
the interdisciplinary nature of the workshop.
The workshop is planned for March 29 - April 1, 1988 at the
Asilomar Conference Center in Monterey, CA. The daily rate is
$52 per night per person which includes meals, meeting space, and
use of the conference facilities.
We are currently talking with Peter Gordon, a publishing partner
from Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., about potential publication
as part of the ACM Press Series of Edited Conference/Workshop
Proceedings. We have also spoken with Michael Morgan of Morgan
Kaufmann Publishers. They are also very interested in the
publication of the workshop proceedings.
Page 3
BUDGET
ITEMS $ AMOUNT
------------------------------------------------------------------
Printing/Mail/Phone .............................. 100.00
Publicity ........................................ 0.00
Committee (travel & lodging for organizers) ...... 600.00
Registration ..................................... 50.00
Facility/Program ................................. 1,555.00
*Peer Review Process 500.00
*Working Volume of Proceedings 600.00
*Audio-Visual Equipment 350.00
*Deposit for Conference Facilities 105.00
Social Functions ................................. 300.00
*Reception (35 people) 300.00
Tutorials ........................................ 0.00
Exhibits ......................................... 0.00
Conference Proceedings ........................... 1,000.00
Other Expenses ................................... 1,000.00
*Reserve for student travel & participation
Conference Management Fee ........................ 262.50
*$2.50 per person/per day
==========
TOTAL EXPENSES: $4867.50
======================================================================
∂21-Apr-87 0615 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu some thoughts
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 87 06:15:24 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA02523; Tue, 21 Apr 87 09:14:00 EST
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA15376; Tue, 21 Apr 87 09:17:18 EDT
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 87 09:17:18 EDT
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8704211317.AA15376@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: some thoughts
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
John,
Several things came to mind after the Kansas workshop. I don't yet
have them all down in coherent form. Still, I'll send what I have, before
I start to forget them!
1. The size of RTM (relevance term memory) in our model, which you asked
about, is not constrained beyond the limitations of whatever can come into
it. The latter, however, is determined by the product of STM size and the RTM
delay time. Thus if STM holds up to 8 wffs, and RTM delay is 50 inference
cycles, then RTM will never have more than 400 wffs at a time.
2. I am not sure your remarks on Miller's Magical Number Seven were quite
right. [This is not a point of particular importance for the memory model
we are constructing, since it is not intended to be an exact match of
human memory data, but still it is interesting to be aware of
similarlities.] As far as I can tell, Miller's results hold for virtually ALL
types of working (short-term) memory tasks, from simple recall to
problem-solving, and for all types of memories (new, old, nonsense syllables,
etc). As a quick illustration of what, to the best of my knowledge, is
the kind of thing cognitive psychologists agree on, consider someone rapidly
reciting several well-known facts, such as "2+2 = 4", "Washington was our
first President", and "Beethoven was a composer." These three you could
undoubtedly repeat back with ease. But what if you were given ten, or
twenty, equally familiar facts? My understanding of this is that most
people would easily be able to parrot back up to 7 or 8 or 9 such, but
beyond that performance would degrade. It is not that people have forgotten
the facts per se, but that they have forgotten the particular momentary
COLLECTION that THOSE facts comprised. They are not able to keep that
particular collection in their attention set all at once. At least this is
what I understand from my limited reading. One source I have consulted is
John Anderson's "Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications", Freeman 1980,
chapter 6.
3. I was intrigued by your mention of a desire to express the fact that a
wff A is derived from a wff B in first-order logic. This sounds related to
what Jennifer and I are doing in what we call step-logics, in which we keep
track of the actual steps of inference, in a way resembling sperficially
Godel's arithmetical definition of provability. Is what you have in mind
anything like the following: A 4-place predicate symbol Deduced(t,x,y,i)
which says intuitively that x is deduced from y by means t (e.g., modus
ponens, default, etc) at step i, with appropriate axioms, such as
Deduced(mp,x,y,i) <- Deduced(t1,y,v,j) & Deduced(t2,implies(y,x),k) & j,k<i
for modus ponens, and, say,
Deduced(dft,x,y,i) <- Deduced(t1,y,v,j) & Deduced(t2,typical(x,y,j),k) & j,k<i
for defaults? You didn't say just what application you had in mind, tho it
sounded as if it had to do with recording the fact that a conclusion may
have been derived in a way that was defeasible.
4. I was even more intrigued by your mention of Meta-Epistemology. I
notice you have written on this in the paper you sent me on Ascribing Mental
Qualities. This (particular research program, not necessarily the other
views you express) fits right in with my own views, which I have sometimes
thought of as Formal Epistemology, briefly hinted at at the end of my paper
"How can a program mean?" I have begun just a little work on characterizing
a version of the problem, with definitions. I am leery of showing it to
anyone in its present rough form...but I can indicate the following:
Suppose an agent in world W has beliefs (according, say, to your idea of a
second-order structural definition), via predictions of behavior. An
illustrative example is the (ascribed) belief that "the store I shop at
never has bargains", as well as "the store you shop at often has bargains."
Now if in fact both of us shop at the same store (unknown to us), then they
can affect my behavior, for instance in trying to arrange to go shopping
with you, while also trying to avoid returning to "my" store. Thus I may
(mistakenly) catch a bus headed east in order to get to "your" store, when
in fact your store is west (the same as my store). I see no way to capture
this kind of reasoning in its connection with the environment, without a
theory of reference. Moreover, it will be a tricky theory, because the
expressions "my store" and "your store" have no single external meaning.
They involve BOTH external phenomena AND internal ones, in a
non-straightforward way. This is what I was trying for in my "How Can
Programs Mean?" paper. I noticed recently that Nicholas Asher has a
similar idea in his "Belief in Discourse Representation" paper in J Phil
Logic, 1986.
As for the paper by Moore, I am trying to track it down. Thanks for the
reference. Do you happen to know where it appeared?
5. You asked me to remind you to send me your notes on using possible worlds
for the "Is Reagan Seated?" problem. I would indeed appreciate these.
It was good seeing you again.
--Don
P.S. I have asked Jennifer Elgot-Drapkin to send you copies of our papers
on step-logics.
∂21-Apr-87 0713 AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM hotel/May 5-6
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 87 07:12:57 PDT
Date: Tue 21 Apr 87 09:13:10-CDT
From: Ellie Huck <AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM>
Subject: hotel/May 5-6
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ai.ellie@MCC.COM
Message-ID: <12296281778.32.AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM>
Dr. McCarthy -- your reservations are for the Brookhollow --
confirmation number R111L -- its being billed directly to MCC. Hope
your trip is uneventful and our Texas weather continues to be as good
as it has been this past week -- Ellie
-------
∂21-Apr-87 0900 JMC
cate
∂21-Apr-87 0900 JMC
teller
∂21-Apr-87 0900 JMC
Virginia Mann 3-2565
∂21-Apr-87 1000 JMC
Bernstein
∂21-Apr-87 1100 JMC
Chandra and other workshop proposals
∂21-Apr-87 1139 RA call for reference
James Gross from Madison Business and Data Processing in NY called re reference
for John Gillmore. His tel. is (212) 675 8940.
You can call him collect.
∂21-Apr-87 1405 RA Re: Paul Haley
[Reply to message recvd: 21 Apr 87 13:48 Pacific Time]
I talked to Chuck Williams' secretary and so far she only has a home number for
Paul Haley which she was reluctant to give me. She will call Paul Haley and
ask him to to get in touch with you ASAP. We can still change the entry in the
catalog. It must be doen by April 30.
∂21-Apr-87 1631 guibas@navajo.stanford.edu Komlos and Goldberg
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 87 16:31:07 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 21 Apr 87 15:30:11 PST
Date: 21 Apr 1987 1530-PST (Tuesday)
From: Leonidas Guibas <guibas@navajo.stanford.edu>
To: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Cc: guibas@navajo.stanford.edu, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Subject: Komlos and Goldberg
Nils,
I have a draft of the long forms for Komlos' appointment for you to look
over. Perhaps you show also show them to the appropriate dean so can they
tell us what else they might want.
I spoke with Andrew Goldberg on the phone and he seemed quite anxious
to get an offer from us. He has an offer from Princeton OR (which is
part of Civil Eng.) and waiting on a couple of others. I think the
prospects of us getting him look good. In view of Friedman's
disinclination to accept, I think we should accelerate whatever has to
be done in order to generate a position for Goldberg. I'd like to be
able to get back to him next week with something more definite.
L.
∂21-Apr-87 1824 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: EDR
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 87 18:24:29 PDT
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 87 18:24:58 PDT
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: EDR
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue, 21 Apr 87 14:18:00 PDT
Message-ID: <12296404077.17.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Hi, John! Glad you're back. When I see you, I'll ask you for a five or ten minute summary of what the EDR project scheme really is. I don't have any detail.
I DO , however, know why it is a company. That is a gimmick for funding
reasons, a component of Fuchi's entrepreneurial brilliance. As it happened,
the Japanese Diet legislated that the public "capital gain" profits from the
privitization of NTT (i.e. money from the sale of stock) should go to fund
"advanced technology development" in private companies in Japan. They set
up an orgnization to dispense the money: the Japan Key Technologies Center.
In order to get a cut of this pie (rumored to be between two and four billion
dollars or even more, depending on what the offering price of the stock was),
a company was formed, The Electronic Dictionary Research Corporation. The
owners are the eight company participants of ICOT plus the Japan Key
Technologies Center (i.e. the government). The latter owns about 30% of the
stock, so I am told. The founding grant was approximately $120-140 million
dollars (depending on what yen conversion rate you use), over a seven year
period. After year 7, they hope to live off the royalties from the various
dictionaries. They reason that all the natural language understanding
programs done in Japan will have to use these dictionaries because it will not
be worthwhile for any one company to recreate all the work that will have
gone into producing the dictionaries.
Ed
-------
∂21-Apr-87 1845 Phelps%csvax.cs.ukans.edu@RELAY.CS.NET 3 Wisemen Puzzle from Frank Brown
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 87 18:45:29 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id aa25010; 21 Apr 87 21:32 EDT
Received: from csvax.cs.ukans.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa26169;
21 Apr 87 21:26 AST
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 87 15:20:20 CST
From: Phelps%csvax.cs.ukans.edu@RELAY.CS.NET
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: 3 Wisemen Puzzle from Frank Brown
Message-ID: <8704211520.aa15380@csvax.cs.ukans.edu>
Dear John,
Could you please send us the FOL proofs of why the
first two wisemen did not know that their spot was white.
I really enjoyed your presentations at the conference.
Particularly the ideas on matching up the anomolous
extensions.
Sincerely,
Jim Phelps for
Frank Brown
∂21-Apr-87 1952 @Score.Stanford.EDU:D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU cs326
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 87 19:52:47 PDT
Received: from LEAR.STANFORD.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 21 Apr 87 19:49:29-PDT
Date: Tue 21 Apr 87 19:51:47-PDT
From: Kevin Quinn <D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: cs326
To: jmc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12296419879.311.D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
I am the student from cs326 last quarter who had eye surgery. If you
recall, I contacted you just before finals and you let me take an
incomplete. You implied that anytime I could finish would be okay, and
I'm afraid I've taken you a bit literally by not finishing yet.
I am working on my paper right now, and I'm very excited about the topic,
which is "how AI should approach causation." I have a number of questions so
I'll just list them as they come to mind:
- Is there some deadline you would like to set? My only concern is that
I can't devote full time to the paper due to my spring qtr classes. But
I should be able to finish it if necessary in a week or two.
- If I get a good rough copy done, could I have you or Prof. Lifschitz look
over it and make suggestions? I'd really benefit from that.
- How long do you want the paper to be? With what I've got right now,
I can see myself writing 12 pages, but if you have suggestions on the
material, I could expand on certain areas.
Well, that's all I can think of right now. Thanks for your time,
kevin quinn
-------
∂22-Apr-87 0732 CLT reminder
Send vita to manning@RATLIFF.CS.UTEXAS.EDU
∂22-Apr-87 1051 JMC
squires 694-5800
∂22-Apr-87 1051 JMC
cate 321-1225
∂22-Apr-87 1051 JMC
qlisp
∂22-Apr-87 1220 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Support Requested for Workshop
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Apr 87 12:20:41 PDT
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 87 08:22:50 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Support Requested for Workshop
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue, 21 Apr 87 15:11:00 PDT
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12296556604.25.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Do you have any on-line proposal from him yet? If you do, can you
send it to me?
CCM
-------
∂22-Apr-87 1405 RA leaving early?
Would you mind if I leave at 4:30 today?
Thanks,
∂22-Apr-87 1417 RA
I am going to get your program.
∂22-Apr-87 1556 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
SHOULD JOHN MCCARTHY AND ED FEIGENBAUM
TALK TO EACH OTHER?
Thursday, April 23, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
Matt Ginsberg
In this talk, I discuss one possible way to bridge the apparently
widening gap between the "neats" and the "scruffies" in AI. According
to Kuhn, a necessary step in resolving the differences between the
two camps is that one attack problems of interest to the other.
I attempt to do this by suggesting that the scruffy programs
are doing essentialy two things: a recognizable approximation
to first-order inference (such as MYCIN's backward chaining), and
some sort of bookkeeping with the results returned (e.g., manipulation
of certainty factors).
Formalizing this bookkeeping is attractive for a variety of reasons:
it will allow precise statements to be made about what the scruffies'
programs are doing, and may lead to more effective implementations of
their ideas. There are also advantages for the neats, since understanding
some of the proposed extensions to first-order inference in this fashion
appears to lead to computationally tractable algorithms for some simple
non-mononotonic logics.
If time permits, I will present a formalization which appears to
have the properties described in the previous paragraph.
∂22-Apr-87 1604 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Linnas' deportation
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Apr 87 16:04:04 PDT
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 87 16:04:05 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Linnas' deportation
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ZENON@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed, 22 Apr 87 01:22:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12296640573.30.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Would JMC turn over a criminal to the Chilean government? Chile
under Pinochet doesn't have a criminal justice system which meets
civilized standards either.
It was determined by the US courts that Linnas was indisputably
guilty, but since the US does not have the jurisdiction to try or
punish him he was turned over to a government which did. I'm sure if
the Soviets didn't want him, the Israelis would have been glad to take
him. I think (I'm not sure) that the reason he was sent to the USSR
to be shot (instead of Israel to be hanged) was that since the crime
happened in territory that is now de facto part of the USSR the USSR
had priority.
-------
∂22-Apr-87 1652 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA re: Support Requested for Workshop
Received: from OHIO-STATE.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Apr 87 16:52:43 PDT
Return-Path: <CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Received: from OSU-20 (osu-20.ARPA) by ohio-state.ARPA (4.12/6.1.OSU-CIS)
id AA28696; Wed, 22 Apr 87 19:53:03 est
Message-Id: <8704230053.AA28696@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Wed 22 Apr 87 19:51:56-EDT
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Subject: re: Support Requested for Workshop
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 21 Apr 87 15:11:00-EDT
Yes, John, it is still relevant. The budget assumes that AAAI will be
supporting it to the tune of $5K. Commitments have been made, so I hope there
will be no problem in AAAI arranging to send us $5K. Jim Hendler of
U Matyland is actually running the logistics of the the conference.
Pl. let me know what I should do to ensure that we will have the money.
Thanks again.
-------
∂22-Apr-87 1719 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA re: Support Requested for Workshop
Received: from OHIO-STATE.ARPA by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Apr 87 17:18:56 PDT
Return-Path: <CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Received: from OSU-20 (osu-20.ARPA) by ohio-state.ARPA (4.12/6.1.OSU-CIS)
id AA28833; Wed, 22 Apr 87 20:19:40 est
Message-Id: <8704230119.AA28833@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Wed 22 Apr 87 20:18:34-EDT
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Subject: re: Support Requested for Workshop
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 22 Apr 87 16:55:00-EDT
Thanks, John.
-------
∂23-Apr-87 0418 NSH logic, methodology, phil. of science
I forgot to mention, my abstract on the incompleteness
theorem proof was accepted for the LMP conference in Moscow.
If I am going, I need to send in the registration fee of 100$
by May 1st (it goes up to 120$ afterwards).
Would it be advisable for me to attend, and if so, will I
have my expenses paid? An added attraction for me is that
my sister will be on a dance tour through the USSR around
the same time, with my mom accompanying.
Shankar
∂23-Apr-87 0800 JMC
conference
∂23-Apr-87 0944 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: soviet courts & re: JMC, re: w.wroth, re Linnas
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Apr 87 09:44:54 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Apr 87 09:41:00-PDT
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: soviet courts & re: JMC, re: w.wroth, re Linnas
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 22 Apr 87 23:19:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12296832977.31.MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
thanks for the reading suggestions and a few highlights of
soviet history. i still am interested in hearing why you believe
the sources you offered me, as opposed to other sources.
i don't ever make the time to read all the sides of all the issues i'm
interested in; i couldn't do anything else if i ever did. i also find
that the things i choose to pay to read (i.e., have subscriptions to)
are ones that already lean in the direction i am biased towards.
sometimes i read material in direct opposition to the views i hold,
to find out what those people think. but i have to admit that, honestly,
i have never researched an issue (outside of election issues) so
thoroughly that i believe i am making a soundly balanced rational-and
emotional decision as to what is best.
therefore, i'm interested in knowing why you trust the facts
presented in your sources when there are usually a plethora of
contradictory "facts".
i'm glad for your answer - i at least have one more bit of background
than i used to have.
-katie
-------
∂23-Apr-87 1158 MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU PhD admittee, Sherry Listgarten
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Apr 87 11:58:51 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Apr 87 11:41:04-PDT
From: Marcia A. Derr <MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: PhD admittee, Sherry Listgarten
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: ra@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12296854836.64.MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Sherry Listgarten, a new CS PhD admittee, will be visiting on Monday
April 27. Her main intererest is AI and she would like
to talk with you about your research. Could you meet with her
either at 10:30-11am or sometime after 3:45pm?
Thanks, Marcia
-------
∂23-Apr-87 1242 RA
Hopcroft
John,
Hopcorft called again re the former msg. He has a meeting in Washington next
week and needs to know.
∂20-Apr-87 1125 RA John Hopcroft
To: JMC
John called re NSF report he wanted to know whether it's ok to distribute the
portion on AI. He would like you to either call him (607) 255 7416 or send
him electronic mail.
∂23-Apr-87 1348 JJW Special Qlisp meeting
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Date: Tuesday, April 28
Time: 2:30 p.m.
Place: MJH 252
Visitor: Prof. Robert Halstead from MIT
Prof. Halstead is also giving the C.S. Colloquium Tuesday at 4:15 in
Terman Auditorium, on "Parallel Symbolic Computing Using Multilisp".
∂23-Apr-87 1430 MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: PhD admittee, Sherry Listgarten
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Apr 87 14:30:52 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Apr 87 14:27:28-PDT
From: Marcia A. Derr <MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: PhD admittee, Sherry Listgarten
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 23 Apr 87 12:02:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12296885127.60.MAD@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
ok, 10:30, meeting with sherry listgarten, in your office.
-------
∂23-Apr-87 1442 RA leaving early
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, eppley@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
BS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I don't feel well and will leave at 3:00 instead of 4:00.
Rutie
-----
∂23-Apr-87 1700 JJW Halstead
Are you interested in having dinner with Bert Halstead next Tuesday?
∂23-Apr-87 1906 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: Liam Peyton on vet pref
Received: from PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Apr 87 19:06:25 PDT
Received: by Psych.Stanford.EDU; Thu, 23 Apr 87 18:57:34 PST
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 87 18:57:34 PST
From: Helen Cunningham <helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Liam Peyton on vet pref
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, helen@psych.stanford.edu, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
Fair enough. Perhaps some equivalent benefit for other forms of public
service (charity work, VISTA, Peace Corps) would also be a good idea.
-helen
∂23-Apr-87 2017 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: No motorcycles
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Apr 87 20:17:43 PDT
Date: Thu 23 Apr 87 20:14:24-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: No motorcycles
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 23 Apr 87 20:02:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12296948286.13.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The trouble was with Harry. I suggest you consult Igor Rivin for
a complete account of this absurd saga.
-------
∂24-Apr-87 0005 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: No motorcycles
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 87 00:05:53 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Apr 87 00:02:33-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: No motorcycles
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: ilan@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 23 Apr 87 20:34:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12296989818.17.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Though this brought images of dancing nurds being shooed out of
the Sala de Puerto Rico by ostracized physicists, I really don't
know of the incident to which you refer.
-------
∂24-Apr-87 0820 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK my proposal
Received: from TUNNEL.CS.UCL.AC.UK by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 87 08:19:43 PDT
Received: from cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk by mv1.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id aa01496; 24 Apr 87 12:06 BST
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 87 01:39:40 GMT
Message-Id: <9413.8704240139@tsuna.cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk>
To: jmc <@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK,@cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk:jmc@sail.stanford.edu>
Subject: my proposal
John,
Nice to hear from you.
I was not actually proposing a whole conference but responding
to a call for workshop proposals at the AAAI conference. I was
thinking of a pretty small and focussed one day affair. But it
is beginning to look as if it will be hard to extricate myself
from commitments in the UK that week. So maybe you are right
and I should postpone the idea for a year.
I did not know about Hewitt's conference in June. I agree with you
about the New Mexico one being somewhat disappointing, though
enjoyable in its way.
When I hear that a conference is to be concerned with foundations
I expect something much more philosophically sophisticated than
that one was.
I guess people mean different things by "foundations".
At present I am trying to characterise notions of representation,
mental state, cognitive process, etc that are neutral between
connectionist and non-connectionist implementations, because too
many people seem to think that somehow only the conventional AI
approach requires representations.
The key idea is that an intelligent system is a complex process
in which there exist a collection of causally interacting sub-states,
where the different sub-states can vary independently of one another,
and some have desire-like characteristics, some belief-like
characterisitics, etc. (Whether they exist what their characteristics
are is a question of fact, not of convention, as Dennett suggests. The
question of fact concerns the causal decomposability of the processes
underlying the behaviour.)
We can then start refining this by talking about different ways in
which causally interacting sub-states can co-exist in one system.
Sometimes they correspond to different physical PARTS of the system.
Sometimes they corresond to different SUPERIMPOSED but nevertheless
separable processes. (E.g. like different superimposed wave forms
that can be filtered out by tuned circuits).
The former is closer to conventional AI the latter to connectionim.
The different implementations do have different properties but they
can both support a notion of a representation as a particular kind of
sub-state with a particular kind of structural variation.
Going back to your old example, a thermostat will have two
causally interacting, but independently variable, sub-states
one belief-like and one desire-like. But each of these states
can vary only a limited way: in one dimension. In general intelligent
systems require sub-states capable of structural variation of a kind
that is appropriate for representing a particular range of
environments, or plans, or goals, etc.
I hope that makes some sense. I am trying to elaborate these ideas
in a book that attempts to answer questions left either unasked or
unanswered (or both) by Dennett, Haugeland, Pylyshyn, etc.
But some of the ideas still need to be developed and clarified.
Best wishes.
Aaron
∂24-Apr-87 0919 SJG re: your talk
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Apr-87 20:05-PT.]
No; I probably won't do that till the fall. But a PLANlunch is
probably in the cards ... I was sorry you weren't there, too!
Matt
∂24-Apr-87 0926 RA Martin Greenberger, UCLA
Greenberger would like you to call him (213) 472 5719. He is going to be
in Northern Calif. within the next week or two and would like to come in to
see you re a study they are going to do at MIT.
∂24-Apr-87 1007 CLT shopping list
cascade
∂24-Apr-87 1113 RA leaving
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, BS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
eppley@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I am leaving shortly for my 11:30 medical appointment.
Rutie
-----
∂24-Apr-87 1224 LUNT@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: departure of Reagan Library
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 87 12:24:13 PDT
Date: Fri 24 Apr 87 12:20:43-PDT
From: Steve Lunt <LUNT@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: departure of Reagan Library
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 24 Apr 87 08:18:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12297124199.40.LUNT@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Intelligence isn't everything.
-------
∂24-Apr-87 1728 @Score.Stanford.EDU:REIS@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 87 17:28:10 PDT
Received: from Sierra.Stanford.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 24 Apr 87 17:20:47-PDT
ReSent-Date: Fri 24 Apr 87 17:22:52-PDT
ReSent-From: Rick Reis <REIS@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
ReSent-To: ejm@Shasta.Stanford.EDU, mccarthy@Score.Stanford.EDU,
bbl@STAR.Stanford.EDU, hennessy@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
linvill@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, m@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
wooley@Sonoma.Stanford.EDU, cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU,
pmbanks@STAR.Stanford.EDU, faheem@Cascade.Stanford.EDU
ReSent-Message-ID: <12297179204.13.REIS@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Hello!
I have a little favor to ask and I apologize for the short notice. I
will understand if you will be unable to accomodate me in this.
Dr. Abdul H. S. Bukhari, a US AID post-doctoral exchange visitor from
Pakistan is in town to talk to academics like you to explore the
possibility of linking up their Institute of Physics and Technology at
the University of Sind, Pakistan with various US institutions under
the sponsorship of the USAID program. Their ultimate goal is to
establish a "Center of Higher Studies and Research" in the fields
of Telecommunications, Electronics and Computer Engineering.
Plans to reach this goal include educational/research training of their
staff in the US (MS/PhD degrees), postdoc training in the US, faculty
exchange program, etc.
Please let Carmen know (Miraflor@sierra or 5-3617) if you would be
able to meet with him briefly anytime on Tuesday, the 28th. I
will also be hosting him for lunch at the Faculty Club and would
be happy if any of you could join us. Please let me know ASAP so
I can make the necessary arrangements.
Thanks.
Rick
-------
∂24-Apr-87 2253 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU lunch?
Received: from [128.114.129.2] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 87 22:53:32 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.57/1.1)
id AA11319; Fri, 24 Apr 87 22:56:17 PDT
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 87 22:56:17 PDT
From: beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8704250556.AA11319@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: lunch?
I'm coming to Stanford next Thursday in the morning to set up the
computer equipment and check that the demo I'm giving in your seminar
actually runs on the very computer and in the very room where I plan
to demonstrate it. That means I'll eat lunch at Stanford too and
would be happy to have some company if you and/or Carolyn and/or
Vladimir would like to join me. If your schedule doesn't permit it
don't hesitate to say so.
∂25-Apr-87 0949 CLT beeson
If you have lunch on Thursday,
you should ask him if he wants to go to Japan.
∂25-Apr-87 1300 JMC
clipper
∂25-Apr-87 1648 JK ps
The proposal lives under baz[ekl,jk], with some of Shankar's stuff
merged in.
JK
∂25-Apr-87 1651 LES Jussi Salary
[In reply to message rcvd 25-Apr-87 16:46-PT.]
Would that be to return here as a Research Associate? Or was he a Senior
Research Associate?
∂26-Apr-87 0024 NSH
I'll be at your office at 5pm monday.
Shankar
∂26-Apr-87 1029 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK workshop at MIT 25-27th June
Received: from TUNNEL.CS.UCL.AC.UK by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 87 10:28:46 PDT
Received: from cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk by mv1.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id aa10777; 26 Apr 87 18:27 BST
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 87 01:29:42 GMT
Message-Id: <14137.8704260129@tsuna.cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk>
To: jmc <@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK,@cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk:jmc@sail.stanford.edu>
Subject: workshop at MIT 25-27th June
John,
Thanks for the information about this. If I had an invitation
with an offer of travel funds I could probably come. If I have
to find travel funds it will depend on my submitting a proposal
to the University.
If a talk were required I could talk about why it is useful to regard
intensional systems as systems with independently variable causally
interacting substates. Different numbers of substates, different kinds
of variability, different kinds of causal interactions and different
ways of implementing these substates are required for different sorts
of systems.
I agree about the desirability of axiomatising things - but I feel
it is necessary to get a reasonably clear intuition about what needs
to be axiomatised first - and I am still groping towards that.
I think I am making progress, though, as you say, it is slow. Maybe I
should soon try formalising what I've already done.
In my experience, discussing paradigms is not as fruitful as
discussing the first order problems - which can be discussed from
different paradigms. One can then compare the paradigms according to
how much progress they make with the problems. (Unless they can't
agree on what the problems are....)
best wishes
Aaron
∂26-Apr-87 1352 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Progress Report
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 87 13:52:19 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Sun, 26 Apr 87 13:47:18 PDT
Date: Sun 26 Apr 87 13:44:14-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Progress Report
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12297663691.2.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I am cautiously optimistic about finding billets enough to make
solid offers to Komlos (1/2), Goldberg, and Mitchell. Jim Gibbons
agreed to go with me to Rosse to present several options for
arranging for these billets, and I have written a memo in support
of our critical need. Jim was going to try to schedule such a
meeting for this week. Anyone in communication with any of our
candidates should let them know that we hope to have something
pretty solid to report within days. -Nils
-------
∂26-Apr-87 2000 JMC
964-0787
∂26-Apr-87 2115 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU comment?
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 87 21:15:27 PDT
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 87 21:15:50 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: comment?
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12297745900.30.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
A Swedish friend of mine who was visiting here briefly tells me that
in his visits to the USSR and China he considers the Chinese form of state
socialism to be much more "human" than the Soviet one, and that Beijing is
in general a much pleasanter place to be than Moscow.
Can you comment on that? You've been to both places, and since you're
hostile to both countries' systems maybe you can impartially compare them...
-------
∂27-Apr-87 0700 JMC
Graubard
∂27-Apr-87 0900 RA expense report
Is there a reason why you did not sign you expense report?
Thanks,
∂27-Apr-87 0900 JMC
new amex number
∂27-Apr-87 1000 JMC
cbcll
∂27-Apr-87 1002 AIR re: Stallman
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Apr-87 21:11-PT.]
I called Stallman yesterday. He prefers to come here on Wednesday or Friday.
∂27-Apr-87 1101 JMC
bookstore rebate, arkady
∂27-Apr-87 1106 coraki!pratt@Sun.COM re: JPL visit
Received: from SUN.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 87 11:06:44 PDT
Received: from sun.Sun.COM by Sun.COM (4.0/SMI-3.2)
id AA14143; Mon, 27 Apr 87 11:04:21 PDT
Received: by sun.Sun.COM (4.0/SMI-3.2)
id AA09591; Mon, 27 Apr 87 11:07:03 PDT
Received: by coraki.uucp (3.2/SMI-1.2)
id AA07604; Mon, 27 Apr 87 11:06:11 PDT
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 87 11:06:11 PDT
From: coraki!pratt@Sun.COM (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8704271806.AA07604@coraki.uucp>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: JPL visit
In-Reply-To: message of 27 Apr 87 0119 PDT.
<8704270818.AA08661@Sun.COM>
Thanks for the explanation. The explanation I got encouraged one to
imagine the satellite catching up with the planet and getting a bit
more speed as it went past. Now I see that one should ideally start
out going in the opposite direction. However I now also see that
(working in a common ecliptic) you get some increment provided only
that you cross the path of the planet behind it, and a decrement if you
cross in front. If both then it gets more complicated.
-v
∂27-Apr-87 1111 AIR alexanjan
His office numer 424-8777, his home number 949-5383.
∂27-Apr-87 1318 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
AUTOMATIC DERIVATION OF THE
EQUATION OF MOTION OF A PENDULUM
Thursday, April 30, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
Michael Beeson
(beeson@csli.stanford.edu)
San Jose State University
Some knowledge of elementary physics has been formalized in first-order
logic. The domain of discourse includes physical objects and their
relations, mathematical formulas, and the semantic relation between
formulas and objects. The knowledge in question has been written in
Prolog and is sufficient to support an automatic derivation of the
differential equation of motion of a pendulum. The inference engine
makes use of the Knuth-Bendix method and also of a symbolic computation
system for algebra and calculus. Perhaps this is the first program to
use both knowledge representation in logic and symbolic computation.
∂27-Apr-87 1319 RA [Reply to message recvd: 27 Apr 87 12:26 Pacific Time]
John Hopcroft:
(607) 255 7416
I don't have a net address.
∂27-Apr-87 1337 RA John Nafeh
Sorry, I forgot to tell you Friday that John Nafeh would like you to call him.
∂27-Apr-87 1338 VAL
John, what was the name of the travel agent at Dina Bolla you recommended?
∂27-Apr-87 1340 RA Richard Schroeppel
Schroeppel called to let you know about June 15 9:30 SAB meeting. I put
it on your calendar.
∂27-Apr-87 1430 jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu net address
Received: from CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 87 14:30:08 PDT
Received: by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA11141; Mon, 27 Apr 87 17:30:28 EDT
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 87 17:30:21 EDT
From: jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft)
Message-Id: <8704272130.AA01105@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (5.54/4.30)
id AA01105; Mon, 27 Apr 87 17:30:21 EDT
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: net address
I got a message that you wanted my net address
jeh@cornell.edu
John
∂27-Apr-87 1519 CLT calendar item
thu 30-apr 20:00 pocket opera (yanked)
waterfront theatre (sf)
entrance beach & polk
∂27-Apr-87 1521 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: Wednesday Apr 29, 11:00
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
Topic: Qlisp programming
Joe will present some Qlisp programs for sorting.
∂27-Apr-87 1632 LES Ketonen
It appears that the right rate for Jussi would be about $61k. Of course,
before making an offer we would need to figure out where the money is
coming from and where he would sit, then do a pseudo-search.
∂27-Apr-87 2012 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU thermostats
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 87 20:12:30 PDT
Date: Mon 27 Apr 87 20:08:54-PDT
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: thermostats
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12297995859.9.RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
[cwr]
I'm trying to defend some of the ideas in your paper that talked about
ascribing intelligence to thermostats. My stack of your papers does
not include this one. Would you have a copy I could have ?
btw: When are you going to release your collected works ?
-------
∂27-Apr-87 2015 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 87 20:15:27 PDT
Date: Mon 27 Apr 87 20:11:57-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 27 Apr 87 14:08:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12297996415.16.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
hopcroft@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu
-------
∂27-Apr-87 2205 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU thanks
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 87 22:05:11 PDT
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 87 22:05:30 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: thanks
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12298017088.55.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Thanks for the information. My impression of Moscow is of a rather
dreary and politically stagnant place, whereas Beijing in the post-
Mao era has the opposite problem (not enough stability).
-------
∂28-Apr-87 0204 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU:GOTO@NTT-20 Common Business Language (Received)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 87 02:04:31 PDT
Received: from NTT-20 by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Tue, 28 Apr 87 02:02:10 PDT
Date: Tue 28 Apr 87 16:00:58
From: Shigeki Goto <Goto@NTT-20>
Subject: Common Business Language (Received)
To: JMC%Sail.Stanford.Edu@SUMEX-AIM
cc: CLT%Sail.Stanford.Edu@SUMEX-AIM, nobuo%nttcoin%NTTLAB.NTT@NTT-20,
goto@NTT-20
Message-ID: <12298027183.36.GOTO@NTT-20.NTT.JUNET>
John,
I just received a copy of your paper "Common Business Communication
Language" in Textverarbeitung und Burosysteme. Thank you very much.
I will share it with my friend, Kawashima-san, at NTT Yokosuka
Laboratories.
Regards,
Shigeki, SG@SAIL
-------
∂28-Apr-87 0700 JMC
amarel
∂28-Apr-87 0830 JMC
waltuch 275249
∂28-Apr-87 1008 RA picture taking
Charles Moore, a photographer with, Newton Science Mag. called re an article
the mag. is doing on AI. He would like to come in tomorrow and take your picture.
Can you meet with him tomorrow? His tel. (209) 532 2645. He is trying to coordinate
your picture taking with that of Feigenbaum and since Feigenbaum is going to
Australia Thursday he would like to do both of you tomorrow.
∂28-Apr-87 1101 VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 87 11:01:12 PDT
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Tue, 28 Apr 87 11:01:40 PDT
From: VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 87 11:03:51 PDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
Date: 28 Apr 87 10:55 PDT
From: VARDI@ALMVMA.BITNET
To: JMC @ SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
Date: 28 April 1987, 10:51:48 PDT
From: VARDI at ALMVMA
To: bunt at htikht5, dolev at hujics, dorit at ernie.berkeley.edu,
joshi at upenn.csnet, kasif at hopkins-eecs-bravo.arpa,
ladner at larry.cs.washington.edu,
lamport at decwrl.dec.com, mazoo at toronto.csnet,
jmc at sail.stanford.edu,
silvio at mc.lcs.mit.edu, rcm at cl.cam.ac.uk, map at upenn.csnet
pfps at kl.sri.com, judea at locus.ucla.edu, peleg at navajo.stanford.edu,
john at csli.stanford.edu, rabin at harvard, mmvy at cornella,
mcvax!uva!theo at seismo.css.gov, paai at htikht5, valiant at harvard,
bonnie at upenn.csnet, weinstein at upenn.csnet
Subject: Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
Please Post Please Distribute
Call for Papers
The Second Conference on
THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF REASONING ABOUT KNOWLEDGE
March 6-9, 1988, Monterey, California
The 2nd Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about
Knowledge, sponsored by the International Business Machines
Corporation and the American Association for Artificial
Intelligence, will be held March 6-9, 1988, at the Asilomar
Conference Center in Monterey, California. While traditionally
research in this area was mainly done by philosophers and
linguists, reasoning about knowledge has been shown recently to
be of great relevance to computer science and economics. The aim
of the conference is to bring together researchers from these
various disciplines with the intent of furthering our theoretical
understanding of reasoning about knowledge.
Some suggested, although not exclusive, topics of interest are:
Semantic models for knowledge and belief
Resource-bounded reasoning
Minimal knowledge proof systems
Analyzing distributed systems via knowledge
Knowledge acquisition and learning
Knowledge and commonsense reasoning
Knowledge, planning, and action
Knowledge in economic models
You are invited to submit ten copies of a detailed abstract (not
a complete paper) to the program chair:
Moshe Y. Vardi
IBM Research
Almaden Research Center K53-802
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099, USA
Telephone: (408) 927-1784
Electronic address: vardi at ibm.com, vardi at almvma.bitnet
Submissions will be evaluated on the basis of significance,
originality, and overall quality. Each abstract should 1)
contain enough information to enable the program committee to
identify the main contribution of the work; 2) explain the
importance of the work - its novelty and its practical or
theoretical implications; and 3) include comparisons with and
references to relevant literature. Abstracts should be no longer
than ten double-spaced pages.
Program Committee:
J. Barwise (Stanford University)
P. van Emde Boas (University of Amsterdam)
H. Kamp (University of Texas at Austin)
K. Konolige (SRI International)
Y. Moses (Weizmann Institute of Science)
S. Rosenschein (SRI International)
T. Tan (University of Chicago)
M. Vardi (IBM Almaden Research Center)
The deadline for submission of abstracts is August 31, 1987.
Authors will be notified of acceptance by November 1, 1987
(authors who supply an electronic address might be notified
earlier). The accepted papers will be due by December 15, 1987.
Proceedings will be distributed at the conference, and will be
subsequently available for purchase through the publisher.
We hope to allow enough time between the talks for private
discussions and small group meetings. In order to ensure that
the conference remains relatively small, attendance will be
limited to invited participants and authors of accepted papers.
Support for the conference has been received from IBM and AAAI
for partial subsidy of participants' expenses; applications for
further support are pending.
∂28-Apr-87 1105 RA John Browning
Browning is with The Economist and is writing an article on knowledge representation
and would like to talk to you about common sense reasoning. He is now in the Bay
Area at 941 0855.He will be here until Friday morning and would like to meet with
you. He will call again this afternoon.
He also gave me his NY number (in case there is no answer in the local one
(212) 541 5730 where you can leave a msg. with Muriel Davis).
∂28-Apr-87 1215 RA Allstate insurance
Steve Hampstead from Allstate insurance called re your claim. His tel.
(415) 329 6929.
∂28-Apr-87 1352 RA picture taking
Charles Moore (the photographer) called again since Feigenbaum cannot
make it tomorrow, Moore
was wondering whether he can meet with you on Monday. He will call back.
If Monday is ok with you let me know what time would be convenient so I can
tell Moore in case you are not in your office when he calls.
Thanks,
∂28-Apr-87 1418 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: thermostats
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 87 14:18:19 PDT
Date: Tue 28 Apr 87 14:13:55-PDT
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: thermostats
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 27 Apr 87 21:07:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12298193380.35.RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
[cwr]
Yes, and the people I'm up against claim that a thing cannot have beliefs.
I think I understand your argument because I reliably produce a great
amount of rage in my supervisors eyes when I espouse these ideas. The
same ideas that almost had me kicked out of Theory of Knowledge and
left me with grade of 'B' because I claimed that robots could have
beliefs and intentionality and speech acts in my term paper.
-------
∂28-Apr-87 1525 RA Re: picture taking
[Reply to message recvd: 28 Apr 87 14:43 Pacific Time]
He can't make it tomorrow and will call you back during the second part of the
month. He will give you a written promise to give you prints of his pictures.
∂28-Apr-87 1709 RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: thermostats
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 87 17:08:54 PDT
Date: Tue 28 Apr 87 16:59:37-PDT
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: thermostats
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 28 Apr 87 14:36:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12298223547.49.RESTIVO@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
[cwr]
The head honcho for their brand (the philosophical brand) of Theory of
Knowledge is Donald Davidson. My enraged supervisor is John Searle.
Hubert Dreyfus and I have almost come to fisticuffs on more than one
occasion. Their chairman was convinced I had my own private language
when I wrote the term paper for his class on some of the ideas
contained in a rogue version of Minsky's Society of Mind. This verse
of the song has been a regular party. There is no free speach at
Berkeley. I have been constructing a reply to the brothers Dreyfus and
plan to publish this.
-------
∂29-Apr-87 0700 JMC
John Cocke
∂29-Apr-87 0800 JMC
275249
∂29-Apr-87 0800 JMC
amarel
∂29-Apr-87 0810 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Rutie
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Apr 87 08:10:32 PDT
Date: Wed 29 Apr 87 08:04:51-PDT
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Rutie
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: Bscott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12298388338.21.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Rutie called to say she is ill and won't be in today.
LaDonna
-------
∂29-Apr-87 1100 JMC
picture to refute Dreyfus
∂29-Apr-87 1100 JMC
Did I send qlisp to Goto?
∂29-Apr-87 1423 beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU next Thursday
Received: from [128.114.129.2] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Apr 87 14:23:02 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.57/1.1)
id AA20903; Wed, 29 Apr 87 11:42:13 PDT
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 87 11:42:13 PDT
From: beeson%ucscd.UCSC.EDU@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8704291842.AA20903@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: next Thursday
Vladimir is having lunch with me so you could wait till the last minute
to see if you can make it without causing anyone to change plans.
∂29-Apr-87 1610 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
AUTOMATIC DERIVATION OF THE
EQUATION OF MOTION OF A PENDULUM
Thursday, April 30, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
Michael Beeson
(beeson@csli.stanford.edu)
San Jose State University
Some knowledge of elementary physics has been formalized in first-order
logic. The domain of discourse includes physical objects and their
relations, mathematical formulas, and the semantic relation between
formulas and objects. The knowledge in question has been written in
Prolog and is sufficient to support an automatic derivation of the
differential equation of motion of a pendulum. The inference engine
makes use of the Knuth-Bendix method and also of a symbolic computation
system for algebra and calculus. Perhaps this is the first program to
use both knowledge representation in logic and symbolic computation.
∂30-Apr-87 0000 JMC
Decide about November trip to Sendai.
∂30-Apr-87 0700 JMC
amarel 202 694-5922
∂30-Apr-87 0700 JMC
jim browne
∂30-Apr-87 0734 unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV
Received: from seismo.CSS.GOV by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Apr 87 07:34:36 PDT
Received: from unido.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA11749; Thu, 30 Apr 87 10:35:40 EDT
Received: by unido.uucp with uucp;
Thu, 30 Apr 87 14:52:25 +0100
From: "Michael Reinfrank" <unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 87 13:30:15 -0100
Message-Id: <8704301230.AA02843@ztivax.uucp>
Received: by ztivax.uucp; Thu, 30 Apr 87 13:30:15 -0100
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Dear John:
here's, in short, my preliminary proposal for a workshop on non-monotonic
reasoning.
Date: June 13-15, 1988
Site: Munich, West-Germany
Topic: Non-monotonic reasoning: theories, systems, and applications
such as
- circumscription, non-monotonic logics, ...
- semantical considerations
- belief revision, truth maintenance
- default reasoning, inheritance with exceptions, the frame problem
and the qualification problem
- related topics like non-monotonic vs. approximate reasoning, ...
Application procedure:
- extended abstract, due, say, early January 1988
- by invitation through an organizing committee, based on
reviews of the abstracts
Proceedings:
- copies of the accepted extended abstracts handed out to
the participants
- a subset of selected attendees will be invited to contribute
a paper to a collection of nmr-papers. Publisher: probably
Springer Verlag
Concerning the organizing committee, I'm beginning to get in touch with
a couple of researchers. I'm pretty sure that e.g. Erik Sandewall and
Matt Ginsberg would join the committee. If you could spare some time
it would be great if you could be a committee member, too.
Concerning additional fundings, I'm currently negotiating with the
German AI-society, and with various industrial sponsors. There's also
a chance to get some EEC-money.
I would very much appreciate if you could approve this proposal as soon
as possible s.t. I can prepare a Call for Participation to be published
in the AI-Magazine and elsewhere here in Europe.
I expect about a dozen contributions from Europe, and would be glad to
get some 25 papers in total.
Here's my mail address:
MICHAEL REINFRANK
ZT ZTI INF 31
SIEMENS AG
OTTO-HAHN-RING 6
8000 Muenchen 83
WEST GERMANY
Phone: **49 89 636 41232
=========== 47661 (secretary)
E-Mail: reinfra@ztivax.uucp
Yours sincerely,
Michael Reinfrank
∂30-Apr-87 0800 JMC
pills
∂30-Apr-87 0830 JMC
RA about pictures
∂30-Apr-87 1152 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU delivery
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Apr 87 11:52:48 PDT
Date: Thu 30 Apr 87 11:49:04-PDT
From: Katherine Howard <KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: delivery
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12298691300.16.KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
You have received a hand-delivery from the Hoover Institute that is supposedly
urgent. I put it in your mailbox.
--Kathy
-------
∂30-Apr-87 1505 RA industrial lectureship
Do you know yet who is going to replace Paul Haley? Shall we cross out his
name from the catalog and replace it with "staff" or "to be announced"?
The woman from ACM, is this a NY number?
Thanks,
∂30-Apr-87 1516 SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu Joel Friedman
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Apr 87 15:16:06 PDT
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 30 Apr 87 15:15:05 PDT
Date: Thu 30 Apr 87 15:10:58-PDT
From: Alejandro Schaffer <SCHAFFER@sushi.stanford.edu>
Subject: Joel Friedman
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12298728055.24.SCHAFFER@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I just found out from someone in my group at IBM that Joel Friedman has
decided to go to Princeton. I hope this at least means we can move faster
on getting an offer out to Goldberg.
Alex Schaffer
-------
∂30-Apr-87 1558 RPG Personal Advice
I have been invited to be a ``distinguished visitor'' at
Cal State in Chico. This involves spending part of a week there,
giving lectures to various classes, and giving a public lecture some
evening.
I have several questions. I don't feel that I deserve such an honor and
that by accepting it I am going to cheat them out of a reasonable
visitor. Furthermore, I feel as though when I show up they will be disappointed
with what I say and do. I realize that my own self-view is pretty negative,
but are my beliefs accurate?
Second, Cal State is not exactly the shining star of academia. Should I
avoid it on that basis?
-rpg-
∂30-Apr-87 1559 RA leaving
It's Thursday and I am leaving one hour early.
∂30-Apr-87 2004 MANDEL@KL.SRI.COM Re: aids
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 Apr 87 20:04:02 PDT
Date: Thu 30 Apr 87 20:05:01-PDT
From: Thomas F. Mandel <MANDEL@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Re: aids
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: mandel@KL.SRI.COM, su-etc@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 30 Apr 87 15:47:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12298781586.11.MANDEL@KL.SRI.COM>
>Tuberculosis and AIDS...
First, I note that the article cited says that there *may* be a link
between the increased incidence of TB and the spread of AIDS.
Second, the article is somewhat incomplete in its remarks about
tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis) and its somewhat nastier cousin,
M. avium-intracellulare (MAI).
For one thing, there seems to be a long-lived TB epidemic winding
its way around the world. It is currently concentrated in
Southeast Asia, among other places, and as the article notes,
TB incidence is significantly higher among minority populations,
mainly those coming from parts of the world where the disease
is more prevalent.
Another thing about TB is that the European/American version of
the epidemic, which was prevalent in the 19th and early 20th
century -- and was regarded at the time much as cancer is today --
probably killed off (or at least infected) most of the susceptible
population. Everyone else was probably immune, or at least highly
resistant to the disease. Despite falling TB fatality rates for
much of this century in Europe and the U.S., there was *no* cure
for M. tuberculosis discovered until the 1940s, and really effective,
less dangerous antibiotics (mainly rifamycin) weren't discovered
until the 1950s.
It is probably plausible to suggest that TB is on the incidence
because (a) the number of immigrants from places where the disease
is more prevalent is growing, (b) the number of people with
weakened immune systems -- the poor suffering from malnutrition,
for instance -- is growing, and (c) the natural immunity of the
overall population has declined over the past half-century.
Regarding MAI, it was believed to have been rare prior to the
AIDS epidemic, and AIDS carriers are rather more susceptible
to MAI. (At this time, MAI is very difficult to treat as the
usually TB drugs are often ineffective; surgical resection is
the usual treatment.) But MAI in AIDS carriers is often
of the miliary form (disseminated throughout the body) rather
than of the much more common pulmonary infection usually
associated with M. tuberculosis.
MAI, by the way, is a fairly common bacterium, to which most people
are immune. It lives in dust, milk, and some other things, sometimes.
Finally, there is a school of thought that suggests that TB was
probably never a disease caused by a single bacterium. The reason
for this view is that medical scientists in recent years have
developed the tools to identify many different kinds of mycobacteria
that they simply didn't know about before. There are dozens of
different mycobacteria, a few of which are known to infect human
beings. (M. tuberculosis is the most common, but MAI is apparently
not that rare.)
It is also possible that some of the mycobacteria are mutating
to get around the human immune system. They are extremely well
adapted bacteria anyway, in the sense that someone with TB can
live for a very long period of time (meaning the bacteria colonies
survive too).
Neither M. tuberculosis nor MAI are highly contagious. In fact,
TB patients put on the relevant drugs are usually not at all
contagious after two weeks or so, and can move about freely without
fear of contaminating others. (Follow your doctor's advice, in any
event.) That is why there are *no more* TB asylums in the U.S.,
despite the fact that there are some 30-40,000 people currently
with the disease in the U.S. MAI, as currently understood, is
not contagious between human beings.
I'm afraid I cannot cite literature in this regard, as most of
my knowledge comes from following the research about MAI, since
I had the disease several years ago (and obviously survived it,
albeit by surrendering part of a lung to Stanford Hospital).
I can tell you that the standard medical textbooks are generally
*out of date* regarding M. tuberculosis, MAI, and the other
mycobacteria that infect humans. One would have to go to the
current journals, or better yet, to experts in the field to
find out what the latest is.
--Tom
-------
∂01-May-87 0000 JMC
III option
∂01-May-87 0019 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 May 1987
Previous Balance 5.30
Payment(s) 5.30 (check 4/30/87)
-------
Current Charges 0.30 (coffee, tea and hot chocolate)
4.00 (bicycle lockers)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 4.30
NEW PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
∂01-May-87 1145 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Vote Needed
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 May 87 11:45:08 PDT
Date: Fri 1 May 87 11:40:47-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Vote Needed
To: Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
RWF@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Latombe@Whitney.Stanford.EDU,
Lantz@Score.Stanford.EDU, ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
EJM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12298951935.34.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
At the faculty meeting on Tuesday, April 28, all faculty members present
voted to recommend the appointment of David Dill as an assistant professor.
He will occupy the CIS billet (initially CS; eventually joint); his thesis
area is hardware verification; his interests include: parallel programming,
compilers, verification, and VLSI. His CV and recommendation letters are
available in Anne Richardson's office.
Your vote is needed on this recommendation, and I will appreciate receiving
it as soon as possible.
Thank you.
Betty
-------
∂01-May-87 1254 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu a request
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 May 87 12:54:40 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA06593; Fri, 1 May 87 15:55:41 EDT
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA28435; Fri, 1 May 87 15:57:10 EDT
Date: Fri, 1 May 87 15:57:10 EDT
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8705011957.AA28435@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: a request
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
John,
My Department will soon be asking various people to write letters of
recommendation for the upcoming decision on my tenure. I am supposed to
suggest names of potential writers of such recommendations. Would you be
willing to serve in this capacity? I would be delighted if you were to do
so, though if you are at all uncomfortable with it then that's fine.
I believe that letters of recommendation will be requested during the
summer, and wanted back approximately by August.
Best regards,
--Don
∂01-May-87 1401 RA ACM
Robin Albert at ACM wanted to know whether the brief biography of you
which they had sent you is ok or whether you want any changes. Have you looked
it over? It's on your desk.
Please let me know and I'll call her.
Thanks,
∂01-May-87 1441 manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu Housing Information
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 May 87 14:41:24 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA04036; Fri, 1 May 87 16:42:17 CDT
Date: Fri, 1 May 87 16:42:08 CDT
From: manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (Elizabeth D. Manning)
Posted-Date: Fri, 1 May 87 16:42:08 CDT
Message-Id: <8705012142.AA10639@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA10639; Fri, 1 May 87 16:42:08 CDT
To: CLT@sail.stanford.edu, JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Housing Information
Cc: manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu
I wrote earlier about your housing needs but haven't heard. I'm sure you
are busier than I am with a darling 18 month old around! In anticipation
of your Monday visit I had hoped to get some idea of your requirements and
preferences regarding housing so that the information can be passed along
to realtors in order to be better prepared and save time. If you get the
chance, please get back with me this weekend.
Woody Bledsoe will meet your plane on Monday and escort you back to the
Department. Can you let me know where you will be lodging during your
visit and how long we can expect the pleasure of your company. We are so
very much looking forward to your all too brief stay in Austin in the Fall
and want to make this change as convenient as possible for your family.
If you would prefer a telephone conversation, I can be reached at home over
the weekend (512) 263-2222.
Elizabeth Manning
∂01-May-87 1441 AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Visit
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 May 87 14:41:24 PDT
Date: Fri 1 May 87 16:43:14-CDT
From: Gordon Novak Jr. <AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Visit
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, clt@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12298985150.6.AI.NOVAK@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
John and Carolyn,
I regret that I'll be out of town during your visit next week. However, I'll
be happy to talk anytime by phone, (512) 471-9569, home 327-2181, or by
net mail.
There is a University Housing Office that keeps a notebook of faculty houses
that are for rent (usually when UT faculty are going somewhere else as
visitors). These are likely to be nice houses in nice areas, often furnished
to faculty tastes, and the owners like to rent to other faculty. I've
suggested this to Elizabeth Manning in case you'd like to look at it.
Regards, Gordon
-------
∂01-May-87 1708 RA ACM
If you would like to change the biographical sketch or to approve it please
call Lise (pronounced Leesee) Hezan at (212) 280 5265 tonight or (212) 929 8553
tomorrow or Sunday.
∂02-May-87 0917 MDD Roger Schank
There is some possibility of his coming to NYU,
and I wonder whether you'd be willing to express an
opinion of his work.
Please send your reply to
davism@nyu.edu
I'd also appreciate it if my forwarding address from SAIL
could be changed to read like that. I don't know how to do it.
Thanks, Martin
∂02-May-87 1304 ME mail forwarding
To: MDD@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Please send your reply to
davism@nyu.edu
I'd also appreciate it if my forwarding address from SAIL
could be changed to read like that. I don't know how to do it.
Your mail is already forwarded to:
davism@nyu.arpa
The host name nyu.edu is not in our host table, but I assume it is the
same host. When and if the host's name in the host table is changed, the
forwarding entry will be updated semi-automatically.
∂02-May-87 1318 JJW Shigeki Goto
To: JMC, CLT
Do you have Shigeki Goto's mailing address in Japan? Jussi would
like me to send him a tape of the current EKL sources.
∂03-May-87 1643 @Score.Stanford.EDU:walker@flash.bellcore.com proposal for AAAI funding
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 May 87 16:43:28 PDT
Received: from flash.bellcore.com by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Sun 3 May 87 16:39:16-PDT
Received: by flash.bellcore.com (4.12/4.7)
id AA27383; Sun, 3 May 87 19:50:15 edt
Date: Sun, 3 May 87 19:50:15 edt
From: walker@flash.bellcore.com (Don Walker)
Message-Id: <8705032350.AA27383@flash.bellcore.com>
To: jmc@score.stanford.edu
Subject: proposal for AAAI funding
John,
I am attaching a proposal for a workshop to be held in conjunction
with the 1987 Linguistic Institute at Stanford this summer. We thought
we had adequate financial support, but one of our sources did not come
through. $5,000 from the AAAI would make a significant difference. This
workshop has had several predecessors, and we believe we are making
significant progress toward the goal of bringing people together to work
on lexical issues from a variety of theoretical perspectives.
The attached description is extracted from a larger one. I can
provide that and also send you descriptions of the workshops that
preceded this one. Let me know what else you need as a basis for
evaluation.
Don
THE LEXICON IN THEORETICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
A two week intensive workshop held 13-24 July 1987 during the 1987
Linguistic Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California
This workshop will examine approaches to the lexicon in linguistics,
computational linguistics, and lexicography to establish dimensions of
similarity and facilitate sharing the results of research efforts. One
major goal will be the establishment of a structure for lexical entries
that will be neutral with respect to theoretical differences so that
the information they contain can be shared. A second objective is the
development of community-wide resources that will be widely
accessible. The workshop will be organized around working groups on
syntax, semantics, morphology, and data and knowledge base design.
Participation will be primarily by invitation, although it is possible
to petition for inclusion. The workshop will be open to selected
graduate students who will be able to devote the majority of their time
to it during the two-week period.
To construct a moderate-sized lexicon for any type of computer
application using natural language without stringent constraints on the
knowledge domain represented is under the most optimistic assumptions a
large and arduous task. Hence it is important (1) to pool resources,
(2) to avoid duplicating efforts unnecessarily, and (3) to organize the
work in such a way that useful results can be obtained, even if they
are only partial.
Linguistic theories present a bewildering diversity of proposals about
language phenomena, in particular with reference to the encoding of
lexical information. However, we do not believe that it is necessary
to build a new lexicon for each additional application within every
theoretical framework. Although the approaches differ in the way they
represent and explain the different word classes, they generally agree
on the extension of and the diagnostics for them. Consequently, we
are working on procedures that will allow building a ``master lexicon''
from which specific lexica for different applications can be derived in
a relatively mechanical way.
Considerable progress has been made during previous workshops and, in
particular, by the working group on syntax. The proposed workshop will
extend these developments, complementing them with insights into the
way semantics, morphology, and data and knowledge base design can
conrtribute.
A PARTIAL LIST OF LIKELY PARTICIPANTS
Robert Amsler, Bell Communications Research
Sue Atkins, Collins Publishers
David Barnhart, Lexik House
Timothy Benbow, Oxford University Press
Branimir Boguraev, Cambridge University
Roy Byrd, IBM Watson Research Center
Nicoletta Calzolari, University of Pisa
Robin Fawcett, Polytechnic of Wales
Charles Fillmore, University of California, Berkeley
Robert Freidin, Princeton University
Robert Ingria, BBN Laboratories
Ronald Kaplan, Xerox PARC
Lauri Karttunen, SRI International
Martin Kay, Xerox PARC
Judy Kegl, Princeton University
Beth Levin, MIT Lexicon Project
George Miller, Princeton University
Martha Palmer, UNISYS R&D
James Pustejovsky, Brandeis University
Robert Schreuder, University of Nijmegen
Jonathan Slocum, MCC Corporation
John Sowa, IBM Systems Research Institute
Don Walker, Bell Communications Research
Susan Warwick, ISSCO/University of Geneva
Annie Zaenen, Xerox, PARC
Antonio Zampolli, University of Pisa
BUDGET
We expect to have between 30 and 40 participants. We would like to
provide travel and subsistence for about 15 invited people who do not
have adequate resources to cover their own expenses. The minimum board
and room costs for the two weeks should be about $600 (assuming
dormitory accommodations); travel costs should average about $400,
because a number are coming from Europe. In addition the Institute
requires a $250 fee and there will be expenses for photocopying and a
reception.
EXPENSES
$15,000 Travel and subsistence for 15 participants @ $1,000
3,750 Linguistic Institute fee
350 Photocopying
500 Reception
-------
$19,600 Total
INCOME
5,000 ACL contribution
5,000 Bell Communications Research contribution
5,000 amount requested from AAAI
4,600 to be sought from other sources
-------
$19,600 Total
Submitted by
Don Walker
Bell Communications Research
435 South Street, MRE 2A379
Morristown, NJ 07960
201:829-4312
walker@flash.bellcore.com (arpanet)
∂04-May-87 1002 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: Wednesday May 6, 11:00
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
Topic: Anoop Gupta will tell about OPS5
(which is to be implemented in Qlisp)
∂04-May-87 1323 RA biographical sketch
Did you go over the biographicaal sketch? Since I did not hear from you shall
I assume it's ok? Lice Hezan from ACM is going to call again tomorrow morning
in order to find out.
Thanks,
∂05-May-87 0903 CLT
sarah would like to talk to you
∂05-May-87 1452 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
SOME THOUGHTS ON NONMONOTONIC REASONING
Yoav Shoham (SHOHAM@SCORE)
Thursday, May 7, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
In the meeting I'll cover some subset of the following:
1. An overview of my semantical approach to nonmon logics, including
a natural approach to what I think are stratified nonmonotonic theories.
2. A discussion of the extra logical rationale behind nonmonotonic
inferences.
3. A discussion of why I'm baffled by the connection between
nonmonotonic logic and truth maintenance.
∂05-May-87 1504 AI.JMC@MCC.COM
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 May 87 15:04:41 PDT
Date: Tue 5 May 87 16:51:09-CDT
From: John McCarthy <AI.JMC@MCC.COM>
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12300035169.20.AI.JMC@MCC.COM>
bajcsy@cis.upenn.edu
-------
∂06-May-87 1025 AI.JMC@MCC.COM next mcc visit
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 10:25:36 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 12:24:32-CDT
From: John McCarthy <AI.JMC@MCC.COM>
Subject: next mcc visit
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12300248776.53.AI.JMC@MCC.COM>
1. look at Proteus.
2. wics with clt july 20-24
3. How about June 29-30 for next MCC visit.
4. Maybe also July 1.
-------
∂06-May-87 1115 RA John Nafeh
Please call John Nafeh either at MAD (408) 943 1711 or at home: (415) 962-9121
∂06-May-87 1122 AI.JMC@MCC.COM quote for Nafeh
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 11:22:34 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 13:21:33-CDT
From: John McCarthy <AI.JMC@MCC.COM>
Subject: quote for Nafeh
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12300259154.53.AI.JMC@MCC.COM>
Needs quote on relational lisp or database adapter.
-------
∂06-May-87 1235 RA Sarah's trip
I gave Franklin an ok to charge Sarah's trip Lexington-SF, 5/7 on your American
Express card.
∂06-May-87 1331 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU visit from John Pucci
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 13:31:48 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 13:25:51-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: visit from John Pucci
To: binford@Whitney.Stanford.EDU, zm@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, les@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12300281782.13.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John Pucci from Dept. of the Navy will be visiting our department next week
and has asked me to arrange meetings for him with those involved with the
N00039-84-C-0211 tasking contract. Tuesday (May 12) and Thursday (May 14)
are the days he is available for meetings. If you are available on either
of these days, please let me know a time you can meet with him. I need to
send him an agenda with meeting times by Friday of this week.
-Sharon Bergman
-------
∂06-May-87 1353 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Pucci
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 13:53:33 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 13:43:08-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Pucci
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 6 May 87 13:42:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12300284931.13.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
O.K., thanks. I'll get back to you.
-Sharon
-------
∂06-May-87 1354 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU suppes
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 13:54:08 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 13:46:54-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: suppes
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, sjg@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
de2smith@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12300285615.14.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
None of you are on mailing list, but I thought you might want a reminder
that Pat Suppes is going to talk next week on causationXprobability.
Yoav
-------
∂06-May-87 1432 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: news!]
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 14:32:11 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Wed, 6 May 87 14:29:33 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 14:26:04-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: news!]
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12300292744.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
fyi
---------------
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 6-May-87 14:25:45
Date: Wed 6 May 87 14:25:45-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: news!
To: avg@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
cc: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12300292687.23.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Andrew, My meetings today with the Dean/Provost and with the School
of Engineering Excom went VERY well. The probability that we will
make you a formal offer is 99% (I always round percentages down
rather than up!). Today is a very rushed day, I'll try to phone you
after some meetings, but perhaps we won't be able to talk by
phone until tomorrow. In summary, we have provostial approval to
make the offers we want to make pending formal Dean's approval
of your candidacy. Preliminary papers describing you were already
approved by the Dean, and I think on the basis of that he will permit
me to write you a letter offering you a position. I will be required
to say in that letter some sentence like "this offer is pending on
final university and board of trustees approval," but, in reality,
we are assured that you can be at Stanford as an Asst. Professor this
fall if you decide to accept. More later, -Nils
-------
-------
∂06-May-87 1507 CLT Pucci
Actually, I sent a message to Sharon suggesting the same thing
before reading your message.
∂06-May-87 1514 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Pucci meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 May 87 15:14:29 PDT
Date: Wed 6 May 87 15:02:52-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Pucci meeting
To: clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, les@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: ra@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12300299445.13.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
It looks as though 11 a.m. on Tuesday is a good time for all three of
you (John, Carolyn and Les), so I'll schedule you all together on Pucci's
agenda.
-Sharon
-------
∂06-May-87 1519 RA meeting with Pucci
Your meeting with Pucci is Tuesday, May 12, 11:00am. I put it in your calendar file.
∂07-May-87 0902 CLT msg
Mr. Seriff (knows you from Cal Tech) called.
He was in town for a meeting and just wanted to say hello.
∂07-May-87 0935 RA photograph
Jane Hill called from the Dean's office re taking portrait photograph of you.
I gave her a tentative date of Friday, May 15. She will call back.
∂07-May-87 0938 RA photograph
Re former msg. May 15 was cancelled.
∂07-May-87 1018 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
SOME THOUGHTS ON NONMONOTONIC REASONING
Yoav Shoham (SHOHAM@SCORE)
Thursday, May 7, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
In the meeting I'll cover some subset of the following:
1. An overview of my semantical approach to nonmon logics, including
a natural approach to what I think are stratified nonmonotonic theories.
2. A discussion of the extra logical rationale behind nonmonotonic
inferences.
3. A discussion of why I'm baffled by the connection between
nonmonotonic logic and truth maintenance.
∂07-May-87 1121 CLT ito
called. He wants to know asap whether you will come
to the IBM meeting in Japan in November.
home phone 022-279-2945
email: ito%aoba.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
(ito suggests sending a copy of email to sato (ms) just to be sure)
∂07-May-87 1453 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu more goldberg
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 May 87 14:53:23 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 7 May 87 14:50:06 PDT
Date: Thu 7 May 87 14:46:25-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: more goldberg
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12300558595.30.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I talked to him on the phone yesterday telling him about
progress. I am mailing him an offer letter today and have already
sent him the text of that letter via netmail. I'll probably see
him when I visit MIT next week. Now it's up to him! Thanks to all
of you for the hard work involved in doing this search. I have
asked Jeff Ullman to write up the final papers, and I expect these
to be approved by the SOE excom on May 20. (The case appears so
open/shut to Jim Gibbons that he is approving our sending out the
offer letter early.)
Now we must get to work on Mitchell and Komlos. Vaughan is writing up
the papers for Mitchell, and Math is carrying the ball (I hope?) on
the papers for Komlos.
It should be noted that Jim Gibbons was extremely supportive of our need
for "billet-relief" and wrote a very persuasive memo to Jim Rosse that
seemed to turn the trick. I think this is evidence that there is strong
backing in high places for the importance of "foundations" in computer
science. We should tolerate no "bad-mouthing" about "problems" in
foundations at Stanford. There are enough people willing to work hard
to keep it strong and to help it grow that I am confident that that is
what is going to happen. -Nils
-------
∂08-May-87 0453 ito%aoba.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET IBM Seminar
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 May 87 04:53:13 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id aa11136; 8 May 87 7:43 EDT
Received: from utokyo-relay by RELAY.CS.NET id ab04796; 8 May 87 7:40 EDT
Received: by u-tokyo.junet (5.51/4.9J-1[JUNET-CSNET])
id AA29990; Fri, 8 May 87 20:24:17 JST
Received: by nttlab.ntt.junet (4.12/5.0N) with TCP; Fri, 8 May 87 14:33:21 jst
Received: by aoba.tohoku.junet (1.1/6.1J) ; Thu, 7 May 87 20:38:31 JST
Message-Id: <8705071138.AA00662@aoba.tohoku.junet>
Date: Thu, 7 May 87 20:38:31 JST
From: Takayasu ITO <ito%aoba.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
To: JMC%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU%csnet-relay.csnet%u-tokyo.junet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: IBM Seminar
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I appreciate if you would kinly let me know your decision about the symposium. When you are not able to participate,the organizing committee must find
another candidate.
Sorry for pushing the matter.
{Your program "substitute" was executed since we had > instead of greaterp,but
at present my students haven't obtained any interesting result about it. I hope
that soon we can send some result to you.}
If any of your staff working on Parallel Lisp or Circumscription is interested
in visiting us,I welcome him.I will be able to support his travel between Tokyo
and Senda and his stay at Sendai for several weeks for co-operative research.
The amount of support will be based on our university regulation on the basis
of his career.(This does not apply for graduate students.)
Looking forward to heering from you.
Sincerely,Takayasu Ito(ito@aoba.tohoku.junet)
∂08-May-87 1422 RA Scientific and Engineering Advisory Board for SDI
Col. Everett from the above called to let you know about a seminar in Stanford
Park hotel, Menlo Park, Sat. May 16. 8:30-4:30. You get complimentary registration.
His tel. (202) 737 4979. If you are going to attend I wil notify John Morse,
former Sect. of Defense about your participation (Everett asked me to do that).
Morse Tel. no. is (415) 326 3341.
∂09-May-87 1644 RA Re: buslet
[Reply to message recvd: 09 May 87 16:38 Pacific Time]
You should tex your buslet on ztex rather than tex I have used some macros
from there. Try it and tell me if it works.
∂09-May-87 1648 RA Re: buslet
[Reply to message recvd: 09 May 87 16:47 Pacific Time]
You are right on the z. I will try to input the macros I am using to my buslet
so I won't have to use ztex.
∂09-May-87 1721 CLT
please don't forget milk
∂09-May-87 1740 JJW Meeting
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
Ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
For the meeting to discuss my thesis progress, how about next Monday
(May 18) at 2:00 p.m.? If this is a bad time for anyone, I'd like to
try for some other time on May 18 or 19.
Joe
∂10-May-87 0900 JMC
Show letter to Angelo.
∂10-May-87 0938 JK postponement
I have added some stuff on postponement to our proposal --- do you have
a reference for it?
∂10-May-87 1247 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU re: suppes
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 May 87 12:47:35 PDT
Date: Sun 10 May 87 12:41:46-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: suppes
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 8 May 87 20:46:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12301322335.17.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Monday, 1:30-3:00, mjh 352.
-------
∂10-May-87 1615 SJG my talk about you and Feigenbaum
... I'll be giving it at PLANlunch tomorrow, in case you want to
come and heckle.
Matt
∂10-May-87 1902 BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: old parking tickets:SIGNATURE collection time CANCELLED.
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 May 87 19:02:03 PDT
Date: Sun 10 May 87 18:55:58-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: old parking tickets:SIGNATURE collection time CANCELLED.
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 10 May 87 12:22:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12301390456.13.BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I couldn't agree more with you. However at this point I have neither the
means nor the time to hire an attorney for this. This is essentially
a "preliminary" letter; I plan to go forward with it (if necessary)
during the summer. I still don't have any idea of who to talk to
(without spending too much money) about a class action suit. Any pointer
will be much appreciated.
Your comment about "malice" is correct. I'll put the change in.
Alex
-------
∂10-May-87 1916 BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re:old parking tickets, improvement?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 May 87 19:16:24 PDT
Date: Sun 10 May 87 19:10:15-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re:old parking tickets, improvement?
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12301393054.13.BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Do you think the following conclusion to the letter is better than the old one?
(which didn't mention any class action suit):
We are fully intent to seek the protection of the courts, especially
in the form of a class action suit, should you continue to harass us
with these unfounded notices.
Alex
-------
∂10-May-87 2056 BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: re:old parking tickets, improvement?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 May 87 20:56:08 PDT
Date: Sun 10 May 87 20:50:02-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: re:old parking tickets, improvement?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 10 May 87 20:53:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12301411221.13.BRONSTEIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
OK. Thanks.
Alex
-------
∂11-May-87 0800 JMC
planlunch
∂11-May-87 0810 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 08:10:24 PDT
Date: Mon 11 May 87 07:56:54-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Tuesday Lunch
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12301532619.17.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Don would like me to extend a special invitation to you to attend our
faculty lunch tomorrow (Tuesday, May 12) as he knows that you are
vitally interested in tomorrow's topic!
-------
∂11-May-87 0945 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu LUNCH
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 09:45:21 PDT
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Mon, 11 May 87 09:43:57 PDT
Date: Sun, 10 May 87 17:42:13 PDT
From: <ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: LUNCH
Date: 10 May 87 17:40 PST
From: ELLIOTT@SLACVM
To: JMC@SAIL
Subject: LUNCH
Date: 10 May 1987, 17:35:17 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: LUNCH
DEAR JOHN,
IT IS GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU. I AM SURE THAT I CAN MAKE TIME FOR
LUNCH ONE DAY THIS WEEK. THURSDAY IS GOOD FOR ME, HOWEVER THAT IS
CORNERSTONE DAY AND THE CAMPUS MAY BE IN A MESS. CAN WE TENTIVELY
SAY THURSDAY AT 12. I HAVE A CLASS AT 1:15PM, SO LET'S MEET AT 11:30
AT THE FACULTY CLUB. I WILL TAKE CARE OF THE RESERVATION.
GREETINGS,
ELLIOTT
∂11-May-87 0959 VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: TARK II
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 09:59:22 PDT
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Mon, 11 May 87 09:58:02 PDT
Date: Sun, 10 May 87 21:15:33 PDT
From: <VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: TARK II
Date: 10 May 87 21:14 PDT
From: VARDI@ALMVMA.BITNET
To: JMC @ SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: TARK II
Date: 10 May 1987, 21:13:55 PDT
From: VARDI at ALMVMA
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: TARK II
Very good.
Moshe
∂11-May-87 0959 RA This afternoon
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, ZM@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, BS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I need to take this afternoon off.
Rutie
------
∂11-May-87 1112 RPG Cons Professor
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I think I am no longer a consulting professor. If you wanted to
re-appoint me, I suppose I wouldn't object.
-rpg-
∂11-May-87 1140 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Cons Professor
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 11:38:20 PDT
Date: Mon 11 May 87 11:31:05-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Cons Professor
To: RPG@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 11 May 87 11:12:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12301571612.17.RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
You are, in fact, still a consulting professor. The confusion lies in the
fact that ID cards are issued for six-month periods only. (I understand
that you have been issued another card.)
-Anne Richardson
Secretary to Nils Nilsson
-------
∂11-May-87 1307 ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Possible Sloan post-doc
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 13:06:55 PDT
Date: Mon, 11 May 87 13:04:32 PDT
From: Paul Rosenbloom <ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Possible Sloan post-doc
To: Fagan@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, Nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU,
Shoham@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12301588624.64.ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
The Sloan cognitive science committee is interested in bringing Ronald
Loui of the University of Rochester here for a one-year post-doc. You
may or may not already be familiar with his work, but I am contacting
you all because you are in the areas closest to those in which he has
been working. He has an interdisciplinary PhD in artificial
intelligence and philosophy of science, focused in the areas of
uncertain and non-monotonic reasoning (along with rational belief,
decision theory, and epistemology). His work often involves going
outside of conventional AI approaches to find relevant work in
philosphy. He has already written a number of papers, including a
response to Hanks & McDermott paper on non-monotonic reasoning (to
appear in the journal Cognitive Science), and several papers for the
AI and Uncertainty workshops (on reference classes [the letter of
reference from Pearl says that this has all of the benefits of
Dempster-Shafer theory without its drawbacks] and interval-based
decisions). He comes with excellent recommendations.
The two questions I have are: (1) whether any of you are interested in
working with him next year; and (2) whether you could provide some
assistance in supporting him (the Sloan money will probably be unable
to support him to the level of a typical CS research associate -- the
amount suggested by NIH for post-doc support is on the order of
$16,000 for the year). I have his folder available if any of you
would like to take a look at it. -- Paul
-------
∂11-May-87 1339 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU [Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Faculty Reports]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 13:39:13 PDT
Date: Mon 11 May 87 13:32:31-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>: Faculty Reports]
To: binford@Whitney.Stanford.EDU, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
genesereth@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU, manna@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12301593717.35.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Folks, Attached is some correspondence with the Dean's Office about
late faculty reports. The Dean's Office relies on these for a variety
of purposes (as I've said before) including appeals to the Provost about
how hard we are working (appeals for extra $ and billets) and including
information taken into account in setting raise amounts. Although the
Dean's Office might conjecture that we are working so hard that we don't
even have time to file faculty reports, that conclusion is defeated by the
facts that several known hard-workers already have filed theirs! -Nils
---------------
1) 8-May Shari I. Austin-Kit Faculty Reports
2) 8-May To: AUSTIN-KITZMILLE Re: Faculty Reports
Message 1 -- ************************
Return-Path: <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Received: from Sierra.Stanford.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 8 May 87 15:15:47-PDT
Date: Fri 8 May 87 15:21:45-PDT
From: Shari I. Austin-Kit <AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Reports
To: Nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: Austin-Kitzmiller@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12300827169.36.AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Nils,
I know that these are probably the last thing on your mind
right now but I am cleaning/organizing my office and I want to
let you know that I still need Faculty Reports for the following;
Binford, Feigenbaum, Genesereth, Manna and McCarthy
Thanks!
Shari
-------
Message 2 -- ************************
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 8-May-87 15:18:30
Date: Fri 8 May 87 15:18:30-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Faculty Reports
To: AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12300827169.36.AUSTIN-KITZMILLER@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12300826579.56.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Maybe we ought to say that next September's raises (if any) will
take effect after last year's faculty report has been handed in!
-Nils
-------
-------
∂11-May-87 1422 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU John Pucci
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 14:22:35 PDT
Date: Mon 11 May 87 14:08:44-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: John Pucci
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, les@Sail.Stanford.EDU, clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12301600309.28.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Nils' conference room has been scheduled for your meeting with John Pucci
at 11 a.m. tomorrow (Tues.) morning.
-Sharon
-------
∂11-May-87 1534 NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Keith Clark
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 15:34:36 PDT
Date: Mon 11 May 87 15:28:23-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Keith Clark
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 11 May 87 15:24:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12301614811.35.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I've sent a msg to Keith suggesting some times to meet next Thursday.
-Nils
-------
∂11-May-87 1614 ibuki!rww@labrea.stanford.edu free KCL
Received: from LABREA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 May 87 16:14:08 PDT
Received: by labrea.stanford.edu; Mon, 11 May 87 16:10:54 PDT
Received: by ibuki.UUCP (1.4/4.7)
id AA38469882; Mon, 11 May 87 15:33:10 pdt
Date: Mon, 11 May 87 15:33:10 pdt
From: ibuki!rww@labrea.stanford.edu (Richard W. Weyhrauch)
Message-Id: <8705112233.AA38469882@ibuki.UUCP>
To: labrea!jmc@sail.arpa
Subject: free KCL
Thanks for the note. Note that it says they are "looking" for a
way to do this. It might not happen. Also it doews not authorize
(that is unauthorize) us. Also the free version will only be for
suns and vaxes and will come unsupported on your tape.....
We are still in business and going strong. Please spread rumors
to that effect if anyone asks.
By the way. I am interested in the idea you proposed of working
with Stanfors for Common Lisp Libraries ... (I would consider
it jointly with Lucid but I don't think they would. Dick no
longer speaks to me!!!!) It is an unexpected casualty of this.)
Anyway if you are interested let me know and we should get together
as see how to preeoceed.
'
Thinks again for the message.λ
Richard
PS I cannot edit this message for spelling, BUT PLEASE read it all.
Richard
∂11-May-87 1633 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
SHOULD ED FEIGENBAUM AND I TALK TO EACH OTHER?
Matt Ginsberg, Stanford
(SJG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU)
Thursday, May 14, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
In a previous talk, I argued on philosophical grounds that the
time has come for the "neats" and "scruffies" in AI to begin
to resolve their differences by working on problems of interest
to each other. I suggested that, if one were to view the scruffy
programs as performing two distinct tasks, one being conventional
inference, and the other being some sort of "bookkeeping" with
the results, insights could be obtained that would be of interest
to both the formal and informal camps.
In this talk, I discuss the application of this idea to problems
of interest to the informal camp. Specifically, I will discuss
the construction of a "flexible" expert sytem shell that can be easily
tailored to solve problems using a variety of different methods, simply
by changing an explicit set of bookkeeping functions. I will show
the system using first-order logic to simulate a digital circuit, as
suggested by Genesereth in his DART work, using an ATMS to diagnose the
same digital circuit, as suggested recently by deKleer, solving a
simple problem in default reasoning, and then solving the same problem
more efficiently by using bookkeeping functions that include both
default and justification information.
∂11-May-87 2214 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: Wednesday May 13, 11:00
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
Topic: Anoop Gupta will continue discussing OPS5
∂12-May-87 0603 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Vladimir
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 May 87 06:03:00 PDT
Date: Mon 11 May 87 20:15:36-CDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Subject: Vladimir
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ics.browne@R20.UTEXAS.EDU, ai.novak@R20.UTEXAS.EDU, ai.woody@MCC.COM
Message-ID: <12301645251.37.AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
We have discussed various possibilities for Vladimir
Lifschitz for the Fall.
Please let us know whether it would be a good idea to invite
Vladimir as a cs faculty visitor for the Fall, with his wife
still at Stanford, or his wife at UT, teaching or not
teaching at UT. Based on a just received message from JC
Browne, I think it is possible, even quite possible, to get
Vladimir a visiting appointment for the Fall. It is not
certain, due to a university-wide freeze on further visitors
for the Fall, which all has to do, I presume, with the
legislature taking its sweet time about next year's
appropriations. Gordon Novak is a close neighbor of the
chairman of the Slavic languages department and would be
most willing to talk with him about a position for
Vladimir's wife. Whether anything could be worked out for
Mrs. Lifschitz this Fall I cannot guess.
As a first step, rushed vitas would be appreciated.
If it would be best just to work on a plan for numerous
consultant visits by Vladimir, at MCC or UT, please say so.
-------
∂12-May-87 0652 walker@flash.bellcore.com Lexicon Workshop Proposal for AAAI funding
Received: from FLASH.BELLCORE.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 May 87 06:50:40 PDT
Received: by flash.bellcore.com (4.12/4.7)
id AA21082; Tue, 12 May 87 09:55:25 edt
Date: Tue, 12 May 87 09:55:25 edt
From: walker@flash.bellcore.com (Don Walker)
Message-Id: <8705121355.AA21082@flash.bellcore.com>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Lexicon Workshop Proposal for AAAI funding
John,
Did you receive the attached proposal in an earlier message?
Concerned about communication channel effectiveness.
Don
From walker Sun May 3 19:50:14 1987
To: jmc@score.stanford.edu
Subject: proposal for AAAI funding
John,
I am attaching a proposal for a workshop to be held in conjunction
with the 1987 Linguistic Institute at Stanford this summer. We thought
we had adequate financial support, but one of our sources did not come
through. $5,000 from the AAAI would make a significant difference. This
workshop has had several predecessors, and we believe we are making
significant progress toward the goal of bringing people together to work
on lexical issues from a variety of theoretical perspectives.
The attached description is extracted from a larger one. I can
provide that and also send you descriptions of the workshops that
preceded this one. Let me know what else you need as a basis for
evaluation.
Don
THE LEXICON IN THEORETICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
A two week intensive workshop held 13-24 July 1987 during the 1987
Linguistic Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California
This workshop will examine approaches to the lexicon in linguistics,
computational linguistics, and lexicography to establish dimensions of
similarity and facilitate sharing the results of research efforts. One
major goal will be the establishment of a structure for lexical entries
that will be neutral with respect to theoretical differences so that
the information they contain can be shared. A second objective is the
development of community-wide resources that will be widely
accessible. The workshop will be organized around working groups on
syntax, semantics, morphology, and data and knowledge base design.
Participation will be primarily by invitation, although it is possible
to petition for inclusion. The workshop will be open to selected
graduate students who will be able to devote the majority of their time
to it during the two-week period.
To construct a moderate-sized lexicon for any type of computer
application using natural language without stringent constraints on the
knowledge domain represented is under the most optimistic assumptions a
large and arduous task. Hence it is important (1) to pool resources,
(2) to avoid duplicating efforts unnecessarily, and (3) to organize the
work in such a way that useful results can be obtained, even if they
are only partial.
Linguistic theories present a bewildering diversity of proposals about
language phenomena, in particular with reference to the encoding of
lexical information. However, we do not believe that it is necessary
to build a new lexicon for each additional application within every
theoretical framework. Although the approaches differ in the way they
represent and explain the different word classes, they generally agree
on the extension of and the diagnostics for them. Consequently, we
are working on procedures that will allow building a ``master lexicon''
from which specific lexica for different applications can be derived in
a relatively mechanical way.
Considerable progress has been made during previous workshops and, in
particular, by the working group on syntax. The proposed workshop will
extend these developments, complementing them with insights into the
way semantics, morphology, and data and knowledge base design can
conrtribute.
A PARTIAL LIST OF LIKELY PARTICIPANTS
Robert Amsler, Bell Communications Research
Sue Atkins, Collins Publishers
David Barnhart, Lexik House
Timothy Benbow, Oxford University Press
Branimir Boguraev, Cambridge University
Roy Byrd, IBM Watson Research Center
Nicoletta Calzolari, University of Pisa
Robin Fawcett, Polytechnic of Wales
Charles Fillmore, University of California, Berkeley
Robert Freidin, Princeton University
Robert Ingria, BBN Laboratories
Ronald Kaplan, Xerox PARC
Lauri Karttunen, SRI International
Martin Kay, Xerox PARC
Judy Kegl, Princeton University
Beth Levin, MIT Lexicon Project
George Miller, Princeton University
Martha Palmer, UNISYS R&D
James Pustejovsky, Brandeis University
Robert Schreuder, University of Nijmegen
Jonathan Slocum, MCC Corporation
John Sowa, IBM Systems Research Institute
Don Walker, Bell Communications Research
Susan Warwick, ISSCO/University of Geneva
Annie Zaenen, Xerox, PARC
Antonio Zampolli, University of Pisa
BUDGET
We expect to have between 30 and 40 participants. We would like to
provide travel and subsistence for about 15 invited people who do not
have adequate resources to cover their own expenses. The minimum board
and room costs for the two weeks should be about $600 (assuming
dormitory accommodations); travel costs should average about $400,
because a number are coming from Europe. In addition the Institute
requires a $250 fee and there will be expenses for photocopying and a
reception.
EXPENSES
$15,000 Travel and subsistence for 15 participants @ $1,000
3,750 Linguistic Institute fee
350 Photocopying
500 Reception
-------
$19,600 Total
INCOME
5,000 ACL contribution
5,000 Bell Communications Research contribution
5,000 amount requested from AAAI
4,600 to be sought from other sources
-------
$19,600 Total
Submitted by
Don Walker
Bell Communications Research
435 South Street, MRE 2A379
Morristown, NJ 07960
201:829-4312
walker@flash.bellcore.com (arpanet)
∂12-May-87 0947 RA Keith Clark
Clark, Impperial College, London called to let you know he is going to be
here next week and would like to meet with you. He will be in LA Tuesday
and Wed. and here probably on Thursday. Will Thursday be convenient for you?
∂12-May-87 1229 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Vladimir
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 May 87 12:28:17 PDT
Date: Tue 12 May 87 14:26:58-CDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Subject: Vladimir
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: ai.novak@R20.UTEXAS.EDU, ics.browne@R20.UTEXAS.EDU, ai.woody@MCC.COM
Message-ID: <12301843927.83.AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
JC Browne, who just got back in town after being gone since
before your last visit, has kindly observed that money is
available to bring Vladimir down to UT for some short visits
while you are here next Fall. I suggest that you give JC a
ring and work out the details, if this is the way you and
Vladimir would like to go.
-------
∂12-May-87 1411 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU list of workshops that I know of
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 May 87 14:11:20 PDT
Date: Tue, 12 May 87 14:08:34 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: list of workshops that I know of
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: aaAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12301862424.94.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
LIST OF AAAI SPONSORED WORKSHOPS
1987-1988
TITLE SPONSOR/ORGANIZER AMOUNT
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1987
THEORETICAL ISSUES ON NLP NM STATE/WILKS $5,000
KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION BOEING/BOOSE $5,000
SYMBOLIC COUPLING BOEING/KANUSZ $7,000
MACHINE LEARNING UC-IRVINE/LANGLEY $10,000
QUALITATIVE REASONING UOF ILL/FORBUS $10,000
REASONING ABOUT KNOWLEDGE IBM-ALMADEN/VARDI $10,000
AI & MEDICINE UNIV OF WASH/KALET $5,000
MATHEMATICAL THEORIES OF
LANGUAGE UNIV OF PENN/JOSHI $7,000
THEORETICAL CONCEPTS OF INFO
PROCESSING UNIV OF MD/HENDLER $10,000
NLP & LOGIC PROGRAMMING SIMON FRASHER/ST-DIZIER $2,000
INTF CONF ON GENETIC ALGORITHMS
MIT/GENESERETTE $2,000
FOUNDATIONS OF AI MIT/KIRSH $10,000
UNCERTAINTY & PROBABLITY NASA/CHEESEMAN $5,000
1988
NON-MONOTONIC REASONING SIEMENS/REINFRANK $10,000
-------
∂12-May-87 1422 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM visits
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 May 87 14:22:21 PDT
Date: Tue 12 May 87 16:20:51-CDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Subject: visits
To: val@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12301864660.72.AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
I think that the simplest thing would be for you, Vladimir,
to say how many visits for what duration you would like this
fall and then we'll run that by JC Browne, cs chairman. He
has said that "there is money for visits by Lifschitz"; so
best we just get down to details.
-------
∂12-May-87 1448 RA visa
The visa office is on 540 Bush. They are open M-F 9-1. You need 1 passport
photo. You can get a visa for 1 year for $15. If you want me to take care
of it for you, let me know.
∂13-May-87 0800 JMC
passport and get photo
∂13-May-87 0820 RA a reminder
Don't forget to bring in your passposrt and passpost picture.
∂13-May-87 0912 RA picture
Pass. picture should be 2 x 2 b&w or color.
∂13-May-87 0917 RA vacation
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, ZM@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, BS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I would like to take 3 days vacation, Mon.-Wed. June 8-10.
Rutie
-----
∂13-May-87 0923 RA picture
They are open tomorrow 3:30-4:30. They are in the Medical School Office Bldg.
Campus & Panama, room 100. If you want to go there tomorrow, I need to make an
appointment. They are also open Tudesday 9:30-10:30, but this would be too
late for you.
∂13-May-87 0958 RA
I am going to the bookstore.
∂13-May-87 1001 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: vacation
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 May 87 10:00:57 PDT
Date: Wed 13 May 87 09:54:54-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: vacation
To: RA@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
BS@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Rutie Adler <RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 13 May 87 09:17:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12302078390.22.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This is o.k. with me if John and Zohar are agreeable, Rutie. Incidentally,
would you please copy LaDonna on all messages concerning time off.
Thanks,
Betty
-------
∂13-May-87 1440 @Score.Stanford.EDU:shoham@jerry-lee-lewis next meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 May 87 14:40:51 PDT
Received: from jerry-lee-lewis.stanford.edu by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 13 May 87 14:31:28-PDT
Received: by jerry-lee-lewis.stanford.edu (3.2/SMI-3.2)
id AA09372; Wed, 13 May 87 14:31:30 PDT
Date: Wed, 13 May 87 14:31:30 PDT
From: shoham@jerry-lee-lewis (Yoav Shoham)
Message-Id: <8705132131.AA09372@jerry-lee-lewis.stanford.edu>
To: humeans@score
Subject: next meeting
Next meeting I'll talk about my nonmonotonic approach to causation.
Ana will have a copy of a short paper of mine. Since Monday the 18th
is qual day, and the 25th is memorial day, we'll meet on some day
in between. Does anyone have a problem with Friday the 22nd at noon?
(We can brown bag it).
Yoav
∂13-May-87 1507 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Moon and Sun
Received: from GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 May 87 15:07:21 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Wed, 13 May 87 15:05:20 pdt
Date: Wed, 13 May 87 15:05:20 pdt
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail, jjw@sail
Subject: Moon and Sun
I've installed three programs from the Vax systems that tell you about
the moon and sun, as you were mentioning the other day.
Gang-of-Four> today
Today is Wednesday, the thirteenth day of May, nineteen eighty-seven.
The time is two minutes and fifty seconds after three PM, Daylight
Savings Time. The Moon is Full.
Gang-of-Four> potm
Phase-of-the-Moon: Full
Gang-of-Four> sunrise
Sunrise: 5:58am Sunset: 8:08pm (PDT)
∂13-May-87 1511 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU More sunrise
Received: from GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 May 87 15:10:56 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU with Sendmail; Wed, 13 May 87 15:08:56 pdt
Date: Wed, 13 May 87 15:08:56 pdt
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail, jjw@sail
Subject: More sunrise
I just discovered the sunrise program can tell you even more:
Gang-of-Four> sunrise -p
Sunrise: 5:58am Azimuth: 66 20'
Sunset: 8:08pm Azimuth: 293 52'
The sun is at: Azimuth: 244 15' Altitude: 56 02'
∂13-May-87 1601 RA leaving
Would you mind if I left at 4:30 today?
Thanks,
∂13-May-87 1624 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu Re: bibliography to Prof. Paris
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 May 87 16:23:01 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA09738; Wed, 13 May 87 19:21:39 EDT
Received: from localhost.umd.edu by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (1.1/3.14)
id AA12567; Wed, 13 May 87 19:23:00 EDT
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8705132323.AA12567@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
Cc: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Subject: Re: bibliography to Prof. Paris
In-Reply-To: Your message of 13 May 87 1525 PDT.
<8705132225.AA08433@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 May 87 19:22:56 -0500
From: Don Perlis <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
I received an inquiry from Prof. J. B. Paris
Department of Mathematics
University of Manchester
Manchester M13 9PL
United Kingdom
in relation to "a survey of mathematical approaches to the problem
of reasoning under uncertainty". I'm sending him a paper each
of mine and Vladimir's, and I think he would benefit from the
current version of your bibliography.
John, I will send him a copy right away. In case you would like an on-line
copy of the latest version for your own use, I include it below. It has
altered a little since the last one I sent you.
I will provide my tenure committee with a list of suggested references
in a few days. In case you did not get my earlier message on this, I
repeat it below. If you feel you know my work well enough to be comfortable
writing about it, it would be quite helpful to my case. (But otherwise of
course there is no advantage, so please not construe my mentioning this
again as any kind of pressure. I bring it up again simply in case you did
not receive the original message.)
-Don
Don Perlis (301) 454-7931
perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
Date: Fri, 1 May 87 15:57:10 EDT
From: perlis
Message-Id: <8705011957.AA28435@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: a request
John,
My Department will soon be asking various people to write letters of
recommendation for the upcoming decision on my tenure. I am
supposed to suggest names of potential writers of such
recommendations. Would you be willing to serve in this capacity? I
would be delighted if you were to do so, though if you are at all
uncomfortable with it then that's fine.
I believe that letters of recommendation will be requested during
the summer, and wanted back approximately by August.
Best regards,
--Don
-------
∂13-May-87 1629 MARTIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU A prospective student,
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 13 May 87 16:29:52 PDT
Date: Wed 13 May 87 16:16:50-PDT
From: Martin Rinard <MARTIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: A prospective student,
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12302147919.10.MARTIN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Robert Kennedy, will be visiting Stanford on Thursday, May 21 and
Friday, May 22. His main interest is MTC. Could you meet with him
sometime during his visit?
-------
∂14-May-87 0836 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab transcript of your talk
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 May 87 08:36:22 PDT
Received: from NTT-20 by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Thu, 14 May 87 07:59:53 PDT
Received: from nttlab.ntt.junet by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Thu 14 May 87 23:14:39
Received: by nttlab.ntt.junet (4.12/6.2NTT.a) with TCP; Thu, 14 May 87 23:14:15 jst
Date: Thu, 14 May 87 23:14:15 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8705141414.AA16991@nttlab.ntt.junet>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20.ntt.junet
Subject: transcript of your talk
Enclosed please find the transcript of your talk at Tohoku University.
Please edit it and send it back to me. We will then translate it into
Japanese.
** masahiko **
--------------
Tape A
see tohoku[s87,jmc]
∂14-May-87 0911 perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu reference
Received: from MIMSY.UMD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 May 87 09:11:10 PDT
Received: from by mimsy.umd.edu (5.54/4.7)
id AA01573; Thu, 14 May 87 12:09:52 EDT
Received: by yoohoo.cs.umd.edu (5.54/3.14)
id AA13501; Thu, 14 May 87 12:11:23 EDT
Date: Thu, 14 May 87 12:11:23 EDT
From: perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu
Return-Path: <perlis@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8705141611.AA13501@yoohoo.cs.umd.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: reference
Cc: perlis@mimsy.umd.edu
Thanks very much, John!
(for serving as a reference for my tenure case)
-Don
∂14-May-87 0934 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU AAAI Housing
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 May 87 09:34:53 PDT
Date: Thu, 14 May 87 09:26:24 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: AAAI Housing
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12302335346.47.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Dr. McCarthy
We were able to make a reservation for you at the Westin. The room is a
single with an arrival date of July 12 and a departure date of July 17.
-------
∂14-May-87 1015 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
SHOULD ED FEIGENBAUM AND I TALK TO EACH OTHER?
Matt Ginsberg, Stanford
(SJG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU)
Thursday, May 14, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
In a previous talk, I argued on philosophical grounds that the
time has come for the "neats" and "scruffies" in AI to begin
to resolve their differences by working on problems of interest
to each other. I suggested that, if one were to view the scruffy
programs as performing two distinct tasks, one being conventional
inference, and the other being some sort of "bookkeeping" with
the results, insights could be obtained that would be of interest
to both the formal and informal camps.
In this talk, I discuss the application of this idea to problems
of interest to the informal camp. Specifically, I will discuss
the construction of a "flexible" expert sytem shell that can be easily
tailored to solve problems using a variety of different methods, simply
by changing an explicit set of bookkeeping functions. I will show
the system using first-order logic to simulate a digital circuit, as
suggested by Genesereth in his DART work, using an ATMS to diagnose the
same digital circuit, as suggested recently by deKleer, solving a
simple problem in default reasoning, and then solving the same problem
more efficiently by using bookkeeping functions that include both
default and justification information.
∂14-May-87 1039 JJW FUNCTION and FUNCALL
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
As I'm working with Qlisp simulators, the following question comes up:
how, syntactically, may LAMBDA and QLAMBDA be used in Qlisp?
In Common Lisp, LAMBDA may be used in two ways:
1. As the CAR of a function application, e.g.
((LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y))) (FOO A) (BAR B))
2. As the argument to the FUNCTION special form, e.g.
(FUNCTION (LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y))))
LAMBDA may not be used by itself as a special form. To re-express the
first example, the following forms are legal Common Lisp:
a. (LET ((F (FUNCTION (LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y))))))
(FUNCALL F (FOO A) (BAR B)))
b. (FLET ((F (X Y) (+ X (* X Y))))
(F (FOO A) (BAR B)))
The following are not legal:
c. (LET ((F (LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y)))))
(FUNCALL F (FOO A) (BAR B)))
d. (LET ((F (LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y)))))
(F (FOO A) (BAR B)))
Form (c) is acceptable in Zetalisp, however, and (d) is correct in Scheme.
There has been some debate about whether Common Lisp should be changed,
but I am assuming for now that it won't be.
Now, it turns out that the original Qlisp simulator does not accept forms
(a), (b) or (d), but does accept form (c). Do we really want this?
The QLAMBDA construct is generally used in one of two ways: to run a
process that is asynchronous from other processes (usually expressed by
the SPAWN macro), or to create a process closure that is called by several
processes. I'd like answers to the following questions:
1. Is the following meaningful?
((QLAMBDA T (X) ...) ...)
If so, what does it mean? Does it matter whether this form is in
a value-ignoring position?
2. Must FUNCTION and FUNCALL be used to create and call a process
closure?
3. Is there an equivalent of FLET (and LABELS) for process closures?
I realize these are not exciting, earth-shattering issues, but we should
decide on them as soon as possible so that people writing code can know
what is correct.
∂14-May-87 1040 VAL the title of the book
Should the (tentative) title be "Papers on AI" or "Papers in AI"?
∂14-May-87 1051 SJG play readings
To: "@PLAY.DIS[1,SJG]"
Hello folks:
Well, in an attempt to avoid writing the talk I am supposed to give
this afternoon, I'm trying to organize all of you enthusiastic play
readers a bit. (If you got this message, that means that you're an
enthusiastic play reader, whether you realize it or not.)
My plan is to have readings every two Sundays in three; are you
interested? If so, please send back a message and let me know:
(1) How often you'd like to read, so that I can get the
density about right, and
(2) Whether or not you're prepared to take responsibility
for picking the play from time to time. (It's a lot
harder than you think.)
[There are currently 23 people (including spouses, etc.) on this
list, so the "average" answer to (1) should be once every 4.3 weeks.]
Thanks! See you some Sunday --
Matt
∂14-May-87 1100 JMC
elliott 1130
∂14-May-87 1100 VAL re: the title of the book
[In reply to message rcvd 14-May-87 10:50-PT.]
"Programs with Common Sense" would be great. I don't think we have to use
the word "papers" in the title, it was my own idea. I should respond to
Ablex and tell them that we're ready to sign the contract. It can wait
until you decide about the title, or we can leave it in the contract as
it is and change it later. What would you prefer?
∂14-May-87 1059 RA photographer
Jane Hill from the Dean's office called re picture taking. The photographer
can make it Tuesday at 4:00. The location will be outside (she will let you
know where). Is the date and time ok with you? Her tel. 3-9041.
∂14-May-87 1124 RA Re: photographer
[Reply to message recvd: 14 May 87 11:13 Pacific Time]
It's Tuesday next week and Jane Hill and the photographer will come by your
office at 4:00.
∂14-May-87 1507 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu FUNCTION and FUNCALL
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 May 87 15:07:40 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Thu, 14 May 87 15:05:11 PDT
Received: from bhopal.edsel.uucp by edsel.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA04459; Thu, 14 May 87 14:27:50 pdt
Received: by bhopal.edsel.uucp (3.2/SMI-3.2)
id AA04867; Thu, 14 May 87 14:29:16 PDT
Date: Thu, 14 May 87 14:29:16 PDT
From: edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu (Jon L White)
Message-Id: <8705142129.AA04867@bhopal.edsel.uucp>
To: navajo!JJW%SAIL@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: navajo!Qlisp%SAIL@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of 14 May 87 1039 PDT <8705141821.AA03747@edsel.uucp>
Subject: FUNCTION and FUNCALL
re: Now, it turns out that the original Qlisp simulator does not accept forms
(a), (b) or (d), but does accept form (c). Do we really want this?
a. (LET ((F (FUNCTION (LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y))))))
(FUNCALL F (FOO A) (BAR B)))
That's very odd; form (a) seems to be the least-common-denominator of
Lisp ways to express this action.
-- JonL --
∂14-May-87 1543 JJW Monday's meeting
I've asked the Jeff Ullman and Dick Gabriel whether they can meet
at 3:00 instead of 2:00 on Monday. Should we hold the meeting in
your office, or should I find another room?
∂14-May-87 1556 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU next meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 May 87 15:54:53 PDT
Date: Thu 14 May 87 15:46:15-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: next meeting
To: humeans@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12302404493.13.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Since MUGS has been moved to Friday at noon, has anyone got a problem
with Friday the 22nd at 10:00?
-------
∂14-May-87 1654 JJW Monday Meeting
To: JMC, CLT
Dick says 3:00 is much worse for him than 2:00, so I think we
should leave the meeting scheduled for 2:00.
∂15-May-87 0827 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 08:27:09 PDT
Date: Fri 15 May 87 08:21:15-PDT
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 14 May 87 22:55:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12302585627.27.MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I would think that if more people carried guns, then it would simply
behoove muggers, rapists, those defending themselves, and everyone
else living in a gun-carrying world to learn how to disarm a
gun-carrier. It would become a battle of who could disarm the other,
leaving us again in the present day gunned vs. not-gunned situation.
Either that, or confrontations would become a competition of
who-can-draw-fastest. It might be that if I were to be trained in the
handling of a gun, I would feel safer. I don't think that would be
true unless I felt I were better skilled at handling my gun than the
people I would be confronting. And if I weren't, then I'd probably
end up dead anyway.
-Katie
-------
∂15-May-87 0900 JMC
Call Jean-Paul Lanngrace 33 1 4 622-5151
359-6080
9pm, 25 ave niel, near arc de triomphe
∂15-May-87 0900 JMC
Kwapisz
∂15-May-87 0914 JJW Another parallel Lisp project
To: JMC, CLT
Here's a message I got from a friend of Yoram in Israel:
∂15-May-87 0806 @wiscvm.wisc.edu:yariva@taurus.BITNET Hello for Lisp-users in Isreal
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 08:06:42 PDT
Received: from taurus by wiscvm.wisc.edu ; Fri, 15 May 87 10:05:12 CDT
Received: by taurus (5.51/ta.1.3.R)
id AA13375; Thu, 14 May 87 16:04:29 +0300
Return-Path: <yariva@taurus.BITNET>
Date: Thu, 14 May 87 16:04:29 +0300
From: Yariv Aridor <yariva%TAURUS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Message-Id: <8705141304.AA13375@taurus>
To: jjw@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Hello for Lisp-users in Isreal
Dear Mr. Joe Weening
A new AI laboratory was opened at the computer science dept. in Tel-Aviv
university (Isreal) last summer. Although it is in its infancy some
research is already taking place. Our staff ,which includes 3 M.A. students
(including myself), is involved in one of these research, supervised by Dr.
Cohen Shimon. It is an attempt to design and implement a new parallel
language and environment based on the COMMON-LISP language.
The language will be a general-purpose one with extentions to Object-Oriented
Programming. The environment will support parallel enviroments needs
(e.g. kinds of monitoring programs) with additions of high-level and
composite facilities (e.g using Knowledge-bases for acquiring Knowledge about
the development code). We are trying to make this system as practical as
possible by having an efficient implementation.
Currently we managed to develop an efficient interpreter for the base
language and a compiler We are in the phase of designning and implementing
the optimizer as part the compilation process.
In addition, we are investigating the "strength" of the new language by
writing as many AI applications (large programs) as possible and not just
dealing with small "toy" programs using parallelism. We hope to have
the full language definiton and an operational compiler in the summer.
The system runs on a single processor and will be ported to parallel
computers as they become available. A Lisp machine (TI EXPLORER) is our main
development tool and some Macintosh PC's, are used, thay are excellent tools
for project design and documentation.
My M.A work is on that compilation / interpretation techniques
I am interested in source-to-source transformation (espacially transorm of
recursive functions forms to tail-recursive ones) and looking for papers on
that subject. (I really did not find many publications on that subject)
I got your name from Yoram moses in Wisdom institute. He told me you might be
willing to help me. (he sent his regards to you)
As I said , I am looking for papers or any kind of REFerence List about that
subject.
Can you Help me ???
Thank You
Yariv Aridor
Mail Adress :
Dr. Cohen Shimon & Yariv Aridor
Computer Science Dept.
Tel-Aviv Univ.
Tel-Aviv 69978
Israel
∂15-May-87 1050 RLG summer
this msg is to remind you of our conversation yesterday regarding
paying me this summer.
thanx,
bob.
∂15-May-87 1051 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 10:51:40 PDT
Date: Fri 15 May 87 10:33:42-PDT
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 15 May 87 09:59:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12302609739.27.MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
i thought i understood your point, although i didn't say that. i was
commenting on the disadvantages of the idea, while you had pointed out
its merits. i think that two ordinary folk are not at equal strengths
if one has a gun and the other doesn't. i don't see how a gun can be
a random variable, but if they both have guns, that certainly brings
them closer together in strength. then the scale of differences in
strength changes.
the characteristics that had been minutiae in a gun/no-gun conflict
become the deciding factors now: accesibility of gun, training at
disarming the other person, aggression to use the gun, how quick at
the draw... these aspects will decide who wins or survives and who is
how badly hurt or killed.
i guess what you're talking about is surprising an attacker by having
a gun that the attacker didn't expect you to have. if gradually the
country comes to the scene of everyone having guns, this surprise
will be lost.
i think that once everyone has guns (i can't imagine my being able to
adapt to such a world, unless things got pretty anarchic and i got
pretty desparate), the outcomes wouldn't change that much. as you say,
the odds would pretty much still be against the victim.
-katie
-------
∂15-May-87 1127 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: FUNCTION and FUNCALL
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 11:27:41 PDT
Date: Fri, 15 May 87 11:26:28 PDT
From: Hiroshi "Gitchang" Okuno <Okuno@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: FUNCTION and FUNCALL
To: edsel!bhopal!jonl@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU
cc: qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <8705142129.AA04867@bhopal.edsel.uucp>
Message-ID: <12302619346.40.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
> Do we really want this?
> a. (LET ((F (FUNCTION (LAMBDA (X Y) (+ X (* X Y))))))
> (FUNCALL F (FOO A) (BAR B)))
If a is not allowed, we cannot specify a Y-operator function.
(The following programs are extracted from Dick's tests program.)
(defun y (f)
(let ((h (lambda (g)
(funcall f (lambda (x)
(funcall (funcall g g) x) )))))
(lambda (x) (funcall (funcall h h) x)) ))
(defun test-y ()
(setq l '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10))
(let ((len (y (lambda (f)
(lambda (x)
(cond ((null x) 0)
(t (1+ (funcall f (cdr x)))) ))))))
(funcall len l) ))
Y can be defined by FLET, but test-Y cannot, because FLET needs a
lambda-list.
- Gitchang -
P.S. I prefer (d) and TAO supports it.
-------
∂15-May-87 1206 DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 12:06:25 PDT
Date: Fri, 15 May 87 12:05:00 PDT
From: John R Delaney <DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri, 15 May 87 09:59:00 PDT
Message-ID: <12302626360.31.DELANEY@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Relaxing the rules involving search, confessions and evidence is the
classic "lawnorder" solution to the problems with the criminal justice
system. Just change the rules and it will work better. But who is going
to prosecute the criminals whose cases are now thrown out because of
violations of the rules? And where will you jail those convicted because
the rule changes make conviction easier?
The primary problem with the criminal justice system is not that the rules
need changing (that is a secondary problem at most). The primary problem
is a lack of willingness by the public to pay for more police, more
prosecutors, more judges, more prisons, more prison guards, more parole
officers, ...
John
-------
∂15-May-87 1232 MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 12:31:57 PDT
Date: Fri 15 May 87 12:09:39-PDT
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Guns are equalizers. Before they existed, the advantage of brawn was much
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 15 May 87 12:11:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12302627208.27.MACMILK@Score.Stanford.EDU>
okay. i still have my own moral? attitudinal? reservations, but
statistically what you say is true - if the victims actually
use their guns.
-katie
-------
∂15-May-87 1305 JJW Page deleting
∂15-May-87 1134 JMC
How about a pagedelete command in E?
[ME is on vacation, so he asked me to check his mail.]
The command I use for this is α∂αβD, which deletes one message, or the
current page if it doesn't have any message marks ("∂" in column one
of a line). It also deletes the page mark following the page. If a
page does have multiple messages, then α∞α∂αβD given at the top of the
page will delete them all.
∂15-May-87 1324 VAL Might as well
Maybe "might as well do an action from A" is simply an abbreviation
for "there is an action xεA such that one might as well do x".
Two domain-independent heuristics:
1. If A is the set of all actions that can be performed in the
current configuration then one might as well do an action from A.
Definition. Let A be a set of actions, B⊂A. We say that
B is representative if for each xεA there exists an automorphism α
of the current configuration such that αxεB.
2. If A is a set of actions such that one might as well do an
action from A, and B a representative subset of A then one might as well
do an action from B.
∂15-May-87 1448 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
REPORTING THE NON-MONTONIC NEWS:
Keeping The Beat Local
Benjamin Grosof
Thursday, May 21, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
Efficient updating is problematic in non-monotonic reasoning systems,
because adding new information in general may require the revision of
many, or even all, previous retractible conclusions. An understanding
is needed of the "partial monotonicities" of updating, i.e. of the
irrelevance of updates to parts of the previous retractible
conclusions.
To define non-monotonic theories, we introduce a formalism based on
McCarthy's circumscription that directly expresses, as axioms, both
default beliefs and preferences among default beliefs. It has a
semantics based on first-order and second-order logic. We
characterize non-monotonic theories as hierarchically decomposable in
a manner more analogous to programming languages than to ordinary
monotonic logics. We then give a set of results about partial
monotonicities of updating. We discover some surprising differences
between updates consisting of default axioms and those consisting of
non-retractible axioms. These results bear on a wide variety of
applications of non-monotonic reasoning.
∂15-May-87 1620 edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu FUNCTION AND FUNCALL
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 16:19:51 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Fri, 15 May 87 16:17:21 PDT
Received: from bhopal.edsel.uucp by edsel.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA09488; Fri, 15 May 87 16:12:58 pdt
Received: by bhopal.edsel.uucp (3.2/SMI-3.2)
id AA08605; Fri, 15 May 87 16:14:27 PDT
Date: Fri, 15 May 87 16:14:27 PDT
From: edsel!bhopal!jonl@navajo.stanford.edu (Jon L White)
Message-Id: <8705152314.AA08605@bhopal.edsel.uucp>
To: navajo!okuno%sumex-aim@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: navajo!qlisp%sail@navajo.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: HIROSHI "GITCHANG" OKUNO'S MESSAGE OF FRI, 15 MAY 87 11:26:28 PDT <12302619346.40.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: FUNCTION AND FUNCALL
Perhaps my comment wasn't clear. I meant to imply that style (a) ought
to work in every conceivable lisp. The other styles would be nice, but
it would be understandable why a 1960's level lisp might not support them.
Do the SCHEMErs explicitly outlaw FUNCALL? (because it would be superfluous?).
-- JonL --
∂15-May-87 1643 JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU re: MS Program Committee Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 May 87 16:43:50 PDT
Date: Fri 15 May 87 16:37:55-PDT
From: Jutta McCormick <JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: MS Program Committee Meeting
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 15 May 87 16:38:00-PDT
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-0572
Message-ID: <12302676045.21.JUTTA@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There aren't very many folders this time. Since time is tight for you, I
won't send you any.
---
-------
∂16-May-87 0051 marum@amadeus.stanford.edu re: Alternative Political Party
Received: from AMADEUS.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 May 87 00:49:59 PDT
Received: by amadeus.stanford.edu; Sat, 16 May 87 00:50:52 PDT
Date: Sat 16 May 87 00:50:51-PDT
From: John Marum <MARUM@amadeus.arpa>
Subject: re: Alternative Political Party
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(187)+TOPSLIB(118) 16-May-87 00:50:51.AMADEUS.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of 15 May 87 1647 PDT
The quote is from Der Nationalsozialismus Dokumente 1933-1945, edited
by Walther Hofer, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Bucheri, 1957, pp 29-31.
The platform was from the National Socialist German Worker's Party,
commonly shortened to Nazi Party. The quote states not the good points
of the Nazi party's platform, but the EVIL ones. The highly effecient
fascist dictatorship was the logical outcome of a government stanglehold
on work, education, medicine, business and individual rights.
It may be worthwhile to compare the demands of the Nazis of 1933 with
the platforms of both liberal and conservative parties in the USA today.
I'm sure you will find some similarities with both.
John Marum
-------
∂16-May-87 1735 CLT reminder
you are out of milk
∂16-May-87 1810 W.WROTH@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: "But if you kick him ..."
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 May 87 18:09:58 PDT
Date: Sat 16 May 87 18:03:45-PDT
From: MARK WROTH <W.WROTH@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: "But if you kick him ..."
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 16 May 87 10:03:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12302953812.201.W.WROTH@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
> It seems to me that it is most important for the person
>under attack to put everything he or she has into the counterattack
>if he or she is going to counterattack at all.
I concur. I also pretty much agree with the rest of your
comments, although I do feel that some degree of rationality can
be hoped for. The degree to which I would expect such rationality
depends on the individual and the circumstances, and I would give
the benefit of the doubt to the (original) victim.
-------
∂17-May-87 1114 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu Goldberg
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 May 87 11:14:04 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Sun, 17 May 87 11:11:24 PDT
Date: Sun 17 May 87 11:07:48-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: Goldberg
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: nilsson@score.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12303140235.12.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I had a nice chat with Andrew last Friday at MIT. My guess is that
the probability of his accepting our offer is 99%. He wants me to
assure him in a letter that we will guarantee him his first summer's
salary (1988), a SUN 3 Workstation, modem, and terminal, and some
travel money for his first year. I think we should certainly guarantee
him these things and I will write him a letter doing so. (I'm not
sure where the money is coming from, but I may ask faculty in the
theory group to help me with suggestions for financing this; perhaps
some will volunteer to loan some travel money out of their
unrestricted funds, and there may be suggestions about financing the
SUN out of some existing research projects.) By copy of this memo,
I'll ask Anne Richardson to arrange to have the housing office send
him a package of housing information. I expect we will get a letter
of acceptance from Goldberg early next week. We take up his case
(in final form) at SOE excom this coming Wednesday. Approval is
assured. -Nils
-------
∂17-May-87 1243 ullman@navajo.stanford.edu Re: Goldberg
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 May 87 12:43:14 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Sun, 17 May 87 12:40:30 PDT
Date: Sun, 17 May 87 12:40:30 PDT
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Goldberg
To: NILSSON@score.stanford.edu, fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
1. Goldberg called me on Friday also. He didn't sound so
optimistic--apparently Tarjan has wangled him a position in
Civil Engineering at Princeton (great racket--the mathematicians
go into CS at Princeton, so the CS people get put in CE--but it
seems to be working). He was concerned about only having to
teach two quarters the first year. I told him sure, why not?
(hope that meets everyone's approval--seemed the sensible thing
to say at the time)
2. I have a SUN II that I'd be happy to contribute; perhaps it
can even be swapped for a SUN III that really belongs to
the PACO group but got traded to Cheriton in a 4-for-3 swap.
---jeff
∂17-May-87 2318 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Goetz should be convicted
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 May 87 23:17:59 PDT
Date: Sun, 17 May 87 23:16:50 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Goetz should be convicted
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun, 17 May 87 13:07:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12303272951.26.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
I don't think he ever promised (or was asked) to give them $5 each; I think
it was $5 total.
I guess they do deserve interest. So I guess the ante has gone up to $5.15
or so by now.
I wonder if the jury can decide upon the maximum sentence. If *I* was on
the jury, I would vote for a conviction *only* if the penalty was a suspended
sentence and total liability of $5 plus interest.
-------
∂17-May-87 2325 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Goetz should be convicted
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 May 87 23:25:41 PDT
Date: Sun, 17 May 87 23:24:32 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Goetz should be convicted
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun, 17 May 87 13:12:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12303274355.26.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Of course, I was born and grew up in New Jersey. But I'm from California
now. I've spent almost 1/3 of my life here.
I have no particular dislike for NYC muggers as opposed to muggers from
other areas. Slime is slime no matter where it comes from.
There is a definite possibility that one of the slimes Goetz shot was one
of the muggers who injured my wife and left her in substantial physical
pain for some years afterwards. Lynn cannot be absolutely sure, but she
does consider it likely.
Actually, I think a better punishment is to die in a dark alley with a
needle in the arm, or of AIDS, both of which are quite likely fates for
the slimes that mugged Lynn.
-------
∂18-May-87 0135 unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV Re: reply to message
Received: from seismo.CSS.GOV by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 01:35:52 PDT
Received: from unido.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV (5.54/1.14) with UUCP
id AA22005; Mon, 18 May 87 04:35:12 EDT
Received: by unido.uucp with uucp;
Mon, 18 May 87 09:03:48 +0100
From: "Michael Reinfrank" <unido!ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Date: Mon, 18 May 87 09:00:24 -0100
Message-Id: <8705180800.AA15252@ztivax.uucp>
Received: by ztivax.uucp; Mon, 18 May 87 09:00:24 -0100
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, ztivax!reinfra@seismo.CSS.GOV
Subject: Re: reply to message
Thank you!
I already rang Claudia, and it looks like everything will work out fine.
Erik Sandewall and Matthew Ginsberg agreed to join a kind of program
committee.
I'll keep you informed about the progress.
An announcement of the workshop will be published in the fall issue of
the AI-Magazine, I'll send you a copy of it in advance.
Best regards,
Michael Reinfrank
∂18-May-87 0900 JMC
reservation to Champaign-Urbana
∂18-May-87 0939 L.LILITH@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU Bad guys practice karate more
Received: from OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 09:38:57 PDT
Date: Mon 18 May 87 09:32:37-PDT
From: Pilar Ossorio <L.LILITH@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Bad guys practice karate more
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12303385052.303.L.LILITH@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Since when? I have never seen any kind of evidence that this was the
case. In fact, I have never seen any kind of evidence that convicted
criminals are proportionally more likely to own weapons or have
weapons training than people who haven't been convicted.
-------
∂18-May-87 1020 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU next meeting fo cs525
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 10:20:27 PDT
Date: Mon 18 May 87 10:11:25-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: next meeting fo cs525
To: humeans@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12303392117.36.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Next meeting is on Friday, May 22nd, at 11:00 (Note: not 10, not 12).
I'll speak on causation and nonmonotonicity.
Ana has copies of my paper.
Coming attractions: developmental issues in causal reasoning, causation
in modern physics.
Yoav
-------
∂18-May-87 1118 amdcad!bandy@decwrl.DEC.COM goetz should be convicted // you think that mrc might be from nj
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 11:17:55 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.3/4.7.34)
id AA10186; Mon, 18 May 87 11:17:01 PDT
Received: by amdcad.AMD.COM (5.51/2.6)
id AA05836; Mon, 18 May 87 10:57:14 PDT
Date: Mon, 18 May 87 10:57:14 PDT
From: amdcad!bandy@decwrl.DEC.COM (Andy Beals)
Message-Id: <8705181757.AA05836@amdcad.AMD.COM>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: goetz should be convicted // you think that mrc might be from nj
I believe he is (but you probably already know that)..
andy
∂18-May-87 1149 RA Harvey Friedman
Called re new academic center being formed in Ohio State. His tel.
(614) 292 9079 (today) and (614) 885 6428 or 27 (tomorrow).
∂18-May-87 1155 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 15-May-87 15:57-PT.]
I may still be busy with the qual at 2:45. Can we start later, say at 3:30?
If not, Wednesday before 2:30 or after 4 would be ok.
∂18-May-87 1302 RA leaving
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, eppley@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
I don't feel well and will leave shortly.
Rutie
-----
∂18-May-87 1353 JJW Using Concert
∂18-May-87 1353 @ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU:rhh@VX.LCS.MIT.EDU Using Concert
Received: from ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 13:53:10 PDT
Received: from ASPEN.LCS.MIT.EDU by ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 51308; Mon 18-May-87 16:52:17 EDT
Date: Mon, 18 May 87 16:52 EDT
From: Robert Halstead <rhh@VX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Using Concert
To: JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: rhh@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: The message of 18 May 87 13:19 EDT from Joe Weening <JJW@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Message-ID: <870518165221.1.RHH@ASPEN.LCS.MIT.EDU>
John McCarthy and I have some ideas we'd like to test out on a
Lisp multiprocessor, and since Qlisp isn't functional yet John
suggested we should see if we can use Concert. Is this feasible?
Sure. I can think of a few logistical hassles, but I'm sure we can
overcome them one way or another. Perhaps if you could give me a little
better idea of what you have in mind, I can think a bit about the
logistical hassles and how to solve them. -Bert
∂18-May-87 1400 JMC
simpson
∂18-May-87 1517 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
There will be no meeting for the next two Wednesdays
(May 20 and May 27)
∂18-May-87 1651 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU [Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>: Memo to Charles Junkerman]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 16:51:47 PDT
Date: Mon 18 May 87 16:43:52-PDT
From: Natarajan Shankar <SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>: Memo to Charles Junkerman]
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12303463559.24.SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, Ernst told me to remind you about sending a memo supporting an
undergraduate program proving course. I've enclosed the memo sent
by Barwise below.
Shankar
---------------
Eve, Please send the following memo to the above Junkerman, a dean in
the school of engineering.
Re: Course on interactive proofs
Dear Prof. Junkerman:
On behalf of the new undergradaute Symbolic Systems Program in H & S,
I would like to support the proposal by McCarthy and Shankar for a new
undergraduate course on interactive proofs. I think the course would
be very useful for and interestting to our majors. We now have 35
majors, about half of them specializing in artificial intelligence.
Sincerely yours,
Jon Barwise
-------
-------
∂18-May-87 1700 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU re: [Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>: Memo to Charles Junkerman]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 17:00:18 PDT
Date: Mon 18 May 87 16:54:18-PDT
From: Natarajan Shankar <SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: [Jon Barwise <BARWISE@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>: Memo to Charles Junkerman]
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 18 May 87 16:56:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12303465458.24.SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I will have it done and put it on Rutie's desk tonight.
Hope that is okay.
Also, do you have any comments/changes on the nsf proposal that
I can incorporate into the current draft?
Shankar
-------
∂18-May-87 2000 JMC
322-7638,mark strassman, videotape on sdi at Stanford
∂18-May-87 2215 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU meeting
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 May 87 22:15:08 PDT
Date: Mon, 18 May 87 22:13:57 PDT
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: meeting
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: de2smith@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12303523649.19.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
John,
Tomorrow is not good for a meeting. I have an oral and we need to
read through the alleys of the book so that the guy can get goin
on the aps. When will you be back?
mrg
Hmm. TYpo above alleys of the book instead of galleys. Must
be Freudian.
-------
∂19-May-87 0150 A.ERIC@GSB-HOW.Stanford.EDU Parking Meeting TODAY !!!
Received: from GSB-HOW.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 May 87 01:50:22 PDT
Date: Tue 19 May 87 01:43:52-PDT
From: Eric M. Berg <A.ERIC@GSB-HOW.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Parking Meeting TODAY !!!
To: "Parking Flamers": ;
Phone-#s: (415)723-1576 (GSB-CF), (415)329-9940 (home)
Message-ID: <12303561862.137.A.ERIC@GSB-HOW.Stanford.EDU>
The first of these two open meetings is TODAY (Tues., 5/19) at NOON.
Hope to see you there!
---------------
The Committee on Parking & Transportation will hold two open meetings,
as follows:
Tues., May 19, 12:00 noon, History corner room 34
Tues., May 26, 12:00 noon, Medical school room M-108
According to the Campus Report article announcing the meetings,
... The hour-long public meetings afford the Stanford
community an opportunity to discuss parking and transportation
issues with the committee and with the administrators who
plan and operate parking facilities and the Marguerite.
While all of its meetings are open, the committee holds
a special public meeting each spring quarter. The agenda
will include presentations of near-term and long-term
plans for new parking facilities, discussions of parking
regulations and enforcement, and questions from the floor.
-------
∂19-May-87 0900 JMC
message about naive conf.
∂19-May-87 0946 RA Harvey Friedman
Friedman called again. He is going to be at this number for the next hour
and then he is going out of town until Friday. (614) 885 6428 or 27
This is re new academic center being formed in Ohio State.
∂19-May-87 1138 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch will be back about 1:00.
∂19-May-87 1434 RA reservation
Your confirmation number 519224C. In order to secure your reservation beyond
6:00pm I gave her your AX card number.
∂19-May-87 1556 RA photographer
Jane Hill (from the Dean's office) and the photographer might be a few minutes
late.
∂19-May-87 1556 forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu re: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
Received: from A.CS.UIUC.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 May 87 15:56:12 PDT
Received: from p.cs.uiuc.edu by a.cs.uiuc.edu with SMTP (UIUC-5.52/9.7)
id AA27599; Tue, 19 May 87 17:55:29 CDT
Received: by p.cs.uiuc.edu (UIUC-5.52/9.7)
id AA01800; Tue, 19 May 87 17:54:54 CDT
Date: Tue, 19 May 87 17:54:54 CDT
From: forbus@p.cs.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Forbus)
Message-Id: <8705192254.AA01800@p.cs.uiuc.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: re: Invitation to Qualitative Physics Workshop
Great. I'll try to have someone meet you there.
∂19-May-87 1928 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU latex draft of foundations contribution
Received: from REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 May 87 19:27:24 PDT
Received: from DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU by REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 40467; Tue 19-May-87 22:26:01 EDT
Date: Tue, 19 May 87 22:26 EDT
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: latex draft of foundations contribution
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
cc: Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, Kirsh@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Supersedes: <870519222543.1.HEWITT@DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU>
Message-ID: <870519222651.2.HEWITT@DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU>
John,
Enclosed please find the draft of my contribution to the foundations workshop.
Responses appreciated!
Cheers,
Carl
moved to hewitt.tex[s87,jmc]
∂20-May-87 0844 ROSENBLUM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 May 87 08:44:23 PDT
Date: Wed 20 May 87 08:44:57-PDT
From: David S. Rosenblum <ROSENBLUM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 20 May 87 01:21:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12303900663.19.ROSENBLUM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Congress may be "hypocritical" about the Contras, but Congressmen
are merely responding to the sentiments of overwhelming numbers
of their constituents. Their on-again, off-again attitude on
Contra funding is nothing new---this happens to many budget programs,
both in the legislature and in the executive. At least Congress is
proceeding within the boundary of the law.
-- David.
-------
∂20-May-87 0907 danny@cappuccino.stanford.edu.STANFORD.EDU A couple of questions for JMC:
Received: from CAPPUCCINO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 May 87 09:06:55 PDT
Received: by cappuccino.stanford.edu.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 20 May 87 09:05:48 PDT
To: su-etc@score
Cc: jmc@sail
Subject: A couple of questions for JMC:
Reply-To: danny@cappuccino.stanford.edu
Date: Wed, 20 May 87 09:05:45 PDT
From: Daniel Abramovitch <danny@cappuccino.stanford.edu.STANFORD.EDU>
True or false? (With corroborating evidence.)
The Contras that the President and the CIA support
are made up mostly of Samoza's (sp?) old guard.
Second question:
There was a second group of contras, based in Costa Rica, whose
leader was Eden (sp?) Pastora, the hero of the revolt against
Samoza. His group received very little aid from the CIA. Why?
-- Danny
∂20-May-87 1920 NILSSON@score.stanford.edu 4 for 4
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 20 May 87 19:20:47 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Wed, 20 May 87 19:18:03 PDT
Date: Wed 20 May 87 19:14:20-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: 4 for 4
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12304015239.16.NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The SOE excom came up with four positive decisions (out of 4) for
Computer Science today. 1) Andrew Goldberg final papers approved;
2) David Dill (systems) final papers approved; 3) John Mitchell
preliminary papers approved; 4) Janos Komlos preliminary papers
approved. All votes were unanimous!
My guess at odds that these people will decide to accept our
offers to come to Stanford: Goldberg 90:1; Mitchell 99:1;
Dill 99:1; Komlos 50:50.
-Nils
-------
∂21-May-87 0743 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Classes
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 May 87 07:43:22 PDT
Date: Thu 21 May 87 09:36:31-CDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Subject: Classes
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, clt@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12304150350.58.AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
The first day of classes at UT is Monday, August 31. The
last day of classes at UT is Wednesday, December 9.
Thanksgiving and the day after are vacation, as is Labor
Day, September 7. If you give a final exam, it might be
officially scheduled for as late at December 17; it depends
on the hour and day that your course is scheduled for. You
do not have to give a final exam, of course.
-------
∂21-May-87 0807 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 May 87 08:07:26 PDT
Date: Thu 21 May 87 08:07:22-PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Subject: re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 20 May 87 01:21:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12304155964.10.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
"[Congress] cut off the Contras, leaving them to be slaughtered. . ."
When it comes to slaughtering people, the Contras are no novices. Consider
the fate of Benjamin Linder: injured with grenades then shot in the head at
close range. His crime - helping bring electric power to a remote
Nicuraguan village. His murderers - the Contras, also known as the Moral
Equals of the Founding Fathers. I'm sure that if Thomas Jefferson, George
Washington, or Ben Franklin could return from the dead they would hardly
applaud the murder of Ben Linder or the thousands of other innocent victims
of Contra terrorism.
And let us not forget who has been instructing these mercenaries in
tactics. Our own Central Intelligence Agency. And all in the name of such
lofty principles as "defense of the Western Hemisphere."
-Ric Steinberger
-------
∂21-May-87 0930 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
REPORTING THE NON-MONOTONIC NEWS:
Keeping The Beat Local
Benjamin Grosof
Thursday, May 21, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
Efficient updating is problematic in non-monotonic reasoning systems,
because adding new information in general may require the revision of
many, or even all, previous retractible conclusions. An understanding
is needed of the "partial monotonicities" of updating, i.e. of the
irrelevance of updates to parts of the previous retractible
conclusions.
To define non-monotonic theories, we introduce a formalism based on
McCarthy's circumscription that directly expresses, as axioms, both
default beliefs and preferences among default beliefs. It has a
semantics based on first-order and second-order logic. We
characterize non-monotonic theories as hierarchically decomposable in
a manner more analogous to programming languages than to ordinary
monotonic logics. We then give a set of results about partial
monotonicities of updating. We discover some surprising differences
between updates consisting of default axioms and those consisting of
non-retractible axioms. These results bear on a wide variety of
applications of non-monotonic reasoning.
∂21-May-87 1126 TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 May 87 11:26:36 PDT
Date: Thu 21 May 87 11:20:12-PDT
From: David Teich <TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Reagan etc. - Time cover presents a larger context
To: STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM
cc: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12304155964.10.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Message-ID: <12304191069.16.TEICH@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
while not excusing other contra terrorist actions against civilians,
there are a few things ignored by the people who hold Linder as an
example. first, he was armed. second, everyone in his party was armed.
they were all local militia or sandinista military. the articles stating
this were inside the papers, they didn't make front page.
Yes, the Contra's have killed innocent civilians, and will again, but
I don't think the Linder case neatly fits into that category (If it does
at all).
david
-------
∂21-May-87 1549 JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU E-School annual report
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 May 87 15:49:11 PDT
Date: Thu 21 May 87 15:49:43-PDT
From: Jane S. Hill <JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: E-School annual report
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jhill@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12304240132.33.JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
JM - For your photo in the annual report, we'd like to have an insightful
quote from you that sounds like you, preferably pertaining to Stanford,
or teaching, or computer science as a great thing. The audience is 99
percent alumni. The quote will look much like a caption. Please send me
no more than 30-40 words that you said once or might if given the chance.
Thank you. Jane Hill (Your photo, by the way, is very good)
-------
∂21-May-87 1800 ULLMAN@score.stanford.edu [Andrew V. Goldberg <AVG@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>: I'm comming...]
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 May 87 18:00:45 PDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by navajo.stanford.edu with TCP; Thu, 21 May 87 17:58:11 PDT
Date: Thu 21 May 87 17:53:55-PDT
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: [Andrew V. Goldberg <AVG@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>: I'm comming...]
To: fndsch@navajo.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <12304262742.13.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Did you guys know this?
---jeff
---------------
Return-Path: <AVG@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Thu 21 May 87 16:19:27-PDT
Date: Thu 21 May 87 19:22:05-EDT
From: Andrew V. Goldberg <AVG@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: I'm comming...
To: ullman@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12304246025.41.AVG@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
I am happy to inform you that I will be comming to Stanford next fall.
I am really looking forward to it.
During our conversation last week, you have mentioned including my name
on a grant proposal in the area of parallel algorithms. Since this is one
of my main areas of interest, I am very interested. Please let me know
if you need any additional information for me.
--Andrew
-------
-------
∂22-May-87 0914 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU message from Yoav Shoham
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 May 87 09:14:11 PDT
Date: Fri 22 May 87 09:03:33-PDT
From: Katherine Howard <KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: message from Yoav Shoham
To: humeans@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12304428336.21.KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Just a reminder that CS525 will be meeting today at 11:00.
-------
∂22-May-87 1723 RA Virginia Mann
Mann from VTSS Forum called re your talk January 18, 1988. She heard you
won't be here in the fall and wanted to ask you to give her any material
which has to be sent out for the course before you leave. Her tel. 3-2565.
∂23-May-87 1048 RPG Qlisp Progress
To: CLT, JMC, JJW
ARG got a simple version of QLET working yesterday, a version with
no queueing of processes. We tried a simple fibonacci program that
only splits 2 ways and then goes serial. And it worked. The interesting
thing, though, is that the speedup over the pure serial version was
1.6162; when I tried the same thing on the Qlisp simulator, the
speedup was 1.6165. I guess this means that the simulator is not
completely broken.
-rpg-
∂24-May-87 1020 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Advising
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 May 87 10:20:33 PDT
Date: Sun 24 May 87 10:14:19-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Advising
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12304965509.10.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I need to talk to you before summer messes things up. Two subjects:
(1) All I have left is required courses (core). Can I waive any I haven't
waived, and is it OK to take them P/F (how will that look on my PhD
application, e.g.)?
(2) I want to apply for the PhD for fall 88. Is that a terrible idea (has to
be really terrible to turn me off), and if not, can you suggest things to
say and not say in the application? I intend to pick an area (haven't
yet) and push on the idea that I'm now old enough to have definite ideas
about what does and does not make sense, thus be more creative and self-
motivating than at an earlier age. Et ceteri, et ceterae, et cetera.
Your time is tighter than mine, probably. I have a full Monday, 11:00 Tuesday
and 12:00 Friday; other classes have canceled further meetings. Let me know
a good time.
Thanks..
..Ed
-------
∂26-May-87 0708 JJW Fibonnaci
To: RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, edsel!arg@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU,
CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
IGS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
OK, I think I understand what "QLET with no queueing" means now that I
read your message more closely. I missed the part about splitting into
only two processes and then going serial.
This also explains the coincidence in the speedup figures. Since f(n)
computes f(n-1) and f(n-2) separately, the time for a serial algorithm is
T(n)=T(n-1)+T(n-2), which is like the Fibonnaci recursion except with
different initial conditions. On two processors, the one computing f(n-1)
takes longest, so the total time is T(n-1). Hence the speedup is
T(n)/T(n-1), which for all such recurrences approaches the Golden Ratio
(1+sqrt(5))/2 = 1.618...
I conjecture that no matter how right or wrong any simulator's time
estimates are, as long as it doesn't forget to count any of the
computation steps it will always get a speedup of around 1.6 for this
problem!
∂26-May-87 1105 simpson@vax.darpa.mil Re: status of proposal
Received: from VAX.DARPA.MIL by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 May 87 11:05:00 PDT
Posted-Date: Tue 26 May 87 14:03:25-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA08668; Tue, 26 May 87 14:03:29 EDT
Date: Tue 26 May 87 14:03:25-EDT
From: Bob Simpson <SIMPSON@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Re: status of proposal
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: amarel@venera.isi.edu, simpson@venera.isi.edu
Message-Id: <549050606.0.SIMPSON@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
In-Reply-To: <8705111425.AA05563@venera.isi.edu>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(213)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
John: Sorry for the delays, but there is much happening here. Your
proposal is still being reviewed for possible FY88 support. One aspect
that we've discussed before is interactions with and technology transfer
to industry. In this vein, I noticed recently in a proposal from Inference
(in partnership with Lockheed) to build a "planning expert system
development environment;" that they list yoas a member of their Scientific
Advisory Board. They further state that their intention is to incorporate
your research in "planning" into their research methodology. Can you tell
me explicitly how the work that you are doing will either influence or
impact either the content or direction of Inference's activities asrelated
to thier ideas on automated planning? Thanks! -- Bob -------
∂26-May-87 1118 VAL Non-monotonic seminar: no meeting this week
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
There will be no meeting on May 28.
∂26-May-87 1430 D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU causality paper
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 May 87 14:30:29 PDT
Date: Tue 26 May 87 14:23:46-PDT
From: Kevin Quinn <D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: causality paper
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12305535208.107.D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
I didn't reply right away because of other distractions and because
I wanted time to think through your suggestions. I do agree with most of
what you said. In a sense, and perhaps I have to convey this more in the
paper, I see causal thinking as a high-level information processing
heuristic which allows humans to make the most of their limited information.
I do also feel, and this apparently I didn't get across, that an artificial
agent can and should be designed to be able to take advantage of this same
"technique."
Thus, I would treat the Nemesis-Oort scenario in much the same
way as yourself. I suppose one difference I would stress would be that for
ordinary experience, humans have learned simple causal-rules to let them
assign causes and make predictions and explanations. In the Nemesis-Oort
scenario, we're dealing with a situation outside ordinary experience, so there
aren't simple rules we can follow to make such an explanation (rules like
"objects fall" or "hot air rises"). Instead, this is where scientific
explanation takes place. This differs in that you have a phenomena to explain
and may make up objects outside experience to account for your data. The
scenario involving the star Nemesis for example was hypothesized as the
simplest possible model which would account for the data of mass extinctions.
I heard you discussing with Prof. Suppes how non-monotonic reasoning was
necessary to forming scientific theories, and I think that's a great insight.
I'd like to think that there is some distinction, perhaps only one of degree,
between how humans predict/explain in the commonsense world and how they do
it in scientific theorizing. That's why I'd like to propose a model of
human causal reasoning involving simple non-monotnic rules like those of
Shoham for familiar, easy causal judgements, AND for where these rules fail
to apply, the human mind falls back on general-purpose non-monotonic
theorizing. I hope this doesn't rub against any of the arguments I made in
the paper; I'll check.
Can we get together and talk about this sometime? I need to get a few of
my own thoughts in order, and a discussion might help a lot.
Thanks,
kevin
-------
∂26-May-87 1553 ME Pony bike locker removal
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, RSF@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, bhayes@CASCADE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: pony@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
This summer there will be major renovation of the "Math Corner Courtyard",
which extends between the Quad buildings from the grass of Memorial Court to
the Math Corner. The Prancing Pony bicycle lockers, which are in this area,
will eventually be located in a new spot not far from where they are now.
However, during the approximately 60 days of construction (about 10 Aug 87
to 10 Oct 87), it's possible that the bike lockers will simply be stored and
inaccessible, unless we can find an acceptable temporary location for them
and can have them moved and reinstalled there.
I would like to know how you would feel about not being able to use your
locker during that period. Note that you couldn't just leave your bike in
the locker throughout, since the lockers would get moved a few times during
construction.
∂27-May-87 1119 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU next meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 May 87 11:19:47 PDT
Date: Wed 27 May 87 11:08:10-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: next meeting
To: humeans@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12305761743.41.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
We meet at the usual time (1:30 next Monday, June 1) and place (352).
Elisabeth Wolf will lead a discussion on what constitute good
explanations, what amond those are causal explanations, and how
these notions develop in children. She'll cover material by Haugeland,
Flavell and Piaget, I think. She'll also let us know what we should
read or think about.
I got a book titles "asymmetries in time" by an MIT philospher named
Horwich. It covers all the exotic subjects, including backward
causation and tachions. If you'd like to borrow it and report on it
later on then please do.
Yoav
-------
∂27-May-87 1123 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 May 87 11:23:17 PDT
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Wed, 27 May 87 11:21:54 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Wed, 27 May 87 11:14:36 PDT
Date: 27 May 87 11:13 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Lunch
Date: 27 May 1987, 11:12:35 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: Lunch
Dear John,
Do you want to eat lunch together today. Friday is good for me also.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂27-May-87 1201 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Black Friday
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 May 87 12:01:49 PDT
Date: Wed 27 May 87 11:51:23-PDT
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Black Friday
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12305769611.14.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
As I mentioned last week, Black Friday is scheduled for next Tuesday,
June 2 (2:30 pm, Jacks 252). I'm currently reviewing all the requests
made of students in their Gray Tuesday letters to see if they have
been met. To ensure that all information I have is accurate and
current, I am sending you the online record of your advisees. Please
send me any changes/corrections/comments as soon as possible. If you
cannot make it to the meeting, it would be especially helpful if you
would send me beforehand any information you feel is relevant about your
advisees.
A few notes: Remember that we use the same system of noting academic
quarters (i.e., 1-86, 2-86, and 3-86 represent Autumn Quarter 1986-87,
Winter Quarter 1986-87, and Spring Quarter 1986-87, respectively) as
the University in order to have consistent records. Additionally,
with the exception of a few small bugs to be ironed out, we now have
the software in place that keeps track of the TA data for each Ph.D.
student. Kaelbling, Leslie P. Advisor.: McCarthy PhD Entry: 1-84, Clock: 4.5
Comp Prog.: Pass Written.: Pass Qual.....: AI , 3-85, Cond
Cand Begin: 1-86 Cand End: 1-91
Teach.....: 0% HCP.....: SRI
COMP 3-82 MS PASS
COMP 2-84 MS PASS WRITTEN
COMP 3-84 PHD PASS WRITTEN
COMP 4-85 PHD PASS PROGRAM
QUAL 3-85 CONDITIONAL PASS AI --See folder for details.
Hope to see you at the meeting,
Victoria
-------
∂27-May-87 1203 CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU Black Friday
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 27 May 87 12:03:31 PDT
Date: Wed 27 May 87 11:52:17-PDT
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Black Friday
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 723-1519
Message-ID: <12305769774.14.CHEADLE@Score.Stanford.EDU>
As I mentioned last week, Black Friday is scheduled for next Tuesday,
June 2 (2:30 pm, Jacks 252). I'm currently reviewing all the requests
made of students in their Gray Tuesday letters to see if they have
been met. To ensure that all information I have is accurate and
current, I am sending you the online record of your advisees. Please
send me any changes/corrections/comments as soon as possible. If you
cannot make it to the meeting, it would be especially helpful if you
would send me beforehand any information you feel is relevant about your
advisees.
A few notes: Remember that we use the same system of noting academic
quarters (i.e., 1-86, 2-86, and 3-86 represent Autumn Quarter 1986-87,
Winter Quarter 1986-87, and Spring Quarter 1986-87, respectively) as
the University in order to have consistent records. Additionally,
with the exception of a few small bugs to be ironed out, we now have
the software in place that keeps track of the TA data for each Ph.D.
student. Weening, Joseph S. Advisor.: McCarthy PhD Entry: 1-80, Clock: 21
Comp Prog.: Pass Written.: Pass Qual.....: MTC, 1-82, Pass
Cand Begin: 1-82 Cand End: 1-87
Teach.....: 100% HCP.....:
Seminar...: 1-85 G81.....: 3-83 Orals...:
Diss......: Parallel Execution of LISP Programs
Readers...: McCarthy, Gabriel, Ullman
COMP 2-80 PHD PASS WRITTEN
COMP 1-82 PHD PASS PROG
EVAL 2/01/1982 Programming project.
EVAL 6/01/1982 Needs programming project by summer.
EVAL 2/01/1983 Needs G81 by 11/83
EVAL 6/27/1986 Expect solid proposal by Autumn 86-87 or Hold reg.
EVAL 10/01/1986 Hold released.
QUAL 1-81 FAIL MTC
QUAL 1-82 PASS MTC
Hope to see you at the meeting,
Victoria
-------
∂27-May-87 1313 RA jury duty
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, BS@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I have jury duty during the week of June 15.
Rutie
-----
∂27-May-87 1315 RA Tom Burns
Burns is with International Data Corp. (617) 872 8200 ext. 364. He is doing
research on ways people use mini super computers and would like to talk to
you for a few minutes.
∂27-May-87 1319 RA Charles Moore
Moore is a photographer with Newton Science Mag. Would like to get a picture of
you. He will be here Mon. June first to photograph Ed Feigenbaum and would like
to take your photograph too, if possible 2:00pm Mon. If this is inconvenient,
please let me know, or if you want to call him, he will be at (209) 532 2645
until Monday.
∂28-May-87 1028 SJG who wants to read a play this Sunday evening?
To: jfinger@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU, young@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU,
CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Probably a French farce ...
Matt
∂28-May-87 1727 MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM [Mimi Gardner <MGardner.pa>: [Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa>: message
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 28 May 87 17:27:03 PDT
Received: from Salvador.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 28 MAY 87 17:26:20 PDT
Date: 28 May 87 17:26 PDT
Sender: MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM
From: Mimi Gardner <MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM>
Subject: [Mimi Gardner <MGardner.pa>: [Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa>: message
to the board]]
To: Genesereth@sumex-aim.stanford.EDU, JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM, Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <870528-172620-4166@Xerox>
Dear Board Member:
We are trying to schedule our annual breakfast meeting of the AI
Editorial Board, though it may not be necessary this year. The only
pressing issue is how to speed up the reviewing process. It currently
takes about four months to get both reviews back from referees, and you
know how this feels as an author. Suggestions are welcome.
In terms of scheduling, we have a choice of whether to hold it at AAAI
or IJCAI. The traditional time is Wednesday morning at 7:30 AM, and it
could be in either of those weeks. Please respond with all relevant
choices:
-- I would prefer not to have a meeting this year.
-- I think we should have a meeting this year.
-- I would attend at AAAI.
-- I would attend at IJCAI.
Please let me know if you feel there are other issues to discuss at a
board meeting this year.
Regards
Daniel G. Bobrow
Editor-in-chief
----- mmg:
----- End Forwarded Messages -----
----- mmg:
∂28-May-87 2153 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Time: Wednesday June 3, 11:00
Place: 252 Margaret Jacks
Topic: Joe will talk about his continuation passing Qlisp simulator
∂29-May-87 1103 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Today
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 May 87 11:03:31 PDT
Date: Fri 29 May 87 10:56:41-PDT
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Today
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12306283940.10.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
If you have a few free moments today, I would like to see you. Re:
Secretarial help. Thanks
LaDonna
-------
∂29-May-87 1103 RA Thelma, Inference
The June 17 board meeting cancelled. The new date is 6/23 in NY at George Sing's
office. The address: 717 5th Avenue, 22nd floor. The entrance is on 56th street.
∂29-May-87 1143 JSW Visitors
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Some visitors from Finland will be here today at 3:00 p.m. and would
like to learn about the Qlisp project. Anyone who would like to come
talk to them is welcome. I've asked for MJH 252 to be reserved for us.
∂29-May-87 1354 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU the latest version
Received: from REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 May 87 13:52:33 PDT
Received: from DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU by REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 41824; Fri 29-May-87 16:50:36 EDT
Date: Fri, 29 May 87 16:51 EDT
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: the latest version
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
cc: Hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <870529165146.3.HEWITT@DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU>
John,
Thank you very much for your comments. Enclosed please find the latest
version. I will incorporate your low level comments and send you a better
version shortly so that the workshop can concentrate on important issues of
agreement and disagreement as opposed to the underbrush.
Cheers,
Carl
∂29-May-87 1650 RA String tie
I called the hotel in Paris. They said that if they find it, they will send it.
I will call them Monday to find out whether they found it. Their number is
33-1-42 65 32.
∂29-May-87 2310 RPG Gang of 4 usage
To: LES, JMC, CLT
Right now we are in a critical period of development on Qlisp.
Debugging the correctness of some Qlisp constructs now involves
comparing timings of various parallel things. There is some
NA hacker running batch jobs and compiling like mad during the
day (at the same time a batch job is running).
I don't mind sharing the machine, but who has priority on the machine?
If the current degradation of the machine during the day continues,
we can expect major delays in development.
-rpg-
∂30-May-87 0937 BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU re: Advising
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 09:37:06 PDT
Date: Sat 30 May 87 09:29:37-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Advising
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: brink@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 29 May 87 22:58:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12306530234.9.BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
Monday is about 70% full for me, but I will try not only to call in the
afternoon but get your schedule from your secretary earlier. Thanks..
..Ed
-------
∂30-May-87 1117 BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU Cognition, Connectionism and me
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 11:17:20 PDT
Date: Sat 30 May 87 11:07:59-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Cognition, Connectionism and me
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: mis@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12306548140.18.BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
The next note describes what I am doing to be rational about my position in
CS328C/Psych289, a seminar on current work in connectionist AI/psych.
I think the concepts are valuable; I don't think anyone, Misha included, thinks
Minsky and Papert were totally wrong and perceptrons are the proper study of
AI.
My take is that some synthesis is the sensible solution: exact work takes time
(formal logic, any von Neumann stuff) and quick stuff is inexact (the analog
stuff of which the connectionist machines are built, with their inherent
parallel capability and limited resolution). So I want to know a certain
amount about this stuff. Hence the proposal; and I thought you would want to
know about it when we talk.
..Ed
-------
∂30-May-87 1123 BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU Triage
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 11:23:34 PDT
Date: Sat 30 May 87 11:10:34-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Triage
To: mis@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12306548612.18.BRINK@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU>
Misha,
I'm going to have to do some triage on this term project. At the current
rate it will not be finished in time. Although I had run the program when
I talked to you before, that original "demo" run did not predict the true
situation.
The program as published has bugs in it, and my compiler did not support
some of the things he used. I have gotten a new version of the compiler,
and another is coming in the mail; that problem seems to be gone or going.
My C is a bit rusty, but with the help of my wizard high school junior son
I am finding the problems and fixing them. (We are pretty sure he first
ran it as a Turbo Pascal program and then converted it semimechanically to
C for the article.)
I have to share the time with Genesereth's 225A. Its last project is
still in progress and due 6/4. It is a team effort and I have not held up
my end so far; they have been carrying me a lot, and it's my turn to help.
The MRS system is buggy and continually changing, and most of the work is
in debugging it and finding out by word of mouth what it is and does.
Anyhow, that leaves me with a few choices. First of all, I don't know
exactly when my project is due to you. I assume some time between 6/4 and
6/11, but it would help if I knew exactly when. You've probably told us,
but I haven't found it in my notes.
Then I have these choices, in order of preference (best first):
* Reduce the requirements.
* Take an incomplete and finish by date X.
* Reduce the course credits.
* Drop the course.
The last option is one I would do almost anything to avoid. The third is
a problem because 3 units exactly makes the total for my concentration,
Symbolic and Heuristic Computation. The second is unrealistic because I
am going back to work 32 hours a week and carrying six rather heavy units
next quarter.
The way I would reduce the requirements for the first option is
1) make the due date as late as possible,
2) stop work on the code, and
3) write up the situation, describing what the program does, how it does
it and how to modify it to include Rumelhart's back propagation
algorithm, inertia and whatever else makes sense in the time I have.
It would be necessary to convey in the writeup that I understand those
things. I have yet to learn the back propagation algorithm well enough to
do that, and I must do so in any case to claim I have finished the course.
The program is public domain, and I could include it with the writeup.
The description in the magazine article is incomplete and misleading, and
I could fix that to a large degree so that a person could pick up where I
left off.
Here is an even better solution:
It occurs to me that perhaps this should continue into an independent
study thing next quarter, changing the units for this course to 2 with a
brief writeup of a proposal for next quarter including some of the things
I mentioned above, combining the best features of the first three options.
Then the work, which is admittedly too interesting to just drop, could
continue in a more sensible fashion.
I will try to see you Monday to discuss these things. This is by way of
saving time at that time.
..Ed
≠
-------
∂30-May-87 1304 RPG JJW
do you plan to attend black friday to discuss Joe?
-rpg-
∂30-May-87 1402 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: Lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 14:02:33 PDT
Received: by lindy.STANFORD.EDU; Sat, 30 May 87 14:01:21 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Sat, 30 May 87 14:02:25 PDT
Date: 30 May 87 14:01 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: re: Lunch
Date: 30 May 1987, 13:59:02 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: re: Lunch
In-Reply-To: JMC AT SAIL.STANFORD.EDU -- 05/29/87, 23:09
Dear John,
I suggest that we meet for lunch next Wed. at 12:05 at the
faculty club. ( Wed June 3.) I will make the reservation.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂30-May-87 1413 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 14:13:20 PDT
Date: Sat, 30 May 1987 17:11 EDT
Message-ID: <MINSKY.12306581472.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-reply-to: Msg of 30 May 1987 17:10-EDT from The Mailer Daemon <Mailer>
or this
∂30-May-87 1416 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 14:16:37 PDT
Date: Sat, 30 May 1987 17:14 EDT
Message-ID: <MINSKY.12306582029.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
In-reply-to: Msg of 30 May 1987 17:07-EDT from The Mailer Daemon <Mailer>
I found that review pathetic: a person apparently incapable of putting
things together or absorbing ideas different from his usual ones. The
problem was that he seemed unable to put together ideas from different
places in the book. You might object that I should have put all
related parts together, but that was simply inpossible. A few
examples.
He says, "but the Society" in question is conceived not as a political
community but as a rigidly stratified corporation". What a monstrous
way to summarize my book, with all its emphasis on heterarchy, mutual
exploitation, circularity, and recursion. You said that this is a
bright philosopher; I say he is a dull and impervious clod. He made
up his mind in the first few pages and never let a new view in.
He complains that "the book presents no detailed theory, is not tied
to technicalities." This is an abonimable thing to say. I outline
many technical theories, for example in the frame arrays and their
connections to the pronomes, in the "reduplication" theory of
language, the paranome theory of metaphor, and others. He seems
unable to see the implications of those ideas.
He then proceeds with the insulting thesis that the SOM "doesn't
explain anything" and says that to do so would require a "demanding
application." A lot of the book explore the demanding application of
the blocks world but somehow he dismisses all that, along with the
page explaining that this did in fact involve an enormous experimental
enterprise.
Consider his opacity in saying, "the new terms are sometimes just ways
of labelling well-tried conceptions". A `polyneme', for instance, is
an old friend from empiricist philosophy, the """complex idea""". Two
points:
1. Does this person think that any normal English Speaker would
consider "complex idea" to be a usable technical term. Foo.
2. He himself defines "complex idea" in terms of "independent
properties." He missed the important technical theory of what
happens to the agencies when the properties are not independent.
He accuses me of naively assuming that mental architecture should
stand in siple correspondence to the structure of English sentences.
This is scandalous. My theory in serction 22.10 is, I think, a
wonderful new theory, beautifully and clearly developed on a single
page. In the last paragraph I explain that as children develop, they
become more able to buffer and postpone the operations, so that
surface structure becomes more remotely related to expression. This
wolliams person wants to believe, apparently, that there is an innate
structure for connecting language and other types of experience. My
answer, and it permeates the whole book, is that there is some innate
endowment, to be sure, but that we can attribute much of its
development to DEVELOPMENT - so that the innate structure need not be so
overwhelming as Chomsky and such thonkers think.
You see, the astounding thing is that nowhere in the review does
Williams even seem to notice that most of the book is abous how
structures develop. He is so rigid that he misses this everywhere,
and not merely in language.
Would it be fair to conclude, David, that developmental thinking is
not natural to philosophers with traditional training?
I could go on. He asks what I mean by "one function of the Self is to
keep ourselves from changing too rapidly". He ask, "Too rapidly for
whom?" Really, now. I explain very clearly that the parts of the
mind that learn "self-ideals" in early childhood are hard to change.
Indeed, he doesn't review my critical new theory, that self-ideals -
that is - very tenacious high level goals - are learned in early
Freudian attachment phases. Too rapidly for whom" - the answer is
spelled out clearly; too rapidly for evolutionary fitness. Again, he
misses the important points because development and evolution are not
memobers of his society of thinking tools. Weirdly, he asks, then,
"how can there be plans .. without already a self thaT has a future
ans whose plans they are?" I resent having to be reviewed by a person
already committed to single-agent thinking. Perhaps he does not have
the idea that it is possible for different parts of minds and machines
to represent and contemplate proposed sequence of activities without
"having" or being committed to those plans.
There is lots more. He questions the relevance of the quotations -
and says that they are merely "stuck" on the wall. I think that he
simply did not understand their subtlety in many cases. He says "If
he takes seriously some of the things he quotes, ..." The man has no
sense of irony; most readers have unerringly seen the humor when the
quotes say the opposite of the chapter - wherein the chapter makes fun
of those ideas. The guy is a clod.
The worst thing is his linguistics. Consider his abuse of my
description of a meaning of "Mary knows Geometry" on page 30.1 I think
tthe points made on that page are powerful and clear; that "meaning"
is relative to manyu things. Note that Williams says, out of context,
"It does not indicate this,. unless we know something special about
Jack, for example, that he is Mary's teacher. BUT MY CLEAR POINT IN
THAT PAGE IS THAT WE do not need to know something special about Jack,
because we assume it by default.
So far as I can see, this is intended to make me seem ridiculous by
putting the thing out of context. I don't know why Williams does this.
It is the same for his next example. He says that I was careless to
say "I heard a pin dropping" because I should have said "I heare the Sound of a pin dropping". Here he is simply out to get me, despite that the example illustrates a rather good point.
Look, too at his enigmatic comment about my example of fantasy, with
Professor Challenger. There is something pathological in his hinting
that this is not a reasonable example of everyday thinking. Instead
of seeing how pervasive are emotional tones to ordinary thought, he
tries to hint that there is something peculiar about my point of view.
I think this last example is the most clear. This is a hostile,
nasty-minded review of a book that is threatening to him because it is
much deeper and more technical than he can bear. Whoever this person
is, I am sorry that he had the privilege of reading the product of my
work, and especially that he went so far out of his way to so attempt
to belittle it.
∂30-May-87 2244 RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Hewitt's Paper
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 30 May 87 22:44:00 PDT
Date: Sat 30 May 87 22:40:20-PDT
From: Ramin D. Zabih <RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Hewitt's Paper
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12306674180.8.RDZ@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Joe Weening and I finally got it to TeX, after bringing over a few
files from MIT he forgot to include. We put the output on your desk.
Ramin
-------
∂31-May-87 1127 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU this and other weeks
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 May 87 11:27:40 PDT
Date: Sun 31 May 87 11:06:58-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: this and other weeks
To: humeans@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12306810101.13.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
First, a reminder that this Monday Elisabeth will be leading a discussion
on developmental aspects of causal understanding.
Second, let's discuss the question of future meetings. I have the impression
that it might be best to pursue things on individual bases (e.g., the
specific papers that some people are writing). I'm ready to be
persuaded otherwise, but it'll have to be demand driven. We still
haven't covered causation in modern physics, which I'd like to, and
not at all in specific AI work (qualitative physics, medicine).
Yoav
-------
∂31-May-87 1623 AIR reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 31-May-87 10:46-PT.]
I am available anytime.
∂31-May-87 1628 MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 31 May 87 16:28:40 PDT
Date: Sun, 31 May 1987 19:26 EDT
Message-ID: <MINSKY.12306868224.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: MINSKY%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Cc: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-reply-to: Msg of 30 May 1987 17:14-EDT from MINSKY
Did you get previous message, or this one? I couldn't get SU-AI to
work but I think SAIL does.
∂31-May-87 1639 AIR re: arbitrary characters in Lisp
[In reply to message rcvd 31-May-87 10:58-PT.]
We should separate the multi-byte representation of large character set
(representation in files, editors dealing with it and slighty separate
questions of displaing and printing) and the mechanism for inputing
charachters from this large set. From internal representation point
of view Kanji and mathematical symbols are more or less the same, just
different characters. From the input point of view user would prefer
probably as you mentioned two different mechanisms, which is fine with
me. We providing both.
∂01-Jun-87 0834 EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU Rutie
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 87 08:32:25 PDT
Date: Mon 1 Jun 87 08:17:49-PDT
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Rutie
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: Eppley@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307041451.25.EPPLEY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Rutie called from Boston, saying that she was ill and unable to get back
to the Bay area. She was uncertain as to when she would be well enough to
get back. However, she will call me tomorrow to let me know exactly when
she will return. If you need help, please let me know.
LaDonna
-------
∂01-Jun-87 0853 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Reminder of Vote Needed
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 87 08:53:26 PDT
Date: Mon 1 Jun 87 08:36:32-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Reminder of Vote Needed
To: Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, RWF@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307044860.27.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
On May 1 I sent you the following message:
At the faculty meeting on Tuesday, April 28, all faculty members present voted
to recommend the appointment of David Dill as an assistant professor. He will
occupy the CIS billet (initially CS; eventually joint); his thesis area is
hardware verification; his interests include parallel programming, compilers,
verification, and VLSI. His CV and recommendation letters are available in
Anne Richardson's office.
Your vote is needed on this recommendation, and I will appreciate receiving it
as soon as possible.
---------
You have not responded to date, and we need your vote for the preparation of
the appointment papers. If you want to see the CV and the letters, they are
now in my office.
Betty
-------
∂01-Jun-87 1000 JMC
start Soviet visa
∂01-Jun-87 1000 JMC
Dina Bolla about seat preference
∂01-Jun-87 1054 VAL re: Visit to Austin in Fall of '87
To: yvo@IM4U.UTEXAS.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, cl.boyer@R20.UTEXAS.EDU,
ai.novak@R20.UTEXAS.EDU, ai.woody@MCC.COM,
cs.dale@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
[In reply to message from yvo@im4u.utexas.edu sent Mon, 1 Jun 87 09:50:15 cdt.]
I am happy to know that it will be possible to arrange a few visits to
Austin for me. Thank you very much for the invitation.
Regards,
Vladimir Lifschitz
∂01-Jun-87 1112 JMC
film at bookstore
∂01-Jun-87 1143 CLT flight plan
9 june 3:00pm 9:50pm united via denver
346 3pm-6:18 sfo - denver
250 6:53 9:50 denver - austin
12 june 6:40pm 10:10pm continental via huston
1058 continental aus-hus 640 725
101 continental hus-sfo 820 1010
∂01-Jun-87 1228 danny@Think.COM paper on non-monotonic logic
Received: from THINK.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 87 12:28:34 PDT
Received: from christopher by Think.COM via CHAOS; Mon, 1 Jun 87 15:31:01 EDT
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 87 15:28 EDT
From: Danny Hillis <danny@Think.COM>
Subject: paper on non-monotonic logic
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: irene@Think.COM
In-Reply-To: <8705152358.AA15635@Think.COM>
Message-Id: <870601152847.4.DANNY@CHRISTOPHER.THINK.COM>
I was suprised (at Los Alamos) to find out that G.C. Rota had not
really heard about the current state non-monotonic logics. Rota
publishes a journal called "Advances in Applied Mathematics", that is
reasonably well read, and since I am nominally one of the editors I
would like to get a paper published in the journal on the subject.
Who would be a good person to ask to write one? I don't suppose that
you would be interested? -danny
∂01-Jun-87 1251 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: paper
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 87 12:51:22 PDT
Date: Mon 1 Jun 87 12:38:16-PDT
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: paper
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 30 May 87 16:08:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12307088864.19.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks. Actually, Beeri came by last Thursday to talk about HIS
work with Abiteboul on the subject.
Perhaps you could let me have a copy, and I'll announce it to
the nail list (or you could mail to nail@navajo yourself).
---jeff
-------
∂01-Jun-87 1345 VAL re: paper on non-monotonic logic
[In reply to message sent Mon, 1 Jun 87 15:28 EDT.]
You said once that I should do research rather than write expository papers.
I decided then that you were right.
∂01-Jun-87 1518 RLG summer
unless something unusual interferes, i will be going east for the summer
and will be unable to accept your job offer.
thanx though for taking the time to work out a position for me, I really
wish i could accept it.
bob.
∂01-Jun-87 1605 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Yoav Shoham asked me to send a nice little poem to this mailing list:
With logics that are monotonic
Relations are nice but platonic
It's when you permit
Just models that fit
That things become most erotonic
Yoav will also speak at our seminar on a related subject:
POTENTIAL HISTORIES AND INERTIAL THEORIES
Yoav Shoham
Thursday, June 4, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
In previous talks I never managed to get to my solution to the
extended-prediction problem (which is my name for the problem
subsuming the frame problem, a name that, shall we say, never
quite caught). I'll describe the intuitive concept of a potential
history, which has a strong McDermott-like persistence flavor.
I'll then embed the concept formally within the logic of
chronological ignorance. I'll identify a class of theories, called
inertial theories, which extend causal theories, and yet which
a. are expressive enough to capture the notion of potential
histories, and b. have the "unique model" and easy computability
properties.
My intention is this time to go into some detail. I'm still
not sure I have enough material for an hour, and if I don't
I'll ask the audience some questions on TMS's.
∂01-Jun-87 1725 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Rosemary
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 87 17:25:04 PDT
Date: Mon 1 Jun 87 17:12:02-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Rosemary
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307138702.27.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, we are trying to develop a plan to use all secretaries effectively.
The possibility of Rosemary working for your group is one thing we are thinking
about. However, since she knows nothing about this, please do not discuss it
with her at this point.
Incidentally, Gene Golub has always been pleased to have Rosemary help his
visitors. He will be on leave next year but he wants to have a secretary
part time to help his group and visitors in his absence. I haven't seen
him lately so have not had an opportunity to discuss this with him, but I
think that he probably would be willing to pay Rosemary 25% time for this
assistance.
Will appreciate your comments after you have a chance to think it over.
Betty
-------
∂01-Jun-87 1957 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 June 1987
Previous Balance 4.30
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.04
Current Charges 4.00 (bicycle lockers)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 8.34
NEW PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 4/30/87.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂02-Jun-87 0917 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com Re: Boland amendment, etc.
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 09:03:17 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jun 87 09:00:33-PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Subject: Re: Boland amendment, etc.
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 1 Jun 87 21:05:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12307311376.40.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
I cannot think of any reason short of pure maliciousness for aiding the
Contras. They have demonstrated that they are certainly in the same league as
the Khmer Rouge. The numerous reports of survivors of Contra attacks on
civilians as well as yesterday's news story about a US government report that
the Contras are continuing to kidnap civilians offer ample evidence that this
group of former Somoza national guardsman should not be allow to continue their
murderous ways with US support.
What should be clear, but often isn't, is that groups on the far Right and
far Left have no qualms about using violence to achieve objectives. The
Jeanne Kirkpatrick school of thought argues that we ought to support fascism
of the Rightward kind as it is good insulation against communism. The Reagan
administration has by and large followed this policy: we actively support
repressive countries like Chile, Honduras, Haiti and South Africa. And in so
doing we insure a set of political conditions where the only survivable
alternatives are of the far Leftish variety. We then have our justification
for continued support of antidemocratic governments.
I see no satisfactory reason why the United States cannot develop foreign
policy strategies to assist citizens and groups that work to support
non-violent democratic principles. (Clearly this would eliminate the
Contras!) We need not and ought not lend assistance to any faction that
endorses or uses violence to achieve their goals.
By persisting in the use of a foreign policy filter that views every
situation in terms of an East-West confrontation, we continue to increase the
amounts of violence and terrrorism in the world as well as loose whatever
moral influence we may have left with the Western Europeans and other
remanining democratic states.
-Ric Steinberger
-------
∂02-Jun-87 1412 JJW System uptime
To: alliant!cs@EDDIE.MIT.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, LES@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
ME@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, kolk@NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU,
Tom@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
We had a power failure this morning, which finally brought down the
Alliant system that had last been rebooted on December 3, when the
hardware field upgrade was done. Total uptime was 180 days 8 hours,
just a few days short of 6 months. I wonder if this is a record.
Certainly it indicates a very reliable system with which we've been
quite pleased.
Joe
∂02-Jun-87 1421 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com re: Boland amendment, etc.
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 14:21:25 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jun 87 14:20:47-PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Subject: re: Boland amendment, etc.
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 2 Jun 87 11:03:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12307369670.18.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
> Subject: re: Boland amendment, etc.
> To: STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM
> CC: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
> 1. Richard Steinberger says, "I cannot think of any reason short of pure
> maliciousness for aiding the Contras. They have demonstrated that they
> are certainly in the same league as the Khmer Rouge." The object of aiding
> the contras is to prevent yet another communist regime from getting
> established and to replace it by democracy. Steinberger may not agree
> with this objective or even believe that it is sincerely held, but he
> surely has heard of it.
>
> I suppose Steinberger's statement is a rhetorical exaggeration obviating
> the need to supply details. I sometimes feel that need myself. His
> comparison with the Khmer Rouge suggests that he can't tell the difference
> between more than a million killed and a few tens. His news sources on
> Contra atrocities are exhibiting deliberate gullibility, because they take
> these reports with Sandinista officials in the room after the Sandinistas
> have had time to prepare the witnesses. I believe the Contras have done
> some bad things, but they have responded to pressure to clean things up
> and have even shot one of their own officers for abusing civilians.
> When members of Congressional committees visited Nicaragua before the $100
> million was voted, many opponents of Contra aid changed their minds.
John,
No one, myself included, appreciates the patronizing superior attitude
such as you displayed in the above response. But let me respond to your
comments. The claim you make that the Contras have murdered only "a few
tens" is somehow supposed to imply that they're just a bunch of over-zealous
boy scouts that occasionally get out of control. There is independent
evidence gathered by many independent American citizens and reporters that
indicate the actual civilian count is in the thousands. An excellent
documentary on PBS (yes, I know, a pinko-leftist anti-American institution)
examined the Contra's "activities" and interviewed the survivors of their
attacks. I suspect that you would propably assault the integrity of
any printed source that provided evidence of Contra atrocities; you could
claim that anyone critizing these "moral equals of the Founding
Fathers" is himself suspect (to which I would reply, "McCarthyism" %-) ).
As to preparing witnesses, no one is better than our own CIA, who
continually attempt to market the Contras as the last and best hope of
democracy in Central America. They regularily coach top Contra leaders
prior to Congressional testimony. I suppose that this is all fair and
legal. But I do object when the CIA prepares and distributes manuals
on applied terrorism to the Contra mercenaries.
> 2. Steinberger mischaracterizes Jeane Kirkpatrick's recommendations as
> well as misspelling her first name. What writing of hers would he say
> recommends supporting Fascists? Her distinction between authoritarian
> and totalitarian regimes has held up by subsequent events. Specifically
> authoritarian regimes often make transitions to democracy, e.g. Spain,
> Portugal, Argentina and the Philippines, while no totalitarian regime
> has done so except when conquered by other countries.
> I don't think he can fairly say that the U.S. is supporting South Africa,
> although maybe the most likely alternative to the present regime is
> far worse - taking the necklacing as an indications of the policies the
> ANC would follow if it won power.
If you haven't read Jeane Kirkpatrick's (OK, John, I confess. I did spell
her first name wrong. That must mean that all my other points were
incorrect) writings about the difference between totalitarian and
authoritarian regimes, I'm sure one of the SU libraries has them.
Her basic point boils down to this: US foreign policy should be to
support strongly anti-communist regimes regardless of the methods they
use to achieve and maintain power. The alleged alternative is to
accept a (Soviet-backed) communist government. I maintain that this
strategy is not the only one available to the United States. There is no
reason why we cannot support flexible politically-centered and primarily
democratic regimes. Better (and far more stable) to have a moderately
left or right leaning regime than an extreme one.
You are correct in pointing out that authoritarian governments
can and sometimes do metamorphize into more democratic forms. But let's
remember that some Communist countries also experiment with moving towards
a more decentralized form of administration, e.g. China and the USSR. They
are certainly not democracies and perhaps never will be, but consider
what types of governments both the countries had 30 years ago and what they
have today. This should NOT be construed as an approval of their current
types of ruling, only to point out that leftist regimes can change style
and direction too.
The United States does have more than two foreign policy options.
It's time to start exploring them instead of supporting every dictatorship
merely because they claim to be anti-communist.
A final question: John, if you're so enthralled with the Contras and their
cause, why not argue for direct US military intervention in Nicuragua?
After all it only took a few days to "clean up" Grenada. How much trouble
could a nation with a per capita annual income of $750 be to a nation that
spends over $300 billion per year on a "defense" budget? Why if we invaded
tomorrow our boys could be home for a big parade and Fourth of July
Barbeque. The CIA admits that the Contras are highly unlikely to
succeed on their own, even with massive transfusions of US dollars
and weapons. Besides, we've got all these nice almost-new battleships.
-Ric Steinberger
-------
∂02-Jun-87 1451 JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU follow-up conversation
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 14:50:56 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jun 87 13:02:36-PDT
From: Jane S. Hill <JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: follow-up conversation
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jhill@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307355438.29.JHILL@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
John, This may save you the headache: I read your article in Psychology
Today (Dec 83) and found a friendly quote. Can I use it for you?
"It's difficult to be rigorous about whether a machine really knows or thinks
because we're hard put to define these things. We understand mental processes
only slightly better than a fish understands swimming."
or:
We'll probably never want to deal with machines that are too much like
us. Who wants to deal with a omputer that loses its temper or an
automatic teller that falls in love? Computers will end up with the
psychology that is convenient to their designers."
Let me know if you object to either of these, or if you prefer another.
I hope this helps. Jane Hill
-------
∂02-Jun-87 1451 LEWIS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Boland amendment, etc.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 14:51:25 PDT
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 87 13:21:39 PDT
From: Jason Lewis <LEWIS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Boland amendment, etc.
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: LEWIS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue, 2 Jun 87 11:03:00 PDT
Message-ID: <12307358906.53.LEWIS@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
>I suspect he has no policy that applies to left and right alike but
>merely picks up what arguments he can find in support of his leftist
>bias.
Well, isn't that to be expected? When one is engaged in any sort of
debate, one is generally selective concerning the facts/arguments used.
It is common practice to use only documentation which supports your
argument. To argue for both sides of an issue strikes me as being
impartial to the point of foolhardiness. We all have biased views,
JMC, be they liberal or conservative. There is no such thing as an
objective opinion, and yes, that includes those which I have just
stated. This may come across as slightly awkward (I generally keep
to myself concerning matters political), but hey, I'm only a kid.
Take Care and
Stay Aware,
--Jason
P.S. I'm no fan of the Contras, and I am opposed to the notion of
funding them, but I certainly don't have any sympathy for the
Sandinistas. Ideological differences aside, both groups appear
to be brutal and corrupt, and I wouldn't trust my country with
either of them. (yes, I know that this is an over-simplification)
-------
∂02-Jun-87 1652 SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU Re: Boland amendment, etc.
Received: from SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 16:52:45 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jun 87 16:50:24-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Boland amendment, etc.
To: STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM
cc: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU, SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12307311376.40.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Message-ID: <12307396909.26.SINGH@Sierra.Stanford.EDU>
Ric says:
`` I see no satisfactory reason why the United States cannot develop foreign
policy strategies to assist citizens and groups that work to support
non-violent democratic principles. (Clearly this would eliminate the
Contras!) We need not and ought not lend assistance to any faction that
endorses or uses violence to achieve their goals.
By persisting in the use of a foreign policy filter that views every
situation in terms of an East-West confrontation, we continue to increase the
amounts of violence and terrrorism in the world as well as loose whatever
moral influence we may have left with the Western Europeans and other
remanining democratic states. ''
I couldn't have put it better myself in a year's worth of trying.
Military intervention and/or bolstering violent `revolutionary'
groups should be a very RARE occurrence in a nation's foreign policy,
to be scrutinized carefully before being undertaken, not an everyday
part of business as usual.
If only the US would restrict its overseas `aid' to more
constructive, humanitarian projects such as education and health-care,
American influence in the world would be significantly greater than
it is now. The pained `Why do we get disliked in spite of the billions
we spend' is as misplaced as the billions that are spent on propping
up pro-US regimes that may tyrranise their populace.
I'm glad that America's domestic climate *does* allow for a
questioning of such foreign policy matters, esp. in the post-Vietnam
era. Even if the changes come too late for the US to retain the
post-WW II stature it had in world affairs, at least countless
peasants in some yet unknown country will not have to endure the
horrors of US military hardware being used against them by their
own countrymen.
Inder
-------
∂02-Jun-87 1548 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Boland amendment, etc.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 15:47:58 PDT
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 87 15:43:34 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Boland amendment, etc.
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM, su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue, 2 Jun 87 11:03:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12307384743.23.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
This is perhaps an oversimplification, but JMC seems to be saying
that (1) Communism is A Bad Thing and (2) Anti-Communism is A Good Thing.
I reject this position. I propose instead that (1) Democracy/Freedom is
A Good Thing and (2) Dictatorship/Lack of Freedom is A Bad Thing.
There is clearly an overlap between Communism and dictatorship/lack
of freedom, but the overlap is not 100%. Several Italian cities have
Communist city governments. The overlap between anti-Communism and
democracy/freedom is much smaller. Perhaps less than 50% of the anti-
Communist governments are democratic/free. Democracy and freedom seems
to be a luxury reserved for Western Europe and North America, with the
occasional bright spot (most notably Japan) elsewhere in the world.
One cannot help but notice the correlation between these countries
and the highly developed Capitalist countries. Perhaps that is why the
focus of US government policy has been to export Capitalism and hope
that democracy/freedom will happen as a side effect. This policy has
not worked, perhaps because true Capitalism can *only* florish in a
democratic/free country. Coincident with this policy has been a
curious "non-interference in internal affairs" -- we'll tell a country
how to run its foreign and trade policy, we'll tell it how to run its
economy, but we won't tell it that it can't torture its citizens.
The end result of this policy seems to be the establishment of a
series of corrupt nasty little dictatorships around the world, who act
as US puppets in their foreign affairs and make a mockery of American
principles of democracy and freedom domestically. True, if you are
politically numb, you can probably survive and be happy in such a
country, just as lots of Germans were in Nazi Germany. Communist
dictatorships do require political consciousness with the current Party
line, and that is a bit more of a burden. This, perhaps, is the
"authoritarian" vs. "totalitarian" distinction that JMC refers to.
I prefer to lump both into a single class -- dictatorship.
I do not think the US should be in the business of propping up
nasty little dictatorships in the name of anti-Communism. Some cases
are particularly blatant -- e.g. South Korea. Here's a country with
a totally insane opponent; even North Korea's friends dislike and
distrust it. Here's a people who are friendly to Western values and
are totally unsympathetic to Communism. We militarily occupy the
country and dictate its foreign policy. Yet, we allow the South
Korean people to be tyrannized by a hopelessly corrupt and ineffectual
government that is afraid to hold direct presidential elections since
it knows it will be voted out of office...simply because we won't
"inferfere with South Korea's internal affairs"!
-------
∂02-Jun-87 1743 ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Boland amendment, etc.
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 87 17:43:07 PDT
Date: Tue 2 Jun 87 17:40:07-PDT
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Boland amendment, etc.
To: STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM
cc: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12307369670.18.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Message-ID: <12307405959.7.ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com> wrote:
But let's remember that some Communist countries also experiment with
moving towards a more decentralized form of administration, e.g. China
and the USSR. They are certainly not democracies and perhaps never
will be, but consider what types of governments both the countries had
30 years ago and what they have today. This should NOT be construed
as an approval of their current types of ruling, only to point out
that leftist regimes can change style and direction too.
Which significant changes are you referring to? Why should we think
that the trivial changes (in the past two years) will last? Obviously
all types of government can change, but some are more likely to make
"good" changes than others.
the means produce the end,
-andy
-------
∂02-Jun-87 2044 JK NSF proposal
To: NSH, JMC
How about meeting thursday at 11 to ok the final form of the proposal?
I have asked Les to come up with a budget.
∂03-Jun-87 0112 POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU crime
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jun 87 01:12:54 PDT
Date: Wed 3 Jun 87 01:10:06-PDT
From: Bill Poser <POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: crime
To: su-etc@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
cc: goldberg@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307487876.13.POSER@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
I think that Jeff Goldberg missed JMC's point. As I understand it,
what JMC is saying is that government officials may claim to be able to
perform actions that would be crimes if other people performed them, but
they do not claim to be able to commit crimes. Precisely their claim is
that because they perform these actions for the public good (putatively),
they are not crimes. That seems to be the basis for Nixon's distinction
between murder and killing.
-------
∂03-Jun-87 1253 ROBERTS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Yosemite: how are snow conditions these days ?
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jun 87 12:53:30 PDT
Date: Wed 3 Jun 87 12:50:34-PDT
From: Paul Roberts <ROBERTS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Yosemite: how are snow conditions these days ?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 2 Jun 87 10:18:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12307615391.48.ROBERTS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
hmm .... ok, thanks for info.
P
-------
∂03-Jun-87 1450 D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU Causality
Received: from LEAR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jun 87 14:50:51 PDT
Date: Wed 3 Jun 87 14:47:59-PDT
From: Kevin Quinn <D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Causality
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12307636767.17.D.DAEDALUS@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
I'm working in the suggestions you made, and polishing off sections
that were a little rough. I don't think I'll have time before the end
of the quarter to discuss the topic with you and then work all that into
the paper as well. Plus, I need my grade reported soon, so that I'll graduate.
I'll get the finisheversion to you on Friday.
Thanks very much,
kevin
-------
∂03-Jun-87 1752 CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU meeting
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 3 Jun 87 17:52:39 PDT
Date: Wed 3 Jun 87 19:52:06-CDT
From: CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: meeting
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12307670283.42.CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
I am in Austin right now and will get into palo alto either thursday
night or friday morning. I have asked Jussi if it was okay to
reschedule the meeting for friday afternoon, and he said around 5pm friday
was okay. I hope this is a convenient time for you. Sorry for
the inconvenience - I got talked into staying here for longer than i had
planned.
Shankar
-------
∂04-Jun-87 0856 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com Re: request for repeat
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 87 08:55:54 PDT
Date: Thu 4 Jun 87 08:55:16-PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Subject: Re: request for repeat
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 3 Jun 87 16:53:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12307834700.35.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
John,
I'm not sure why the message didn't reach the SU-ETC bboard. I try to
remember to cc all replies that I make to individuals to SU-ETC@SCORE.
STANFORD.EDU. I don't generally keep copies myself. I'll check the
SRI version of SU-ETC. If I find the message there, I'll resend it.
I presume all messages posted to SCORE automatically are forewarded to
SAIL.
-Ric Steinberger
-------
∂04-Jun-87 1023 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
This will be our last meeting before the summer break.
POTENTIAL HISTORIES AND INERTIAL THEORIES
Yoav Shoham
Thursday, June 4, 4:15pm
Bldg. 160, Room 161K
In previous talks I never managed to get to my solution to the
extended-prediction problem (which is my name for the problem
subsuming the frame problem, a name that, shall we say, never
quite caught). I'll describe the intuitive concept of a potential
history, which has a strong McDermott-like persistence flavor.
I'll then embed the concept formally within the logic of
chronological ignorance. I'll identify a class of theories, called
inertial theories, which extend causal theories, and yet which
a. are expressive enough to capture the notion of potential
histories, and b. have the "unique model" and easy computability
properties.
My intention is this time to go into some detail. I'm still
not sure I have enough material for an hour, and if I don't
I'll ask the audience some questions on TMS's.
∂04-Jun-87 1108 SUBRAMANIAN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: summer job
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 87 11:08:39 PDT
Date: Thu 4 Jun 87 11:04:16-PDT
From: Devika Subramanian <SUBRAMANIAN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: summer job
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 3 Jun 87 17:07:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12307858185.53.SUBRAMANIAN@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Thank you very much. Could I talk to you at 2 pm this afternoon?
Devika
-------
∂04-Jun-87 1139 MAZZETTI@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU liability statement
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 87 11:39:28 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 87 11:37:51 PDT
From: Claudia Mazzetti <MAZZETTI@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: liability statement
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: MAZZETTI@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12307864299.67.MAZZETTI@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
John,
Could you add to your information statement to prospective grantee
that the AAAI will not be legally or financially responsible for any
event it donates money to? I'm currently telling people this but I
thought we also tell them in their initial contact with us.
Claudia
-------
∂04-Jun-87 1207 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch.
∂04-Jun-87 1302 VAL Ksenia Velikanova
Ksenia Velikanova, one of two sisters known by their participation in the
dissident movement, is now in Germany. She has cancer, and funds are being
collected in the Russian community to pay for her treatment. If you want
to participate, you can send a check to
Kornelia Gerstenmeyer
Rheinhohen Weg 90
D-5486 Oberwinter
West Germany
The check should be made payable to Gesellschaft Kontinent.
∂04-Jun-87 2044 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Advice
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 87 20:44:11 PDT
Date: Thu 4 Jun 87 20:41:39-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Advice
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307963293.7.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Don't imagine you've been wondering where I was, but just in case:
I've had a term project due in 225A today. It's just about done. I also need
to turn in "what I've got" by Monday night to Misha Pavel for the incomplete in
CS238C/PS289. So it behooves me, I think, to consider seeing you Tuesday or
Wednesday after I get my stuff together for the purpose.
Hope you aren't going to be vanished by then.
..Ed
-------
∂04-Jun-87 2320 RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 87 23:20:10 PDT
Date: Thu 4 Jun 87 08:31:26-PDT
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: fulltenured@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12307830363.13.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Following the general faculty meeting on Tuesday, June 9 (which starts at
2:30 in MJH 146), there will be meeting of full professors to discuss
the proposed appointment of Roland Glowinski as a full professor (1/2 in
CSD, 1/2 in ME) as part of the AM/SC program. Please stop by my office
prior to the meeting to read the letters that we have received on him.
-Anne
-------
∂05-Jun-87 0228 J.JBRENNER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: Political primaries
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 87 02:28:01 PDT
Date: Fri 5 Jun 87 02:27:20-PDT
From: Joe Brenner <J.JBRENNER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Political primaries
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: J.JBRENNER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 4 Jun 87 18:48:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12308026225.106.J.JBRENNER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Okay, if you say so. I was registered as a Republican in New York,
and I didn't hear anything about primaries. I'll try again out here.
Thanks, Joe B.
-------
∂05-Jun-87 0942 RA Nils Reimers
Nils called re MIT information which he found out for you. His tel. 3-0651.
∂05-Jun-87 0950 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com Re: Soviet Politics
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 87 09:50:20 PDT
Date: Fri 5 Jun 87 09:49:44-PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Subject: Re: Soviet Politics
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12308106759.25.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
JMC writes:
"The Soviet Union will only cease to be a danger to world peace when
it has free elections, so that its foreign policy becomes subject to
public opinion. In the mean time, money might be saved by some
disarmament agreements, but this is unlikely to change the situation
qualitatively."
It should be clear that *any* nation with tens of thousands of nuclear weapons
is a danger to world peace. Stated intents of when/whether to use such
weapons are largely irrelevant.
The Soviet citizenry do have little influence over their nation's foreign
policy. But how much influence did American citizens or their elected
representatives have on our "secret state department" - the one that
operated from the basement of the White House.
Was Congress or the American people consulted prior to the Libyan
bombing mission or the Grenada invasion? Foreign policy, as conducted in
America, may be harder to disguise and more subject to post hoc public
opinion than in the USSR. But there is considerable room for dramatic
improvements in our own front yard.
Let us keep in mind that the money that would be saved should a genuine
arms reduction treaty be signed would be saved by the USA as well as the
USSR. To sign such a treaty ought not be considered a favor we do for
the Soviet leadership. Both countries (and the world) need to devote
their efforts to problems such as declining fossil fuel stocks,
deterioration of various ecosystems, loss of topsoil, inequitable
distribution of land and resources, etc. Time and effort and
money spent on weapons that must never be used is wasted no matter which
country spends it.
-Ric Steinberger
-------
∂05-Jun-87 1202 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch.
∂05-Jun-87 1550 RA reminder
I just wanted to remind you that I will be on vacation Mon.-Wed. I finished
typing in the material from your notebook. If there is anything you would like
me to do before that please let me know. Also, since I am going to be in town
I can come in (if you want) Tuesday afternoon since my guests are
going to be busy elsewhere at that time.
∂05-Jun-87 2211 AI.BOYER@MCC.COM Free Distribution of Kyoto Common Lisp
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 87 22:10:39 PDT
Date: Sat 6 Jun 87 00:08:57-CDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
Subject: Free Distribution of Kyoto Common Lisp
To: pratt@SUN.COM, fateman@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, sgadol@SUN.COM,
ai.clive@MCC.COM, rpg@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU,
cl.hunt@R20.UTEXAS.EDU, capshaw@MCC.COM, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
rms@PREP.AI.MIT.EDU, ai.schelter@MCC.COM, eaton@MCC.COM, cizmar@MCC.COM,
ai.nasr@MCC.COM, cizmar@MCC.COM, hanne@MCC.COM
cc: reiji%kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET,
hagiya%kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET,
yuasa%kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Message-ID: <12308241331.28.AI.BOYER@MCC.COM>
It appears certain that very soon Kyoto Common Lisp will
become very widely available at no charge via ftp on the
Arpanet. For those who are not familiar with it, KCL is a
complete implementation of Common Lisp. It is written
entirely in C. It runs on Suns, Vaxes, a Data General
machine, and others. It ports very quickly to machines
running BSD Unix. It is extremely efficient and very well
documented. I have used it extensively for over a year as
my main programming language.
The purpose of this message is to solicit a little help in
debugging the broadcast distribution message. I would
ESPECIALLY like help from knowledgeable Unix people who use
Vaxes runing BSD 4.2.
The implementors of Kyoto Common Lisp have agreed to make
Kyoto Common Lisp available on extremely generous terms.
All one must do to be authorized to make a copy of KCL is to
sign a license agreement. A copy of this agreement is
enclosed. No fee is charged for KCL. Please note that KCL
is definitely not in the public domain. Those who have not
sent in a signed license agreement are definitely not
authorized to copy KCL. The license agreement also contains
restrictions on distributing changes to KCL and requirements
concerning returning to the authors of KCL improvements to
KCL.
It is our intention to put a copy of KCL on an Arpanet
machine at the University of Texas in an unprotected way and
to announce publicly how to ftp the program. We will seek a
very wide distribution of the announcement, for example
through the Common Lisp bboard and via the Arpanet-Bboards.
If you would be willing to help with debugging the initial
instructions for ftping the program, or if you know of
someone who would be willing, please let me know. I would
like to make sure that a few sites have managed to perform
the ftping and installation of KCL without problems before
making a broadcast that might cause problems for dozens or
hundreds of sites.
To participate in this experiment, besides replying to this
message, you should send a signed copy of the license agreement
to the Kyoto address mentioned in the license agreement. Then
you will be authorized to do the ftping and use KCL in your
home or organization.
LICENSE AGREEMENT
FOR
KYOTO COMMON LISP
The Special Interest Group in LISP (Taiichi Yuasa and Masami Hagiya) at the
Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Kyoto University (hereinafter
referred to as SIGLISP) grants to
USER NAME: _______________________________________________
USER ADDRESS: ____________________________________________
(hereinafter referred to as USER), a non-transferable and non-exclusive
license to copy and use Kyoto Common LISP (hereinafter referred to as KCL)
under the following terms and conditions and for the period of time
identified in Paragraph 6.
1. This license agreement grants to the USER the right to use KCL within
their own home or organization. The USER may make copies of KCL for use
within their own home or organization, but may not further distribute KCL
except as provided in paragraph 2.
2. SIGLISP intends that KCL be widely distributed and used, but in a
manner which preserves the quality and integrity of KCL. The USER may send
a copy of KCL to another home or organization only after either receiving
permission from SIGLISP or after seeing written evidence that the other home
or organization has signed this agreement and sent a hard copy to SIGLISP.
If the USER has made modifications to KCL and wants to distribute that
modified copy, the USER will first obtain permission from SIGLISP by written
or electronic communication. Any USER which has received such a modified
copy can pass it on as received, but must receive further permission for
further modifications. All modifications to copies of KCL passed on to
other homes or organizations shall be clearly and conspicuously indicated
in all such copies. Under no other circumstances than provided in this
paragraph shall a modified copy of KCL be represented as KCL.
3. The USER will ensure that all their copies of KCL, whether modified or
not, carry as the first information item the following copyright notice:
(c) Copyright Taiichi Yuasa and Masami Hagiya, 1984. All rights reserved.
Copying of this file is authorized to users who have executed the true and
proper "License Agreement for Kyoto Common LISP" with SIGLISP.
4. Title to and ownership of KCL and its copies shall at all times remain
with SIGLISP and those admitted by SIGLISP as contributors to the
development of KCL. The USER will return to SIGLISP for further
distribution modifications to KCL, modifications being understood to mean
changes which increase the speed, reliability and existing functionality of
the software delivered to the USER. The USER may make for their own
ownership and use enhancements to KCL which add new functionality and
applications which employ KCL. Such modules may be returned to SIGLISP at
the option of the USER.
5. SIGLISP will not be responsible for the correction of any bugs or
deficiencies found by the USER. In no event shall SIGLISP be liable for
special, indirect or consequential damages arising out of or in connection
with the use or performance of KCL.
6. This license for KCL shall be effective from the date hereof and shall
remain in force until the USER discontinues use of KCL. In the event the
USER neglects or fails to perform or observe any obligations under this
Agreement, this Agreement and the License granted hereunder shall
immediately terminated the USER shall certify to SIGLISP in writing that
all copies of KCL in whatever form in its possession or under its control
have been destroyed.
7. Requests. KCL is provided by SIGLISP in a spirit of friendship and
cooperation. SIGLISP asks that people enjoying the use of KCL cooperate
in return to help further develop and distribute KCL. Specifically,
SIGLISP would like to know which machines KCL gets used on. A brief
notice form is appended to this agreement which the user is requested to
send by email or otherwise. Please send in further notifications at
reasonable intervals if you increase the number and type of machines on
which KCL is loaded. You may send these notices to another USER which is
cooperating with SIGLISP for this purpose.
USER
DATE: _________________________________________
BY: ___________________________________________
TITLE: ________________________________________
ADDRESS: ______________________________________
______________________________________
SIGLISP
DATE: _________________________________________
BY: ___________________________________________
Taiichi Yuasa Masami Hagiya
Special Interest Group in LISP
Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences
Kyoto University
Kyoto, 606, JAPAN
Telephone: 075-751-2111
Telex: 05422020 RIMS J
JUNET: yuasa@kurims.kyoto-u.junet
UUCP: kddlab!nttlab!kurims!yuasa
USER intends to load KCL on:
Model Number Production Name Number of Machines
...
USER has loaded KCL on:
...
Model Number Production Name Number of Machine
-------
∂06-Jun-87 0805 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab Re: Please pass on a request
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 6 Jun 87 08:05:11 PDT
Received: from NTT-20.NTT.JUNET by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Sat, 6 Jun 87 08:01:47 PDT
Received: from nttlab.NTT (NTTLAB.NTT.JUNET.#Internet) by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Sat 6 Jun 87 18:07:20
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Sat, 6 Jun 87 18:08:29 jst
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 87 18:08:29 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8706060908.AA04071@nttlab.NTT>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 05 Jun 87 1126 PDT
Subject: Re: Please pass on a request
According to Professor Ito, Oki gave him two string ties and he gave
one of them to you. Professor Ito says that he will give you the one
he now have, and he will later ask Oki to give him a new one.
Professor Ito thinks that, in view of the recent trade friction
between the U.S. and Japan, it would be better to ask someone who will
visit the U.S. soon to bring the tie rather than to send it by mail (as it
is a chip anyway!) He also thinks that it would be better to make it
a gift from him and not from Oki.
So, please wait for a while. You will get it soon.
** masahiko **
∂06-Jun-87 0804 CLT
did you ever get the pictures i asked you to get copies of?
if you take the car today could you please get gas? tnx
∂06-Jun-87 1426 SJG "hypothetical" question
Dear John:
Let's say, as a matter of argument, that Genesereth were to run out
of money and fire me. If I were interested in switching to your
group, would I be better off approaching you about it before or after
I finished the circumscription theorem prover I'm working on?
Matt
∂06-Jun-87 1438 SJG re: "hypothetical" question
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Jun-87 14:31-PT.]
Yes, I thought that was the case. I hope you'll let me know if
things change.
Matt
∂07-Jun-87 1113 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Vietnam
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 87 11:13:44 PDT
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 87 11:12:20 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Vietnam
To: SU-etc@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
cc: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12308646086.33.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Vietnam gets all of the attention, but it is largely a no-op. In
many ways, we were involved in an ancient blood-feud that was being
fought long before Communism, Capitalism, and other Western -ism's
were heard of. It is inappropriate to assess blame on the US government
or any of its people for the fall of South Vietnam. South Vietnam was
*not* conquered by military might. South Vietnam *surrendered* without
(much of) a fight. In the face of a relatively minor offensive, the
ARVN soldiers dropped billions of dollars worth of US military gear and
ran. The South Vietnamese leaders were more concerned with saving their
own hides than their country -- they, and not the US, "lost" Vietnam.
Hell's bells, we spent billions of dollars and over 50,000 American
lives to save one government in a civil war from the other government
(and a domestic insurrection allied with the other government). We gave
that government the most advanced military technology on the planet.
Those turkeys should have been able to defend themselves!
-------
∂07-Jun-87 1646 SSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU BBOARD
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 87 16:46:02 PDT
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 87 16:44:52 PDT
From: Sally Smith <SSmith@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: BBOARD
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: SSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12308706621.27.SSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
John:
Keep up the fight--the famed "silent majority" is with you!
Sally (Age 25 & Republican)
-------
∂07-Jun-87 1853 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: One more thing re JMC
Received: from PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 87 18:52:54 PDT
Received: by Psych.Stanford.EDU; Sun, 7 Jun 87 18:50:20 PDT
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 87 18:50:20 PDT
From: Helen Cunningham <helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: One more thing re JMC
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, helen@psych.stanford.edu, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU
Thanks for the informative piece, John. It contains interesting specifics
on the domestic policies of the Soviet system. I would have liked to see more
on FOREIGN POLICY, however, since that's what my question concerns. The fact
that the Russians dominate the Ukraine, as part of the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics, is interesting. But does the Russian domination of the
Ukraine imply a desire for conquest of far-flung nations such as in Indo-
China or the Western Hemisphere? That is, is there evidence to support the
view that Russia is "exporting revolution" at any greater rate than the
U.S. is? Is there evidence that the Russians constitute a threat to the
Western Hemisphere?
Clearly the Russians fear invasion, themselves. They have been invaded from
the West many times before, with great miseries inflicted upon them as a
result. Their fear of invasion is thus historically justified. It's not
at all surprising to me that they would be worried about their immediate
surroundings and would want to exert control over them. As for imperialism,
correct me if I'm wrong but they've never had anything comparable to the
empire that the British once had. Why should the Russians believe that
the British (or their friends the Americans) are not capable of repeating
history and re-establishing worldwide domination?
The U.S. has never been invaded, or even close. Yet we also exert tight
control over our immediate surroundings. Again, without more details as
to differences in foreign policy of the two countries, I'm still having
trouble believing there really is much of a difference.
-helen
∂07-Jun-87 2217 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Russia, feudalism and academia
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 87 22:17:38 PDT
Date: Sun 7 Jun 87 22:15:02-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Russia, feudalism and academia
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 7 Jun 87 22:03:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12308766726.16.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This was in you message about the USSR:
> e. Top-down rule within the Party. The higher bodies are
>elected by lower bodies, but the higher bodies name the candidates.
>The top-down rule extends to a single ruler. A consequence is that
>the talents of a courtier are decisive in rising in the Party
>hierarchy. The system is essentially feudal in that when someone
>rises he takes his followers along with him.
Replace the word ``Party'' by ``Academic Department'' and
``Single Ruler'' by ``A Small Number Of Rulers''.
-------
∂07-Jun-87 2313 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Russia, feudalism and academia
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 87 23:13:29 PDT
Date: Sun 7 Jun 87 23:10:52-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Russia, feudalism and academia
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 7 Jun 87 22:27:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12308776891.16.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
First of all, let me make one general comment. If you, who are at the
top of the academic hierarchy, cannot recognize the inherent feudalism
in your own system, then how do you expect the Russian leaders to do so?
It may be that the Computer Science department at Stanford may be a
fairer department than others, however achivements in Computer Science
are more objective than ones in, for example, history, philosophy
or psychology. In those departments personal character and being one
of the ``boys'' counts for a lot.
When I was at the institute for advanced study, I would sometimes sit
next to historians. Invariably, there would be a grand old man of history
sitting and lecturing his junior members not only about history, but about
every other thing that he felt they should be lectured about, for example
why cross country skiing is favorable to down hill. ``Juniors'' would
sit quietly and listen. Actually trips to Princeton are unnecessary,
for such displays just go to the faculty club any evening.
A young faculty member in those departments considers his or,
more rarely, her every move with respect to how it would affect his or her
career. For example, I was recently at a talk given by a Berkeley
psychologist. It turned out that the majority of the results that he
talked about had been done by his research assistant, who was never once
mentioned. Some (non-tenured) people in the audience knew about this,
but never challenged the speaker for fear of being branded as contentious
and thus never being hired by the people who concluded this. We therefore
see an example of research assistant (serf), being forced into oblivion,
while colleagues sit by in hope of not suffering a similar fate.
I would say that the difference between a bad professor and good
professor in those fields is about the same as the difference between
a despot and an enlightened despot.
-------
∂08-Jun-87 0852 @RELAY.CS.NET,@ai.toronto.edu,@utterly.ai.toronto.edu:hector@ai McDermott critique update
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 08:52:21 PDT
Received: from ai.toronto.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id aa24929; 8 Jun 87 11:41 EDT
Received: from utterly.ai.toronto.edu by ai.toronto.edu via ETHER with SMTP id AA23175; Mon, 8 Jun 87 11:33:20 EDT
Received: from ai by utterly.ai.toronto.edu via ETHER with SMTP id AA10344; Mon, 8 Jun 87 10:41:42 EDT
Message-Id: <8706081441.AA10344@utterly.ai.toronto.edu>
Date: 08 Jun 87 10:41:34 EDT (Mon)
From: Hector Levesque <hector%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
To: james@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU, bobrow@XEROX.COM, stefik@XEROX.COM,
kabowen@amax.npac.syr.edu, rjb%allegra.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET,
ec%cs.brown.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, dekleer.pa@XEROX.COM,
jon.doyle@C.CS.CMU.EDU, forbus@P.CS.UIUC.EDU, phayes@KL.SRI.COM,
hayes@SPAR-20.ARPA, hewitt@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, hinton@C.CS.CMU.EDU,
hobbs@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM, israel@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, val@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, bmoore@STRIPE.SRI.COM,
rcm%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.CS.UCL.AC.UK,
nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, pentland@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
watdaisy!dlpoole%watmath.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET,
reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET, stan@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
stan%humus.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.edu,
alberta!lksc%ubc-vision.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET, briansmith@XEROX.COM,
stickel@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM, tyson@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM,
waldinger@KL.SRI.COM, tw@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, wwoods@BBN.COM,
woods@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
Subject: McDermott critique update
Cc: mcdermott-drew@YALE.ARPA
You will all be very glad to know that our submission for the special issue of
*Computational Intelligence* on McDermott's critique is now safely in the
hands of the publisher. Just the proofs to do and we're home free. I'm told
these will be ready by early July, so with any luck, we will have an issue to
distribute by IJCAI or very soon thereafter.
For those of you whose submissions I will be proofreading, thank you, your job
is done. For those of you who have either requested a look at the galleys or
who have been asked by me to do same, my plan is to send you the proofs by
courier and expect you to reply also by courier within 48 hours. Please let
me know if this might be a problem for you. My editorial feeling is that at
this stage of the game, I can and should be fairly ruthless about deadlines.
In fact, I'm suffering from Editorial Fatigue and Ennui (EFE) and feeling
pretty ruthless about everything, so don't count on any residual deadline
compassion.
Hector
∂08-Jun-87 0857 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU A new mailing list
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 08:57:07 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 8 Jun 87 08:54:19-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Mon 8 Jun 87 11:48:33-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 8 JUN 87 11:50:03 EDT
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1987 11:47 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12308881831.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: A new mailing list
I have created a mailing list for people who are interested in
the machine verification of mathematics; if you get this message then
you are currently on the list. I created the list for several
reasons:
1) I would like to hear about particular machine verifications of
mathematical theorems. I would like people on the list to
announce new verifications that they have done or that they
have heard about.
2) I would like to hear about other people's experiences with
various verification systems. Failed attempts at machine verification
are probably just as interesting as successful attempts.
3) I would like to provide a convenient communication
channel for people working on the machine verification
of mathematical theorems. This communication channel can
be used for anything the members think is appropriate
for such a list.
You can send messages to the list by sending them to
theorem-provers@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Requests for additions or removals from the list can
be sent to me, dam@mc.lcs.mit.edu
David McAllester
∂08-Jun-87 0900 JMC
10
∂08-Jun-87 1016 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU deadline
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 10:15:59 PDT
Date: 8 Jun 1987 13:15 EDT (Mon)
Message-ID: <KIRSH.12308897796.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: David Kirsh <KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Cc: KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: deadline
In-reply-to: Msg of 1 Jun 1987 12:21-EDT from John McCarthy <JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
John,
There's supposed to be a deadline for comments and that is around
the 15th of June. But predictably everyone has been late in
delivering drafts of the main talk and so although we will pre-publish
main talks I doubt we will be able to publish many commentaries.
If you can get me something by the 17th we can include your
contribution.
Nils wrote me that he won't have time to compose a second draft.
Can you exert a little discrete pressure behind the scenes?
-- David
∂08-Jun-87 1053 K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU re: What is meant by "Finlandlization" (sic) of the west? Jim?
Received: from LEAR.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 10:53:08 PDT
Date: Mon 8 Jun 87 10:52:30-PDT
From: Ronald Chrisley <K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: What is meant by "Finlandlization" (sic) of the west? Jim?
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 8 Jun 87 07:49:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12308904618.13.K.KARN@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU>
Thanks for the informative reply. I will bw living in Finland for a school
year starting in Sept., and my revelations of this fact to my friends have
often been greeted with concern for me, as if Finland were a Soviet puppet.
-- Ron
-------
∂08-Jun-87 1109 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU deadline
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 11:09:48 PDT
Date: 8 Jun 1987 14:08 EDT (Mon)
Message-ID: <KIRSH.12308907546.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: David Kirsh <KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Cc: KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: deadline
In-reply-to: Msg of 8 Jun 1987 13:34-EDT from John McCarthy <JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
I look forward to your draft by the 17th.
Our intent is to publish the papers in a more polished version with
MIT Press.
-- David
∂08-Jun-87 1200 JMC
grade for Kevin Quinn
∂08-Jun-87 1215 CLT Qlisp meeting reminder
To: QLISP@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
No meeting this week.
Meetings for the summer tba.
∂08-Jun-87 1323 gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu Teaching Assistant
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 13:23:25 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA24154; Mon, 8 Jun 87 15:22:34 CDT
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 87 15:22:20 CDT
From: gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (Gloria Ramirez)
Posted-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 87 15:22:20 CDT
Message-Id: <8706082022.AA28098@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA28098; Mon, 8 Jun 87 15:22:20 CDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Teaching Assistant
Dr. McCarthy:
We are in the process of assessing our teaching assistant situation for
the Fall semester. Please let us know if you will need a TA(grader)
for your course. The closing limit has been set at 30, and we anticipate
that this limit will be met (thus far 41 students have requested your
course, with three additional opportunities to register yet to come.)
We will probably have to use some criteria for choosing the 30 students
who will get your course (i.e. CS PhD students).
Thank you,
Gloria Ramirez
Graduate Secretary
∂08-Jun-87 1412 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: urgent grade
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 14:12:50 PDT
Date: Mon 8 Jun 87 14:10:08-PDT
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: urgent grade
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 8 Jun 87 11:06:00-PDT
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12308940597.17.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I just submitted a grade change for Kevin today (per a message sent to me
6/4 by Rutie) giving him an A-. Do you wish that to be upgraded to an "A"?
I can try to catch the grade card.
Claire
-------
∂08-Jun-87 1541 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 15:41:00 PDT
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 87 15:39:39 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon, 8 Jun 87 15:16:00 PDT
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12308956892.60.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Tom Hayden was neither.
The primary blame for the loss of South Vietnam must rest upon the South
Vietnamese government. I question too whether the word "genocide" is an
appropriate description of what happened in South Vietnam. North Vietnam's
behavior seemed somewhat typical of the winning side of a civil war. Can
JMC or others document *unusual* barbarism on the part of the North
Vietnamese? The key word is "unusual" -- it appears to be the usual
practice to execute the former leaders, oppress the losing side's people
(treating them as conquered subjects), etc. Perhaps persecuting the ethnic
Chinese was an unusual twist -- virtually all of South Vietnam's Chinese
population became "boat people", and it was for this reason that China
invaded Vietnam.
Perhaps a reason for the "boat people" is that they had someplace to go.
They left because there *was* an alternative. I am sure that the North
Vietnamese encouraged those people to leave. It is much easier to rule
when all the free-thinking individuals are gone.
-------
∂08-Jun-87 1600 JMC
sarah
∂08-Jun-87 2000 JMC
paper for val
∂08-Jun-87 2051 B.BCPLAYR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU Re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 20:51:04 PDT
Date: Mon 8 Jun 87 20:50:27-PDT
From: Christopher Hayes <b.bcplayr@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
To: su-etc@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 8 Jun 87 15:16:00-PDT
Address: Haus Mitt 316 (620 Mayfield Ave., Stanford, CA 94305-8466)
Telephone: 415 327 4904
Message-ID: <12309013472.122.B.BCPLAYR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
From JMC, in reference to an short article in the New York
Times about Tom Hayden's appearance at the SJCC commencement:
> It appears that Mr. Hayden, besides making no statement responding to
> the Vietnamese complaint, may have been engaging in deception.
I wouldn't assume that he made no statement responding to the
"Vietnamese complaint". The brief in the NYT was just that, brief,
and left out a lot of details the editor didn't feel were important.
One of those may have been any statement Hayden made about the
"Vietnamese complaint".
In any case, I am very likely missing something obvious, but I
don't understand what deception you are referring to. Please point it
out to me.
----------
As for my own views on the Hayden thing, he probably shouldn't
have shown up. I think it is reasonable that if a large group of the
graduates didn't want to have him speak, he shouldn't have been
allowed to and he shouldn't have had his presence announced in what
was probably a "well here he is so what are you going to do about it"
manner. Such a callous disrespect for the views of the students,
however misguided he thought they might be, is wrong. If you want to
win an opponent over to your views, the first step is not to insult
him.
As for Tom Hayden's being a promoter of genocide, I doubt it.
I will admit that I know very little of who did what during the
Vietnam War, since I was born in 1966, but I get the idea (possibly
mistaken, someone please correct me if I'm wrong) that he was against
the war mainly because it was sacrificing American soldiers' lives in
a foreign country with little chance of winning given the limits we
placed on our involvement. It's ludicrous to call anyone a supporter
of genocide because he didn't want Americans to die for someone else's
freedom. More Vietnamese might have died if we hadn't aided South
Viet Nam; I don't know and neither does anyone else. But refusing to
send your sons to war to die to defend someone else's family is
certainly not genocide. (The above paragraph is not directed at JMC,
but rather at anyone who would accuse Hayden of supporting genocide.)
---cjh
-------
∂08-Jun-87 2129 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 21:29:01 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Mon, 8 Jun 87 21:27:54 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Mon, 8 Jun 87 21:28:50 PDT
Date: 8 Jun 87 21:27 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: lunch
Date: 8 June 1987, 21:26:27 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: lunch
Dear John,
How about Wed or Thurs. for lunch
Greetings,
Elliott
∂08-Jun-87 2151 quintus!qed!watson@Sun.COM CS522 -- Heuristic Programming Seminar
Received: from SUN.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 21:51:51 PDT
Received: from sun.Sun.COM (192.9.2.3) by Sun.COM (4.0/SMI-3.2)
id AA17797; Mon, 8 Jun 87 21:48:22 PDT
Received: from quintus.UUCP by sun.Sun.COM (4.0/SMI-3.2)
id AA23726; Mon, 8 Jun 87 21:51:36 PDT
Received: from qed.quintus.uucp by quintus.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA05133; Mon, 8 Jun 87 21:50:08 pdt
Return-Path: <watson@qed>
Received: by qed.quintus.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA21159; Mon, 8 Jun 87 21:49:53 pdt
Message-Id: <8706090449.AA21159@qed.quintus.uucp>
Date: Mon 8 Jun 1987 21:45:03 PDT
From: Kennita Watson <quintus!qed!watson@Sun.COM>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: CS522 -- Heuristic Programming Seminar
I would like to take CS522 this quarter, and somehow came by the idea
that I would be taking it with you and maybe working some more on my
multivalued logic ideas (then again, maybe not). Am I completely
confused (as I may be, since I haven't been able to get my hands on a
Time Schedule)? If you aren't teaching it, do you know who is?
Kennita
∂08-Jun-87 2353 berglund@navajo.stanford.edu Foreign Policy, Republicans, Generation Gaps, Etc.
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 87 23:53:14 PDT
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Mon, 8 Jun 87 23:50:41 PDT
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 87 23:50:41 PDT
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Foreign Policy, Republicans, Generation Gaps, Etc.
To: su-etc@navajo.stanford.edu
Cc: helen@psych.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
In no particular order, my reactions to various su-etc discussions:
1. Contrary to a few random comments, I think the discussion between
JMC, Helen, Stefan (sp?), and crew has been excellent. It's nice
to see us step back for a broader view every once in a while.
Thanks to Helen for opening it up, and to JMC for the responses.
As a JMC fan, I eagerly await his "How our behavior has differed
from theirs in foreign policy" note.
Note, however, that even if there are no differences, the mere
fact that their policies are determined by a few, with little
input from public opinion makes them more dangerous than we.
2. I think the generational difference is poppycock. If memory
serves correctly (sorry, Helen, no source) it is only during
the late 60's and early 70's that young people voted significantly
differently than older ones. Before and since, young and old
usually held/hold the same views in the same proportions. Why
was there a big transformation in the 60s? I doubt that it
was some unique feature about Helen's (my?) generation--other
than events and circumstances of the time: an extremely long
period of prosperity, nuclear proliferation, Martin Luther King,
the assassination of prominent political figures, and fear of
being drafted.
3. Whoever did the summaries of Republicans and Democrats missed
one of my favorites: Pierre "Pete" DuPont, the Republican from
Delaware. Seems to be fairly libertarian on a lot of issues,
and politically courageous: according to the Mercury News he's
been telling Iowa farmers that farm subsidies should be eliminated
over the next five or ten years.
4. I think Bill Moore's "live in the present"/go with the feeling
messages are everything I ever imagined California would be.
5. I'm a big fan of the Bboard stats; I also like the fact that
"the point" of them is left to the reader (and the writers).
--Eric
∂09-Jun-87 0004 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: talkin bout my ge-ge-generation
Received: from PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 00:04:06 PDT
Received: by Psych.Stanford.EDU; Tue, 9 Jun 87 00:01:13 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 87 00:01:13 PDT
From: Helen Cunningham <helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: talkin bout my ge-ge-generation
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, helen@psych.stanford.edu, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
whew.
∂09-Jun-87 0630 gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu re: Teaching Assistant
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 06:30:28 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA10201; Tue, 9 Jun 87 08:29:59 CDT
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 87 08:29:54 CDT
From: gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (Gloria Ramirez)
Posted-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 87 08:29:54 CDT
Message-Id: <8706091329.AA00568@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA00568; Tue, 9 Jun 87 08:29:54 CDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: re: Teaching Assistant
I believe there may be some confusion, I am referring to the course you
are scheduled to teach for the CS Dept. at UT-Austin, Epistemological
Problems of A.I.
Thank you,
Gloria Ramirez
Grad. Sec.
CS Dept. UT-Austin
∂09-Jun-87 1036 CLT in case
I will be at the Driskill Hotel in Austin.
You can get a computer message to me via
CS.HAM@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
who is running the workshop.
Make sure Timothy has milk and huggies.
The file TTM[1,CLT] has Timothys schedule,
and other data.
My itinerary is on your terminal (at school)
∂09-Jun-87 1100 gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu re: Teaching Assistant
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 11:00:52 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA16709; Tue, 9 Jun 87 13:00:24 CDT
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 87 13:00:17 CDT
From: gloria@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (Gloria Ramirez)
Posted-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 87 13:00:17 CDT
Message-Id: <8706091800.AA01787@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA01787; Tue, 9 Jun 87 13:00:17 CDT
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: re: Teaching Assistant
Thank you.
∂09-Jun-87 1310 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Stone Representation Theorem
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 13:10:38 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 9 Jun 87 13:07:42-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Tue 9 Jun 87 16:06:04-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 9 JUN 87 16:08:14 EDT
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1987 16:05 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12309190934.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Stone Representation Theorem
I would like to construct a list of well known mathematical theorems
that have been machine verified and a list of challenge problems. I
will start with the list of challange problems given by Bledsoe in his
1977 AI journal article on non-resolution theorem proving:
1) The Schroder-Bernstein Theorem: if there exists an injection from A
into B and there exists an injection from B into A then there exists a
bijection between A and B.
2) Rolle's Theorem (a special case of the mean value theorem)
3) Bolzano Weierstrass Theorem: If S is a bounded infinite set of real
numbers then there exists a number y which is a limit point of S-y.
4) A continuous function on a compact set is uniformly continuous.
5) Heine-Borel Theorem: Any closed bounded subset of R↑n is compact.
6) Hahn-Banach Theorem: A linear operator f on a linear subset of a
Banach space can be extended to a linear operator f' on the whole
space such that the norm of f' equals the norm of f.
7) The Pythagorean Theorem
8) A seperable normal space is metrizable
9) The Tychonoff Theorem: an arbitrary product of compact spaces is
compact.
10) For any ring R, if x↑3=x for all x in R then R is Abelian.
I think I read somewhere that EKL has been used to verify at least
one of the above results --- can someone tell me which one?
Does anyone know of other results on this list which have been machine
verified?
I am particularly interested in foundational verifications,
i.e. verifications which start with a foundational system
such as ZF set theory, higher order type theory or Boyer
and Moore's logic. The following theorems HAVE been
machine verified with foundational systems:
1) The uniqueness of prime factorizations for natural numbers.
This has been done with the Boyer-Moore prover and the nuPRL
system.
2) Ramsey's theorem. This has been done with a 50 line EKL proof.
3) Fermat's theorem. This has been done with the Boyer-Moore prover
as a subgoal to verifying the RSA encription algorithm.
4) Wilson's theorem --- The Boyer-Moore prover.
5) Gauss' Law of Quadratic Reciprocity --- The Boyer-Moore prover.
6) The Church-Rosser theorem for the pure lambda calculus ---
The Boyer-Moore prover.
7) Goedel's incompletelness theorem --- The Boyer-Moore prover.
(Perhaps Shankar can tell us exactly what was proved here).
8) The Stone Representation theorem for Boolean algebras --- Ontic.
I would like to hear about any other well known mathematical results
that have been proven with foundational systems. I would also
like to propose the following challenge problems in addition to
those provided by Bledsoe:
11) A model-theoretic proof of the compactness theorem
for first order logic.
12) Corrolaries of compactness, such as the fact that the first
order theory of arithmetic has non-standard models or that there
is no first order axiomatization of the notion of transitive closure.
13) The completeness theorem for some standard inference system for
first order logic (e.g. the proof in Bell and Machover).
14) The interpolation lemma (or Beth's definability theorem)
for first order logic.
15) The fundamental theorem of algebra: Every polynomial has a
root in the complex plain.
16) The independence of the continuum hypothesis.
Other proposals for challenge problems are welcome. I am particularly
interested in well known but deep results. The challenge is to prove
such results in a foundational verification system.
David McAllester
∂09-Jun-87 1403 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU membership list
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 14:02:55 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 9 Jun 87 13:53:06-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Tue 9 Jun 87 16:44:35-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 9 JUN 87 16:32:59 EDT
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1987 16:30 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12309195443.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: membership list
It has been suggested that I send mail the
distribution list of the theorem-provers mailing list
to the members of the list so they see who's currently
on the list and suggest new members. The current list
is as follows:
dam@ai.ai.mit.edu
Guttag@larch.lcs.mit.edu
Garland@larch.lcs.mit.edu
kathy@larch.lcs.mit.edu
yishai@ai.ai.mit.edu
jar@ai.ai.mit.edu
rc@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
howe@gvax.cs.cornell.edu
cmp.kaufmann@r20.utexas.edu
cl.moore@r20.utexas.edu
cs.lengauer@r20.utexas.edu
cs.pollack@r20.utexas.edu
atp.plummer@r20.utexas.edu
atp.cohen@r20.utexas.edu
atp.Bledsoe@r20.utexas.edu
atp.simon@r20.utexas.edu
atp.starbird@r20.utexas.edu
atp.ballantyne@r20.utexas.edu
atp.hines@r20.utexas.edu
theorem-provers@ipsa.arpa
ai.boyer@mcc.com
pixlay@mcc.com
shankar@score.stanford.edu
JMC@score.stanford.edu
JK@sail.stanford.edu
RWW@sail.stanford.edu
CLT@sail.stanford.edu
Bronstein@score.stanford.edu
ZM@SAIL.stanford.edu
GLB@SAIL.stanford.edu
JJW@SAIL.stanford.edu
RDZ@sushi.stanford.edu
wimmers@ibm.com
sytek!dan@hplabs.hp.com
sdcrdcf!win!eggert@cs.ucla.edu
sdcrdcf!win!schorre@cs.ucla.edu
dale%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay
andr%uconn.csnet@csnet-relay
andrews@a.cs.cmu.edu
Pfenning@theory.cs.cmu.edu
issar@k.cs.cmu.edu
Nesmith@k.cs.cmu.edu
*<dam>theorem-archive.txt
∂09-Jun-87 1425 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com re: "Largest Peacetime...
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 14:24:59 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Jun 87 14:23:30-PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
Subject: re: "Largest Peacetime...
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 9 Jun 87 13:21:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309205175.28.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.Com>
JMC writes:
"The Center for Defense Information has a political agenda - anti-defense
or at least against most current defense proposals.
The defense budget is still below the 10 percent of GNP it was in 1960.
Please explain why you thing the current discussions with the Russians
and with the allies at the Venice meeting don't count as some "desire
for entering any forms of arms control treaty". "
The CDI does have an agenda. So does the Republican party and the
Heritage foundation. Does that mean when they supply dollar figures
from the Pentagon that the figures are somehow distorted? While they
oppose many current defense initiatives, they have consistently sought
to establish a genuinely strong US national defense. Such a defense is
not based on space weaponry or 30,000+ nuclear warheads. Many people
who serve on their staff are former high ranking US servicemen who
want to establish a sane and reliable national defense.
Comparing defense spending, or anything else with GNP, is playing somewhat
of a game; the assumption being, among other things, that GNP is a
relatively constant and objective measure. The real issue, I think, is
"What constitues an adequate defense for the United States?". Not
surprisingly, many people, especially bboard readers, have strong opinions.
Although it will be impossible to answer this question here, it is
possible to define characteristics of such a defense strategy.
Assuming this can be done, the current defense policy of the US could
then be evaluated in terms of how well it conforms to such characteristics.
(I won't try to produce a list here; but I believe that it could be done.
Furthermore I suspect that the liberals (incl. me, Helen) and the conservatives
(incl. JMC, Andy, Ed) would be able to agree on more that a few such
characteristics. - If there is enough interest expressed, I will try to
begin such a list and submit it for comment to SU-ETC.)
The current discussions with the Russians and the Europeans may or may not
indicate a strong interest for genuine arms control among the policymakers
of the current US administration. The president only seems interested in
pursuing such courses of action if they will boost his approval ratings
with the public while not destroying his credibilty with his conservative
supporters. We have seen over six years go by with no arms control
agreements reached with the Russians. I plead the (paraphrased) axiom
of the Nixon years: "Watch what they do, not what they say."
-Ric Steinberger
-------
∂09-Jun-87 1507 RA John Nafeh
Please call Nafeh (408) 943 1711
∂09-Jun-87 2034 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU stanford vs ussr
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 20:34:46 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Jun 87 20:32:03-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: stanford vs ussr
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: ilan@Score.Stanford.EDU, rivin@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12309272268.8.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I just have been looking at a book called ``chess kaleidoscope''
by Karpov and Gik, in it they give a game between Kaissa the russian
program and a Stanford university program, the game was supposedly
played in 1967. No other mention of the authors is given and
amusingly enough, the game reads ``Kaissa vs Stanford University''.
Do you know about this match?
Ilan
-------
∂09-Jun-87 2128 ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Paper on Computer Chess
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 21:28:32 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Jun 87 21:25:53-PDT
From: Ilan Vardi <ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Paper on Computer Chess
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12309282066.9.ILAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This paper has been accepted in the Journal of the International
Computer Chess Association. I still have to make a few revisions
(marked in the paper).
\documentstyle[12pt]{article}
\begin{document}
\title{Information and Strategy\\in Computer Chess\\$\;$\\Ilan Vardi}
\author{Mathematics Department\\Stanford University\\Stanford
CA 94305}
\date{\today}
\maketitle
\section{Introduction}
Computer implementation of chess is based on generating
a look-ahead tree, using an evaluation function on the terminal nodes, then
returning a value to the root of the tree according
to the minimax algorithm. Experience has
%
%
%(this is incorrect and is to be revised)
%shown that a wide search is needed initially, and that candidate moves can
%be chosen, these are then examined more thoroughly.
Empirical evidence seems to indicate that playing strength is closely
related to the depth of search \cite{ne:one}.
In this paper I propose a new consideration which may improve the level of
play of good programs. This is the {\em Information Content} of
a move. This is an easily implemented number which quantifies such strategic notions as
``keep your options open'' or ``force the opponent to show his hand''.
It must be stressed that the following analysis is useful only for a program
which has reached a high level of play, and then only in positions of a
highly strategic nature.
\section{Definition of Information Content}
We will work in analogy to Information Theory. Recall that if an experiment
$A$ has possible outcomes $T_{1},T_{2},\ldots,T_{n}$with
probabilities $p_{1},p_{2},\ldots,p_{n}$ so $p_{1}+p_{2}+\cdots+p_{n}=1$,
then the {\em Entropy} is defined by:
$$E=-\sum_{i=1}↑{n} p_{i}\log p_{i}.$$
Now if another experiment is performed which changes the probabilities in $A$
to $q_{1},q_{2},\ldots,q_{m}$ with corresponding entropy
$$E'=-\sum_{i=1}↑{n}q_{i}\log q_{i}$$
then the {\em Information} in $B$ relative to $A$ is defined by:
$$I=E-E'.$$
We now carry this over to chess positions. Let $R$ be a chess position
and let $R_{1},R_{2},\ldots,R_{n}$ be the candidate moves
with corresponding valuations
$v_{1},v_{2},\ldots,v_{n}$, not all 0 (see diagram 1).
Recall that a valuation can be given by
a real number $v \in [0,1]$ where $v=0$ means a win for black, $v=\frac{1}{2}$
means an equal game, and $v=1$ is a win for white. Now define $p_{i}=v_{i}/v_{total}$
where $v_{total}=\sum_{i} v_{i}$. We define the {\em Entropy of} $R$ by:
$$E(R)=-\sum_{i} p_{i}\log p_{i}.$$
Further if a move $R \rightarrow S$ is made then the {\em Information Content}
of $R \rightarrow S$ is defined by:
$$I(R,S)=E(R)-E(S)$$
Recall further that $-\sum p_{i}\log p_{i}$ increases as the $p_{i}$
approach $1\over n$ and as $n$ increases. In the game context this says
that a position with many equal alternatives has a high entropy, and that
an informative move is one that reduces options.
As an example consider the position of Diagram 2. Let us assume
that Black's candidate moves are:
1..h6, 1..Nbd7,1..c5.
Assuming further that White's best reply to 1..h6 is 2.Be3 and that
from this position Black's candidate moves are:
2..Nbd7,2..c5 (note that this basically
corresponds to chess theory).
Letting $R$ be the position of Diagram 2 and $S$ the position
after 1..h6, 2.Be3 (Diagram 3). %This is a NEW Diagram 3!!
Assign a valuation somewhat arbitrarily by \mbox {letting $v=\frac{1}{2}$} if the
position is roughly equal. Using this model we easily compute the information
content of the move 1..h6. Note that $R$ has Entropy $\log 3$ since
each $v_{i}=\frac{1}{2},\;\; v_{total}=\frac{3}{2}$ and thus $p_{i}=\frac{1}{3}$
and so $E(R)=-(\frac{1}{3} \log \frac{1}{3} +\frac{1}{3} \log \frac{1}{3}
+\frac{1}{3} \log \frac{1}{3})=\log 3$. similarly $E(S)=\log 2$.
Thus 1..h6 {\em gains} information by the value $\log 3 -\log 2$.
\section{Information and level of play}
Chess is a game which is governed by strict time limits. In tournament
play, for example, one must maintain an average of three minutes per move.
This has serious consequences on the performance of the game playing
algorithm. If there are a large number of candidate moves, less time
can be devoted to any one particular move, and less time means that less
depth of analysis can be achieved, leading to a corresponding drop in the
level of play. This has been observed in Monroe Newborn's OSTRICH
program. One concludes that computers may play weaker moves more often
in positions of high entropy. In effect this seems to have been David Levy's
winning strategy in his famous 1978 match against CHESS 4.7. In Levy's
own words this was the ``Do-Nothing-But-Do-It-Well'' strategy
\cite{le:one}.
Now I propose that if information content is taken into account, then the
weaker player should favor moves that gain information, while the stronger
player should make moves that lose information.
As an example, let us go back to Diagram 2. Assume now that Black is
the stronger player. The move 1..c5 leads to a fairly complicated
position in which the forcing move ...h6 can be played at any time.
This increases the size of the search tree and increases the number of
candidate moves at every level. Furthermore at deep levels the computer
may only be looking at forcing moves and exchanges. Thus, if White
looks at ...h6 too deep in the tree, it may only consider B$\times$f6 as
a reply. Since this is clearly a mistake in this type of position,
White would return a faulty evaluation of the position.
On the other hand, if Black plays 1..h6 immediately, this would
force White to play the good move 2.Be3.
Conversely, if Black is the weaker player, he should play 1..h6.
Note that this move gains information as was shown in the previous
section.
\section{Notes}
$\;$
I. The strategy suggested in section 3 is an example of the
{\em Enough Rope Principle} \cite{be:one}, which states
that if you are losing (or drawing) and all your options are mediocre,
then in practice you should pick the move that makes the situation too
complicated for you opponent to analyze. Newborn believes that
computers will eventually use this strategy to help them defeat their
human competition.
II. {\em Information gathering is a time honored strategy in the Orient!}\\
In the Game of Go, there is an established strategy called ``Yosu-Miru''.
This strategy corresponds to decreasing entropy. It is
defined in the following way by Yoshiaki Nagahara, professional 4-dan
\cite{na:one}:
``When playing a Yosu-Miru move, one maintains his own flexibility and
options but forces his opponent to settle in a particular shape \ldots
the player can plan his strategy on the basis of this fixed shape.''
III. As a final comment, it might seem strange that we are considering
measures of
information in Chess, which is well known to be a game of ``Perfect Information''.
However this refers to the fact that Chess has no hidden variables as
do Backgammon or Battleships. What {\em is} hidden is the best move!
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
\bibitem{be:one}
Elwyn Berlekamp, John Conway, Richard Guy, {\em Winning Ways},
Academic Press, London, 1982.
\bibitem{le:one}
David Levy, Monroe Newborn. {\em All about Chess and Computers},
Computer Science Press, Rockville MD, 1982.
\bibitem{ne:one}
Monroe Newborn, {\em A Hypothesis Concerning the Strength of Chess Programs},
ICCA Journal, Vol. 8 (1985), p. 209-215.
\bibitem{na:one}
Yoshiaki Nagahara, {\em Strategic Concepts of Go}, Ishi Press,
Tokyo, Japan, 1972.
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}
-------
∂09-Jun-87 2204 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Gorbachev and peace
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 22:04:36 PDT
Date: Tue 9 Jun 87 22:01:35-PDT
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Gorbachev and peace
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 9 Jun 87 16:41:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309288565.40.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
John, don't you see any conflict between this belief:
Peace with the Soviet Union is what we have now. We should maintain
it. I oppose hostile action of any kind, i.e. any kind of military
threats.
and your belief that an SDI system can work and should be developed?
While I don't want to turn this into an SDI discussion, I have serious
difficulty understanding the SDI proponents who persistently claim
that it would be a strictly defensive system with no first-strike
capability or incentive BUT also argue that the Soviets are ahead of
us in research in this area, and that it's imperative they not deploy
such a system before we do.
Obviously, the perception of this conflict depends on whether one
believes the ABM treaty or even the MAD principle itself is in any
part responsible for keeping the peace. Before the Reagan
administration started talking (in public, no less!) about limited
nuclear war, I might have believed that common sense held the weapons
in check even without the Doomsday Machine, but I no longer believe
that. While MAD may be insane, it is arguably a sane response to an
insane situation. How could a working SDI system not fail to disturb
the current peace?
joe
-------
∂09-Jun-87 2226 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 87 22:26:50 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Tue, 9 Jun 87 22:25:44 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Tue, 9 Jun 87 22:26:31 PDT
Date: 9 Jun 87 22:25 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: re: lunch
Date: 9 June 1987, 22:21:01 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: re: lunch
In-Reply-To: JMC AT SAIL.STANFORD.EDU -- 06/09/87 09:25
Dear John,
It turns out that I have to pick up my daughter at Santa Barbara
on Wed. She is not feeling well, and we want to get her home.
Is Thursday ok? The flea Street cafe is fine with me. Can you
make the reservation. Just tell me the time by mail. I will
read my mail on Wed night or Thursday morning.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂10-Jun-87 0846 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:AI.WOODY@MCC.COM Re: Stone Representation Theorem
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 08:46:40 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 10 Jun 87 08:43:39-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Wed 10 Jun 87 11:42:03-EDT
Received: from MCC.COM (TCP 1200600076) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 10 Jun 87 11:43:06 EDT
Date: Wed 10 Jun 87 10:38:56-CDT
From: Woody Bledsoe <AI.Woody@MCC.COM>
Subject: Re: Stone Representation Theorem
To: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
cc: AI.Woody@MCC.COM
Message-ID: <12309404593.52.AI.WOODY@MCC.COM>
David,
I think your getting a list of all machine verified proofs is a fine
idea. At one time Larry Wos was collecting a list of hard(er)
theorems proved automatically, so you will want him on
your list Wos@anl-mcs.arpa, as well as Ross Overbeek
Overbeek@anl-mcs.arpa, and Rusty Lusk Lusk@anl-msc.arpa.
The Ring theorem,
10) For any ring R, if x↑3=x for all x in R then R is Abelian.
we proved by Mark Stickel, using CSOR's a year or two ago.
Also Larry Wos and his group had done some kind of proof
(interactive?) earlier. Mark's is documented somewhere.
He is at SRI and is someone else that you will want on your list:
Stickel@Stripe.sri.com I believe
Also Richard Hodges has worked entensively with me to collect
provers for MCC, so you might want him on too:
Hodges@Stripe.sri.com, Ai.Hodges@mcc.com
The following two were proved by Ballantyne and Bledsoe several
years ago using a NON-STANDARD ANALYSIS prover. Also many others.
3) Bolzano Weierstrass Theorem: If S is a bounded infinite set of real
numbers then there exists a number y which is a limit point of S-y.
4) A continuous function on a compact set is uniformly continuous.
I agree with you that we should make a distinction between machine
verification and proof discovery. I am mainly interested in the
second. But Machine verification can not only handle much harder
theorems, such as the Stone Representation Theorem and the Godel
Incompleteness theorem, but can remove any doubt that people
proofs have indeed been correct.
Finally, let me suggest that you put a not in the JAR, and I
believe that you will generate a lot of interest.
Woody
-------
∂10-Jun-87 0915 @Score.Stanford.EDU:danny@cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 09:15:02 PDT
Received: from cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 10 Jun 87 09:06:09-PDT
Received: by cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 10 Jun 87 09:07:34 PDT
To: su-etc@score
Cc: jmc%sail@score
Subject: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
Reply-To: danny@isl.stanford.edu
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 87 09:07:31 PDT
From: Daniel Abramovitch <danny@cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU>
These questions were posted several weeks ago, and they were never
answered. Seeing that JMC seems to be in a mood to answer questions
now, I will repeat them:
True or false? (With corroborating evidence.)
The Contras that the President and the CIA support
are made up mostly of Samoza's (sp?) old guard.
Second question:
There was a second group of contras, based in Costa Rica, whose
leader was Eden (sp?) Pastora, the hero of the revolt against
Samoza. His group received very little aid from the CIA. Why?
-- Danny
∂10-Jun-87 0947 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In processing the following command:
MAIL
The command was aborted because these Host Name(s) are Unknown or Ambiguous:
isl.stanford.edu
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂10-Jun-87 0947 JMC re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
To: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from danny@isl.stanford.edu sent Wed, 10 Jun 87 09:07:31 PDT.]
I'm not in a mood to answer more questions at length, and I haven't
studied the details of what has been published about the Contras.
I read one piece (NYT?) saying that they were mostly dodgin the
Sandinista draft with no clear answer to the reporter's question
of why they had chosen to join one army just to get out of being
drafted into another. Though I suppose if I was anti-Sandinista,
the imminence of being drafted into the Sandinista army might
trigger my joining the Contras. Incidentally, it's Somoza,
not Samoza. I also don't know about Pastora and why he quit.
I suppose there are some former Somoza officers in the Contras;
where else would they go. It would be politically ideal if all
Contras were former Sandinistas who realized they had been duped
by the communists, but it seems unlikely. Concrete questions about
what their goals and prospects are and whether their victory would
lead to something more democratic and whether their defeat would
settle Nicaragua in the totalitarian Cuban mold would be more
relevant. Unfortunately, I have no answers for those either.
I suggest that someone invite a Contra spokesman to give a
talk at Stanford. There have certainly been enough speakers for
the Sandinistas.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂10-Jun-87 0952 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Advising
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 09:52:09 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Jun 87 09:48:58-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Advising
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12309417341.9.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Noe that I've caught up with you all on world politics, it's time to talk
about school. I'll call you before I come, but I'm planning to see you today,
perhaps this morning, to discuss
1) My ephemeral PhD plans and a proposed subject. Do you think
"The Use of Nonmonotonic Reasoning in Semiautomatic Creation of a
Knowledge Base from a Relational Data Base"
would sell? I'm only half kidding; the first part is for you, and the
last two for IBM. I want to get full-time sponsorship from them, which
would put me in a rather unusual category here.
2) The status of my MS program in light of the above. That is, if the PhD
makes sense, how best to steer the MS program toward it; and if not, how
best to finish it.
It's been fun reading and writing SU-ETC. Andy Freeman suggested I look at it,
knowing how I react to BBoards. It's his fault.
..Ed
-------
∂10-Jun-87 1000 JMC
reservation at flea tomorrow
∂10-Jun-87 1015 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Advising
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 10:15:34 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Jun 87 10:12:29-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Advising
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 10 Jun 87 10:01:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309421623.25.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I'm restarting on getting into the PhD program. I applied for fall '87 and
was turned down; in retrospect I can say my letter showed I didn't really
know what I was getting into. So i asked about MS and was immediately accepted
for that time. I deliberately didn't apply for this fall because I hadn't got
enough work done and professors acquainted with me to establish a firm footing.
So I guess I'm wondering whether I should formally apply again, and if so, for
fall '88 (the earliest available date for that route), or try to get the MS
program somehow transmuted into a PhD Program as of even date. The literature
I've been reading says the clock starts when you start the MS; if that's still
true, then I should be doing PhD-ish work ASAP while trying to get properly
into the program. I've done quite a bit of that already: seminars, very heavy
duty special courses like 326 and 356. I've all but finished the Symbolic and
Heuristic specialization for the MS; but I need several core courses. For the
PhD, I need much of the same core information plus some more, for the comps.
But I could probably get away without Numerical Analysis, e.g., because I've
had the stuff but not in an accredited school (at IBM).
So: to get into the program, what is my best next step?
..Ed
-------
∂10-Jun-87 1024 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Advising
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 10:23:54 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Jun 87 10:20:50-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Advising
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Wed 10 Jun 87 10:20:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309423143.25.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
3 PM it is, and by the way that was for last fall, i.e., fall '86(-87), that I
applied previously.
..Ed
-------
∂10-Jun-87 1046 KANAKIA@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Question for Helen and maybe Richard Steinberger
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 10:46:00 PDT
Date: Wed 10 Jun 87 10:42:53-PDT
From: Hemant Kanakia <KANAKIA@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Question for Helen and maybe Richard Steinberger
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 9 Jun 87 21:56:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309427157.21.KANAKIA@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Here is a question for JMC and others who feel good about US involvement in
Vietnam.
1. How did US involvement in Vietnam began?
As I recall being told, US entered the picture because France wanted
to get out and end its occupation of Vietnam and US was not in favor of it.
In fact it seems that early demands from Ho chi Ming was only to declare
Vietnam an independent Nation.
2. If indeed all that they wanted was to be independent, why do you blame them
for fighting Americans (and French) and puppet regimes installed by them?
May be JMC can tell us if they were indeed puppet regimes or
elected by people?
3. I do not condone the repression that led to fleeing of boat people, but
I am curious to know more about the class they came from? For instance,
are these people mainly associated with South Vietnamese regime that fell?
or are they big land-lords? Petty criminals? or people who fought on the
side of North Vietnamese and were persecuted for wnating more political
freedom?
Footnote: I am directing these questions to JMC primarily because he seems to
have not said much about how US got involved. He seems more preoccupied with
saying how the involvement ended and how it should have ended, if ever.
-------
∂10-Jun-87 1128 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 11:28:13 PDT
Received: from Sushi.Stanford.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 10 Jun 87 11:22:51-PDT
Date: Wed 10 Jun 87 11:22:21-PDT
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
To: danny@isl-sun.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU, jmc%sail@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Daniel Abramovitch <danny@cappuccino.stanford.edu>" of Wed 10 Jun 87 09:14:21-PDT
Message-ID: <12309434341.40.ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Daniel Abramovitch <danny@cappuccino.stanford.edu> asks JMC on su-etc:
There was a second group of contras, based in Costa Rica, whose leader
was Eden (sp?) Pastora, the hero of the revolt against Samoza. His
group received very little aid from the CIA. Why?
Unless JMC has inside knowledge of CIA decision-making, any answer he
gives is mere speculation, which the question rejects as inadequate.
Despite his military success, Pastora lost the revolution. Even the
CIA knows that. :-) The CIA, like NASA, DoD, HEW, and every other US
government agency is a bureaucracy. That makes it difficult to
distinguish ulterior motive from insight (or inside information),
stupidity, inertia, empire-building, turf-protecting, etc. (I don't
think NASA tried to destroy the US space program, but it doesn't look
too good these days. There is only one space program, comrade.) The
last I heard, Pastora had become a fisherman.
-andy
ps - Su-etc is entertainment. No one, including JMC, even if he
decided that the CIA shouldn't support Pastora, is obligated to
respond.
-------
∂10-Jun-87 1201 @Score.Stanford.EDU:danny@cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU Re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 12:00:59 PDT
Received: from cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 10 Jun 87 11:57:37-PDT
Received: by cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 10 Jun 87 11:58:57 PDT
To: Andy Freeman <ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: su-etc@Score.Stanford.EDU, jmc%sail@Score.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Repeat of a couple of questions for JMC
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 10 Jun 87 11:22:21 PDT.
<12309434341.40.ANDY@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: danny@isl.stanford.edu
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 87 11:58:54 PDT
From: Daniel Abramovitch <danny@cappuccino.STANFORD.EDU>
>-andy
>
>ps - Su-etc is entertainment. No one, including JMC, even if he
>decided that the CIA shouldn't support Pastora, is obligated to
>respond.
The point is that he has responded to everything else anyone cared
to drop on su-etc, no matter how flamish it is. I just want to hear
want a supporter of the Contras, someone who has vocally supported
and defended all the US policy in Central America, believes about
these two seldom discussed items.
The questions were as objective as I could make them. I am not
trying to elicit an expected response so that I can flame back. I
have no idea what the view on the first question, or the reason on
the second question are. (Right now I am assuming that the first
message was never seen by JMC.)
-- Danny
∂10-Jun-87 1307 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU A response by Boyer
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 13:07:39 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 10 Jun 87 13:04:51-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Wed 10 Jun 87 15:59:52-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 10 JUN 87 15:52:08 EDT
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1987 15:52 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12309450696.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: A response by Boyer
Date: Wednesday, 10 June 1987 01:21-EDT
From: Bob Boyer <AI.BOYER at MCC.COM>
To: DAM
Re: Stone Representation Theorem
At Stanford, Suppes' students have verified some nice set
theory. I know of undergraduates having checked the
inner-equivalence of many version of the axiom of choice.
Matt Kaufmann checked a finite version of Ramsey's theorem.
Wu, and subsequently Chou, have check an enormous number of
geometry theorems. Write atp.chou@r20.utexas.edu. I am not
sure whether this counts as foundational (a good choice of a
word, by the way); it might be an interesting challenge for
someone to write a program that would take a Wu/Chou proof
and from it produce a proof using Euclidean axioms. Or
even better, prove in one of the foundational systems that
such a proof could be converted into a Euclidean proof.
A good challenge problem for constructive theorem-prover
sorts (Boyer-Moore, nuPrl): the consistency of elementary
number theory, a la Gentzen. Another good one is the
constructive proof of the prime factorization theorem; the
latter was recently suggested to me by Fenstad, the editor
of Skolem's collected works. Don't even know a reference
on the latter one, but apparently it is very deep and
very famous.
∂10-Jun-87 2210 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Re: re: re: lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 87 22:10:38 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Wed, 10 Jun 87 22:09:31 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Wed, 10 Jun 87 22:10:01 PDT
Date: 10 Jun 87 22:08 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: re: re: lunch
Date: 10 June 1987, 22:06:52 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: re: re: lunch
In-Reply-To: JMC AT SAIL.STANFORD.EDU -- 06/09/87 23:51
Dear John,
I will meet you at the restaurant at noon.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂11-Jun-87 0700 JMC
susie
∂11-Jun-87 0800 JMC
stone and simpson
∂11-Jun-87 0838 aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK workshop on 24th- 27th
Received: from [14.0.0.9] by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 87 08:37:51 PDT
Received: from cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk by mv1.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id aa08290; 11 Jun 87 16:31 BST
From: Aaron Sloman <aarons%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 87 16:30:45 GMT
Message-Id: <24628.8706111630@tsuna.cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk>
To: kirsh <@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK:kirsh@mit-ai.arpa>,
hewitt <@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK:hewitt@mit-ai.arpa>
Subject: workshop on 24th- 27th
Cc: jmc <@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK,@cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk:jmc@sail.stanford.edu>
Karl, David
Thanks very much for your invitation to the workshop, just received.
The university has given me travel funds and I plan to turn up. But
I need to know some details re budgeting and travel arrangements.
I would have phoned, but your letter did not have your complete phone
number!
a. Roughly how much should I expect to spend on travel from Boston
airport to and from the workshop? From your map I could not tell
whether there is likely to be any kind of public transport service.
b. I expect to arrive around 1 pm on the Wednesday, and assume that
will give plenty of time to get to Endicott house. (There is only one
flight per day.)
c. I assume the workshop will be over mid Saturday and there will be
time for me to get an early evening flight back on the Saturday.
Is that OK?
Thanks
Aaron
phone: work 044 - 273 - 678294
home 044 - 273 - 506532
Aaron Sloman, U of Sussex, Cognitive Sciences, Brighton, BN1 9QN, England
Email - aarons%uk.ac.sussex.cvaxa@cs.ucl.ac.uk
∂11-Jun-87 0900 JMC
stone
∂11-Jun-87 0920 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU References
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 87 09:20:52 PDT
Date: Thu 11 Jun 87 09:17:48-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: References
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12309673811.20.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Just got on Socrates (FOLIO) and looked up the model theory and proof theory
authors. Nothing under Schoenfeld or Gentzen, though there is plenty of
material on both subjects. Closest I came was Jensen, Don, something like
"Why you can't prove consistency".
I'll go check out a couple; thanks.
Haven't heard from Vladimir yet.
..Ed
-------
∂11-Jun-87 1017 RA quitting date
The best last day at the office for me is July 10. The problem is that I would
like to audit some of the Linguistic Summer Institute courses in the last two weeks
and I need your permission to do so. If it's ok with you, please let me know.
Thanks,
∂11-Jun-87 1126 RA letter to ACM
You still need to send me the letter to the ACM to go with GENERA.
Thanks,
∂11-Jun-87 1152 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: References
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 87 11:52:22 PDT
Date: Thu 11 Jun 87 11:48:22-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: References
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 11 Jun 87 09:27:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309701220.16.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks. I have seen references to Gentzen before; I was surprised his didn't
show up on FOLIO. It covers most or all libraries, in particular the Math-
Science one.
I'm behind schedule; have to go over there after the 1PM funeral.
..Ed
-------
∂11-Jun-87 1359 RA Re: quitting date
[Reply to message recvd: 11 Jun 87 13:47 Pacific Time]
There will be no problem in making up for the time I am in class by
working through my lunch hour and working more on the last two Wednesdays.
The classes I want to attend are: M,T,TH,F 3-5.
∂11-Jun-87 1452 KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU message
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 87 14:52:20 PDT
Date: Thu 11 Jun 87 14:49:02-PDT
From: Katherine Howard <KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: message
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12309734109.17.KHOWARD@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Harold Stone from IBM called. He would like the reference for Alan Newell as
soon as possible, preferably by overnight mail. His number is (914) 789-7811.
--Kathy
-------
∂11-Jun-87 1656 SJG absurd claim?
To: VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
CC: myers@SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU
Dear John, Vladimir:
I have a circumscriptive theorem prover running, based on the specialization
of the multi-valued prover to a bilattice corresponding to circumscription.
Would you like to see it?
Matt
∂11-Jun-87 1806 SJG circ. thm prover
To: JMC, VAL
John:
You didn't break the prover; I did. I inadvertently told it that
canaries were birds and also that birds were canaries (I thought I
removed this, but apparently didn't). So then when it tried to
prove things about Tweety, it started looping. As soon as I told it
that birds weren't canaries, it had no trouble concluding that Tweety
flew.
Vladimir:
The stuff about equality is really pretty hopeless. The reason is
that MRS handles quantification implicitly using binding lists, like
prolog does. Since there is no such thing as a "negative" binding list
(i.e., this statement is true if x≠a), there is no way to handle equality.
There is a way around this that involves incorporating binding information
in the truth value, handling quantification this way instead of the usual
logic programming way. I've done a little bit of work implementing things
like this, but haven't got anything substantial to show for it, yet. Once
that work is done, I would expect "equality" examples such as the following
to work:
(foo a) [true by default]
(foo b) [true by default]
(not (ab $x)) [true by default]
(ab a) [true absolutely]
(ab b) [true absolutely]
Now the query (or (not (ab $x)) (foo $x)) should succeed (by default). But
this is all in the future.
See you guys tomorrow, I hope.
Matt
∂11-Jun-87 1812 SJG
sure, although I have to be done by 7.15 at the *very* latest.
∂11-Jun-87 2015 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: References
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 87 20:15:16 PDT
Date: Thu 11 Jun 87 20:03:13-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: References
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 11 Jun 87 13:41:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309791305.8.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I knew there was a time limit on Socrates, and had thought about it; just
assumed for the moment that this was recent enough to be in there, but didn't
discount the possibility... oh, wow. You know what I mean.
..Ed
-------
∂11-Jun-87 2131 helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU re: US/USSR/Vietnam/60s Radicalism
Received: from PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 87 21:31:19 PDT
Received: by Psych.Stanford.EDU; Thu, 11 Jun 87 21:30:47 PDT
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 87 21:30:47 PDT
From: Helen Cunningham <helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: US/USSR/Vietnam/60s Radicalism
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, helen@psych.stanford.edu, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU
Here's a response that's really a question. I thought that under
Jimmy Carter we supported the Sandinistas over Somoza because Somoza's
was an autocratic and repressive government and the Sandinistas had
popular support.
The question is, can anyone describe the events that changed the U.S.
government's mind about the Sandinistas? I realize I should know this
already, but during those years I was deep into graduate studies.
Thanks.
-helen
∂12-Jun-87 0845 RA
John,
For your information:
∂12-Jun-87 0838 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Re: AAAI preregistration
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 87 08:38:02 PDT
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 87 08:36:43 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: AAAI preregistration
To: RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "Rutie Adler <RA@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu, 11 Jun 87 11:22:00 PDT
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12309928477.31.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
We cannot pre-register people without written orders. Howver, since the late
registration deadline is today, Prof. McCarthy will have to register on-site.
Rick Skalsky
Membership Coordinator
-------
∂12-Jun-87 0900 PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: US/USSR/Vietnam/60s Radicalism
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 87 09:00:08 PDT
Date: Fri 12 Jun 87 08:56:55-PDT
From: Joseph I. Pallas <PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: US/USSR/Vietnam/60s Radicalism
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: helen@Psych.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 11 Jun 87 20:45:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12309932152.14.PALLAS@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Of more current interest is whether the supporters of the Sandinistas
"have any reason to expect a crime to be committed" by the people they
support.
And likewise for the Contras, yes?
-------
∂12-Jun-87 0942 RA
John,
This is a msg. I just got from Claudia:
Rudi,
Pls ignore last msg about J. McCarthy. We will take care of his registration.
Claudia
-------
∂12-Jun-87 1014 RA Tom Burns
Burns from International Data Corp. called re research on users of mini super
computers (617) 872 8200
∂12-Jun-87 1111 RA John Sowa
John wanted to talk to you about the conference in China in 1988 (914) 742 5639.
∂12-Jun-87 1122 RA leaving
I am leaving now for a medical appointemnt; will be back at 1:30.
∂12-Jun-87 1343 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU CS143A
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 87 13:43:37 PDT
Date: Fri 12 Jun 87 13:40:01-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: CS143A
To: oliger@Navajo.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12309983690.39.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I need to know if there has been any change in the requirement for CS243 as
core for MSCS. My schedule has become too tight for summer and I need to
remove about 3 units. I'm taking 143A as prereq for 243 later; if 143A will be
sufficient, as I have reason to believe, then I should drop it and take it
later instead of 243. Else I may have to do something more disagreeable to
avoid overcommitting myself for summer quarter.
If you would be preannouncing something by answering the question, I am quite
willing and able to keep the answer secret.
Thanks..
..Ed
-------
∂12-Jun-87 1512 SJG
my circ'n thm prover does indeed solve the shooting problem
"correctly" (i.e., it can't tell whether Fred lives or not).
∂12-Jun-87 1904 Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM The 30th anniversary of Lisp
Received: from XEROX.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 87 19:04:20 PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 12 JUN 87 17:16:06 PDT
Date: 12 Jun 87 17:15 PDT
Sender: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM
From: Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM>
Subject: The 30th anniversary of Lisp
To: pplace!deutsch@sun.COM, RPG@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
Masinter.pa@Xerox.COM,JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM,
gls@think.COM, gjs@ai.ai.mit.edu,teitelman@sun.COM
cc: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM, NII@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <870612-171606-2361@Xerox>
Dear Colleague:
Last year, Ed Feigenbaum and Penny Nii helped celebrate the 30th
anniversary of Artificial Intelligence. Penny put together a signature
quilt of contributors to AI, and Ed edited a corresponding anthoglogy of
classic papers in Artificial Intelligence. The quilt became the cover
of the book put out by Addison-Wesley. As Penny told me "Because there
were so many people, we made a conscious decision to leave out the
people whose strongest association was with Lisp."
Next year is the 30th anniversary of Lisp, and Penny has expressed an
interest in doing a "Lisp-quilt," which will be similar in spirit and
size to the AI-quilt but of a different design. I am willing to put
together the Lisp anthology, if we think it is a good idea,
and a publisher is interested. I am sending this message to you as my
first cut at those people who I think should be represented in the
anthology, and who I can also reach easily by electronic mail.
Would you please respond to me with answers to the following questions:
1) Do you think an anthology of classic papers
in Lisp is worthwhile?
If NO, you can skip the rest of the questions.
2) What paper of yours would you want to see in such an anthology?
3) Who else should be represented in this anthology? What paper of theirs
do you have in mind?
Here are some other candidates I thought of whose net address I don't have.
Please comment on their suitability.
Paul Abrahams (Lisp 2 paper)
Daniel Friedman (Reflection without metaphysics)
Carl Hewitt (Planner?)
Drew McDermott (Conniving is Better ... )
4) Should more than one paper by an individual be allowed to appear in the anthology?
Penny also notes:
"Since I am not familiar with all the people, I would need to have the
names organized in some way (e.g., Interlisp group, Maclisp group;
chronological order; contribution by language features, etc.) to help me
with the design. In the "AI-quilt" the names are organized more or less
by research areas and chronologically within them. This task can be
done later, but it might help you NOT to forget some names. "
For a reasonable book, we might have 20-30 papers, so we will have to make some choices.
∂12-Jun-87 2003 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab Re: red and black
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 87 20:03:30 PDT
Received: from NTT-20.NTT.JUNET by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Fri, 12 Jun 87 20:01:31 PDT
Received: from nttlab.NTT (NTTLAB.NTT.JUNET.#Internet) by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Sat 13 Jun 87 11:47:44
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Sat, 13 Jun 87 11:48:50 jst
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 87 11:48:50 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8706130248.AA00571@nttlab.NTT>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 08 Jun 87 1536 PDT
Subject: Re: red and black
It would be nice if you could modify the text so that formulas won't be
referred to by colors. (We can do this when we translate your text if
you leave them as they are.)
** masahiko **
∂13-Jun-87 2125 SJG re: another way of putting it
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jun-87 18:30-PT.]
I don't see your argument. If the intelligence thinks about things
differently from the god, in a way that is (presumably) simpler but
is wrong in an untestable way, what's wrong with that? Indeed, it
seems to me that the intelligence *is* smarter than the god in this
case -- the god is doing a lot of extra work!
∂13-Jun-87 2135 SJG re: another way of putting it
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jun-87 21:33-PT.]
Why is the god right? What does it mean to say that the world is not
like x if you can't prove it? In what sense is the intelligence wrong?
As far as the intelligence eventually coming up with the god's description,
he obviously can, even if not every part of it is testable -- witness
quark theory, which is just fine even thought there are good theoretical
reasons for believing that no one is ever going to see a quark.
∂13-Jun-87 2147 SJG re: another way of putting it
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jun-87 21:44-PT.]
Good plan. Meanwhile, can you tell me where this is from?
Sentences can be true in much wider contexts than specific programs
can be useful. The supplier of a fact does not have to understand much
about how the receiver functions or how or whether the receiver will use it.
The same fact can bee used for many pruposes, because the logical
consequence of collections of facts can be available.
(You wrote it.) Thanks.
∂13-Jun-87 2208 SJG re: another way of putting it
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jun-87 22:05-PT.]
Vladimir sent it to me; I am trying to find a quote to this effect
for the non-mon book introduction. What was the 1960 paper, anyway?
The advice taker was 1969, was it not?
Thanks for the pointer ...
∂13-Jun-87 2216 SJG re: another way of putting it
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jun-87 22:11-PT.]
OK; thanks!
Matt
∂14-Jun-87 1359 B.BCPLAYR@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
Received: from OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 87 13:59:48 PDT
Date: Sun 14 Jun 87 13:57:25-PDT
From: Christopher Hayes <b.bcplayr@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Was Tom Hayden a hero or a just a promoter of genocide?
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 8 Jun 87 22:23:00-PDT
Address: Haus Mitt 316 (620 Mayfield Ave., Stanford, CA 94305-8466)
Telephone: 415 327 4904
Message-ID: <12310511146.108.B.BCPLAYR@OTHELLO.STANFORD.EDU>
Thanks for the info.... I'm always trying to improve my supply.
---cjh
-------
∂14-Jun-87 2337 SJG information
Bill Bradley is a WASP.
There are no CD's for kids.
∂15-Jun-87 0833 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Bledsoe's List and Automated Proving vs. Verification
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 08:32:54 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 15 Jun 87 08:29:13-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Mon 15 Jun 87 11:30:24-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 JUN 87 10:56:16 EDT
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1987 10:51 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12310706597.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Bledsoe's List and Automated Proving vs. Verification
There is a continuum between verification and automated theorem
proving; as the steps which are automatically verifiable get
larger, a verifier becomes a theorem prover. The Boyer-Moore
system is a good example of something which can be called either
an automated theorem prover or a verifier.
I am primarily interested in FOUNDATIONAL verification, i.e.
the verification of theorems via a sequence of definitions
and lemmas that starting only with a general mathematical foundation
such as set theory, type theory, or the Boyer-Moore computational
logic. Foundational verification forces one to mechanically
verify (or mechanically prove) ALL the steps of a proof.
While I realize that Bledsoe's list was originally intended as a
challenge list for automated theorem provers, I would still like to
know which of the theorems on Bledsoe's list have been verified,
foundationally or otherwise.
David McAllester
∂15-Jun-87 0859 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Constructive Validity
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 08:59:35 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 15 Jun 87 08:55:52-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Mon 15 Jun 87 11:57:10-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 JUN 87 11:26:13 EDT
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1987 11:17 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12310711354.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Constructive Validity
Classical theorems can always be verified in a constructive
logic by proving the double negation of the original
theorem, i.e. rather than prove Phi directly one proves --Phi.
I don't think that the mechanical verification community should try to
dictate mathematical ethics. I think the verification community
should try to understand how mathematicians achieve confidence in
their results. Ideally, I think, a foundational verification system
should be able to verify any argument that the mathematical community
has judged to be sound.
Constructive systems can verifify classical arguments, its just
a little clumbsy.
∂15-Jun-87 0900 JMC
prints
∂15-Jun-87 0914 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU message from Ernie Cohen (forwarded with permission)
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 09:14:20 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (AI.AI.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 15 Jun 87 09:09:05-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Mon 15 Jun 87 11:57:28-EDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 JUN 87 11:26:48 EDT
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1987 10:23 EDT
Message-ID: <DAM.12310701565.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: DAM%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: message from Ernie Cohen (forwarded with permission)
Date: Tuesday, 9 June 1987 16:55-EDT
From: Ernie Cohen <ATP.COHEN at R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
To: DAM
Re: Stone Representation Theorem
Bledsoe's list was (if I remember correctly) a challenge for automatic
theorem provers, rather than proof checkers. I'm pretty sure that machine
checked proofs exist for most of the list.
Regarding challenge problems, I think that to be fair, they should at
least be constructively valid (so that constructive proof checking
systems, which are the dominant form these days, can compete). This
would rule out some of your metamathematical challeges.
Ernie
∂15-Jun-87 0944 SJG reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 15-Jun-87 07:22-PT.]
I guess I must have jumped to the conclusion that all basketball players are black.
Yes, my mother and I concluded that ...
∂15-Jun-87 1339 RA [Reply to message recvd: 14 Jun 87 20:01 Pacific Time]
Flea St. Cafe was closed Mond. I will call them tomorrow morning.
∂15-Jun-87 1415 @RELAY.CS.NET:ito%aoba.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET Elis Loop Tie
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 14:15:19 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id aa02911; 15 Jun 87 16:48 EDT
Received: from utokyo-relay by RELAY.CS.NET id ab11636; 15 Jun 87 16:43 EDT
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.2.9Junet)
id AA29325; Tue, 16 Jun 87 05:23:57 JST
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Tue, 16 Jun 87 00:33:10 jst
Received: by aoba.tohoku.junet (1.1/6.2Junet); Mon, 15 Jun 87 23:18:33 JST
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 87 23:18:33 JST
From: Takayasu ITO <ito%aoba.tohoku.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
Return-Path: <ito@aoba.tohoku.junet>
Message-Id: <8706151418.AA00849@aoba.tohoku.junet>
To: JMC%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU%csnet-relay.csnet%u-tokyo.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET,
masahiko%nttlab.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Elis Loop Tie
Dear John,
Congratulation for being named the first Pigott professor in School of Engineering.
From Masahiko I learned that you lost the string tie with Elis chip and want to
have another when you attend a meeting.
The executive director of OKI in charge of Elis development made me those two
ties for me to express their gratitude for my guidance and advice on the development on Elis VLSI chip.I decided to share one of them to you as a gift from OKI.Since you like Elis and its tie I will send the one (I have) to you as a gift
from me.
NTT and OKI started a new company of selling and developing ELIS on June 1st.
The company's name is NTT Intelligent Technology. I talked with the executive
director of this new company by phone;on this occassion I suggested to him to
have a ceremoy of opening this company and to prepare the string ties with Elis
as the gifts for guests to attend the party.
If they work for this idea I will be able to have another tie with Elis soon.
So,don't hesitate to receive mine.
I have been very happy these days since I have been one of the fathers of Elis
VLSI chip and NTT Intelligent Technology.
Sincerely, Takayasu Ito
∂15-Jun-87 1549 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Summer Project
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 15:49:14 PDT
Date: Mon 15 Jun 87 15:44:55-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Summer Project
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12310792861.7.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I have checked out a few books and will go to Green in the next few days
to find the Reiter paper. I have Chang on Model Theory, Bridge on
"Beginning" Model Theory, Bowen on Model Theory for Modal Logic and
Schuette on Proof Theory. None of them is very quick reading; I have yet
to finish deciding whether any of them is right for what I want. All of
them seem to cover things -------
∂15-Jun-87 1611 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Summer Project cont'd
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 16:11:24 PDT
Date: Mon 15 Jun 87 15:55:42-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Summer Project cont'd
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12310794824.7.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
(Sorry; fingers slipped)
in addition to the central topics, and will require some unnecessary sorting
out and crystallizing concepts, I think.
I have only this week until I am back at work 32 hours/week, so I MUST get a
start on the incomplete I received in Pavel's Connectionist course,
PS289/CS328C, this last quarter. That's essentially getting someone else's C
program properly running and improving it to do reasonably interesting
experiments.
So I will not get to do much except find the Reiter paper until next week, as
far as our project is concerned.
You probably know this, but I have not done "real" research work before. So
the main exposure is whether I can get up to speed on the techniques of doing
so in time. The background I need to amass is also potentially enough to swamp
the project. So I will need your help in carefully circumscribing the effort.
I will be seeing you about that probably early next week.
Thanks for your help.
..Ed
-------
∂15-Jun-87 1651 VAL Organizational semantics
I enjoyed both the paper and your comments. Question: in what sense is pure
Prolog complete (Section 3 of your comments)? I thought its depth-first strategy
makes it hopelessly incomplete.
It seems that Hewitt's "deductive indeterminacy" is related to multiple
minimal models in circ'n. His example with 2 checks (Section 5.5) inspired me
to write these axioms:
1. badcheck(Check1) ∧ badcheck(Check2) ⊃ newbalance=oldbalance
¬badcheck(Check1) ∧ badcheck(Check2) ⊃ newbalance=oldbalance-amount(Check1)
badcheck(Check1) ∧ ¬badcheck(Check2) ⊃ newbalance=oldbalance-amount(Check2)
¬badcheck(Check1) ∧ ¬badcheck(Check2) ⊃ newbalance=oldbalance-amount(Check1)
-amount(Check2)
2. newbalance≥0
3. amount(Check1)=70
amount(Check2)=80
olbalance=100
If we add some arithmetic to it and circumscribe badcheck with newbalance varied
then there will be 2 minimal models, with one bad check in each.
∂15-Jun-87 2006 @SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,@NTT-20:masahiko@nttlab [ito@aoba.tohoku.junet: Elis Loop Tie]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 87 20:06:24 PDT
Received: from NTT-20.NTT.JUNET by SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU with Cafard; Mon, 15 Jun 87 20:02:45 PDT
Received: from nttlab.NTT (NTTLAB.NTT.JUNET.#Internet) by NTT-20.NTT.JUNET with TCP; Tue 16 Jun 87 10:14:06
Received: by nttlab.NTT (4.12/6.2NTT.f) with TCP; Tue, 16 Jun 87 10:15:28 jst
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 87 10:15:28 jst
From: masahiko%nttlab@nttlab (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8706160115.AA03892@nttlab.NTT>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%sumex-aim@ntt-20
Subject: [ito@aoba.tohoku.junet: Elis Loop Tie]
I forward the following message from Prof. Ito to you, just in case
you could not receive it directly from him. If you could not receive
this message from Prof. Ito, please let me know. I will suggest
another address to reach you.
** masahiko **
--------------
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 87 23:18:33 JST
From: ito@aoba.tohoku.junet (Takayasu ITO)
Return-Path: <ito@aoba.tohoku.junet>
To: JMC%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU%csnet-relay.csnet@u-tokyo.junet,
masahiko@nttlab.junet
Subject: Elis Loop Tie
Dear John,
Congratulation for being named the first Pigott professor in School of Engineering.
>From Masahiko I learned that you lost the string tie with Elis chip and want to
have another when you attend a meeting.
The executive director of OKI in charge of Elis development made me those two
ties for me to express their gratitude for my guidance and advice on the development on Elis VLSI chip.I decided to share one of them to you as a gift from OKI.Since you like Elis and its tie I will send the one (I have) to you as a gift
from me.
NTT and OKI started a new company of selling and developing ELIS on June 1st.
The company's name is NTT Intelligent Technology. I talked with the executive
director of this new company by phone;on this occassion I suggested to him to
have a ceremoy of opening this company and to prepare the string ties with Elis
as the gifts for guests to attend the party.
If they work for this idea I will be able to have another tie with Elis soon.
So,don't hesitate to receive mine.
I have been very happy these days since I have been one of the fathers of Elis
VLSI chip and NTT Intelligent Technology.
Sincerely, Takayasu Ito
∂16-Jun-87 0900 JMC
NY and Boston trip
∂16-Jun-87 1008 RA [Reply to message recvd: 14 Jun 87 20:01 Pacific Time]
You have reservation for 3 for noon today at the Flea St. Cafe.
∂16-Jun-87 1027 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Summer Project
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 10:27:04 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Jun 87 10:23:20-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Summer Project
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon 15 Jun 87 18:27:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12310996461.12.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
OK; that's what I thought also. I'm well aware of the weight of the books. If
I used them for anything it would be reference only; if I need background I
don't have, it better not be that much.
I have an appointment Thursay at 12:30 with my manager; otherwise I'm free,
except that I want as many big blocks of time as I can get this week for work
on the incomplete. Midafternoon tomorrow is a suggestion; let me know when is
best for you.
..Ed
-------
∂16-Jun-87 1044 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Gentzen and Shoenfield
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 10:44:31 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Jun 87 10:40:45-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Gentzen and Shoenfield
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12310999633.12.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
No Gentzen in the Math and CompSci card catalog; maybe in the main library.
Shoenfield has three traps in his spelling, and I just found the last one when
I spotted his name in one of the four books I checked out. Haven't looked
under the spelling above (no "c") yet, but he wasn't there by subject in either
Model Theory or Proof Theory in the Math and CompSci cards, nor was Gentzen.
..Ed
-------
∂16-Jun-87 1101 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Memory
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 11:01:41 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Jun 87 10:57:56-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Memory
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12311002761.21.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Mine is notoriously untrustworthy. In particular I now recall I didn't look in
the cards under subjects for Gentzen and Shoenfield; I used my printouts from
FOLIO. I just now went back to FOLIO and found Shoenfield in the Math and
CompSci library; but I'm betting the book isn't there now, because I looked at
that section of the racks when I was in there. I'll reserve it or something.
Sorry to waste your time reading all this; just hate to leave a mistake unfixed.
..Ed
-------
∂16-Jun-87 1204 RA Mr. Reimers
Reimers called re information from MIT. His tel. 3-0651.
∂16-Jun-87 1300 JMC
material for Mann and Texas ta
∂16-Jun-87 1403 RA hotels confirmation
Your reservation at the Hyatt Grand in NY 6/22 - 6/24 and Boston Colonnade
6/24 - 6/27 is confirmed and guaranteed.
∂16-Jun-87 1447 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:RDZ@AI.AI.MIT.EDU MIT Article on Lisp
Received: from REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 14:47:26 PDT
Received: from PIGPEN.AI.MIT.EDU by REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 44923; Tue 16-Jun-87 17:47:11 EDT
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 87 17:47 EDT
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@AI.AI.MIT.EDU>
Subject: MIT Article on Lisp
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
cc: jjw@sail.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <870616174716.0.RDZ@PIGPEN.AI.MIT.EDU>
Do you remember the MIT article about a "Lisp patent" that I showed you?
It turns out that there is another strange thing on that page, besides
their obvious confusion between Lisp and Lisp Machines. The picture
above the article shows some MIT bureaucrat holding a tape that the
caption describes as "A tape of the original Lisp program".
Unfortunately, the tape is definitely 1975 vintage at the earliest.
Ramin
∂16-Jun-87 1656 RA hoter[w76,jmc]
I think that this file is a tex version of the older file.
∂16-Jun-87 1657 RA correction of formaer msg.
The newer file is hoter[w87,jmc]
∂16-Jun-87 1720 OLIPHANT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU re: Mid-Peninsula Free University
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 17:20:51 PDT
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 87 17:19:26 PDT
From: Steve Oliphant <OLIPHANT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Mid-Peninsula Free University
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Mon, 8 Jun 87 18:51:00 PDT
Message-ID: <12311072211.70.OLIPHANT@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Thank you for responding to my question about the Mid-Peninsula Free
University. It would certainly be interesting to read a complete history
of the organization.
Steven Oliphant
-------
∂16-Jun-87 1849 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU incompleteness theorem
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 18:49:23 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 16 Jun 87 18:45:39-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Tue 16 Jun 87 21:47:29-EDT
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU (TCP 1200600013) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 16 Jun 87 21:41:36 EDT
Date: Tue 16 Jun 87 18:34:38-PDT
From: Natarajan Shankar <SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: incompleteness theorem
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <12311085900.10.SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The following is the statement of the incompleteness theorem
that was verified with the Boyer-Moore theorem prover.
"In the theory Z2 (described below) extended with any finite
number of axioms, one can construct a sentence G such that,
if either G or its negation is provable, then both G and
its negation are provable."
Z2 is Shoenfield's first-order logic with Cohen's axioms
for heredetarily finite sets (null set, extensionality,
pairing, union, and induction over finite ordinals),
and a principle of definition for adding new function and
predicate symbols (described in Section 4.6 of Shoenfield).
Remarks
1. The goal of the project was to employ the Boyer-Moore theorem
prover (without modification) to check a traditional proof
of the incompleteness of a formal system which was well-known,
natural, and at least as powerful as Peano Arithmetic.
2. The only "suspicious" aspect of Z2 (as described above)
is the principle of definition for introducing new function
and predicate symbols. A proof of the eliminability of
such definitions is described in Kleene's Metamathematics,
and it is extremely hairy. I feel that the verification
would have been feasible even without the ability to introduce
new function symbols, but would have made the proof tedious
and unpleasant.
3. Two minor modifications were made to the Boyer-Moore prover.
One was to introduce a flag to disable the code which automatically
simplifies a ground term to the constant representing its value.
The other was to strengthen the part of rewriter which simplifies
hypotheses of instances of rewrite rules to recognize tautologies.
4. The details appear in my dissertation which has yet to
be turned into a tech. report. The dissertation also contains
an annotated script of the proof as described to the Boyer-Moore
prover. I can mail out copies of the relevant pages if you send
me a message at SHANKAR@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU.
Shankar
-------
∂16-Jun-87 2110 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU re: Summer Project
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 87 21:10:14 PDT
Date: Tue 16 Jun 87 21:06:26-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Summer Project
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Tue 16 Jun 87 11:13:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12311113533.18.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
2 PM it is. I can't think of anything I can do to prepare except maybe get the
Reiter paper; if you know anything I can do, let me know. ..Ed
-------
∂17-Jun-87 0700 JMC
texas ta
∂17-Jun-87 0958 RA hoter
Which area do you want the hoter.tex to be?
∂17-Jun-87 1309 RA
I am going to the bookstore.
∂17-Jun-87 1453 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Publications Committee Meeting
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jun 87 14:53:05 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 87 14:50:01 PDT
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Publications Committee Meeting
To: engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, aimag@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
bobrow%XEROX.COM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
nilsson%SCORE.STANFORD.EDU@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
ai.woody%MCC.COM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: aaai-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
lerman%KL.SRI.COM@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12311307153.35.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
I'm not as organized this year as in the past and may have not sent
you specific information about the time and location of the publication
committee meeting. It will be Tuesday, July 14 at 7:30 am in the Whideby-Orcas
room in the Westin Hotel.
Claudia
-------
∂17-Jun-87 1534 LES Secretary
Here is Gio's recommendation. She isn't here now, so I asked him to aim
her at you when she shows up.
∂17-Jun-87 1048 WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU Replacement for victoria or Jutta.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 17 Jun 87 10:48:47 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 87 10:47:06 PDT
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Replacement for victoria or Jutta.
To: les@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12311262933.72.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU>
Ariadne, my former secretary, is coming in these pm's to help me
while Caroline in on vacation.
I think she'd make an excellent candidate fot such a slot,
she worked well with students and remains unruffled under stress.
Maybe you, or whoever is working on that would like to talk to her.
She is not comfortable working for Betty however.
Gio
-------
∂17-Jun-87 1642 RA leaving
I am leaving a little earlier today.
∂17-Jun-87 1850 LES LLL Final Report
To: RA, JMC
JMC doesn't remember signing the one-sentence Final Report for Lawrence
Livermore Lab. that we discussed last week. Please be sure that it gets
out.
∂17-Jun-87 2336 SJG Cheeseman paper
Well, I tried to write a mild review, but I think I missed. You want
to have a look at it anyway?
(No sweat if not -- and I'm aware that we have a metaepistemology discussion
pending.)
Matt
∂18-Jun-87 0700 JMC
Dennett
∂18-Jun-87 0800 JMC
kirsh 253-6569
∂18-Jun-87 1102 SJG Cheeseman review
I've left a draft in your box, in case you feel like reading it
before we have lunch tomorrow.
Matt
∂18-Jun-87 1145 RA John Nafeh
Please call John Nafeh, (408) 943 1711
∂18-Jun-87 1153 RA Dan Dennet
Returned your call. He will attend the AI conference at MIT next week and
will be in San Diego until then. He hopes to see you. He will try to reach
you at home.
∂18-Jun-87 1500 JMC
Hoover
∂18-Jun-87 1455 VAL workshop on the foundations of AI
Kirsh and Hewitt invited me to participate, and I'd like to, if we have money
for travel.
∂18-Jun-87 1519 D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU re: Causality
Received: from HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 18 Jun 87 15:19:32 PDT
Date: Thu 18 Jun 87 15:12:38-PDT
From: Kevin Quinn <D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Causality
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sat 6 Jun 87 10:14:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12311573416.302.D.DAEDALUS@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
Thanks so much for all your input. I would really enjoy pursuing this
subject further with you. Unfortunately, right now, I am going to be
out of town for about 6 weeks. When I get back, I should have plenty of
free time so I'll get in touch with you then (~aug14).
Thanks again,
Kevin Quinn
-------
∂19-Jun-87 0059 JUSTESON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU tiling problem
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jun 87 00:59:01 PDT
Date: Fri 19 Jun 87 00:55:11-PDT
From: John S. Justeson <JUSTESON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: tiling problem
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12311679463.7.JUSTESON@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Ilan found an asymptotic solution to the terms in that expansion I gave
you, as O((3 + sqrt(8))↑n). I'll put a new sheet in your box.
-- John
-------
∂19-Jun-87 0657 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:KIRSH@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU papers mailed
Received: from REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jun 87 06:56:54 PDT
Received: from JANIS.AI.MIT.EDU by REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 45296; Fri 19-Jun-87 09:56:05 EDT
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 87 09:56 EDT
From: David Kirsh <KIRSH@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
Subject: papers mailed
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, kirsh%oz.ai.mit.edu@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
cc: Kirsh@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: The message of 18 Jun 87 17:27 EDT from John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Message-ID: <870619095612.8.KIRSH@JANIS.AI.MIT.EDU>
It's printed now, though there are a few random marks preceding the title.
We've whited them out.
-- David
∂19-Jun-87 1110 AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Your fall grad course
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jun 87 11:10:25 PDT
Date: Fri 19 Jun 87 13:09:51-CDT
From: Robert L. Causey <AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject: Your fall grad course
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: cs.brennan@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Message-ID: <12311791362.25.AI.CAUSEY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
I am told that you have requested that the Philosophy Dept. cross-list
your U. T. course on "Epist. Probs. of A. I.". We are happy to do so;
it will = PHL 383 (which covers misc. topics in the Theory of Knowledge).
However, by long tradition, our grad. courses are always small seminars, and
when we cross-list, we put rather severe limits on the Philosophy side of
the enrollments. For now I should follow that practice and limit the
PHL 383 registrations to 6. This can be adjusted upward later if appropriate.
We all look forward to your visit here,
Bob Causey
Chairman, Dept. of Philosophy
Assoc. Dir, U. T. A. I. Lab
-------
∂19-Jun-87 1134 SJG
I'm starved! Any chance of leaving a little early?
∂19-Jun-87 1413 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Rowland Glowinski
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jun 87 14:13:43 PDT
Date: Fri 19 Jun 87 14:05:55-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Rowland Glowinski
To: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, RWF@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
Guibas@decwrl.dec.com, JLH@Sonoma.Stanford.EDU, DEK@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, EJM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12311823412.14.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I apologize for being so tardy in getting this message out to you.
At the senior faculty meeting on Tuesday, June 9, the eight faculty present
voted to recommend Roland Glowinski as a Professor in CSD and ME as part of
the AM/SC program. I will appreciate receiving your vote just as soon as
possible. I have the letters, etc., in my office if you wish to see them.
Thanks for your speedy response.
Betty
-------
∂19-Jun-87 1415 danny@Think.COM Hopper award
Received: from THINK.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 19 Jun 87 14:15:16 PDT
Received: from valentine by Think.COM via CHAOS; Fri, 19 Jun 87 17:17:38 EDT
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 87 17:15 EDT
From: Danny Hillis <danny@Think.COM>
Subject: Hopper award
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, hillis@think.com
Cc: irene@Think.COM
In-Reply-To: <8706161857.AA12656@Think.COM>
Message-Id: <870619171534.8.DANNY@VALENTINE.THINK.COM>
Thank you, I am flattered. (Of course I still hope most of my good deeds are yet
to come.) Here is a short biography:
Biography of W. Daniel Hillis
Danny Hillis was born on September 25, 1956 in Baltimore, Maryland. He
spent his childhood in Europe, Central Africa, Asia and southern United
States. He entered the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as an
undergraduate in 1974. As an undergraduate, Danny did research with
Seymour Papert at the M.I.T. Logo Group where he designed and
constructed a computer terminal for preliterate children. He also
worked part-time as a toy designer for the Milton-Bradley Corporation.
In 1977 he started a software company called Terapin Incorporated that
currently develops and markets computer software and curriculum
materials for elementary schools.
In 1978 he received his Bachelor's degree from M.I.T. in the field of
Mathematics. He was awarded a Fanny and John Hertz Foundation
Fellowship and began his graduate studies at the M.I.T. Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory. His Master's work, supervised by Marvin Minsky,
was in the area of robotics. It included the development of tendon
control manipulators, a touch sensitive robot skin(1)
and a program for tactile recognition. He also designed a computer for playing
tic-tac-toe entirely of tinker toys, which is currently in the Boston
Computer Museum. His Master's degree on ``Active Touch Sensory'' was
awarded in 1981.
During this period Danny became interested in the physical limitation of
computation,(2) and the possibility of constructing highly parallel
computers.(3) This work culminated in 1985 with the design of the
parallel computer called the Connection Machine which was the topic of
his Ph.D. thesis for which Hillis won a 1985 Distinguished Award from
the Association for Computing Machinery and the Hertz Foundation Thesis
Award. A book based on the thesis was published by the M.I.T.
Press.(4)
In June of 1984 Danny helped found a company, Thinking Machines
Corporation, which produces the Connection Machine as a commercial
product. At the company Hillis has concentrated his research on methods
of parallel programming,(5,6,7) applications of parallel
computers,(8,9,10) and computer architecture.(11,12,13) His current
research is on parallel learning algorithms.
Notes
1. A High resolution Imaging Touch Sensor, W. D. Hillis, International
Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer 1982, pp. 33-44.}
2. New Computer Architectures and Their Relationship to Physics or Why
Computer Science is No Good, W. D. Hillis, International Journal of
Theoretical Physics, Vol. 21, Nos. 3/4, 1982.
3. The Connection Machine (Computer Architecture for the New Wave), W.
D. Hillis, M.I.T. A.I. Lab Memo 646, September 1981.
4. The Connection Machine, W. D. Hillis, M.I.T.
Press, 1985.
5. Data Parallel Algorithms, W. D. Hillis and G. Steele Jr., Communications
of the ACM, Vol. 29, No. 12, December 1986, pp. 1170-1183.
6. Connection Machine Lisp: Fine Grained Parallel Symbolic Processing,
G. Steele, Jr. and W. D. Hillis, in Proc. 1986 ACM Symposium on Lisp and
Functional Programming, Cambridge, MA, August 1986.
7. Programming a Highly Parallel Computer, Nature, Vol. 326, No. 6108,
March 1987, pp. 27-30.
8. Parallel Computers for A.I. Databases, W. D. Hillis
in On Knowledge Based Management Systems Integrating Artificial
Intelligence and Database Technologies, ed. by M. L. Brodie and
Mylopoulos, Springer-Verlag, 1986.
9. Turbulence in Fluid Dynamics, W. D. Hillis, Nature, Vol. 325,
No. 6102, January 22-28, 1987, pp. 299-300.
10. The Connection Machine, W. D. Hillis, Scientific American,
Vol. 256, No. 6, June 1987, pp. 108-115.
11. New Computer Architectures: A Survey, W. D. Hillis in On Knowledge
Based Management Systems Integrating Artificial Intelligence and
Database Technologies, ed. by M. L. Brodie and Mylopoulous,
Springer-Verlag, 1986.
12. Why Parallel Processing Is Inevitable, W. D. Hillis in
Supercomputers: A Key to U.S. Scientific, Technological, and Industrial
Preeminence, Praeger Publishing Co., 1986.
13. Balancing a Design, W. D. Hillis, IEEE Spectrum, Vol. 24, No. 5, May
1987, p. 38.
∂19-Jun-87 1911 RWF re: certificates of respectability
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from JMC rcvd 19-Jun-87 14:44-PT.]
I see no difficulty in principle with certificates of trustworthiness.
However, my bank has quietly begun to discourage check guarantee cards,which
exemplify the principle. They are no longer advertized, and there is a
substantial fee. I found when I had one that a check guarantee card was
in practice taken just as one more ID card, even though the bank guaranteed
to honor all checks written on it.
I can see sme value in making such a certificate highly visible, like a badge.
It would tend to be reassuring in contacts with strangers in scary circumstances.
Naturally, it only helps if it is VERY hard to counterfeit. And, of course,
if it doesn't identify the carrier as a pigeon. For example, a $100 bill
pinned to my collar would distinguish me from the typical mugger, but
would also distinguish me TO the mugger.
∂21-Jun-87 2032 GOLDBERG@CSLI.Stanford.EDU Re: Tom Hayden
Received: from CSLI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Jun 87 20:32:28 PDT
Date: Sun 21 Jun 87 20:32:23-PDT
From: Jeffrey Goldberg <GOLDBERG@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tom Hayden
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Sun 21 Jun 87 19:36:00-PDT
Phone: (415) 326-8301
Message-ID: <12312418054.11.GOLDBERG@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Maybe the quote is as accurate as the location. Maybe not, maybe he
really did cancel a SJSU speech as well as the whole SJCC mess. The SJCC
mess was heavily reported in the local press and I would be surprised if
something went on at SJSU without us knowing about it.
But suppose that the quote is accurate. Was the quote out of context?
Who knows. I have heard the former mayor of Santa Cruz when asked about
police brutality charges running around the city and specifically ask
what he though about the officers on the force say, "They are like people
everywhere: One third are great, one third are bums, and one third will go
which ever way the wind blows."
The headline in the LA times the next day was:
Santa Cruz Mayor calls 1/3 police "Bums"
The article did not contain the entire quote.
(I note the the entire quote is not exactly the kind of thing one would hope
the hear from a politician who generally tries to sound "populist".)
If Hayden actually feels that the students demand to choose a speaker who
is not offensive to them (for what ever reason) demonstrates that that they
have learned nothing of freedom, then Tom Hayden has his head up his ass.
However, I do not trust the mainstream press to quote radical politicians
accurately. (Either Radical left or Radical right.) Once someone is
labelled radical the press likes to bolster the image toward radicalism.
-jeff goldberg
-------
∂21-Jun-87 2106 CLT
please push the button on the dishwasher
∂21-Jun-87 2157 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 21 Jun 87 21:57:03 PDT
Date: Sun 21 Jun 87 21:53:01-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Inverse Method
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12312432735.11.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I have spent about 1.5 hours scanning the paper. It looks quite interesting.
I noticed a half dozen or so typos of the sort one can find without fully
understanding the logic, and I am marking them on the second scan.
I have two classes Wednesday, 10:00-11:50 and 4:15-5:30. May I suggest meeting
at 3:30 to discuss the possibilities? By that time I should have understood
the paper in sufficient detail to talk intelligently.
..Ed
-------
∂22-Jun-87 0701 AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM Re: reservations
Received: from MCC.COM by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Jun 87 07:01:49 PDT
Date: Mon 22 Jun 87 09:00:02-CDT
From: Ellie Huck <AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM>
Subject: Re: reservations
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Fri 19 Jun 87 14:08:00-CDT
Message-ID: <12312532314.81.AI.ELLIE@MCC.COM>
Dr. McCarthy -- you are reserved at the Brookhollow (Hawthorne) as
usual -- the confirmation # is: A173T...direct billed to MCC.
Ellie Huck
-------
∂22-Jun-87 0941 RPG Proposal
John, I'd like to discuss an interesting proposal with you confidentially.
The reason for confidentiality is that I have not made a decision yet
to proceed with the proposal, and knowledge of it by the outside world
before I can understand the problems would be harmful to Lucid.
I believe that in 6 months to 1 year, the nature of Lucid will be such that
there is no need for either me or the 20 best people at Lucid to be at Lucid
any more. The nature of the business will be for minimal improvements to the
product along with the addition of simple products.
The 20 best people include a number of PhD's (mostly in mathematics) and
many outstanding hackers. I am interested in seeing whether you would have
any interest in starting a permanent institute with me at Stanford for
the study of symbolic computation/advanced programming languages/advanced
computing environments.
Some of the projects I have in mind are a new Lisp-like language (which
Steele, Clinger, and I have started on), an innovative operating system
(in which users can easily write programs whose components are other
programs - I can go into a lot of detail) in which EBOS is a trivial
exercise, parallel languages, and object-oriented systems. I believe that
I can get some DARPA support and industrial patronage.
One difference between this and other possible groups is that I can bring
to bear enough horsepower to produce nearly commercial quality prototypes.
I expect to be able to easily induce visitors from Xerox, Tektronix, HP,
TI, Symbolics, and Xerox.
My questions are:
1. Are you interested?
2. How can I find out whether Stanford is interested?
3. How can I proceed in secrecy as long as possible?
4. Would you want to extend the charter to include your other interests?
5. Do you think there is a better way to do this?
My goal is to find a less stressful setting in which to pursue research
using the excellent group I have put together. I want to have a relatively
permanent situation that enables me to live comfortably without having to
don a mantle of ugly business behavior and without having to referee spats
all day.
We can either converse or you can mail to rpg-q (a private mailbox).
-rpg-
∂22-Jun-87 1106 RA John Nafeh
In case you log in while you are away, John Nafeh would like you to call
him (408) 943 1711.
∂22-Jun-87 1553 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU Logic in Leningrad
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 22 Jun 87 15:53:41 PDT
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU (MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 22 Jun 87 15:48:56-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU with Chaos/SMTP; Mon 22 Jun 87 18:47:22-EDT
Received: from SAIL.STANFORD.EDU (TCP 1200000013) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 22 Jun 87 18:01:15 EDT
Date: 22 Jun 87 1500 PDT
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Logic in Leningrad
To: theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Dr. Vladik Kreynovich has sent me his reviews of several talks
given recently at his logic seminar in Leningrad, and promised to keep
me informed on new developments in the logic community there. I am
compiling a mailing list for the people who would like to receive copies
of his reviews. If you want to be included, please send me a message
(VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU). Please tell your friends who may be interested.
The titles of Kreynovich's reviews available at this time are:
A. B. Volpert, Disciplines in quasiparallel systems; A. A. Shalyto, The
realization of Boolean functions and Boolean formulas and its applications
to design; V. Neyman, Deduction search in Horn predicate calculus;
M. I. Zakharevich, A survey of the traditional Indian logic Navya-Nyaya and
possible applications of its ideas to modern expert systems; E. Ya. Dantsin,
The analysis of an algorithm for the satisfiability problem in propositional
logic.
Vladimir Lifschitz
∂22-Jun-87 1605 JJW SYMPAL report 1
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
I got this message and the one to follow from Shimon Cohen. If you are
interested in this work, please send him a message to be added to his list.
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 87 11:47:19 +0300
From: Shimon Cohen <cohen%TAURUS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Message-Id: <8706210847.AA13469@taurus>
To: jjw@sail.stanford.edu, masinter.pa@xerox.com, raim.pasa@xerox.com
Subject: SYMPAL report 1
Hello,
Included is a status report describing the SYMPAL project in the Computer
Science Dpet. in the Tel-Aviv University. If you think others
might be interested to get on the distribution list then please let me know.
If you feel it does not interest you then ALSO please let me know ...
The purpose of the SYMPAL project is to develop a Parallel Symbolic System.
SYMPAL (SYMbolic PArallel Langauge) is designed to be a practical system
that is efficient and easy to write/read/use.
SYMPAL includes:
* Language - based on Common LISP + extensions
Object Oriented Programming
* Interpreter - takes forms written in SYMPAL and execute them.
* Run-time system - user interface, debugger, tracing
* Real-time - support realtime programs
* Compiler - portable optimizing compiler
* Knowledge base -
CURRENTLY:
* 1st version of the language is defined
* The interpreter is working (on the VAX, Lisp Machine)
* 1st version of the compiler is working
* Interpreted code can call compiled code AND VICE VERSA !!!!
* The compiler is written in SYMPAL and can be either:
* run on the interpreter
* compile itself and run compiled
* run on regular LISP system
Shimon Cohen
Computer Science Dept.
Tel-Aviv University
∂22-Jun-87 1606 JJW SYMPAL report 2
To: Qlisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 87 11:47:41 +0300
From: Shimon Cohen <cohen%TAURUS.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Message-Id: <8706210847.AA13481@taurus>
To: jjw@sail.stanford.edu, masinter.pa@xerox.com, raim.pasa@xerox.com
Subject: SYMPAL report no. 2
SYMPAL report 2 June 1987
Hello,
Included is the 2nd status report describing the SYMPAL project.
If you think others might be interested to get on the distribution list
then please let me know. If you feel it does not interest you then
ALSO please let me know ...
The purpose of the SYMPAL project is to develop a Parallel Symbolic System.
SYMPAL (SYMbolic PArallel Language) is designed to be a practical system
that is efficient and easy to write/read/use.
CURRENTLY:
* 1st version of the compiler is working.
The design of the 2nd version is on its way, we consider some
novel methods for optimization, these techniques are based on the
"smart" (we hope so ...) definition of the language as well as
the detailed description of the primitive functions and their normal
and parallel behaviour. By normal we mean the type of arguments
and result they take/return, and by parallel we mean the way they suspend
on values and/or returned "cooked" values. Coding of the 2nd version is
scheduled to start within 2-3 weeks.
* The complicated LOOP macro that support "procedural style" of
programming is operational. LOOP includes: FOR, WHILE, UNTIL
INITIALLY, FINALLY, COLLECT, MAXIMIZE, MINIMIZE, COUNT, WITH ...
The LOOP is expanded into the basic SYMPAL language and therefor will
be easily "consumed" by the compiler.
* The Object Oriented part of SYMPAL is now working. We have Flavors
with multiple-inheritance and methods. messages are sent to objects
in parallel and are Qed if another message is running. OOP is tailored
to run efficiently, meaning: we will have to tailor the compiler
to compile flavors and methods. Most of the work is already done
because the internal tables and method transformations were already made.
Shimon Cohen
Yariv Aridor
Gidi Beeri
Irit Danieli
Computer Science Dept.
Tel-Aviv University
∂22-Jun-87 2123 CLT Real Estate Lady
Vicki Milner
Associated Properites of Austin
Leasing and property management
6901 Lamar suite 138
Austin TX 78752
phones: (512)-
ofc: 467-1743
car: 480-7692
pager: 482-6493 (when ringing stops you have 10 (30?) seconds to
give your name and number where she can return the call)
home: 250-9200
∂23-Jun-87 1255 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu Lunch
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Jun 87 12:55:24 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Tue, 23 Jun 87 12:53:24 PDT
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Tue, 23 Jun 87 12:54:27 PDT
Date: 23 Jun 87 12:53 PST
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Lunch
Date: 23 June 1987, 12:52:19 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: Lunch
How about lunch at the faculty club tomorrow or Friday.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂23-Jun-87 1420 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU account end
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 23 Jun 87 14:20:11 PDT
Date: Tue 23 Jun 87 14:16:11-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: account end
To: clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12312873858.27.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Carolyn, One of Prof. McCarthy's NSF accounts (2-DMA451) ends
6/30/87. Shankar's salary is the only salary being charged there, and
this leaves a projected overdraft of $8831 (total with staff benefits and
indirct costs included) at the end of June. Do you have plans for using
up this money, *or* would you like me to charge several (approximately 4,
if he has this many) of John's research assistants to this account for
the month June. We don't want to have any money left in the account when
it ends.
-Sharon Bergman
-------
∂24-Jun-87 1940 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Project
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 24 Jun 87 19:40:47 PDT
Date: Wed 24 Jun 87 19:36:36-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Project
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12313194331.10.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
When we talk on Monday I will be suggesting we put the project officially on
CS399 status. Keeps me honest, and could help towards the MS specialization if
I drop the number of units on the CS328C incomplete in order to finish the
project. Is there any problem with that?
..Ed
-------
∂25-Jun-87 1322 BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU SOE Faculty Directory
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Jun 87 13:21:32 PDT
Date: Thu 25 Jun 87 10:34:08-PDT
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: SOE Faculty Directory
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 723-4776
Message-ID: <12313357723.19.BERG@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The School of Engineering plans to publish an updated version
of the Faculty Directory. Included with each faculty listing
will be a brief (50 word) profile of the work s/he is engaged
in. The description should be comprehensible to the lay reader.
I hope that some editing of the information you provided for
the departmental brochure will serve the needs for this
new publication. I am including the text which we are using in
the brochure. Please cut and revise so that the text
meets the specified 50 word length. Please mail
your response to me no later than 8 July.
If I do not receive a revised text, I will submit the unchanged
copy. It will be edited and cut by the SOE's publications staff.
I suspect (and fear) that if the text is edited by a non-computer
scientist, some of the meaning and context will be altered. I'd
appreciate your cooperation.
My thanks for your kind attention to this request.
Kathy
-------------
John McCarthy, Charles M. Pigott Professor of Engineering, Professor
of Computer Science and (by courtesy) Electrical Engineering,
Ph.D. Princeton, 1951.
Research Interests: Artificial intelligence, computing with
symbolic expressions, time sharing, formalizing common sense, non-monotonic
logic.
One of the founders of artificial intelligence research, Professor
McCarthy invented
LISP, the programming language most used in AI research and also
first proposed the general purpose time-sharing mode of using computers.
The emphasis of his AI research has been in identifying the common
sense rules that determine the consequences of actions and other events,
the expression of such rules and other common sense information as
sentences in logical languages in the data bases of artificial intelligent
programs. A past president of AAAI,
Professor McCarthy received the First IJCAI Research Excellence Award in 1985.
-------
∂25-Jun-87 1356 RQ.AAA@forsythe.stanford.edu v
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Jun 87 13:56:38 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Thu, 25 Jun 87 13:55:27 PDT
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 13:56:31 PDT
From: Annelise Anderson <RQ.AAA@forsythe.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: v
∂25-Jun-87 1403 RQ.AAA@forsythe.stanford.edu
Received: from LINDY.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 25 Jun 87 14:03:29 PDT
Received: by lindy.stanford.edu; Thu, 25 Jun 87 14:02:13 PDT
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 14:03:21 PDT
From: Annelise Anderson <RQ.AAA@forsythe.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Nominee
Name: Professor John McCarthy
Department of Computer Sciences
Building 460 Room 356
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
Telephone: 415-723-4430
Nominator
Name: Annelise Anderson
Member, National Science Board
Address: The Hoover Institution
Stanford, California 94305
Telephone: 415-723-3139
Biographical Data
Year and Place of Birth: September 4, 1927, Boston,
Massachusetts
Education: Major Disciplines
B.S. (Mathematics) California Mathematics
Institute of Technology, 1948 Computer Science
Ph.D. (Mathematics) Princeton Artificial
Intelligence
University, 1951
Positions Held:
Procter Fellow, Princeton University, 1950-51; Higgins Research
Instructor in Mathematics, Princeton University, 1951-53; Acting
Assistant Professor of Mathematics, Stanford University,
September
1953 - January 1955; Assistant Professor of Mathematics,
Dartmouth College, February 1955 - June 1958; Assistant
Professor of Communication Science, M.I.T., 1958 - 1961;
Associate Professor of Communication Science, M.I.T., 1961 -
1962; Professor of Computer Science, Stanford University, 1962 -
present, Director, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Stanford
University, 1965 - 1980.
Narrative Statement:
Professor John McCarthy has had an extraordinary impact on the
fields of mathematics and computer sciences, especially the
field of artificial intelligence. In fact he gave the field of
artificial intelligence its name, coining the term in connection
with the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial
Intelligence held in the summer of 1956. McCarthy organized
this seminar, the first occasion that brought together most of
the individuals thinking about how to make computers behave
intelligently.
Building on concepts embodied in other computer languages,
McCarthy's efforts to develop an algebraic programming language
for computation with symbolic expressions led in 1958 to the
development of LISP, the programming language that is even today
the most fundamental tool of those working in the field of
artificial intelligence.
McCarthy based LISP on his mathematical theory of computation,
in itself another substantial contribution to the field of
computer sciences. This theory provides the basis for one of
two current approaches to proving computer programs correct.
McCarthy also contributed to another fundamental conceptual
breakthrough in computer science, one that led to substantial
developments in the way we use computers: that of time-sharing.
McCarthy's initial proposals were further developed by others
and contributed to the time-sharing systems developed for the
IBM 7090 and, under his direction, for the DEC PDP-1.
McCarthy's greatest scientific contribution is the "reasoning
program" approach to artificial intelligence pioneered in his
1960 paper on this subject, in which facts and problems are
presented as sentences of mathematical logic. McCarthy is today
the leader in the active field of common sense reasoning. His
paper on circumscription provides artificial intelligence with a
rigorous foundation for non-monotonic reasoning.
Other Comments:
In summary, John McCarthy has made more fundamental
contributions to the fields of computer science and artificial
intelligence than any person living today.
Proposed Citation:
For fundamental contributions to computer science and artificial
intelligence, including the development of the LISP programming
language, the mathematical theory of computation, the concept
and development of time-sharing, and the naming and thus
definition of the field of artificial intelligence itself.
References:
Professor John Boyer
Institute of Computing Sciences
Building 2100
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712
Telephone: 512-471-1901
Mr. C. Gordon Bell
Assistant Director
Computer & Information Science Engineering
1800 "G" Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20550
Telephone: 202-357-7936
Professor Raymond Reider
Toronto
Professor Woodrow Bledsoe
MCC
3500 West Balcones Center Drive
Austin, Texas 78759
Telephone: 512-338-3560
----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
Note to John McCarthy and RA:
This should be put in the mail Monday morning. Here's what I
need from you:
1) JMC needs to read and make any changes in the substance
necessary for accuracy or any other reason. I.e., narrative
statement, other comments, proposed citation.
2) Also JMC needs to pick the three references. The three are
based on our earlier conversation plus Boyer, since Boyer wrote
the document Danzig sent me on which most of this is based. The
three people will be receiving a letter asking them to send a
supporting letter; I would think this request would include a
copy of the basic nominating papers (as above). In this regard
we have been unable to track down Raymond Reider of Toronto.
3) We have not yet done the section on pertinent contributions
and publications, limited to 20. Boyer's piece references 14
publications by JMC to which I have added a few from the longer
list, since 20 are permitted. They will be rearranged by date,
but here is an abbreviated listing of them to which JMC should
add or subtract as he sees fit:
With Cartright, Recursive Programs, Stanford, 1979
with Gabrield, Queue-based...Lisp, 1984.
Programs with Common Sense, 1959.
Lisp Manual, 1960.
"Recursive Functions...", 1960
Computer Programs for checking mathematical proofs, symposium,
Providence, 1962
Towards a Mathamtical Sci. of computation, 1962
Time-sharing in MIT Press book, 1962
Basis for a Math. Theory of Computation, Netherlands book, 1963
LISP Manual, MIT, 1965
Programs with Common Sense, in Minsky, MIT, 1968.
with Hayes, Philosophical Problems, 1969.
Epistemological Problems of AI, Conf. proceedings, 1977.
History of LISP, 1978
Circumscription, AI, 1980
Also (my choices--there may be better ones):
Mechanical Servants, Britannica Yearbook
Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines, 1979
AI Needs More Fundamental Research, AI Mag, 1983
Application of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense
Knowledge, 1984 AAAI Confersence (is this now published? If so
please give ref..)
That's 19 so something could be added--perhaps something recent.
I will check my electronic mail Friday and early Monday to make
final changes. Thanks very much.
Annelise Anderson
∂26-Jun-87 0811 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: cat recipe
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jun 87 08:11:11 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Jun 87 08:06:57-PDT
From: Taleen Marashian <TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: cat recipe
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>" of Thu 11 Jun 87 15:49:00-PDT
Message-ID: <12313593074.16.TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I like your reply to Lyn Bowman (re. recipe). It was great.
Taleen
-------
∂26-Jun-87 0822 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU [PUCCI@A.ISI.EDU: Spread the good news!]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jun 87 08:22:14 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Jun 87 08:17:55-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [PUCCI@A.ISI.EDU: Spread the good news!]
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, CLT@Sail.Stanford.EDU, LES@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
Cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, Bergman@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12313595070.19.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
For your information. - Betty
---------------
Return-Path: <PUCCI@A.ISI.EDU>
Received: from A.ISI.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 26 Jun 87 05:37:19-PDT
Date: 26 Jun 1987 08:40:43 EDT
From: PUCCI@A.ISI.EDU
Subject: Spread the good news!
To: BScott@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
cc: Pucci@A.ISI.EDU
Betty,
I thought I'd start your weekend on the right foot by telling you
that tasks 13, McCarthy's task for $241,302, and 14, Cheriton's task for
$376,360will be signed today.
John
P.S. - What is the status of the follow on contract?
-------
-------
∂26-Jun-87 1332 SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU [Mike Gordon <mjcg%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>: NSF Proposal]
Received: from SCORE.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 26 Jun 87 13:32:43 PDT
Date: Fri 26 Jun 87 13:28:27-PDT
From: Natarajan Shankar <SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: [Mike Gordon <mjcg%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>: NSF Proposal]
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12313651600.23.SHANKAR@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Mike Gordon's message below is the first response I have on the
proposal.
Shankar
---------------
Return-Path: <mjcg%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Received: from Cs.Ucl.AC.UK by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 25 Jun 87 13:29:05-PDT
Received: from computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk by nss.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
via Janet with NIFTP id aa01664; 25 Jun 87 21:27 BST
Received: from cl.cam.ac.uk by Jenny.CL.Cam.AC.UK
with SMTP with TCP/IP over Ethernet id a014105;
25 Jun 87 21:22 BST
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 87 20:55:58 BST
From: Mike Gordon <mjcg%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
To: Natarajan Shankar <SHANKAR@score.stanford.edu>
Subject: NSF Proposal
Message-Id: <mjcg.87175.300.2400@UK.AC.Cam.CL.Steve>
Hi,
Thanks for the NSF proposal. It looks excellent to me. In fact it is quite
similar to a proposal we have submitted to SERC. I will try and remember to
send you a copy next time I'm in the office (this message is from my home
terminal).
Whilst reading your proposal I remembered the stuff I did on "Lisp induction"
when I too was an RA for McCarthy. This kind of induction was intuitively
induction on the `length of computation', but by proving an equivalence
between an operational and denotational semantics of Lisp, I was able to show
it sound. If this sounds interesting, its all in "Operational Reasoning and
Denotational Semantics", a Stanford report of around 1975.
Have you looked at Mike Fourman's logic in the section on the Logic of Topoi
in the Handbook of Mathematical Logic? This is a higher-order free logic (i.e.
it allows non-denoting terms and has a definedness predicate). It is rather
elegant and is complete (for topos semantics). Mike Fourman is now Professor
of Microelectronics at Brunel University!
I'll send a copy of our latest paper on HOL. Some of the details (e.g. the
form of polymorhism used) might interest you or the EKL guys. Thierry Coquand
has shown that apparently minor strengthenings of the type system allow the
Burali-Forte paradox to be expressed. Thus HOL seems to have about the
strongest kind of polymorphism that is consistent.
There is a lot of interest here right now on how best to formulate mathematics
in type theory. Just today there was a seminar by Elsa Gunter on (among other
things) how to do group theory. Thierry has good ideas in this area too.
Cheers,
Mike
-------
∂29-Jun-87 0304 TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU connectionist models summer school
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 87 03:04:12 PDT
Received: ID <TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Mon 29 Jun 87 06:03:49-EDT
Date: Mon 29 Jun 87 06:03:48-EDT
From: Dave.Touretzky@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: connectionist models summer school
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12314324318.19.TOURETZKY@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
Last year Geoff Hinton, Terry Sejnowski and I organized a nine day
Connectionist Models Summer School at CMU. We are seeking funds to hold
another one in 1988. The original summer school, which cost a little under
$30,000, was sponsored by a grant from the Sloan Foundation. For the next one
we are hoping to find three sponsors willing to share the expense. We already
have a tentative commitment from Lee Giles at AFOSR for $10,000.
The first summer school brought together 40 students, including 5 from Europe,
and sixteen tutors and guest lecturers. We received nearly 150 applications
for the available places. The increasing interest in connectionism, the
continuing shortage of researchers in this area, and the enthusiasm of the
first set of attendees lead us to believe that it ought to be repeated.
The primary goal of the summer school is to nurture and train new
connectionists, mainly graduate students, but also junior faculty members. The
people we seek have already begun working in the area, but are isolated and
would thus benefit from an intensive exposure to some of the leaders of the
field. The faculty of the first summer school consisted of Dana Ballard and
Jerry Feldman from Rochester, David Rumelhart and Pat Churchland from UCSD,
Paul Smolensky from UC Boulder, Andy Barto from UMass, Christof Koch from MIT,
Jim Anderson from Brown, David Tank from AT&T Bell Laboratories, Robert Hummel
from NYU, David Willshaw from the Medical Research Council (Edinburgh), Scott
Fahlman and Jay McClelland from CMU, plus Hinton, Sejnowski, and me. The
program was divided between tutorial lectures in the morning and small
discussion groups in the afternoon, each led by a faculty member. There was
also time set aside for demos in the evenings, and several attendees used our
local computing facilities to conduct research.
Would AAAI be interested in co-sponsoring the 1988 summer school? I spoke with
Raj and Claudia about it, and they suggested that funding might be arranged
through the workshop program you administer. If you would agree to contribute
$10,000, I would have no trouble raising the remainder. Please let me know
what you think.
Thanks, -- Dave
-------
∂29-Jun-87 1006 manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu 87-88 parking permit
Received: from SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 87 10:05:59 PDT
Received: by sally.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA07640; Mon, 29 Jun 87 10:43:56 CDT
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 87 10:34:23 CDT
From: manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (Elizabeth D. Manning)
Posted-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 87 10:34:23 CDT
Message-Id: <8706291534.AA02340@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu>
Received: by ratliff.cs.utexas.edu (5.54/5.51)
id AA02340; Mon, 29 Jun 87 10:34:23 CDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: 87-88 parking permit
Cc: manning@ratliff.cs.utexas.edu
Dr. McCarthy:
In order to assure for you on-campus parking for the coming year, we need from you the following information:
--license plate # and state for any vehicle (up to two) to have permit
--Make (yearP and style (sedan, wagon, jeep, pick-up, etc.) for each
(up to two) vehicle
--Owner's name and relation to applicant for each vehicle
Virtually the only way to park near campus is to have one of these permits. The fee for the year is $58.00, and you can be refunded for the portion of the year that you are not here. This can be paid by check to The University d can be sent to this
department in care of Elizabeth Manning. Thank you.
-- Laura Bryan
(for Elizabeth Manning)
He has a tragic vision of life - as in a cigarette ad. - jmc 1987
Lawyers are replacing rats in psychological experiments.
1. They are more numerous.
2. You don't get so attached to them.
3. There are some things you just can't get a rat to do.
also newspapermen and tv personalities
Dan Dennett 1987.
-------
∂29-Jun-87 1514 RA hotel Cosmos
Franklin called to let you know that he got confirmation for 9 nights at
hotel Cosmos; it includes arrival and departure transportation and daily
to and from transportation to the congress. This cannot be charged to a
credit card so you need to send him a check for $1446. He is sending me
the forms for your visa. He can give it to a visa service who will take
care of it for you, they charge $16.50 plus whatever expenses.
∂29-Jun-87 1754 BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU Inverse Method
Received: from SUSHI.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 87 17:54:30 PDT
Date: Mon 29 Jun 87 17:50:02-PDT
From: Ed Brink <brink@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Inverse Method
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12314485651.19.BRINK@Sushi.Stanford.EDU>
I've read Vladimir's paper and I think I could code up something in LISP to
model the method, especially if I were to imbed it in an existing resolution
theorem prover or the like. We decided to do that, with a view to trying some
fair sized examples and some different control strategies. It's not by any
means a trivial piece of work, but it looks doable.
So I have a number of procedural questions:
1) I assume I should register for CS 399 for this, maybe about 3 units; you are
a better judge of that than I.
2) I'm asking around for machines and programs. I think MRS is probably the
best bet, if only because it's a relatively known quantity to me. I'm
approaching Mike Genesereth, for example, about the Explorers he has at the
Ginzton Trailers for 225A. I'm also asking Mark Stickel (new name to me) for
suggestions, and Joe Weening for general practical wisdom in the area. Or
should I use some mainframe LISP, e.g., the one on SAIL, instead of a LISP
machine? I wouldn't think so unless there was existing code I could work from
to save time. Or do you have a better idea?
3) I assume you are still going to use this as a basis to judge what to write
in your letter to accompany my PhD application. If there is anything in
particular you need to see as output, I'd be grateful to know it now! I intend
to produce code, example runs, and a writeup of both, of the former for use by
anyone who wants to run more experiments and of the latter as a more formal
examination of the results.
I need to know whatever you can tell me as soon as possible so I can get
started; this could take a while, and we only have a few months.
Thanks for everything.
..Ed
-------
∂30-Jun-87 1011 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Jun-87 08:54-PT.]
I got hotel confirmation too.
∂01-Jul-87 0001 JMC Expired plan
Your plan has just expired. You might want to make a new one.
Here is the text of the old plan:
I will be away till July 1. I will check MAIL occasionally, however. I
can be reached by telephone evenings as follows. June 22-23 Hyatt Grand
Hotel, NYC. June 23-26 M.I.T. Endicott House 617 326-5151 June 27
Colonnade Hotel, Boston, June 28 29, Brookhollow Hotel, Austin, TX.