perm filename S89.IN[LET,JMC] blob
sn#874967 filedate 1989-07-03 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00582 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00071 00002 ∂01-Apr-89 1741 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU [pehoushe: AFLB talk abstract]
C00074 00003 ∂01-Apr-89 1909 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM tanflubulence
C00077 00004 ∂02-Apr-89 2003 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com new new-qlisp
C00079 00005 ∂03-Apr-89 0910 MPS Re: Meeting with John McCarthy
C00081 00006 ∂03-Apr-89 1221 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil BAA
C00083 00007 ∂03-Apr-89 1732 @Score.Stanford.EDU:tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Facilities Committee Meeting
C00085 00008 ∂05-Apr-89 0848 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Theory Faculty Candidates
C00087 00009 ∂05-Apr-89 1149 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Eva Tardos vote
C00089 00010 ∂05-Apr-89 1329 jle@Orange.stanford.edu Re: Theory Faculty Candidates
C00091 00011 ∂05-Apr-89 1609 pullen@vax.darpa.mil BAA 88-05 Extended
C00093 00012 ∂06-Apr-89 1146 gerlach@sierra.STANFORD.EDU SCHOA
C00096 00013 ∂06-Apr-89 1202 ME Prancing Pony Bill
C00099 00014 ∂06-Apr-89 1247 @polya.Stanford.EDU:T.TANK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
C00100 00015 ∂06-Apr-89 1352 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU talking with undergraduates
C00102 00016 ∂07-Apr-89 0946 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Faculty Minutes 4/3/89
C00107 00017 ∂07-Apr-89 1101 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Revision Faculty Meeting 4/3/89
C00114 00018 ∂07-Apr-89 1546 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU ARPA Follow-On Umbrella Contract
C00118 00019 ∂09-Apr-89 0143 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
C00121 00020 ∂09-Apr-89 1355 harnad@Princeton.EDU ANOVA and Heredity/Environment Interaction: BBS Call for Commentators
C00126 00021 ∂09-Apr-89 2357 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
C00130 00022 ∂10-Apr-89 1007 saraswat@glacier.stanford.edu Seminar on Taguchi Method
C00132 00023 ∂10-Apr-89 1112 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
C00137 00024 ∂10-Apr-89 1549 rpg@lucid.com Parallel Lisp Worshop
C00141 00025 ∂11-Apr-89 0352 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
C00149 00026 ∂11-Apr-89 0910 VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU 3rd Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
C00151 00027 ∂11-Apr-89 1830 @Score.Stanford.EDU:goldberg@csli.Stanford.EDU banning of jokes
C00154 00028 ∂11-Apr-89 2346 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM For Dr. Z.
C00163 00029 ∂12-Apr-89 0119 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM For Dr. Z.,cont'd
C00166 00030 ∂12-Apr-89 1222 NA.TDJ@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C00168 00031 ∂12-Apr-89 1226 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Latest results on Boyer, 7.0 out of 8
C00176 00032 ∂12-Apr-89 1339 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Re: paper
C00178 00033 ∂12-Apr-89 2012 rms@wheaties.ai.mit.edu A way to fight Apple
C00184 00034 ∂12-Apr-89 2138 eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu confidential
C00186 00035 ∂14-Apr-89 0330 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM this is obvious?
C00190 00036 ∂14-Apr-89 0844 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Let's argue about futures
C00193 00037 ∂14-Apr-89 0917 MPS
C00194 00038 ∂14-Apr-89 1008 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com Let's argue about futures
C00197 00039 ∂14-Apr-89 1235 saraswat@glacier.stanford.edu Seminar on R&D in Japan and USA
C00200 00040 ∂14-Apr-89 1343 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Let's argue about futures
C00202 00041 ∂14-Apr-89 1418 winograd@loire.stanford.edu Note from Stallman
C00203 00042 ∂14-Apr-89 1659 harnad@Princeton.EDU Homeostasis and the Preipheral NS: BBS Call for Commentators
C00209 00043 ∂14-Apr-89 1826 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU shared variables
C00218 00044 ∂14-Apr-89 1938 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com shared variables
C00221 00045 ∂14-Apr-89 2217 tiemann@yahi.stanford.edu A way to fight Apple
C00223 00046 ∂14-Apr-89 2344 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu the "N" in "NCONC"
C00225 00047 ∂15-Apr-89 0026 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM imaginary imaginaries [Was: Bessel, yo is my worry now]
C00231 00048 ∂15-Apr-89 0205 vanMeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM the "N" in "NCONC"
C00237 00049 ∂15-Apr-89 0232 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
C00240 00050 ∂16-Apr-89 1519 vanMeule@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
C00249 00051 ∂17-Apr-89 0000 JMC
C00250 00052 ∂17-Apr-89 0001 JMC Expired plan
C00251 00053 ∂17-Apr-89 0518 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM this is oblivious
C00258 00054 ∂17-Apr-89 0752 CLT US-Japan Cooperative Research on Theoretical Computer Science
C00260 00055 ∂17-Apr-89 1032 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
C00263 00056 ∂17-Apr-89 1120 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
C00266 00057 ∂17-Apr-89 1245 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
C00269 00058 ∂17-Apr-89 1343 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com a new new-qlisp
C00273 00059 ∂17-Apr-89 1319 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
C00274 00060 ∂17-Apr-89 1434 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
C00276 00061 ∂17-Apr-89 1743 JK
C00277 00062 ∂17-Apr-89 1911 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com new new-qlisp
C00279 00063 ∂17-Apr-89 2237 goldberg@csli.Stanford.EDU Jeff Goldberg is off the net
C00281 00064 ∂18-Apr-89 0000 JMC
C00282 00065 ∂18-Apr-89 0231 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
C00286 00066 ∂18-Apr-89 2101 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU a problem in inference
C00288 00067 ∂18-Apr-89 2103 tony@cs.UAlberta.CA Hard Copy in mail. Re 6th WCCt
C00292 00068 ∂18-Apr-89 2126 eyal@coyote.stanford.edu re: my M.Sc. thesis
C00293 00069 ∂18-Apr-89 2128 jonl@lucid.com the "N" in "NCONC"
C00298 00070 ∂19-Apr-89 0428 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM quickie
C00301 00071 ∂19-Apr-89 0559 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fibonacho
C00304 00072 ∂19-Apr-89 0725 CLT JSPS/NSF proposal
C00307 00073 ∂19-Apr-89 1121 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Questions
C00309 00074 ∂19-Apr-89 1359 tony@cs.UAlberta.CA WOrkshop notice (computer chess)
C00315 00075 ∂19-Apr-89 1636 CLT Japan collaboration
C00317 00076 ∂19-Apr-89 1726 susan@nessus.stanford.edu CIS EdCom proposals
C00321 00077 ∂19-Apr-89 1912 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Preliminary Qlisp manual
C00323 00078 ∂19-Apr-89 2204 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:okuno@ntt-20.ntt.jp Re: Preliminary Qlisp manual
C00325 00079 ∂20-Apr-89 0723 @SAIL.Stanford.EDU:agha-gul@YALE.ARPA Japan collaboration
C00328 00080 ∂20-Apr-89 0809 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
C00330 00081 ∂20-Apr-89 0900 JMC
C00331 00082 ∂20-Apr-89 0900 JMC
C00332 00083 ∂20-Apr-89 1000 JMC
C00333 00084 ∂20-Apr-89 0936 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
C00335 00085 ∂20-Apr-89 1144 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Performance reviews
C00336 00086 ∂20-Apr-89 1502 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Performance reviews
C00338 00087 ∂20-Apr-89 1532 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU retreat
C00340 00088 ∂20-Apr-89 1835 brooks@Portia.stanford.edu re: Jones and Palmer Cold Fusion Paper (VERY LONG!)
C00344 00089 ∂21-Apr-89 0725 siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU SCLC Amendment
C00346 00090 ∂21-Apr-89 1348 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: First Amendment
C00347 00091 ∂21-Apr-89 1353 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU re: comparative costs
C00349 00092 ∂21-Apr-89 1412 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: First Amendment
C00350 00093 ∂21-Apr-89 1421 HEMENWAY@Score.Stanford.EDU Evaluation Meeting Request
C00355 00094 ∂21-Apr-89 1425 boesch@vax.darpa.mil A survey
C00358 00095 ∂21-Apr-89 1900 JMC
C00359 00096 ∂22-Apr-89 0036 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM Huh? Oh!
C00362 00097 ∂22-Apr-89 1223 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Re: Przymusinski
C00364 00098 ∂23-Apr-89 0946 VAL reply to message
C00365 00099 ∂23-Apr-89 1127 JJW HP workstation
C00366 00100 ∂23-Apr-89 1130 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Japan trip
C00367 00101 ∂24-Apr-89 0630 JMC
C00368 00102 ∂24-Apr-89 0837 mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU Ehrlich on energy
C00372 00103 ∂24-Apr-89 0930 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU The original Tak has deep dynamic spawning properties
C00387 00104 ∂24-Apr-89 1222 drb@cscfac.ncsu.edu your visit to NC State
C00395 00105 ∂24-Apr-89 1228 VAL US-Japan Cooperative Research Project
C00396 00106 ∂24-Apr-89 1254 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Boyer-Moore in Qlisp
C00399 00107 ∂24-Apr-89 1301 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00402 00108 ∂24-Apr-89 1349 CLT (non)umbrella
C00405 00109 ∂24-Apr-89 1359 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU undergraduate seminar
C00407 00110 ∂24-Apr-89 1541 MPS
C00408 00111 ∂24-Apr-89 1638 MPS
C00409 00112 ∂24-Apr-89 1640 MPS
C00410 00113 ∂24-Apr-89 1844 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU re: undergraduate seminar
C00411 00114 ∂24-Apr-89 2136 sf@csli.Stanford.EDU Novosibirsk
C00413 00115 ∂25-Apr-89 0657 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
C00417 00116 ∂25-Apr-89 0902 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Condensed Original Tak Data Table
C00423 00117 ∂25-Apr-89 0906 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
C00427 00118 ∂25-Apr-89 0910 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
C00430 00119 ∂25-Apr-89 1015 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU Some naive observations on Dans statistics
C00433 00120 ∂25-Apr-89 1123 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU,@SAIL.Stanford.EDU:weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Some naive observations on Dans statistics
C00438 00121 ∂25-Apr-89 1124 tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Congratulations
C00439 00122 ∂25-Apr-89 1227 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU NAS
C00440 00123 ∂25-Apr-89 1521 eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu congratulations
C00441 00124 ∂25-Apr-89 2235 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: throwing money
C00442 00125 ∂26-Apr-89 0513 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM Bernoulli non-factorial generating function [Was: 1,1,5,61,1385,50521,...]
C00447 00126 ∂26-Apr-89 0925 Mailer Re: throwing money
C00455 00127 ∂26-Apr-89 1021 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU,@SAIL.Stanford.EDU:pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Some naive observations on Dans statistics
C00466 00128 ∂26-Apr-89 1321 jqj@hogg.cc.uoregon.edu job hunting at Stanford
C00470 00129 ∂26-Apr-89 1332 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
C00473 00130 ∂26-Apr-89 1357 peters@russell.Stanford.EDU [MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem): Returned mail: User unknown]
C00476 00131 ∂26-Apr-89 1519 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Meeting next week
C00478 00132 ∂26-Apr-89 1724 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
C00484 00133 ∂27-Apr-89 0602 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu JPL Paper
C00486 00134 ∂27-Apr-89 0700 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM ruler Dirichlet
C00490 00135 ∂27-Apr-89 1045 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: JPL Paper
C00491 00136 ∂27-Apr-89 1143 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
C00495 00137 ∂27-Apr-89 1549 JSW PHIL.TEX[ESS,JMC]
C00496 00138 ∂27-Apr-89 1708 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
C00500 00139 ∂27-Apr-89 1813 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Spawn times
C00505 00140 ∂27-Apr-89 1826 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com Spawn times
C00507 00141 ∂27-Apr-89 2142 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Spawn times
C00513 00142 ∂27-Apr-89 2312 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com Spawn times
C00516 00143 ∂28-Apr-89 0049 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:arg@lucid.com assumptions underlying "lightweight" processes
C00519 00144 ∂28-Apr-89 0231 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM unruly Dirichlet
C00525 00145 ∂28-Apr-89 0752 Mailer Re: democracy
C00528 00146 ∂28-Apr-89 0951 CLT spring clean up
C00529 00147 ∂28-Apr-89 1008 Mailer re: democracy
C00533 00148 ∂28-Apr-89 1014 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: larger programs, behavioral questions
C00536 00149 ∂28-Apr-89 1056 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com larger programs, behavioral questions
C00539 00150 ∂28-Apr-89 1035 CLT Timothy's message
C00540 00151 ∂28-Apr-89 1106 MPS
C00541 00152 ∂28-Apr-89 1308 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU larger programs, behavioral questions
C00544 00153 ∂28-Apr-89 1315 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com larger programs, behavioral questions
C00547 00154 ∂28-Apr-89 1404 MPS
C00548 00155 ∂28-Apr-89 1424 binford@Boa-Constrictor.Stanford.EDU congratulations
C00549 00156 ∂28-Apr-89 1713 CLT
C00550 00157 ∂28-Apr-89 1724 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00553 00158 ∂28-Apr-89 1922 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Hagelstein papers
C00563 00159 ∂30-Apr-89 2102 P.REDLICH@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU GSB PhD program
C00567 00160 ∂01-May-89 0153 @CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:GOLUMBIC@ISRAEARN.BITNET
C00569 00161 ∂01-May-89 0700 JMC
C00570 00162 ∂01-May-89 0938 JMC
C00571 00163 ∂01-May-89 0938 JMC
C00572 00164 ∂01-May-89 1025 ATM@UWACDC.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU Congratulations!
C00575 00165 ∂01-May-89 1034 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM locus pocus
C00579 00166 ∂01-May-89 1323 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Qlisp meeting this week
C00580 00167 ∂01-May-89 1400 JMC
C00581 00168 ∂01-May-89 1400 JMC
C00582 00169 ∂01-May-89 1533 NA.PHL@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C00584 00170 ∂01-May-89 1819 Mailer re: democracy
C00587 00171 ∂01-May-89 1857 gurevich@polya.Stanford.EDU English
C00589 00172 ∂01-May-89 2017 ACT Prancing Pony Bill
C00591 00173 ∂01-May-89 2215 gurevich@polya.Stanford.EDU English
C00592 00174 ∂02-May-89 0256 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM log smog
C00601 00175 ∂02-May-89 0933 Mailer re: Pat Buchanan has gone off the deep end
C00607 00176 ∂02-May-89 1130 MPS
C00608 00177 ∂02-May-89 1343 VAL seminar
C00609 00178 ∂02-May-89 1518 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Parallel Evaluation of Game Trees
C00613 00179 ∂02-May-89 1546 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU undergraduate seminar
C00614 00180 ∂02-May-89 1600 JMC
C00615 00181 ∂02-May-89 1800 JMC
C00616 00182 ∂02-May-89 1803 peyton@polya.Stanford.EDU democracy
C00621 00183 ∂02-May-89 1900 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:STICKEL@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM CADE Call for Papers
C00627 00184 ∂03-May-89 0803 Mailer re: Pat Buchanan has gone off the deep end
C00636 00185 ∂03-May-89 1329 VAL re: invitation requirements
C00637 00186 ∂03-May-89 1330 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C00639 00187 ∂03-May-89 1400 JMC
C00640 00188 ∂03-May-89 1423 VAL borrowed books
C00641 00189 ∂03-May-89 1541 levinth@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Janapense Trip
C00643 00190 ∂03-May-89 1552 VAL seminar
C00644 00191 ∂03-May-89 1702 debra@russell.Stanford.EDU FACULTY MEETING
C00647 00192 ∂03-May-89 1729 CLT david chud
C00648 00193 ∂03-May-89 1741 Mailer@Score.Stanford.EDU Message of 3-May-89 11:58:50
C00649 00194 ∂03-May-89 1801 JMC
C00650 00195 ∂03-May-89 1837 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU undergraduate seminar
C00651 00196 ∂03-May-89 1900 JMC
C00652 00197 ∂03-May-89 2000 JMC
C00653 00198 ∂04-May-89 0019 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU re: undergraduate seminar
C00656 00199 ∂04-May-89 0759 perlis@cs.rochester.edu Academy of Sciences
C00658 00200 ∂04-May-89 0830 JMC
C00659 00201 ∂04-May-89 0845 CLT
C00660 00202 ∂04-May-89 1050 levinth@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Janapense Trip
C00661 00203 ∂04-May-89 1343 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: GNU compiler and the Free Software Foundation
C00664 00204 ∂04-May-89 1420 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil Re: GNU compiler and the Free Software Foundation
C00666 00205 ∂04-May-89 1447 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Thesis
C00668 00206 ∂04-May-89 1649 I.IONLYONTUES@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: OK. I think I found the problem
C00670 00207 ∂04-May-89 1720 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Prolog in TeX
C00672 00208 ∂04-May-89 1742 munnari!yarra-glen.aaii.oz.au!root@uunet.UU.NET Dartmouth Conference???
C00675 00209 ∂04-May-89 1801 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Re: paper
C00676 00210 ∂04-May-89 1857 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:arg@lucid.com really new qlisp
C00679 00211 ∂04-May-89 2032 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:hewitt@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU Gul Agha
C00683 00212 ∂05-May-89 0343 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Re: Japan
C00685 00213 ∂05-May-89 0504 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: paper
C00686 00214 ∂05-May-89 0522 @CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:GOLUMBIC@ISRAEARN.BITNET BISFAI-8 Schedule
C00699 00215 ∂05-May-89 0748 MPS
C00700 00216 ∂05-May-89 0945 ARK SAIL going private
C00701 00217 ∂05-May-89 1056 VAL Nonmonotonic Seminar: No Meeting
C00702 00218 ∂05-May-89 1405 ARK re: SAIL going private
C00703 00219 ∂05-May-89 1451 saraswat@cascade.Stanford.EDU Seminar on Intels's Microprocessor 80486
C00705 00220 ∂05-May-89 1602 peters@russell.Stanford.EDU CSLI Faculty Meeting
C00708 00221 ∂05-May-89 1656 peters@russell.Stanford.EDU Correction
C00710 00222 ∂05-May-89 2212 munnari!yarra-glen.aaii.oz.au!root@uunet.UU.NET re: Dartmouth Conference???
C00712 00223 ∂06-May-89 0832 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM a neat one
C00715 00224 ∂06-May-89 0835 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:wilf@CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Re: a neat one
C00718 00225 ∂07-May-89 0053 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM stop me if you've heard this one
C00721 00226 ∂07-May-89 0318 ariel%bimacs.bitnet@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU making contact
C00736 00227 ∂07-May-89 0649 op@polya.Stanford.EDU Go left, young censor
C00737 00228 ∂07-May-89 1457 op@polya.Stanford.EDU re: Go left, young censor
C00738 00229 ∂07-May-89 2009 CLT $5K
C00739 00230 ∂08-May-89 0600 JMC
C00740 00231 ∂08-May-89 0823 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C00744 00232 ∂08-May-89 0900 CLT
C00745 00233 ∂08-May-89 1004 @b.nsf.gov:hhamburg@nsf.GOV e-mail, budget
C00747 00234 ∂08-May-89 1004 @b.nsf.gov:hhamburg@nsf.GOV more on budget
C00749 00235 ∂08-May-89 1008 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C00751 00236 ∂08-May-89 1018 dicker@opus.Stanford.edu TODAY'S SEMINAR
C00753 00237 ∂08-May-89 1050 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU DARPA ISTO BAA
C00755 00238 ∂08-May-89 1100 JMC
C00756 00239 ∂08-May-89 1101 VAL new NSF budget
C00757 00240 ∂08-May-89 1159 VAL re: new NSF budget
C00758 00241 ∂08-May-89 1422 MPS
C00759 00242 ∂08-May-89 1552 eyal@coyote.stanford.edu my M.Sc. thesis
C00761 00243 ∂08-May-89 2056 DEK retreat talk
C00762 00244 ∂08-May-89 2210 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com futures
C00764 00245 ∂09-May-89 0738 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM Re: "nuclear information"
C00767 00246 ∂09-May-89 0907 MPS Visa Views
C00768 00247 ∂09-May-89 0923 Mailer re: "nuclear information"
C00770 00248 ∂09-May-89 1024 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU rabbits
C00772 00249 ∂09-May-89 1244 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: "nuclear information"
C00775 00250 ∂09-May-89 1352 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C00777 00251 ∂09-May-89 1522 Mailer re: "nuclear information"
C00780 00252 ∂09-May-89 1612 MPS
C00781 00253 ∂09-May-89 1953 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU interview
C00783 00254 ∂09-May-89 2149 wada%tomo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp@relay.cs.net your schedule in Tokyo
C00786 00255 ∂10-May-89 0742 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU now I get it about the rabbits
C00788 00256 ∂10-May-89 0823 MPS Announcement
C00789 00257 ∂10-May-89 1009 CLT
C00790 00258 ∂10-May-89 1259 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: "nuclear information"
C00792 00259 ∂10-May-89 1307 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: "nuclear information"
C00793 00260 ∂10-May-89 1313 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: "nuclear information"
C00795 00261 ∂10-May-89 1820 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU rec.humor.funny
C00797 00262 ∂10-May-89 1855 VAL Report: please approve
C00799 00263 ∂10-May-89 2030 ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp Workshop on Parallel Lisp
C00802 00264 ∂10-May-89 2119 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU self-reproducing automata
C00804 00265 ∂11-May-89 0053 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of March computer charges.
C00807 00266 ∂11-May-89 0213 @ntt-20.NTT.JP:okuno@ntt-20.NTT.JP Message from Tak
C00811 00267 ∂11-May-89 0812 MPS Books
C00812 00268 ∂11-May-89 1105 MPS
C00813 00269 ∂11-May-89 1340 MPS George Rife, Edmonton
C00814 00270 ∂11-May-89 1359 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Meeting to discuss retirement of SAIL
C00821 00271 ∂11-May-89 1528 VAL New budget for the NSF proposal
C00822 00272 ∂11-May-89 1604 VAL re: paradox?
C00823 00273 ∂11-May-89 1617 MPS meeting
C00824 00274 ∂11-May-89 1727 @ntt-20.NTT.JP:okuno@ntt-20.NTT.JP re: Message from Tak
C00826 00275 ∂12-May-89 0838 MPS Proposal
C00827 00276 ∂12-May-89 0933 VAL
C00828 00277 ∂12-May-89 1020 MPS
C00829 00278 ∂12-May-89 1104 VAL Budget
C00832 00279 ∂12-May-89 1139 jussi%hpljak@hplabs.hp.com More MADness
C00834 00280 ∂12-May-89 1630 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM wiggly
C00838 00281 ∂12-May-89 1630 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM ('int,'int)
C00841 00282 ∂12-May-89 1806 VAL McCarthy's proposal
C00845 00283 ∂12-May-89 2028 ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp R
C00848 00284 ∂13-May-89 0637 CLT powow
C00849 00285 ∂13-May-89 1028 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Re: paper
C00853 00286 ∂13-May-89 1640 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: paper
C00854 00287 ∂14-May-89 1144 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00856 00288 ∂14-May-89 1255 ARK SAIL survey
C00865 00289 ∂14-May-89 1728 PSTINSON@GSB-WHAT.STANFORD.EDU Re: Elephant query
C00867 00290 ∂14-May-89 1828 Mailer Faithful Elephants
C00868 00291 ∂14-May-89 1915 op@polya.Stanford.EDU
C00869 00292 ∂14-May-89 1918 larrabee@polya.Stanford.EDU Re: elephant query
C00871 00293 ∂15-May-89 0733 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
C00872 00294 ∂15-May-89 0823 MPS
C00873 00295 ∂15-May-89 0858 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
C00874 00296 ∂15-May-89 0908 john@russell.Stanford.EDU
C00875 00297 ∂15-May-89 0913 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Tomorrow's faculty meeting
C00877 00298 ∂15-May-89 0930 JMC
C00878 00299 ∂15-May-89 0948 debra@russell.Stanford.EDU CSLI FACULTY MEETING
C00881 00300 ∂15-May-89 1000 JMC
C00882 00301 ∂15-May-89 1007 MPS Rubber Stamp
C00883 00302 ∂15-May-89 1009 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Re: reply to message
C00884 00303 ∂15-May-89 1044 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
C00886 00304 ∂15-May-89 1054 bloom@opus.Stanford.edu SEMINAR
C00888 00305 ∂15-May-89 1127 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU
C00898 00306 ∂15-May-89 1141 op@polya.Stanford.EDU
C00900 00307 ∂15-May-89 1401 JMC
C00901 00308 ∂15-May-89 1449 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Pat
C00902 00309 ∂15-May-89 1922 cwitty@csli.Stanford.EDU Re: elephant query
C00904 00310 ∂15-May-89 2313 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
C00907 00311 ∂15-May-89 2349 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
C00910 00312 ∂15-May-89 2353 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
C00912 00313 ∂16-May-89 0537 cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU Re: demonstrations and aggression
C00915 00314 ∂16-May-89 0740 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
C00917 00315 ∂16-May-89 0800 JMC
C00918 00316 ∂16-May-89 0831 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU pill problem
C00920 00317 ∂16-May-89 0912 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU complete solution of pill problem
C00922 00318 ∂16-May-89 1016 MPS library book
C00923 00319 ∂16-May-89 1018 MPS Paper
C00924 00320 ∂16-May-89 1630 MPS Chereshkin
C00925 00321 ∂16-May-89 1737 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com implicit futures
C00930 00322 ∂17-May-89 0716 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C00931 00323 ∂17-May-89 0739 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
C00938 00324 ∂17-May-89 0800 JMC
C00939 00325 ∂17-May-89 0932 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Academic Council Meeting
C00941 00326 ∂17-May-89 1057 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:davies@cascade.Stanford.EDU Multiprocessor sales pitch
C00944 00327 ∂17-May-89 1500 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU an interview for IEEE
C00945 00328 ∂17-May-89 1622 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Special Faculty Meeting
C00947 00329 ∂17-May-89 1648 ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU elephant
C00949 00330 ∂17-May-89 1651 paulf@jessica.Stanford.EDU Re: demonstrations and aggression
C00952 00331 ∂17-May-89 1651 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Senior Faculty Meeting 5/16/89
C00954 00332 ∂17-May-89 1709 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Senior Faculty Meeting 5/16/89
C00955 00333 ∂18-May-89 0729 masahiko@nuesun.ntt.jp Re: possible visit by Lifschitz
C00957 00334 ∂18-May-89 0800 JMC
C00958 00335 ∂18-May-89 0939 MPS Meeting
C00959 00336 ∂18-May-89 1054 ARK Future of SAIL
C00960 00337 ∂18-May-89 1325 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Jussi Ketonen
C00962 00338 ∂18-May-89 1344 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Jussi Ketonen
C00963 00339 ∂18-May-89 1549 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU 1989 DEPARTMENTAL AWARDS FOR OUTSTANDING SERVICE
C00969 00340 ∂19-May-89 0825 MPS Paper
C00970 00341 ∂19-May-89 0850 barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU
C00972 00342 ∂19-May-89 1014 VAL reply to message
C00973 00343 ∂19-May-89 1409 VAL Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
C00975 00344 ∂19-May-89 1544 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Your Abstention on Winograd Promotion
C00979 00345 ∂19-May-89 1911 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU pills
C00981 00346 ∂19-May-89 2033 CLT Itinerary, etc
C00983 00347 ∂20-May-89 1056 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: paper
C00985 00348 ∂21-May-89 0800 JMC
C00986 00349 ∂21-May-89 1528 ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU Re: AI Letters
C00992 00350 ∂21-May-89 2010 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: Protesters and Martin Luther King Junior
C00995 00351 ∂22-May-89 0005 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00997 00352 ∂22-May-89 0830 JMC
C00998 00353 ∂22-May-89 1434 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU last week's CSLI/SU faculty meeting
C01002 00354 ∂22-May-89 1442 @Score.Stanford.EDU:betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU office at Cordura after this quarter
C01004 00355 ∂22-May-89 1510 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU new task--QLISP
C01006 00356 ∂22-May-89 1534 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Latex file for JPL Paper
C01008 00357 ∂22-May-89 1542 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU CSD Retreat
C01009 00358 ∂22-May-89 1549 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Text of jmc-jpl.tex (Part 1 of 2)
C01070 00359 ∂22-May-89 1550 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Text of jmc-jpl.tex (Part 2 of 2)
C01130 00360 ∂22-May-89 1553 MPS
C01131 00361 ∂22-May-89 1649 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU sit cal and temp log
C01133 00362 ∂22-May-89 1733 VAL re: sit cal and temp log
C01134 00363 ∂22-May-89 1744 nedzel@cive.Stanford.EDU Re: Demonstration Straw Poll
C01137 00364 ∂22-May-89 1800 VAL arithmetic in logic programming
C01138 00365 ∂23-May-89 0637 underdog@Portia.stanford.edu re: passports
C01139 00366 ∂23-May-89 0900 JMC
C01140 00367 ∂23-May-89 1001 VAL reply to message
C01141 00368 ∂23-May-89 1100 JMC
C01142 00369 ∂23-May-89 1313 VAL
C01143 00370 ∂23-May-89 1340 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM Invention(s) & Technology
C01145 00371 ∂23-May-89 1345 hellman@isl.Stanford.EDU Student Referrals
C01147 00372 ∂23-May-89 1404 Mailer re: Chinese protesters
C01151 00373 ∂23-May-89 1405 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Thesis
C01153 00374 ∂23-May-89 1558 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@PRECARIOUS.Stanford.EDU:RDZ@SCORE.Stanford.EDU rn on go4
C01155 00375 ∂24-May-89 0800 JMC
C01156 00376 ∂24-May-89 0829 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Preliminary Time Schedules
C01158 00377 ∂24-May-89 0933 shoham@time.stanford.edu mtg
C01159 00378 ∂24-May-89 1037 VAL re: mtg
C01160 00379 ∂24-May-89 1039 VAL Reminder: Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
C01162 00380 ∂24-May-89 1358 MPS Retreat
C01163 00381 ∂24-May-89 1525 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:arg@lucid.com new really-new-qlisp
C01166 00382 ∂24-May-89 1742 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU Space in MJH
C01171 00383 ∂24-May-89 1745 Mailer re: Stanford sit-in compared to Chinese situation
C01175 00384 ∂24-May-89 1807 VAL Proposal
C01176 00385 ∂24-May-89 1845 VAL NSF Proposal
C01177 00386 ∂24-May-89 2358 decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!uqv-mts!Ursula_M._Maydell@labrea.stanford.edu weather
C01180 00387 ∂25-May-89 0745 ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU AI letter idea
C01183 00388 ∂25-May-89 1127 ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU re: AI letter idea
C01184 00389 ∂25-May-89 1151 marx@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Recommendations for Outstanding Service Award
C01186 00390 ∂25-May-89 1154 @b.nsf.gov:hhamburg@nsf.GOV proposal
C01188 00391 ∂25-May-89 1356 VAL Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
C01191 00392 ∂25-May-89 1408 tom@polya.Stanford.EDU your home system
C01194 00393 ∂25-May-89 1424 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: your home system
C01197 00394 ∂25-May-89 1708 CLT
C01198 00395 ∂25-May-89 1751 hellman@isl.Stanford.EDU Post-MS Admissions
C01200 00396 ∂26-May-89 0703 sacook@neat.ai.toronto.edu
C01201 00397 ∂26-May-89 0958 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU signatures for Bob Byer
C01203 00398 ∂26-May-89 1153 VAL VAL's papers
C01208 00399 ∂26-May-89 1409 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Research Assistant
C01210 00400 ∂26-May-89 1713 eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Comprehensive proposals
C01213 00401 ∂26-May-89 1734 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: protestors
C01218 00402 ∂26-May-89 1820 A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: protestors
C01221 00403 ∂27-May-89 0923 pratt@coraki.stanford.edu MTC -> ?
C01223 00404 ∂30-May-89 0224 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01227 00405 ∂30-May-89 0715 kessler%cons@cs.utah.edu Parallel Lisp workshop
C01229 00406 ∂30-May-89 0826 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01234 00407 ∂30-May-89 0902 wicker@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Faculty Mtg
C01235 00408 ∂30-May-89 0957 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Tau Beta Pi
C01237 00409 ∂30-May-89 1004 rpg@lucid.com Parallel Lisp workshop
C01241 00410 ∂30-May-89 1022 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01244 00411 ∂30-May-89 1432 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU changing offices
C01247 00412 ∂30-May-89 1434 VAL Geffner's seminar
C01248 00413 ∂30-May-89 1529 MPS phone
C01249 00414 ∂31-May-89 0201 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01253 00415 ∂31-May-89 0722 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01256 00416 ∂31-May-89 0755 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01260 00417 ∂31-May-89 0845 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:wilf@CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Re: fractal freaquest
C01263 00418 ∂31-May-89 0912 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
C01266 00419 ∂31-May-89 1027 jezuk@sierra.STANFORD.EDU EERA Personnel Changes
C01269 00420 ∂31-May-89 1034 @Score.Stanford.EDU:gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu ELIS Machines
C01271 00421 ∂31-May-89 1233 VAL Reminder: Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
C01275 00422 ∂01-Jun-89 1403 drb@cscfac.ncsu.edu your visit to NC
C01277 00423 ∂01-Jun-89 1630 ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU contentions
C01278 00424 ∂02-Jun-89 0000 JMC Expired plan
C01279 00425 ∂02-Jun-89 1052 CLT travel
C01280 00426 ∂02-Jun-89 1614 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU E.E. Outstanding Service Awards for 1989
C01282 00427 ∂02-Jun-89 1951 CLT israel
C01283 00428 ∂03-Jun-89 0243 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
C01286 00429 ∂03-Jun-89 0816 CLT foundation
C01287 00430 ∂03-Jun-89 1521 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: changing offices
C01289 00431 ∂03-Jun-89 1546 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: signatures for Bob Byer
C01292 00432 ∂04-Jun-89 1507 CLT misc
C01293 00433 ∂04-Jun-89 1614 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: changing offices
C01295 00434 ∂04-Jun-89 1649 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: changing offices
C01297 00435 ∂05-Jun-89 0944 gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu ELIS Machines
C01299 00436 ∂05-Jun-89 1000 JMC
C01300 00437 ∂05-Jun-89 1501 cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU re: Rumor reposted from soc.culture.china (was A must !)
C01301 00438 ∂05-Jun-89 1534 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
C01304 00439 ∂05-Jun-89 1610 JMC
C01305 00440 ∂05-Jun-89 1830 grossman@polya.Stanford.EDU GO4 root password
C01307 00441 ∂06-Jun-89 0043 PAF China
C01309 00442 ∂06-Jun-89 0915 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
C01311 00443 ∂06-Jun-89 0930 JMC
C01312 00444 ∂06-Jun-89 1055 MPS phone call
C01313 00445 ∂06-Jun-89 1139 PAF Beijing
C01315 00446 ∂06-Jun-89 1751 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
C01317 00447 ∂06-Jun-89 1900 JMC
C01318 00448 ∂06-Jun-89 1907 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
C01321 00449 ∂06-Jun-89 2222 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: Avoiding Blacks...
C01329 00450 ∂06-Jun-89 2312 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: Avoiding Blacks...
C01331 00451 ∂07-Jun-89 0153 MAILER-DAEMON@uunet.uu.net Returned mail: Host unknown
C01335 00452 ∂07-Jun-89 0800 JMC
C01336 00453 ∂07-Jun-89 0841 Mailer Re: A triumph of stupidity
C01340 00454 ∂07-Jun-89 1230 MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU re: Nicaragua and China events
C01342 00455 ∂07-Jun-89 1359 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
C01345 00456 ∂07-Jun-89 1408 NA.KXB@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU EERA PERSONNEL SERVICES
C01357 00457 ∂07-Jun-89 1409 MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU final pre-massacre issue of Beijing Review
C01361 00458 ∂07-Jun-89 1726 gerlach@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Re: change electronic mail address
C01362 00459 ∂07-Jun-89 2012 R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU Environmental Science
C01363 00460 ∂08-Jun-89 0422 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Re: A triumph of stupidity
C01365 00461 ∂08-Jun-89 0902 R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU re: Environmental Science
C01367 00462 ∂08-Jun-89 0908 MPS
C01368 00463 ∂08-Jun-89 1023 davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU Re: Avoiding Blacks...
C01371 00464 ∂08-Jun-89 1201 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Autumn Quarter Textbooks
C01373 00465 ∂08-Jun-89 1916 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU possible IEEE interview
C01375 00466 ∂08-Jun-89 2048 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU re: possible IEEE interview
C01378 00467 ∂08-Jun-89 2114 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu comments on Lisp book
C01381 00468 ∂09-Jun-89 0755 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C01382 00469 ∂09-Jun-89 0838 MPS
C01383 00470 ∂09-Jun-89 0902 looking!brad@watmath.waterloo.edu Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
C01385 00471 ∂09-Jun-89 0916 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
C01386 00472 ∂09-Jun-89 0917 winograd@loire.stanford.edu Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
C01387 00473 ∂09-Jun-89 1135 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU A favor, please?
C01390 00474 ∂09-Jun-89 1136 MPS
C01391 00475 ∂09-Jun-89 1336 heit@meme.Stanford.EDU Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
C01392 00476 ∂09-Jun-89 1356 boyer@CLI.COM congrats
C01393 00477 ∂09-Jun-89 1407 hayes@kanga.parc.xerox.com Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
C01395 00478 ∂09-Jun-89 1516 MPS U of Md trip
C01396 00479 ∂09-Jun-89 1520 taleen@polya.Stanford.EDU re: A favor, please?
C01398 00480 ∂09-Jun-89 1523 MPS
C01399 00481 ∂09-Jun-89 1522 looking!brad@watmath.waterloo.edu Statement on the restoration of rec.humor.funny
C01403 00482 ∂09-Jun-89 1548 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored - clarification
C01404 00483 ∂09-Jun-89 1656 portia@Portia.stanford.edu well, there is a rec.humor.funny
C01405 00484 ∂10-Jun-89 0757 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: Protestors
C01406 00485 ∂10-Jun-89 0900 JMC
C01407 00486 ∂10-Jun-89 0900 JMC
C01408 00487 ∂10-Jun-89 2348 LES Printing trasparencies
C01409 00488 ∂10-Jun-89 2355 LES re: Printing trasparencies
C01410 00489 ∂11-Jun-89 0026 LES re: Printing trasparencies
C01411 00490 ∂11-Jun-89 0032 LES re: Printing trasparencies
C01412 00491 ∂11-Jun-89 0037 LES re: Printing trasparencies
C01413 00492 ∂11-Jun-89 1003 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of April computer charges.
C01416 00493 ∂11-Jun-89 1021 ARK Contined Operation of SAIL
C01418 00494 ∂11-Jun-89 1118 ME directory protection
C01419 00495 ∂11-Jun-89 1454 ME re: manual feed on Imagen
C01421 00496 ∂11-Jun-89 2338 LES re: manual feed on Imagen
C01422 00497 ∂12-Jun-89 0825 ball@hudson.Stanford.EDU Contined Operation of SAIL
C01424 00498 ∂12-Jun-89 0900 JMC
C01425 00499 ∂12-Jun-89 0901 MPS
C01426 00500 ∂12-Jun-89 1014 JMC
C01427 00501 ∂12-Jun-89 1014 JMC
C01428 00502 ∂12-Jun-89 1024 wheaton@Athena.Stanford.EDU Contined Operation of SAIL
C01430 00503 ∂12-Jun-89 1134 VAL reply to message
C01431 00504 ∂12-Jun-89 1528 LES Manual feed on Imagen
C01432 00505 ∂12-Jun-89 1729 ME re: Manual feed on Imagen
C01433 00506 ∂12-Jun-89 1756 90.EJOHNSON@GSB-How.Stanford.EDU Learning Lisp
C01436 00507 ∂12-Jun-89 2139 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Qlisp meeting(s) next week
C01438 00508 ∂13-Jun-89 0353 ariel%bimacs.bitnet@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU travel plans
C01442 00509 ∂13-Jun-89 1126 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Summer Time Schedules
C01446 00510 ∂13-Jun-89 2003 JMC
C01447 00511 ∂13-Jun-89 2009 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Lisp book
C01449 00512 ∂13-Jun-89 2036 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Re: Lisp book
C01451 00513 ∂14-Jun-89 0002 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Re: Lisp book
C01454 00514 ∂14-Jun-89 0721 CLT mess
C01455 00515 ∂14-Jun-89 1042 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Alliant presentation
C01457 00516 ∂14-Jun-89 1052 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Summer schedule
C01459 00517 ∂14-Jun-89 1054 MPS
C01460 00518 ∂14-Jun-89 1244 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Parallel Lisp mailing list
C01465 00519 ∂14-Jun-89 1338 wicker@sierra.STANFORD.EDU EE Faculty Mtg
C01467 00520 ∂14-Jun-89 1353 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Re: EE junk electronic mail
C01469 00521 ∂14-Jun-89 1454 zalta@csli.Stanford.EDU office space at Cordura
C01471 00522 ∂14-Jun-89 1551 ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU Hyperproof lab
C01473 00523 ∂14-Jun-89 1552 ZM
C01474 00524 ∂14-Jun-89 1613 VAL
C01475 00525 ∂14-Jun-89 1614 Mailer Re: Avoiding Blacks
C01480 00526 ∂14-Jun-89 1723 VAL lunch
C01481 00527 ∂14-Jun-89 1729 AR.RXM@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU Joke File
C01482 00528 ∂14-Jun-89 1822 MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM AIJ Board Meeting at IJCAI
C01488 00529 ∂14-Jun-89 2117 VAL Hi
C01490 00530 ∂15-Jun-89 0747 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu revised history section
C01499 00531 ∂15-Jun-89 0800 JMC
C01501 00532 ∂15-Jun-89 1052 dliu@sierra.STANFORD.EDU re: Stanford graduate expelled from China
C01503 00533 ∂15-Jun-89 1134 Mailer re:Stanford graduate expelled from China
C01506 00534 ∂15-Jun-89 1300 JMC
C01507 00535 ∂15-Jun-89 1516 davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU Re: Avoiding Blacks
C01513 00536 ∂16-Jun-89 0800 JMC
C01514 00537 ∂16-Jun-89 1008 tkeenan@note.nsf.gov Proposal 8915663
C01516 00538 ∂16-Jun-89 1016 S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: AIDS
C01520 00539 ∂16-Jun-89 1031 CLT Proposal 8915663
C01521 00540 ∂16-Jun-89 1034 S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU AIDS
C01523 00541 ∂16-Jun-89 1041 ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU invitation to banquet
C01525 00542 ∂16-Jun-89 1147 CLT keeley
C01526 00543 ∂16-Jun-89 1315 tkeenan@note.nsf.gov Re: Proposal 8915663
C01528 00544 ∂16-Jun-89 1316 A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: AIDS
C01531 00545 ∂16-Jun-89 1327 ME failed mail
C01534 00546 ∂16-Jun-89 1330 MPS Inference
C01535 00547 ∂16-Jun-89 1400 JMC
C01536 00548 ∂16-Jun-89 1405 Mailer Re: Hong Kong and the Falklands
C01538 00549 ∂16-Jun-89 1508 ME failed mail
C01542 00550 ∂16-Jun-89 1612 cohen@venera.isi.edu Sharing Tech Reports
C01548 00551 ∂17-Jun-89 0418 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu reminder
C01550 00552 ∂17-Jun-89 0700 JMC
C01551 00553 ∂17-Jun-89 0700 JMC
C01552 00554 ∂17-Jun-89 1040 RWF re: rec.humor.funny
C01553 00555 ∂19-Jun-89 1027 CLT for timothy
C01554 00556 ∂20-Jun-89 0605 decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!goebel@labrea.stanford.edu Elephants never forget.
C01558 00557 ∂20-Jun-89 1050 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Qlisp meeting tomorrow
C01560 00558 ∂20-Jun-89 1156 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU interview
C01562 00559 ∂20-Jun-89 1307 decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!piotr@labrea.stanford.edu EKL
C01565 00560 ∂21-Jun-89 1320 siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU rec.humor.funny
C01572 00561 ∂23-Jun-89 1142 S.SUMMER-RAIN@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU re: AIDS
C01577 00562 ∂23-Jun-89 1655 Mailer re: AIDS
C01579 00563 ∂26-Jun-89 0621 beckmann@boulder.Colorado.EDU Stanford prof
C01581 00564 ∂27-Jun-89 0934 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU 7/11 Faculty Meeting
C01583 00565 ∂27-Jun-89 1959 CLT miro
C01584 00566 ∂28-Jun-89 0905 MPS telephone message
C01588 00567 ∂28-Jun-89 1153 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU No texts?
C01589 00568 ∂28-Jun-89 1546 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil ANNUAL REPORTING
C01605 00569 ∂29-Jun-89 0816 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU re: No texts?
C01607 00570 ∂29-Jun-89 1025 cohen@venera.isi.edu Re: cbcl
C01609 00571 ∂29-Jun-89 1029 MPS
C01610 00572 ∂29-Jun-89 1249 underdog@Portia.stanford.edu re: question for the profs.
C01611 00573 ∂29-Jun-89 1534 @VM1.NoDak.EDU:avg@saturn.ucsc.edu re: Reducing the number of literals in equations
C01613 00574 ∂29-Jun-89 1651 harnad@Princeton.EDU Brain Evolution
C01620 00575 ∂30-Jun-89 1100 jeff%venus@rand.org Re: ANNUAL REPORTING
C01623 00576 ∂30-Jun-89 1224 hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM An Interview
C01624 00577 ∂30-Jun-89 1330 hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM re: An Interview
C01627 00578 ∂30-Jun-89 1350 VAL proposals
C01628 00579 ∂30-Jun-89 1412 hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM sorry about the grammar/coherency mistakes in the last message
C01629 00580 ∂30-Jun-89 1445 MPS
C01630 00581 ∂30-Jun-89 1607 VAL re: proposals
C01631 00582 ∂30-Jun-89 1931 underdog@Portia.stanford.edu CS stuff
C01647 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Apr-89 1741 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU [pehoushe: AFLB talk abstract]
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 Apr 89 17:41:01 PST
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA02441; Sat, 1 Apr 89 17:42:47 PST
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 89 17:42:47 PST
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904020142.AA02441@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU, clt@sail, jmc@sail
Subject: [pehoushe: AFLB talk abstract]
I'll give an AFLB talk this coming Thursday. It concerns the
Hamiltonian Circuit algorithm, which I discovered before joining the
Qlisp group. I hope this is OK; it is not exactly Qlisp, but the
algorithm does have alot of parallelism.
Return-Path: <pehoushe>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 89 09:23:14 PST
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe>
Full-Name: Dan Pehoushek
To: misha@polya
Cc: pehoushek
Subject: AFLB talk abstract
Hamiltonian Circuit Problems
A divide and conquer algorithm is used to solve various Hamiltonian
Circuit problems, including the decision, minimum weighted, and
enumeration versions of the problem. The general approach is
described quite well in Arnborg and Proskurowski, 1984. With respect
to this algorithm, the space of graphs is stratified into "complexity
classes" based on tree-width, ranging from linearly to exponentially
hard. One surprising aspect of the algorithm is the small difference
in difficulty between the enumeration (#P) and decison (NP and coNP)
Hamiltonian Circuit problems, even though #P-complete problems are not
known to be in NP.
-Dan Pehoushek
∂01-Apr-89 1909 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM tanflubulence
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 Apr 89 19:09:52 PST
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 370630; Sat 1-Apr-89 22:00:24 EST
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 85537; Sat 1-Apr-89 18:57:30 PST
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 89 18:57 PST
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: tanflubulence
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890324123740.1.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890402025712.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
n
====
\
sin > c
/ i
====
i = 1
n n
==== /===\
\ ! !
= limit eps > ! ! (cos(c ) + cot(a - a + eps) sin(c )).
eps->0 / ! ! j i j j
==== j = 1
i = 1
This implies
n n
==== /===\
\ ! !
> ! ! cot(a - a ) = n mod 2 .
/ ! ! j k
==== k = 1 RWONG
j = 1 k # j
Schroeppel said he disbelieved this, and was right, as usual.
The correct rhs appears to be sin n π/2. (Tested exactly on
0≤n≤7, and numerically 8≤n≤13.) If he disbelieves this too,
I'm in trouble, since something very like this (which should
be only moderately drudgerous to extract) must hold for the
cots of a[i] to cancel out of the rhs of the first formula.
∂02-Apr-89 2003 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com new new-qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 Apr 89 20:03:33 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04138; Sun, 2 Apr 89 20:04:37 PDT
Received: from edsel ([192.9.200.1]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA14638g; Sun, 2 Apr 89 19:57:20 PDT
Received: from kolyma.lucid.com by edsel id AA16840g; Sun, 2 Apr 89 19:57:25 PDT
Received: by kolyma id AA22500g; Sun, 2 Apr 89 20:04:39 PDT
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 89 20:04:39 PDT
From: Carol Sexton <carol@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904030304.AA22500@kolyma.lucid.com>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: new new-qlisp
I haven't installed the new new-qlisp yet. I'll
install it sometime on Monday or Tuesday.
Carol
∂03-Apr-89 0910 MPS Re: Meeting with John McCarthy
To: JMC, CLT
∂03-Apr-89 0805 schwartz@vax.darpa.mil Re: Meeting with John McCarthy
Received: from vax.darpa.mil (darpa.mil) by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 Apr 89 08:05:15 PDT
Received: from sun34.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA17255; Mon, 3 Apr 89 11:06:40 EDT
Posted-Date: Mon 3 Apr 89 11:06:23-EDT
Received: by sun34.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA15697; Mon, 3 Apr 89 10:06:25 EST
Date: Mon 3 Apr 89 11:06:23-EDT
From: Jack Schwartz <SCHWARTZ@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Re: Meeting with John McCarthy
To: MPS@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <607622783.0.SCHWARTZ@SUN34.DARPA.MIL>
In-Reply-To: <5Hsuo@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@SUN34.DARPA.MIL>
Hello Pat:
April 17th 11:00 am - 11:30 am will be fine.
Neva
(202) 694-5922
-------
∂03-Apr-89 1221 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil BAA
Received: from vax.darpa.mil (darpa.mil) by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 Apr 89 12:21:07 PDT
Received: from sun45.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA18230; Mon, 3 Apr 89 15:10:14 EDT
Posted-Date: Mon 3 Apr 89 15:06:28-EDT
Received: by sun45.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA15781; Mon, 3 Apr 89 14:06:30 EST
Date: Mon 3 Apr 89 15:06:28-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: BAA
To: SW-PI@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <607637188.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
The final BAA deadline has been extended to 2 June 1989 4:00pm.
This was announced in the CBD of Thursday 30 march 1989.
We received many more proposal abstracts than expected, and so
are a bit behind in responding. Most of the software abstracts
have been reviewed and letters will be sent shortly. We apologize
for the delays.
Bill Scherlis
-------
∂03-Apr-89 1732 @Score.Stanford.EDU:tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Facilities Committee Meeting
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 Apr 89 17:32:29 PDT
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 3 Apr 89 17:31:42-PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA16183; Mon, 3 Apr 89 17:33:08 PDT
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 1989 17:33:07 PDT
From: TC Rindfleisch <tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: Facil@score.stanford.edu
Cc: Rindfleisch@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: Facilities Committee Meeting
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.607653187.tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
This is to confirm that we will have a CS Facilities Committee meeting this
Wednesday, April 5, from 3:00 - 5:00 in MJH 352. The agenda includes
discussions of:
1) The CF study George Wheaton and I did and the draft report.
2) Jim Ball's redesign proposals for CF.
3) Committee recommendations to the rest of the faculty and Nils Nilsson.
Please be on time as there is lots of material to cover and I'm hoping to get
through all of the agenda to avoid burdening you with another meeting.
Tom R.
∂05-Apr-89 0848 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Theory Faculty Candidates
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Apr 89 08:47:56 PDT
Date: Wed 5 Apr 89 08:47:24-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Theory Faculty Candidates
To: Binford@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, JLE@Polya.Stanford.EDU,
AG@Amadeus.Stanford.EDU, JLH@Amadeus.Stanford.EDU,
Latombe@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
EJM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, Oliger@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU, Ullman@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Winograd@Score.Stanford.EDU
cc: bscott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12483731893.20.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Rajeev Motwani and Serge Plotkin are being recommended for Assistant Pro-
fessor positions in Theory. Faculty present at the meeting on 3/14
approved these two recommendations. I need your vote. Unless I hear from
you by Monday, April 10, I will assume that your vote is "yes."
Betty
-------
∂05-Apr-89 1149 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Eva Tardos vote
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Apr 89 11:49:29 PDT
Date: Wed 5 Apr 89 11:48:55-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Eva Tardos vote
To: CHERITON@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
JLH@Amadeus.Stanford.EDU, DEK@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
LATOMBE@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
EJM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, PRATT@Score.Stanford.EDU,
ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU, WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
cc: BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12483764936.20.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
At yesterday's faculty meeting, the majority vote was for approval of a
recommendation of Eva Tardos as a joint CS-OR Associate Professor without
tenure. I need your votes. Unless I hear from you by Wednesday, April 12,
I will assume a "yes" vote.
The Tardos papers are in Joyce Chandler's office, MJH 214, if you wish to
look at them.
Thanks in advance.
Betty
-------
∂05-Apr-89 1329 jle@Orange.stanford.edu Re: Theory Faculty Candidates
Received: from Orange.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Apr 89 13:29:31 PDT
Received: by Orange.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA00474; Wed, 5 Apr 89 13:28:56 PDT
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 89 13:28:56 PDT
From: Jeffrey Eppinger <jle@Orange.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8904052028.AA00474@Orange.stanford.edu>
To: AG@Amadeus.Stanford.EDU, BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Binford@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, EJM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU,
JLE@Polya.Stanford.EDU, JLH@Amadeus.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, Latombe@Coyote.Stanford.EDU,
Oliger@Score.Stanford.EDU, Shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Ullman@Score.Stanford.EDU, Winograd@Score.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Theory Faculty Candidates
Cc: bscott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Hi Betty,
I approve.
Jeff.
∂05-Apr-89 1609 pullen@vax.darpa.mil BAA 88-05 Extended
Received: from vax.darpa.mil (darpa.mil) by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Apr 89 16:09:37 PDT
Received: from sun30.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA09942; Wed, 5 Apr 89 18:21:31 EDT
Posted-Date: Wed 5 Apr 89 18:20:19-EST
Received: by sun30.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA14311; Wed, 5 Apr 89 17:20:20 EST
Date: Wed 5 Apr 89 18:20:19-EST
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: BAA 88-05 Extended
To: ISTO-PI-LIST@vax.darpa.mil
Cc: pullen@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <607821619.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Dear PI,
This is to advise you that the cutoff for the ISTO BAA (the one in the
brochure) has been extended to 4 PM, 2 June 89. This was necessary
because we developed a backlog in processing Abstract Proposals,
due to the large number of responses.
Mark Pullen
-------
∂06-Apr-89 1146 gerlach@sierra.STANFORD.EDU SCHOA
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 89 11:45:57 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 6 Apr 89 11:41:53 PDT
From: gerlach@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sharon Gerlach)
Date: Thu 6 Apr 89 11:41:52-PDT
Subject: SCHOA
To: EE-FACULTY@sierra
Cc: gerlach@SIERRA
Message-Id: <607894912.0.GERLACH@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
To: EE and Engr Faculty Members/Campus Homeowners
From: Tony Siegman
Re: Campus Homeowners Association (SCHOA)
Much work is being done at the minute toward developing a stronger,
better financed, more representative Stanford Campus Homeowners'
Association, which will be both legally incorporated and officially
recognized by the University as the primary contact point and
representative body for homeowners' interests on campus. These plans
and their future development, plus an important report from a
University-appointed Homeowners' Committee on Ground Rents, will be on
the agenda of an SCHOA meeting scheduled for Tuesday, August 25th, 7:30
pm, Bishop Aud.
You'll receive an invitation from SCHOA; but I'd like to reinforce the
message that if you're a campus resident you may find this a moderately
important meeting and worth attending.
-------
∂06-Apr-89 1202 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 6 April 1989
Previous Balance 8.94
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.09
Current Charges 4.00 (bicycle lockers)
0.60 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 13.63
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 1/10/89.
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.
∂06-Apr-89 1247 @polya.Stanford.EDU:T.TANK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 89 12:47:04 PDT
Received: from Macbeth.Stanford.EDU by polya.Stanford.EDU with SMTP (5.61/25-eef) id AA15969; Thu, 6 Apr 89 12:47:04 -0700
Date: Thu 6 Apr 89 12:45:54-PDT
From: KOKHUAN TAN <T.TANK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
To: mccarthy@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <12484037453.81.T.TANK@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Do you know what jokes bboards there are available?
-------
∂06-Apr-89 1352 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU talking with undergraduates
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Apr 89 13:52:17 PDT
Date: Thu 6 Apr 89 13:51:41-PDT
From: "H. Roy Jones" <JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: talking with undergraduates
To: "CS200 Guest Lecturers": ;
Message-ID: <12484049431.22.JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
This quarter, I'm teaching a colloquium to help computer science
undergraduates get to know the faculty better and further their
development of a cohesive view of the field. Each week we will have
a different faculty member as a guest. We hope that each faculty
member will discuss their view of the field and experiences as a
computer scientist.
We'd like you to join us some Wednesday this quarter from 3:15 - 5:05.
Right now, all Wednesdays from 4/19 - 5/31 are open. Please let me
know whether you'd be willing to come and what Wednesdays would work.
Many thanks,
Roy
-------
∂07-Apr-89 0946 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Faculty Minutes 4/3/89
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 89 09:46:40 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 7 Apr 89 09:40:48 PDT
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 89 09:40:48 PDT
From: shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Diane J. Shankle)
To: EE-Faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-Adminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Faculty Minutes 4/3/89
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.607970445.shankle@>
Department of Electrical Engineering
Faculty Meeting
Minutes--April 3,1989
Goodman opened the meeting and discussion began with Franklin's presentation
of
the Recommendation by the Qualifying Examination Appeals Committee. There
were
14 appeal cases and the committee recommended that 5 students be passed, 6
allowed to apply again, and 3 not passed.
The following students on the list were reconsidered:
Rank Name Supervisor Decision
73 Lou, Hui-Ling Cioffi Faculty voted to pass
74 Chiussi, Fabio Tobagi Faculty voted not to pass
96 Flagherty, Paul Tobagi Faculty voted not to pass
but student will be
allowed to take exam again
The next agenda item was degree conferral. The faculty voted to approve the
Committee's recommendation that all the people on the degree list be passed
for
the D
for the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY:
Bruck, Jehoshua (Goodman)
Fleischer, Bruce Martin (Angell)
Hansen, Fred R. (Franklin)
Kasturia, Sanjay (Cioffi)
)
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.00 or
better
for the PhD MINOR IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING:
Carim, Altaf Hyder (Materials Science & Engineering)
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.10 or
better, be granted the degree of ENGINEER:
Bierbaum, Neal Robert (Flynn)
Duc, Jean-Fernand (Lusignan)
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.00 or
better
for the MASTER OF SCIENCE:
Brainard, David H.
Casida, Eric Gerhard
Chen, Janet Ping
Ellis, Cynthia J.
Ferraiuolo, Neil
Garlick, Todd Forrest
Gerdt, Steven Douglas
Green, Evan Drake Harriman
Itakura, Tetsuro
Kim, Chai Kwon
Klein, Thierry
Noe, Terrence Raymond
Piche, Stephen William
Shakouri, Mohammad S.
Shreeve, William O'Brien
Todd, Timothy Gene
Wang, Sheng-jyh
Wat, Yatsun Watson
Woodward, Mark Joseph
Yang, Christine Yu
The final agenda item concerned the new Certificate Program proposed by SITN.
Goodman presented a graph depicting EE operating budget support in 87/88 - 14%
of the budget is funded by HCP revenue. There was a drastic reduction in
revenues in 87/88 but ifferings
. Admission fees similar to NCO
. Grade requirements and pre-requisites set by department
. Program administered by department
The meeting was adjourned with Franklin's presentation on Undergraduate
Curriculum being postponed till the Spring Quarter Faculty Meeting.
∂07-Apr-89 1101 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Revision Faculty Meeting 4/3/89
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 89 11:00:58 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 7 Apr 89 10:56:06 PDT
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 89 10:56:06 PDT
From: shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Diane J. Shankle)
To: EE-Faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-Adminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Revision Faculty Meeting 4/3/89
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.607974965.shankle@>
Previous minutes had an error in down load mechanics.
Department of Electrical Engineering
Faculty Meeting
Minutes--April 3,1989
Goodman opened the meeting and discussion began with Franklin's presentation
of
the Recommendation by the Qualifying Examination Appeals Committee. There
were
14 appeal cases and the committee recommended that 5 students be passed, 6
allowed to apply again, and 3 not passed.
The following students on the list were reconsidered:
Rank Name Supervisor Decision
73 Lou, Hui-Ling Cioffi Faculty voted to pass
74 Chiussi, Fabio Tobagi Faculty voted not to pass
96 Flagherty, Paul Tobagi Faculty voted not to pass
but student will be
allowed to take exam again
The next agenda item was degree conferral. The faculty voted to approve the
Committee's recommendation that all the people on the degree list be passed
for
the Doctor of Philosophy, PhD Minor, Engineer, and Master of Science degrees.
Final Recommending List
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.35 or
better
for the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY:
Bruck, Jehoshua (Goodman)
Fleischer, Bruce Martin (Angell)
Hansen, Fred R. (Franklin)
Kasturia, Sanjay (Cioffi)
McHenry, Mark Allen (Banks)
Pang, Joseph Wai-Ming (Tobagi)
Schreyer, Timothy Alan (Saraswat)
Sha, Lu (Dutton)
Shapiro, Frederic B. (Meindl)
Winter, Rodney Gerard (Widrow)
Yang, Tsen-Shau (Wooley)
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.00 or
better
for the PhD MINOR IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING:
Carim, Altaf Hyder (Materials Science & Engineering)
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.10 or
better, be granted the degree of ENGINEER:
Bierbaum, Neal Robert (Flynn)
Duc, Jean-Fernand (Lusignan)
The following people have met all the requirements with a GPA of 3.00 or
better
for the MASTER OF SCIENCE:
Brainard, David H.
Casida, Eric Gerhard
Chen, Janet Ping
Ellis, Cynthia J.
Ferraiuolo, Neil
Garlick, Todd Forrest
Gerdt, Steven Douglas
Green, Evan Drake Harriman
Itakura, Tetsuro
Kim, Chai Kwon
Klein, Thierry
Noe, Terrence Raymond
Piche, Stephen William
Shakouri, Mohammad S.
Shreeve, William O'Brien
Todd, Timothy Gene
Wang, Sheng-jyh
Wat, Yatsun Watson
Woodward, Mark Joseph
Yang, Christine Yu
The final agenda item concerned the new Certificate Program proposed by SITN.
Goodman presented a graph depicting EE operating budget support in 87/88 -
14%
of the budget is funded by HCP revenue. There was a drastic reduction in
revenues in 87/88 but it is hoped this will be offset by increased HCP
enrollments. One of the measures proposed to increase revenue and respond to
the competition is endorsement of a certificate program which would:
. Address education needs of companies
. Strengthen vulnerable student category (NCO)
. Provide "focus" for NCO students
. Increase revenue by taking advantage of existing course offerings
. Admission fees similar to NCO
. Grade requirements and pre-requisites set by department
. Program administered by department
The meeting was adjourned with Franklin's presentation on Undergraduate
Curriculum being postponed till the Spring Quarter Faculty Meeting.
∂07-Apr-89 1546 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU ARPA Follow-On Umbrella Contract
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Apr 89 15:46:06 PDT
Date: Fri 7 Apr 89 15:45:27-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: ARPA Follow-On Umbrella Contract
To: Cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, Genesereth@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Latombe@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, DCL@Sail.Stanford.EDU, ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JCM@Polya.Stanford.EDU, Nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU, Wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
cc: CLT@Sail.Stanford.EDU, BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12484332285.17.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Over the past several months Carolyn Talcott has been in contact with Mark
Pullen at ARPA about our follow-on umbrella contract. This is a summary of
what she has learned to date and I told her I would would forward the in-
formation to all PIs concerned.
When we submitted the follow-on umbrella draft in February, Mark Pullen
(who had earlier agreed to shepherd it through ARPA), said that the program
managers were no longer very enthusiastic about the umbrella mechanism and
that they were in the process of sending a Stanford task (not CS) through
NASA-AMES. The test is now complete and both Pullen and the PI involved
(Bill Yundt) were happy with the way it went.
Pullen sent a copy of Carolyn's umbrella draft summary to Henry Lum at
NASA-AMES, asking whether he would be comfortable with the idea that all
tasks of this sort for Stanford be routed through him. Lum replied to
Pullen that he saw no problem with this arrangement.
The proposal now is to abandon the formal umbrella and send tasks through
NASA-AMES. Individual tasks would be negotiated between PIs and program
managers as before, the difference being that formal proposals would be
sent through our Sponsored Projects Office to NASA-AMES, rather than to
SPAWAR. They would be formulated mainly as grants rather than as contracts.
If you have any comments, questions, suggestions or objections please
contact Carolyn Talcott (CLT@Sail, 3-0936) as soon as possible. It will
be helpful to me to also be copied on any E-mail exchanges.
Thanks in advance,
Betty
-------
∂09-Apr-89 0143 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 89 01:43:48 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 372713; Sun 9-Apr-89 04:41:02 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86231; Sun 9-Apr-89 01:36:59 PDT
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 01:36 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: is this obvious?
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890409083654.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Character-Type-Mappings: (1 0 (NIL 0) (NIL :ITALIC NIL) "CPTFONTI")
Fonts: CPTFONT, CPTFONTI
I'm too sleepy to tell. But
==== H
\ k-1
> ---- = zeta(3),
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
where H is then kth harmonic number = 1 + 1/2 + + 1/k .
k
(From expanding wrt ε1aε0 that crazy series with Gammas of sqrt((k+ε1aε0)k)
that I sent last week.)
∂09-Apr-89 1355 harnad@Princeton.EDU ANOVA and Heredity/Environment Interaction: BBS Call for Commentators
Received: from Princeton.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 89 13:55:36 PDT
Received: from clarity.Princeton.EDU by Princeton.EDU (5.58+++/2.6)
id AA16595; Sun, 9 Apr 89 16:51:39 EDT
Received: by clarity.Princeton.EDU (3.2/1.81)
id AA19049; Sun, 9 Apr 89 16:38:59 EDT
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 16:38:59 EDT
From: harnad@Princeton.EDU (Stevan Harnad)
Message-Id: <8904092038.AA19049@clarity.Princeton.EDU>
To: harnad@Princeton.EDU
Subject: ANOVA and Heredity/Environment Interaction: BBS Call for Commentators
Below is the abstract of a forthcoming target article to appear in
Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), an international,
interdisciplinary journal that provides Open Peer Commentary on important
and controversial current research in the biobehavioral and cognitive
sciences. Commentators must be current BBS Associates or nominated by a
current BBS Associate. To be considered as a commentator on this article,
to suggest other appropriate commentators, or for information about how
to become a BBS Associate, please send email to:
harnad@confidence.princeton.edu or write to:
BBS, 20 Nassau Street, #240, Princeton NJ 08542 [tel: 609-921-7771]
____________________________________________________________________
INSENSITIVITY OF THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TO HEREDITY/ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION
Douglas Wahlsten
Psychology Department
University of Waterloo
It makes sense to attribute a definite percentage of variation in some
measure of behavior to variation in heredity only if the effects of
heredity and environment are truly additive. The two-factor additivity
hypothesis is often tested by examining the interaction effect in a
two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) or its equivalent regression
model; if this interaction is not statistically significant at the
p > 0.05 level, it is common practice in certain fields of science
(e.g., behavior genetics) to conclude that the two factors are really
additive and then to use linear models which assume additivity.
However, several simple, nonadditive, interactive relationships between
heredity and environment reveal that ANOVA often fails to detect
nonadditivity because it has much less power in tests of interaction
than in tests of main effects. Likewise, the sample sizes needed to
detect real interactions are substantially greater than those needed to
detect main effects. Data transformations that reduce interaction
effects also drastically change the properties of the causal model and
may conceal theoretically interesting and practically useful
relationships. If the goal of partitioning variance among mutually
exclusive causes and calculating "heritability" coefficients is
abandoned, interactive relationships can be examined more seriously and
can enhance our understanding of the ways living things develop.
∂09-Apr-89 2357 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Apr 89 23:57:28 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 372795; Mon 10-Apr-89 02:55:02 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86247; Sun 9-Apr-89 23:44:41 PDT
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 23:44 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: is this obvious?
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890409083654.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890410064434.6.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Character-Type-Mappings: (1 0 (NIL 0) (NIL :ITALIC NIL) "CPTFONTI")
Fonts: CPTFONT, CPTFONTI
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 01:36 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I'm too sleepy to tell. But
==== H
\ k-1
> ---- = zeta(3),
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
where H is then kth harmonic number = 1 + 1/2 + + 1/k .
k
(From expanding wrt ε1aε0 that crazy series with Gammas of sqrt((k+ε1aε0)k)
that I sent last week.)
A funster points out an amusing paradox here: Since H >> 1/k,
k-1
how could the above possibly hold?
Hint: trivially equivalent is
==== H
\ k
> -- = 2 zeta(3).
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
I still don't see a (direct) proof (even after three cups of Paylord's
speedfreaky tea). The techiques in KonKrete Knuthematics seem to fall
just short.
∂10-Apr-89 1007 saraswat@glacier.stanford.edu Seminar on Taguchi Method
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 89 10:07:34 PDT
Received: from glacier.stanford.edu by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Mon, 10 Apr 89 10:02:25 PDT
Received: by glacier.stanford.edu; Mon, 10 Apr 89 09:54:08 PDT
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 89 09:54:08 PDT
From: Krishna Saraswat <saraswat@glacier.stanford.edu>
Subject: Seminar on Taguchi Method
To: CIS-people@glacier.stanford.edu, ee-faculty@sierra.stanford.edu
S E M I N A R A N N O U N C E M E N T
EE 310 - Spring 1989
TOPIC: Qquality Engineering by Design: Application of Taguchi Approach
SPEAKER: Yogesh Parikh, Digital Equipment, Cupertino
WHERE: McCullough 134
WHEN: Tuesday, April 11, 4:15 p.m.
This seminar will discuss the use of ststistical techniques like
Taguchi method, for experiment design and process control, a technique
quickly becoming very popular in the industry.
∂10-Apr-89 1112 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 89 11:12:11 PDT
Received: from WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via INTERNET with SMTP id 372897; 10 Apr 89 14:10:09 EDT
Received: from BLUE.SWW.Symbolics.COM by WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 250400; Mon 10-Apr-89 11:07:28 PDT
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 89 11:07 PDT
From: Marc Le Brun <MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: is this obvious?
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890410064434.6.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890410180722.3.MLB@BLUE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Character-Type-Mappings: (1 0 (NIL 0) (NIL :ITALIC NIL) "CPTFONTI")
Fonts: CPTFONT, CPTFONTI
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 23:44 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 01:36 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I'm too sleepy to tell. But
==== H
\ k-1
> ---- = zeta(3),
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
where H is then kth harmonic number = 1 + 1/2 + + 1/k .
k
(From expanding wrt ε1aε0 that crazy series with Gammas of sqrt((k+ε1aε0)k)
that I sent last week.)
A funster points out an amusing paradox here: Since H >> 1/k,
k-1
how could the above possibly hold?
Hint: trivially equivalent is
==== H
\ k
> -- = 2 zeta(3).
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
I still don't see a (direct) proof (even after three cups of Paylord's
speedfreaky tea). The techiques in KonKrete Knuthematics seem to fall
just short.
Well, using MACSYMA, I just started with -ln(1-x)/(1-x) and "Dirichlet upped" it (ie divide by
x and integrate) twice. MACSYMA handled the first "upping" OK, but broke on the second (it
got Lisp errors, and was generally polylogjammed). However it could "up" each of the three
terms individually OK, resulting in the expected polyloggia. As x goes to one the first
resulting term went to 2 zeta(3), the middle term went to 0, and the last term to - zeta(3).
Is that "direct" enough?
∂10-Apr-89 1549 rpg@lucid.com Parallel Lisp Worshop
Received: from lucid.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 Apr 89 15:49:29 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA01069g; Mon, 10 Apr 89 15:43:29 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA03870g; Mon, 10 Apr 89 15:38:31 PDT
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 89 15:38:31 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904102238.AA03870@challenger>
To: clt@sail.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu, pehoushe@go4.stanford.edu,
weening@go4.stanford.edu, carol@lucid.com, arg@lucid.com
Subject: Parallel Lisp Worshop
I've been talking with DARPA about the trip to Japan. It seems that
such trips are out of favor, and I (or someone) will have to do some
explaining before we will be granted permission to go. The problem is
with the definition of ``such trips.'' It seems DARPA has the idea
that too much US innovation ends up outside the US, and particularly
in Japan.
When I first brought up the trip, the answer was ``no.'' Then, it
became ``no, unless you can assure us that you will gather more
information than you give out.'' I was finally asked to write a note
for perusal at DARPA explaining that the Qlisp participants in
particular, and all of the US participants in general, would only talk
about already-published material. If I don't do this, I suspect we
will not be authorized to go (certainly no support and possibly some
restrictions on what DARPA-paid people can say about DARPA-supported
work).
Now, you might object that this isn't in the spirit of open research
etc. The response I got was that DARPA (and possibly DoD) was thinking
of shifting research funding from universities (currently more than
half, possibly close to 90%) to companies in order to slow the flow of
innovation out of the US. So, this concern is deep and widespread.
Don't be surprised, then, if we either don't get to go or you don't
get to say much.
-rpg-
∂11-Apr-89 0352 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM is this obvious?
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 89 03:51:56 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 373155; Tue 11-Apr-89 06:48:31 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86329; Tue 11-Apr-89 03:44:15 PDT
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 89 03:44 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: is this obvious?
To: MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM
cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
bug-macsyma@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890410180722.3.MLB@BLUE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890411104412.2.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Character-Type-Mappings: (1 0 (NIL 0) (NIL :ITALIC NIL) "CPTFONTI")
Fonts: CPTFONT, CPTFONTI
[Added: bug-macsyma.]
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 89 11:07 PDT
From: Marc Le Brun <MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 23:44 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 89 01:36 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I'm too sleepy to tell. But
==== H
\ k-1
> ---- = zeta(3),
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
where H is then kth harmonic number = 1 + 1/2 + + 1/k .
k
This sum is computed in the u.r. element of
[ 1 ]
∞ [ 1 - 0 ]
/===\ [ K ] [ 1 ZETA(1) ZETA(3) ]
! ! [ ] [ ]
(D39) ! ! [ 1 ] = [ 0 1 ZETA(2) ]
! ! [ 0 1 -- ] [ ]
K = 1 [ 2 ] [ 0 0 1 ]
[ K ]
[ ]
[ 0 0 1 ]
(where zeta(1) is a polite way of saying 1/0), so there ought to be a matrix
product proof.
It is amusing to find a zeries even zlower than 1/k↑3. zeta(3) = 1.2020569,
but the sum doesn't even pass 1 until k = 23:
(C40) sum(harm[k-1]/k↑2,k,1,23);
358139906840739559
(D40) ------------------
357754861271808000
(From expanding wrt ε1aε0 that crazy series with Gammas of sqrt((k+ε1aε0)k)
that I sent last week.)
That was the a↑2 term. I wonder what you get from the a↑3 term!
A funster points out an amusing paradox here: Since H >> 1/k,
k-1
how could the above possibly hold?
The inequality is false for k = 1, which is all it takes.
Hint: trivially equivalent is
==== H
\ k
> -- = 2 zeta(3).
/ 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
I still don't see a (direct) proof (even after three cups of Paylord's
speedfreaky tea).
(Not to mention the most murderously hot chili pakoras I have ever experienced.)
The techiques in KonKrete Knuthematics seem to fall
just short.
Well, using MACSYMA, I just started with -ln(1-x)/(1-x) and "Dirichlet upped"
The formal term is Dirischlepped.
it (ie divide by
x and integrate) twice. MACSYMA handled the first "upping" OK, but broke on the second (it
got Lisp errors, and was generally polylogjammed). However it could "up" each of the three
terms individually OK, resulting in the expected polyloggia. As x goes to one the first
resulting term went to 2 zeta(3), the middle term went to 0, and the last term to - zeta(3).
Is that "direct" enough?
Beautiful!
LOG(1 - X)
(D22) - ----------
1 - X
(C23) INTEGRATE(%/X,X);
2
LOG (1 - X)
(D23) - LOG(1 - X) LOG(X) + ----------- - LI (1 - X)
2 2
(C24) SUBSTPART(INTEGRATE(DIFF(PIECE,X),X),%,3);
2
LOG (1 - X)
(D24) LI (X) + -----------
2 2
/* Simultaneously making f(0)=0, and facilitating */
(C25) INTEGRATE(%/X,X,0,X);
Is X - 1 positive or negative?
NEG;
Is X positive, negative, or zero?
POS;
2
LOG (1 - X) LOG(X) + 2 LI (X) + 2 LI (1 - X) LOG(1 - X) - 2 LI (1 - X)
3 2 3
(D25) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- + ZETA(3)
2
(C26) MAP(LAMBDA([Y],LIMIT(Y,X,1)),EXPAND(%));
2
limit LOG (- X) LOG(X + 1)
X -> 0
(D26) --------------------------- + 2 ZETA(3)
2
Bug-Macsyma: shouldn't LIMIT be able to do this one? Like since 1970?
Also, it shouldn't be necessary to MAP to avoid trapping the doable addends
in the nounout.
∂11-Apr-89 0910 VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU 3rd Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 89 09:10:31 PDT
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Tue, 11 Apr 89 09:09:48 PDT
Date: 11 Apr 89 09:10 PDT
From: VARDI%ALMVMA.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
To: JMC @ SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: 3rd Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
Date: 11 April 1989, 09:04:43 PDT
From: Moshe Vardi VARDI at ALMVMA
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: 3rd Conf. on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
The 3rd TARK will take place on March 4-7, 1990 at Asilomar. Rohit
Parikh will be the program chair. As you know the first two TARKs
were quite successful, to a large degree due to generous support from
the AAAI. Thus, I'd like to obtain the AAAI supports for the 3rd TARK
as well. Will it be possible for us to obtain a grant for $10,000 for
the AAAI?
Moshe
∂11-Apr-89 1830 @Score.Stanford.EDU:goldberg@csli.Stanford.EDU banning of jokes
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 89 18:30:09 PDT
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 11 Apr 89 18:29:11-PDT
Received: from localhost by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA23220; Tue, 11 Apr 89 18:29:35 PDT
Message-Id: <8904120129.AA23220@csli.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@score.stanford.edu
Subject: banning of jokes
Reply-To: goldberg@csli.stanford.edu
X-Phone: (415) 326-8301
X-Mailer: MH 6.5
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 89 18:29:34 PDT
From: Jeffrey Goldberg <goldberg@csli.Stanford.EDU>
I have been out of the country for months and will be leaving again
very shortly. I assume you or other bboard readers remember me.
I was jsut told be a friend that the USENET jokes bboard was banned
on campus for being ofensive. I was also told that you had collect
names in opposition to this idiotic and dangerous move. Censorship
of any kind always (almost) starts with the banning of ofensive
items. In Hungary were there is a great deal of subtle censorship
the justification is that for the benifit of society, facist literature
cannot be published. Of course, the censors get to decide what is facist,
and we know what that means.
If people wish to show there `sensitivity toward others' by banning what
they call ofensive, then we live in a society in which freedom must be
very carefully guarded.
If you are still collected names, you may use mine. If you think it
is helpful, you may post this.
I will be in a place where I can observe first hand what happens
when ill-liberal acts are done in the name of the social good.
My address is in my finger plan.
-jeff goldberg
__
Jeff Goldberg goldberg@csli.stanford.edu
∂11-Apr-89 2346 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM For Dr. Z.
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 Apr 89 23:46:04 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 373506; Wed 12-Apr-89 02:45:09 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86386; Tue 11-Apr-89 23:41:08 PDT
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 89 23:41 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: For Dr. Z.
To: "jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM,
"wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dhb@ew11.nas.nasa.gov"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890319092603.2.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890412064104.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Hi, Dr. Z:
Sorry I didn't get to it sooner, but a derivation of your 6 bits/term
pi↑2 identity is: define two matrix-valued functions
[ 3 ]
[ j 3 j ]
[ ------------------ k + --- - 1 ]
(D90) [JM(j, k) := [ 1 2 2 ],
[ 4 (j + -) (k + j) ]
[ 2 ]
[ ]
[ 0 1 ]
[ 2 ]
[ k ]
[ -------- 2 j - 1 ]
KM(j, k) := [ 2 ]] .
[ (k + j) ]
[ ]
[ 0 1 ]
/* Then path invariance is */
(C91) RATSIMP(JM(j,k) . KM(j+1,k)-KM(j,k) . JM(j,k+1));
[ 0 0 ]
(D91) [ ]
[ 0 0 ]
/* Now we describe a triangular path, from (j=1,k=1) to (j=1,k=m), then to (j=m,k=m),
vs the diagonal path directly from (j=1,k=1) to (j=m,k=m), then let m blow up. In
fact, we can be careless, in this case, and take m=inf outright, so that the K leg
contributes */
(C92) PRODUCT(KM(1,K),K,1,INF) = PRODUCT(MATRIX([K↑2/(K+1)↑2,1],[0,1]),K,1,INF) = MATRIX([0,'(ZETA(2))],[0,1]);
INF INF [ 2 ]
/===\ /===\ [ K ]
! ! ! ! [ -------- 1 ] [ 0 zeta(2) ]
(D92) ! ! KM(1, K) = ! ! [ 2 ] = [ ]
! ! ! ! [ (K + 1) ] [ 0 1 ]
K = 1 K = 1 [ ]
[ 0 1 ]
/* and the J leg contributes nothing (its O(k) u.r. element is swamped by the O(k↑-2)
u.l. element of the K leg.) The diagonal leg consists of the alternating product
JM(1,1) KM(2,1) JM(2,2) KM(3,2) . . ., whose nth member is */
(C93) REFORM(JM(n,n) . KM(n+1,n) = KM(n,n) . JM(n,n+1),n);
[ 8 ] [ 8 ]
[ 3 21 (n - --) ] [ 3 21 (n - --) ]
[ n 21 ] [ n 21 ]
[ ----------- ----------- ] [ ----------- ----------- ]
(d93) [ 1 3 8 ] = [ 1 3 8 ] .
[ 64 (n + -) ] [ 64 (n + -) ]
[ 2 ] [ 2 ]
[ ] [ ]
[ 0 1 ] [ 0 1 ]
/* Setting this product equal to the zeta(2) product from the other two legs: */
(C94) PRODUCT(MATRIX([n↑3/(64*(n+1/2)↑3),21*n/8-1],[0,1]),n,1,INF) = RHS(D92);
INF [ 3 ]
/===\ [ n 21 n ]
! ! [ ----------- ---- - 1 ] [ 0 zeta(2) ]
(D94) ! ! [ 1 3 8 ] = [ ]
! ! [ 64 (n + -) ] [ 0 1 ]
n = 1 [ 2 ]
[ ]
[ 0 1 ]
/* Testing to 9 terms, */
(C95) DFLOAT(EVAL(SUBST([INF = 9,NOUNIFY(PRODUCT) = PRUD],%)));
[ 1.2685112804730351d-18 1.6449340668482264d0 ]
(D95) [ ] =
[ 0.0d0 1.0d0 ]
[ 0.0d0 1.6449340668482262d0 ]
[ ] .
[ 0.0d0 1.0d0 ]
This product, when converted to the quaint, traditional Sigma notation,
gives the exotic looking (21n+13) n!↑6/(2n+1)!↑3 summand you requested.
There is also one with a 7n+9 instead of 21n+3, and q-versions of both.
The original JM and KM matrices come from a coordinate change and
projection of a 4 dimensional system of 2by2s, which in turn are
specializations of the 6 dimensional system of 3by3s that I called the
3F2[1] Rosetta Stone, in the 1984 slide copies I mailed you back then.
Do you think I should use this example in my June MIT talk?
∂12-Apr-89 0119 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM For Dr. Z.,cont'd
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Apr 89 01:19:05 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 373513; Wed 12-Apr-89 04:18:13 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86395; Wed 12-Apr-89 01:14:13 PDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 89 01:14 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: For Dr. Z.,cont'd
To: "jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM,
"wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dhb@ew11.nas.nasa.gov"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890412064104.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890412081409.6.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
. . . There is also one with a 7n+9 instead of 21n+3, . . .
INF
==== 3 2
\ (7 K + 16) K! (K + 1)! (K + 2)! (K + 3)! %PI 59
(D128) > ----------------------------------------- = ---- - --
/ 3 9 54
==== (2 K + 5)!
K = 0
(C129) BFLOAT(EV(%,SUM,INF = 22));
(D129) 4.03011863955836505568418517142420022004B-3 =
4.0301186395583650556841851714242002192B-3
∂12-Apr-89 1222 NA.TDJ@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Apr 89 12:22:20 PDT
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 12 Apr 89 12:15:44 PDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 89 12:17:05 PDT
To: ee-faculty@sierra
From: "Tina Johnson" <NA.TDJ@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING NOTICE:
THE HIGH NOON, HI-TECH, EASY LISTENING LECTURE SERIES
Presents
"Do Real Engineers Use Theory?"
by THOMAS KAILATH
Hitachi America Professor of Engineering
After a light-hearted initial exploration of this rhetorical
question, an attempt will be made to present some of the central
ideas of Information Theory and to describe their recent
applications in telecommunications engineering.
Professor Kailath's lecture will be held FRIDAY, APRIL 28th
TERMAN AUDITORIUM
Hope to see you there!
∂12-Apr-89 1226 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Latest results on Boyer, 7.0 out of 8
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Apr 89 12:26:38 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04439; Wed, 12 Apr 89 12:27:26 PDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 89 12:27:26 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904121927.AA04439@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Latest results on Boyer, 7.0 out of 8
In the latest version of the Qlisp' system, a version of the Boyer
benchmark program on 8 processors gets a speed-up of 7.0 on 8
processors and 3.75 on 4 processors. On 8 processors, an average of
13,780 tasks were spawned, with roughly 2000 of them ending up running
on a processor distinct from the spawning processor. On 4 processors,
an average of 6945 tasks were spawned, with roughly 680 ending up on a
different processor. This version uses the dynamic spawning
predicate. The lossage is fairly evenly split between the 5% complex
slowdown, and scheduling+idle times, on 8 processors.
In the Always Spawn version, the speed-up was 6.6//8 and 3.5//4, with
45,837 spawns, ~1909 transfers on 8 processors, and ~623 transfers on
4 processors. The main improvement over previous results is that
transferring (swapping tasks from one processor to another) is now
much less expensive. This also seemed to make the parallel running
times more consistent. Note the std deviations are less than 10ms.
By the way, serial time is measured by running a serial program on one
processor, not in complex mode. The serial version took 10.8 seconds;
The Boyer program, a variant of Gabriel's Boyer benchmark, helps to
show that the general scheduling approach that we've been
investigating is useful on things other than Fib, Tak, Touch, and
Qexp. -dan
P.S. I tried to label the columns below with informative headings,
like estimated total idle time, estimated total spawning time, number
of spawns, etc. If you have any problems reading the results, please
tell me.
************** Dynamic Spawning, 8 and 4 processors
> (cpu (boyer-test) 4)
4 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT: 1551 Sp:13802 303 Id: 352 Sw: 59 st: 11172
PT: 1542 Sp:14527 319 Id: 292 Sw: 58 st: 11148
PT: 1541 Sp:12168 267 Id: 326 Sw: 63 st: 11154
PT: 1545 Sp:14623 321 Id: 311 Sw: 60 st: 11148
#P:8 (BOYER-TEST)
CpuT (min mean stddev): 1541 1544.7 3.9
Avg Idle Time (mean): 320.8
Spawn (avgcount cost):13780.0 303.2
Swap (avgcount cost): 2016.5 60.5
> (cpu (boyer-test) 4)
4 Trials, on 4 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT: 2883 Sp: 7026 154 Id: 99 Sw: 20 st: 10774
PT: 2876 Sp: 6912 152 Id: 100 Sw: 20 st: 10748
PT: 2880 Sp: 6979 153 Id: 103 Sw: 19 st: 10761
PT: 2881 Sp: 6866 151 Id: 109 Sw: 21 st: 10758
#P:4 (BOYER-TEST)
CpuT (min mean stddev): 2876 2880.0 2.4
Avg Idle Time (mean): 103.3
Spawn (avgcount cost): 6945.7 152.8
Swap (avgcount cost): 682.2 20.5
*********************** Always Spawn, 8 and 4 processors
> (cpu (boyer-test) 4)
4 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT: 1638 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 307 Sw: 56 st: 11182
PT: 1629 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 291 Sw: 54 st: 11131
PT: 1651 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 349 Sw: 60 st: 11236
PT: 1634 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 317 Sw: 57 st: 11140
#P:8 (BOYER-TEST)
CpuT (min mean stddev): 1629 1638.0 8.2
Avg Idle Time (mean): 316.9
Spawn (avgcount cost):45837.0 1008.4
Swap (avgcount cost): 1909.5 57.3
> (cpu (boyer-test) 4)
4 Trials, on 4 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT: 3073 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 94 Sw: 18 st: 10655
PT: 3071 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 94 Sw: 18 st: 10648
PT: 3082 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 97 Sw: 19 st: 10686
PT: 3076 Sp:45837 1008 Id: 93 Sw: 19 st: 10667
#P:4 (BOYER-TEST)
CpuT (min mean stddev): 3071 3075.5 4.1
Avg Idle Time (mean): 95.1
Spawn (avgcount cost):45837.0 1008.4
Swap (avgcount cost): 623.2 18.7
∂12-Apr-89 1339 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Re: paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Apr 89 13:34:24 PDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1989 16:33:23 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: paper
In-Reply-To: Your message of 25 Mar 89 1256 PST
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.608416403.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
I haven't sent the paper in yet. Do you want to have another
whack at the context section? We shouldn't delay much longer, so I'd
only recommend it if you thought you could make a noticeable difference
in a few days.
Hope your trip went well.
--Rich
∂12-Apr-89 2012 rms@wheaties.ai.mit.edu A way to fight Apple
Received: from sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Apr 89 20:12:20 PDT
Received: by sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu; Wed, 12 Apr 89 23:12:28 EDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 89 23:12:28 EDT
From: rms@wheaties.ai.mit.edu (Richard Stallman)
Message-Id: <8904130312.AA00542@sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
To: weening@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
To: bothner@pescadero.stanford.edu
To: raju@portia.stanford.edu
To: tiemann@yahi.stanford.edu
Subject: A way to fight Apple
Here is an ad that Minsky, Sussman and I just put in The Tech.
(It requires a little paste-up to be ready to go.)
You might want to find a couple of well-known, respected people
to join with you to put such an ad in the Stanford paper.
What do you think?
\input texinfo.tex
@center @titlefont{Computer Scientists, Watch Out!}
@parindent=0pt
@hsize=4.5in
Apple and Lotus are trying to create a new form of legal monopoly: a
copyright on a class of user interfaces. These monopolies would cause
serious problems for users and developers of computer software and
systems.
Until two years ago, the law seemed clear: no one could restrict
others from using a user interface; programmers were free to implement
any interface they chose. Imitating interfaces, sometimes with
changes, was standard practice in the computer field. The interfaces
we know evolved gradually in this way; for example, the Macintosh user
interface was developed over fifteen years at Stanford, SRI, Xerox and
other places. Hundreds of students and researchers contributed to
this effort, and no one has a right to own it all now.
Most computer companies, and nearly all computer users, are happy with
this state of affairs. Lotus and Apple say it does not offer ``enough
incentive'' to develop their products, but they must have considered
it ``enough'' when they made their decision to do so. It seems they
are not satisfied with the opportunity to continue to compete in the
marketplace---not even with a head start.
@page
If Lotus and Apple are permitted to make law through the courts, the
precedent will hobble the software industry:
@itemize @bullet
@item
Gratuitous incompatibilites will burden users. Imagine if each
car manufacturer had to arrange the pedals in a different order.
@item
Software will become and remain more expensive. Users will be
``locked in'' to proprietary interfaces, for which there is no real
competition.
@item
Large companies have an unfair advantage wherever lawsuits become
commonplace. Since they can easily afford to sue, they can intimidate
small companies with threats even when they don't really have a case.
@item
User interface improvements will come slower, since incremental
evolution through creative imitation will no longer be permitted.
@item
Even Apple and Lotus will find it harder to make improvements if
they can no longer adapt the good ideas that others introduce, for
fear of weakening their own legal positions. Some users suggest that
this stagnation may already have started.
@end itemize
@sp 2
Express your opinion! Reconsider your plans! You can make a difference.
@hsize=8in
@leftskip=0in
@sp 3
@center This is a paid political advertisement, sponsored by
@center Marvin Minsky, Richard Stallman, Gerald J. Sussman
@sp 3
@titlefont{Keep Their Lawyers Off Our Computers}
@bye
∂12-Apr-89 2138 eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu confidential
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Apr 89 21:38:13 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA28820; Wed, 12 Apr 89 21:39:19 PDT
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1989 21:39:19 PDT
From: Edward A. Feigenbaum <eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: nilsson@tenaya.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: confidential
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.608445559.eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
[Nils, please forward this on to Jean-Claude since I dont know his e-mail
address]
For what it is worth, I am getting the suspicion (but unconfirmed) that Raj
Reddy would be moveable from CMU to here if we asked. I get the feeling that
he would like to uncouple from the Directorship of the Robotics Institute,
and
an offer from us might be just the right excuse.
If there is some evidence that he is a really well-organized fellow, I might
even suggest him for next chairman, but I'm not sure he is well-organized.
We might try to find that out, though.
I get the distinct feeling that he is looking at "new options".
Ed
∂14-Apr-89 0330 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM this is obvious?
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 03:30:29 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 374222; Fri 14-Apr-89 06:26:49 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86492; Fri 14-Apr-89 03:22:53 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 03:22 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: this is obvious?
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890410180722.3.MLB@BLUE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890414102246.6.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
(2)
==== H 2
\ k zeta(2) + zeta(4) 7 4
> ---- = ------------------ = --- pi .
/ 2 2 360
==== k
k ≥ 1
(2)
where H is then kth "2nd order" harmonic number = 1 + 1/2↑2 + + 1/k↑2
k
= zeta(2) - Psi (k+1) .
1
This one is actually easy. You can almost do it by inspection, and, at any
rate, via summation by parts.
I can't prove it, but numerically consistent is
(2)
==== H 2
\ k pi zeta(3) - 9 zeta(5)
> ---- = ----------------------- .
/ 3 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
These came out of my question about the third order term of that batbleep
sum(gammas(sqrt(k))) identity. The actual result is so strange that
proffering it now will get me in trouble with either the IRS or the FTC.
∂14-Apr-89 0844 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Let's argue about futures
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 08:44:43 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04687; Fri, 14 Apr 89 08:45:14 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 08:45:14 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904141545.AA04687@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Let's argue about futures
Here's a one-line program that illustrate's one reason why I dislike
futures. In conjunction with setq, its extremely easy to hang
parallel programs by abusing futures. Such misuse can be arbitrarily
subtle.
(let ((x 5)) (setq x (future (sqrt x))))
The idea of the above form is expressed in the following new-qlisp
program, which correctly? hangs in parallel, but incorrectly? works
in serial, (i.e. no process spawning is done in serial, so it doesn't
hang).
(defun foo (&aux (x 5))
(setq x (spawn t (sqrt (get-future-value x))))
(get-future-value x))
-Dan
"Junk Futures are the next great investment idea ..."
-Boesky and Milken talking to people with alot of money.
"Futures are the easiest way to parallelize programs."
-Parallelism researchers talking to Darpa.
∂14-Apr-89 0917 MPS
Misha Donskoy (408) 725-1208 called. He met you in the USSR
in '75 and would like you to call.
Pat
∂14-Apr-89 1008 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com Let's argue about futures
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 10:08:22 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04910; Fri, 14 Apr 89 10:08:43 PDT
Received: from edsel ([192.9.200.1]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA06420g; Fri, 14 Apr 89 10:07:34 PDT
Received: from kolyma.lucid.com by edsel id AA24088g; Fri, 14 Apr 89 10:07:09 PDT
Received: by kolyma id AA08064g; Fri, 14 Apr 89 10:07:30 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 10:07:30 PDT
From: Carol Sexton <carol@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904141707.AA08064@kolyma.lucid.com>
To: pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Dan Pehoushek's message of Fri, 14 Apr 89 08:45:14 PDT <8904141545.AA04687@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Let's argue about futures
In the lisp that I hope to install as new-qlisp sometime in the next few
days, your example,
(defun foo (&aux (x 5))
(setq x (spawn (t) (sqrt (get-future-value x))))
(get-future-value x))
now causes an error to be signalled while running in parallel.
> (foo)
>> A process is blocking on a future for which the process is also trying
to compute a value.
GET-FUTURE-VALUE:
Required arg 0 (FUTURE): (FUTURE: realized-p=NIL type=(SPAWN) computing-processes= (PROCESS: pid=10 type=SPAWN status=WAITING-FOR-EVENT evaluating=((SQRT (GET-FUTURE-VALUE X))) parent-pid=-1 children-pid=NIL) waiting-processes= (PROCESS: pid=-1 type=MA
IN-QLISP-PROCESS status=WAITING-FOR-FUTURE evaluating=(ENTER-TOP-LEVEL T) parent-pid=-2 children-pid=NIL) )
:A 0: Abort to Lisp Top Level in Process 10 SPAWN
1: Abort to Lisp Top Level in Process 10 SPAWN
->
-- Carol
∂14-Apr-89 1235 saraswat@glacier.stanford.edu Seminar on R&D in Japan and USA
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 12:35:21 PDT
Received: from glacier.stanford.edu by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 14 Apr 89 12:30:05 PDT
Received: by glacier.stanford.edu; Fri, 14 Apr 89 13:23:01 MDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 13:23:01 MDT
From: Krishna Saraswat <saraswat@glacier.stanford.edu>
Subject: Seminar on R&D in Japan and USA
To: cis-people@glacier.stanford.edu, ee-faculty@sierra.stanford.edu,
mfg-others@glacier.stanford.edu, mfg-staff@glacier.stanford.edu
EE 310 SEMINAR
ON: VLSI R&D IN JAPAN AND USA
BY: Dr. Yoshio Nishi
Director, Hewlett Packard Silicon Processing Laboratory
(On Leave from Toshiba, Japan)
IN: McCullough 134
ON: April 18, 1989
AT: 4:15 P.M.
This is a rare opportunity to attend a seminar on a very important topic.
Dr. Nishi, popularly known as the father of the megabit DRAM in Toshiba,
came to HP three years ago under a long term exchange program. He is also a
consulting Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering at
Stanford. While at Toshiba he headed the MOS VLSI Technology department and
before that he was in charge of the Japanese VLSI project. He also taught at
a local university. Having been involved with industry as well as academia
both in Japan and USA, he is perhaps the best person to compare the R&D in
the two countries.
∂14-Apr-89 1343 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Let's argue about futures
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 13:43:13 PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05462; Fri, 14 Apr 89 13:43:34 PDT
Message-Id: <8904142043.AA05462@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Let's argue about futures
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 13:43:31 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
When side effects are allowed, any of the usual synchronization
methods will lead to the possibility of deadlock and non-determinacy.
So I don't see why futures should be considered any worse because of
this. As Carol points out, simple versions of this problem can at
least be detected and signal an error.
∂14-Apr-89 1418 winograd@loire.stanford.edu Note from Stallman
Received: from loire.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 14:17:57 PDT
Received: by loire.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA02661; Fri, 14 Apr 89 14:17:29 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 14:17:29 PDT
Message-Id: <8904142117.AA02661@loire.stanford.edu>
From: Terry Winograd <Winograd@csli.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Note from Stallman
I got a note from Stallman about an ad he did with Marvin and GJS. He
said he was sending it to you to. Are you moved to do anything with
it? --t
∂14-Apr-89 1659 harnad@Princeton.EDU Homeostasis and the Preipheral NS: BBS Call for Commentators
Received: from Princeton.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 16:59:43 PDT
Received: from psycho.Princeton.EDU by Princeton.EDU (5.58+++/2.6)
id AA01821; Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:58:09 EDT
Received: by psycho.Princeton.EDU (3.2/1.81)
id AA21779; Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:40:41 EDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:40:41 EDT
From: harnad@Princeton.EDU (Stevan Harnad)
Message-Id: <8904142340.AA21779@psycho.Princeton.EDU>
To: harnad@Princeton.EDU
Subject: Homeostasis and the Preipheral NS: BBS Call for Commentators
Below is the abstract of a forthcoming target article to appear in
Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), an international,
interdisciplinary journal that provides Open Peer Commentary on important
and controversial current research in the biobehavioral and cognitive
sciences. Commentators must be current BBS Associates or nominated by a
current BBS Associate. To be considered as a commentator on this article,
to suggest other appropriate commentators, or for information about how
to become a BBS Associate, please send email to:
harnad@confidence.princeton.edu or harnad@pucc.bitnet or write to:
BBS, 20 Nassau Street, #240, Princeton NJ 08542 [tel: 609-921-7771]
____________________________________________________________________
BETA-AFFERENTS:
A FUNDAMENTAL DIVISION OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM MEDIATING HOMEOSTASIS?
James C. Prechtl & Terry L. Powley
Laboratory of Regulatory Psychobiology
Department of Physiological Sciences
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907
Keywords: autonomic nervous system; capsaicin; dorsal root ganglion;
neuroimmunology, nerve growth factor; nociception; sypathetics;
substance P; sensory neurons; tachykinins; visceral afferents
The peripheral nervous system (PNS) has classically been subdivided
into a somatic division composed of both afferent and efferent
pathways and an autonomic division containing only efferents. Langley,
who codified this asymmetrical plan at the beginning of the 20th
century, considered different afferents, including visceral ones, as
candidates for inclusion in his concept of the "autonomic nervous
system" (ANS), but he finally excluded all candidates for lack of any
distinguishing histological markers. Langley's classification has been
enormously influential in shaping modern ideas about both the
structure and the function of the PNS. Here we survey modern information
about the PNS and argue that many of the sensory neurons designated as
"visceral" and "somatic" are in fact part of a histologically distinct
group of afferents dedicated to autonomic function. These afferents have
traditionally been known as "small dark" neurons or B-neurons. In this
target article we outline an association between autonomic and
B-neurons based on ontogeny, cell phenotype and functional relations,
grouping them together as part of a common reflex system involved in
homeostasis. This more parsimonious classification of the PNS,
provided by the identification of a group of afferents associated
primarily with the ANS, avoids a number of confusions produced by the
classical orientation. It may also have practical implications for our
understanding of nociception, homeostatic reflexes and the evolution
of the nervous system.
∂14-Apr-89 1826 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU shared variables
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 18:26:26 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07746; Fri, 14 Apr 89 18:26:58 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 18:26:58 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904150126.AA07746@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: shared variables
Dan and I discussed the issues raised by his message on futures and
came up with something that I think is a useful new idea. The example:
(setq x (spawn t (sqrt x)))
can be considered a problem with futures, but I would like to view it
as a problem with the semantics of variables. Someone writing this
code probably means "spawn a process to compute sqrt(x), using the
current value of x, and replace x by the result, using a future so
that the parent process can continue execution until the result is
needed."
The program fails because the parent and child process share the
binding for x, and x may be modified in the parent before being read
in the child. What would work is:
(setq x (let ((x x)) (spawn t (sqrt x))))
Another case that I think is even more likely to occur in practice is
the following:
(dotimes (i n)
(spawn t (foo i)))
The programmer probably intends to call (foo 1), (foo 2), etc., in
parallel processes, but this program won't necessarily do that because
the loop index i is shared among all of the processes. So unless each
process manages to call foo before the parent has incremented i in the
dotimes loop, it will call foo with the wrong value. It has to be
fixed as follows:
(dotimes (i n)
(let ((i i)) (spawn t (foo i))))
Our new idea is to make this the default behavior whenever a process
is created. To be more precise, whenever a process is created to
evaluate a form, the free variables v1,...,vn of the form are rebound
to their current values before the process is created.
An equivalent way to look at this, which points out a benefit in the
way it can be implemented, is that instead of calling the closure
(lambda () form)
in the spawned process, we instead call the function
(lamdba (v1 ... vn) form)
with the current values of v1,...,vn as arguments. This function no
longer needs to be a closure, because it has no free variables. It
should be possible to implement this without dynamic allocation at the
time the process is spawned, as is necessary for a closure.
In a way this is returning to the way that QLET was implemented in the
first version of Qlisp, but not completely. In an expression such as:
(spawn t (+ (sqrt x) (sqrt y)))
the early Qlisp would have evaluated (sqrt x) and (sqrt y) in the
parent, and then created a child process to call the + function with
these values as arguments. In the current Qlisp, the closure
(lambda () (+ (sqrt x) (sqrt y)))
is called in the child with an appropriate environment. In the new
proposal, the function
(lambda (x y) (+ (sqrt x) (sqrt y)))
is called in the child, using as arguments the values of x and y at
the time that the child was created. So all of the computation in the
form process gets evaluated in the child, but it no longer shares the
environment of the parent.
This solves one problem but introduces another, namely what to do when
a programmer actually wants to share a variable between two processes.
This is actually a fairly rare event. First, side effects must be
involved or else it would not matter whether the variable was rebound.
Secondly, in many cases a variable is bound to a data object, and the
object, rather than the variable itself, is modified. This is the
case with arrays and locks shared between processes, for example.
Still, we probably need to allow shared variables, so our proposal is
to introduce a new attribute of symbols used as variables; namely,
that they can be shared or unshared. The default will be unshared.
Whenever a form is to be evaluated in a new process, its free
variables are computed, and those that are unshared are made arguments
for the function to be evaluated in the new process, while those that
are shared are left as free variables. If there are any shared free
variables, then a closure must be created to capture the environment.
The parent copies the current values of the unshared variables into an
argument list for the child, and the child calls the function or
closure with these arguments.
Shared variables would be declared with (declare (shared x)) at the
appropriate place in the program where x is bound (i.e., right after
the bindings of a LET or the variables of a LAMBDA, etc.). Use of
shared variables is thus made explicit, and is noticed by anyone
reading the program.
All of the above has assumed that the variables are lexically bound.
It may also be useful to have shared and unshared special variables,
but we haven't thought about this very much.
To summarize, the proposal consists of the following:
1. A new property shared/unshared for variables. The default is
unshared, and a declaration can make a variable shared.
2. When the form to be computed in a new process contains unshared
free variables, their current values are passed as arguments to the
process.
3. When there are shared free variables, a closure is created for the
form to be computed in the child and these variables exist in the
environment of this closure.
Comments, please. I would like to make this a serious proposal for a
future version of the language.
Joe
∂14-Apr-89 1938 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com shared variables
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 19:37:59 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07938; Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:38:39 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA07055g; Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:37:29 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA02277g; Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:37:20 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 19:37:20 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904150237.AA02277@challenger>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of Fri, 14 Apr 89 18:26:58 PDT <8904150126.AA07746@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: shared variables
Well, Goldman and I already thought about this. When you have to create
a new feature to gain back functionality, you should think twice about
what you're up to. For the moment, you can write a copy-spawn that
does a treewalk to find free variables (I think there is such a function
in LCL that we could export for your use) and does the right binding?
(copy-spawn t (sqrt x)) => (let ((x x)) (spawn t (sqrt x)))
Or you could define a finer grained form like this:
(with-new-environment (x y) ...) that does the binding you want:
(with-new-environment (x) (spawn t (sqrt x)))
=>
(let ((x x)) (spawn t (sqrt x)))
But you might was well just use LET.
-rpg-
∂14-Apr-89 2217 tiemann@yahi.stanford.edu A way to fight Apple
Received: from yahi.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 22:16:58 PDT
Received: by yahi.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA00401; Fri, 14 Apr 89 22:15:59 PDT
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 22:15:59 PDT
From: tiemann@yahi.stanford.edu (Michael Tiemann)
Message-Id: <8904150515.AA00401@yahi.stanford.edu>
To: rms@wheaties.ai.mit.edu
Cc: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, weening@gang-of-four.stanford.edu,
bothner@pescadero.stanford.edu, raju@portia.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: Richard Stallman's message of Wed, 12 Apr 89 23:12:28 EDT <8904130312.AA00542@sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu>
Subject: A way to fight Apple
Reply-To: tiemann@lurch.stanford.edu
I would like to help do this. I can scrape together up to $1000 of
my own money. If you think it would not compromise our position, I
can try to see about getting companies to match my (or our) donation(s).
I would like to run this add in the Stanford Daily, as well as a local
paper, such as the San Jose Mercury News (which reprinted the NYT
article about rms's battle to make software free).
Michael
∂14-Apr-89 2344 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Apr 89 23:43:59 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 15 Apr 89 02:43:45 EDT
To: common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu
cc: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: the "N" in "NCONC"
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 02:43:43 EDT
Message-ID: <2558.608625823@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
To complete the 2nd edition of my Lisp book, I am researching the origin of
the "N" convention for naming destructive functions.
>From the description of NCONC in the Lisp 1.5 Programmer's Manual (p. 62),
it seems plausible that the "N" originally stood for "No copy". The manual
never says this explicitly, though.
If any of you Lisp historians out there can shed more light on this
important matter, I'd be much obliged.
-- Dave
∂15-Apr-89 0026 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM imaginary imaginaries [Was: Bessel, yo is my worry now]
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Apr 89 00:25:57 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 374526; Sat 15-Apr-89 03:22:59 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86536; Sat 15-Apr-89 00:19:02 PDT
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 00:18 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: imaginary imaginaries [Was: Bessel, yo is my worry now]
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
rcs.la.tis.com@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "gasper@nuacc.acns.nwu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19881121091315.9.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890415071851.7.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
[Andrews, Askey, & Berndt omitted for lack of email addresses]
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 88 01:13 PST
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I was puzzled by the sqrt(-1)s on only the rhs of
==== N
\ (- 1)
(C + i) > ---------------------------------------
/ N
==== /===\
N ≥ 0 ! ! 1 K - 1
! ! (1 - ------) (1 - i C (- Z) )
! ! K
1 K = 1 (- Z)
C + -------------------------- = -----------------------------------------------------
1
C Z + -------------------- ==== N
2 1 \ (- 1)
C Z + ------------- > -----------------------------------
3 1 / N
C Z + ------ ==== /===\
. N ≥ 0 ! ! 1 K
. ! ! (1 - ------) (1 - i C (- Z) )
. ! ! K
K = 1 (- Z)
This is easy to test numerically, as both sides converge rapidly for c,z>1 (or
|c|,|z|>>1).
And even easier if you just Taylor expand about inf wrt z, say. Both sides give
4 4
1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 C + 1 3 4 3 C + 1
C + --- - ----- + ----- + ----- - ------ - ------ + ------ - ------ + ------ - ------- + ------ - ------- + -------- + . . .
C Z 3 4 5 7 5 9 7 10 7 12 9 13 7 14 9 15 11 16 9 17 11 18 13 19
C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z C Z
Note the peculiar coupling of c powers to z powers. Eventually you see
numerator trinomials (with c powers 8,4,0), but the bunching stays very tight.
It sure seems like the rhs is nontrivially real.
Dawk! If you believe the equation, you can get rid of i on the right
simply by replacing c by i c, z by -z, and dividing thru by i, which
clearly preserves the lhs! (To scale a c.f., you can just alternately
multiply and divide the terms.)
∂15-Apr-89 0205 vanMeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM ([128.81.41.45]) by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Apr 89 02:05:13 PDT
Received: from PERTA.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 134490; Sat 15-Apr-89 04:26:11 EDT
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 04:26 EDT
From: Andre van Meulebrouck <vanMeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: the "N" in "NCONC"
To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, gsb@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, vanmeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <2558.608625823@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <19890415082630.6.VANMEULE@PERTA.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
[common-lisp removed, gsb added.]
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 02:43:43 EDT
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
To complete the 2nd edition of my Lisp book, I am researching the origin of
the "N" convention for naming destructive functions.
>From the description of NCONC in the Lisp 1.5 Programmer's Manual (p. 62),
it seems plausible that the "N" originally stood for "No copy". The manual
never says this explicitly, though.
If any of you Lisp historians out there can shed more light on this
important matter, I'd be much obliged.
-- Dave
I don't know about the nconc thing, but I do have a mental note on something
regarding one of your books that I've always wanted to mention to you.
In "LISP A Gentle Introduction to Symbolic Computation", copyrighted 1984, on
page 109, you state as follows.
"Functions that use AND and OR can also be implemented using COND or IF, and
vice versa."
And on page 111 you state as follows.
"Since IF, COND, AND, and OR are interchangeable conditionals, you may wonder
why Lisp has more than one."
On page 110 you give an example of using combinations of AND and OR instead of
IF.
My comment to the above is that IF is not interchangeable with AND and OR if you
use the interchange pattern used in your example. True, your example works, but
not for arbitrary cases, and I feel you should present the correct
implementation of IF in terms of AND and OR if you are going to make such
(strong) statements about semantic equivalences. (I'm not being a nitpicker,
I'm just a stickler for accuracy in stating semantic equivalences.)
Consider the following example, which shows the error in using the overly simple
pattern of (or (and if then) else).
(defmacro incorrect-if (if then else)
`(or (and ,if ,then)
,else))
(incorrect-if t nil 'else-clause) ; expands to
(OR (AND T
NIL)
'ELSE-CLAUSE) ; => else-clause
(defmacro correct-if (if then else)
`(let ((evaled-if ,if))
(or (and evaled-if ,then)
(and (not evaled-if) ,else))))
(correct-if t nil 'else-clause) ; expands to
(LET ((EVALED-IF T))
(OR (AND EVALED-IF
NIL)
(AND (NOT EVALED-IF)
'ELSE-CLAUSE))) ; => nil
In other words, (or (and if then) else) can't return NIL if IF is TRUE.
I hope you might see fit to note this in future versions of your book (if it's
not already noted in any versions already in print). And if you do note it, I
wouldn't mind being acknowledged for such in your next edition.
Regards, and best wishes in your endeavors.
∂15-Apr-89 0232 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Apr 89 02:32:39 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 15 Apr 89 05:31:29 EDT
To: Andre van Meulebrouck <vanMeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, gsb@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 15 Apr 89 04:26:00 -0400.
<19890415082630.6.VANMEULE@PERTA.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 05:31:07 EDT
Message-ID: <2673.608635867@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Hi, Andre. Thanks for your note. You are certainly correct in your
observation about the equivalence between IF and AND/OR. My book relied
on the fact that all the examples use IF's with a non-NIL "then" part. In
the second edition, I have inserted the following problem at the end of
chapter 4:
We can usually rewrite an IF as a combination of AND plus OR by following
this simple scheme: replace (IF @i[test true-part false-part]) with the
equivalent expression (OR (AND @i[test] @i[true-part]) @i[false-part]).
But this scheme fails for the expression (IF (ODDP 5) (EVENP 7) 'FOO). Why
does it fail? Suggest a more sophisticated way to rewrite IF as a
combination of AND's and OR's that does not fail. (Thanks to Andre van
Meulebrouck for pointing out this special case.)
The student won't have learned LET yet, so the solution I'm looking for is:
(or (and test true-part)
(and (not test) false-part))
Of course this has the disadvantage of evaluating the test twice, but at
this point in the book they're using a purely side effect-free style, so
it's not a problem.
Regards, -- Dave
∂16-Apr-89 1519 vanMeule@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Apr 89 15:19:44 PDT
Received: from PERTA.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 450076; Sat 15-Apr-89 18:01:00 EDT
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 17:54 EDT
From: Andre van Meulebrouck <vanMeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu, vanMeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, gsb@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, vanmeule@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <2673.608635867@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <19890415215440.7.VANMEULE@PERTA.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 89 05:31:07 EDT
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Hi, Andre. Thanks for your note. You are certainly correct in your
observation about the equivalence between IF and AND/OR. My book relied
on the fact that all the examples use IF's with a non-NIL "then" part. In
the second edition, I have inserted the following problem at the end of
chapter 4:
We can usually rewrite an IF as a combination of AND plus OR by following
this simple scheme: replace (IF @i[test true-part false-part]) with the
equivalent expression (OR (AND @i[test] @i[true-part]) @i[false-part]).
But this scheme fails for the expression (IF (ODDP 5) (EVENP 7) 'FOO). Why
does it fail? Suggest a more sophisticated way to rewrite IF as a
combination of AND's and OR's that does not fail. (Thanks to Andre van
Meulebrouck for pointing out this special case.)
Ah very good exercise. And thanks for the acknowledgment. Much appreciated.
(BTW, the e in Andre is an accented one--usually though, it doesn't appear that
way as the accented e is not a member of standard character sets.)
I found this special case by doing the exercises in your book--so thank you very
much for making me think... (When I started at Symbolics, I started in customer
support. The manager at the time had everyone go through your book as training
for support people.)
I've since heard from someone that they had some foggy recollection such that
they believe they recall that MIT Scheme writes IF as a macro using AND and OR,
but since I don't have MIT Scheme nor have ever looked at it, I can't verify
that. In any case, I'm sure I'm not the first person to ever notice this, but
as so often happens, one reinvents old wheels (but one knows the wheels more
deeply when one has to reinvent them).
The student won't have learned LET yet, so the solution I'm looking for is:
(or (and test true-part)
(and (not test) false-part))
Of course this has the disadvantage of evaluating the test twice, but at
this point in the book they're using a purely side effect-free style, so
it's not a problem.
Well, LET is purely side effect free, since it's merely syntactic sugar for an
invocation of a lambda form to arguments (at least in Scheme, where there is
only one environment, rather than multitudenous ones; one for values, one for
functions, one for specials, etc.), but I understand your point in that as a
book author presenting material, you have certain orders you want to present
material in. And for that matter, when you present LET, one of the exercises
could be to rewrite exercise xx to make it more efficient as some authors do (I
don't recall your book's style in that regard).
I notice in the Revised↑3 Report on Scheme that they give that semantic
equivalence for LET, i.e. (let ((varn valn) ...) body) = ((lambda (varn ...)
body) valn ...), but they don't give the AND OR semantic equivalent to IF (or at
least, if they do, I didn't see it in section 7.3 Derived Types, nor in section
4.2.1 Conditionals. I think that's rather interesting, but I don't know what to
make of it. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a correct IF in terms of AND
and OR in any book. I think AND and OR deserve much much more attention than
they usually get in Lisp books (yours was the first book I saw that mentioned
it, though I'd known about it previously). One of my interests in AND and OR is
from a minimalist perspective (i.e. what is the smallest set of primitives
needed in order to bootstrap the rest of Lisp)--from AND and OR, all other
conditionals in Lisp can be bootstrapped, so I'm particularly fond of AND and
OR. I'd like to see more books delve into AND and OR more deeply than they do.
For example, how are they implemented in lambda calculus, what type of
evaluation do they represent (I.e. call-by-name, or call-by-need. Are they
lazy? What are the ramifications of their evaluation style?), etc., but I
assume that's getting out of the scope of direct interest to your book.
Anyway (after much rambling...), I'll keep my eye out for your book at my local
bookstore! I liked your previous edition and will be interested to see your
next edition. (I'm always interested in seeing how people present Lisp to
beginners.)
Regards, -- Dave
∂17-Apr-89 0000 JMC
New ogm.
∂17-Apr-89 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 in Britain and the Soviet Union till April 17.
My secretary Pat Simmons, mps@sail.stanford.edu, 415 723-6321
has my schedule.
∂17-Apr-89 0518 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM this is oblivious
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 05:18:39 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 374679; Mon 17-Apr-89 08:11:27 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86590; Mon 17-Apr-89 05:07:32 PDT
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 05:07 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: this is oblivious
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890414102246.6.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890417120723.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 89 03:22 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
(2)
==== H 2
\ k zeta(2) + zeta(4) 7 4
> ---- = ------------------ = --- pi .
/ 2 2 360
==== k
k ≥ 1
(2)
where H is then kth "2nd order" harmonic number = 1 + 1/2↑2 + + 1/k↑2
k
= zeta(2) - Psi (k+1) .
1
This one is actually easy. You can almost do it by inspection, and, at any
rate, via summation by parts.
I can't prove it, but numerically consistent is
(2)
==== H 2
\ k pi zeta(3) - 9 zeta(5)
(*) > ---- = ----------------------- .
/ 3 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
These came out of my question about the third order term of that batbleep
sum(gammas(sqrt(k))) identity. The actual result is so strange that
proffering it now will get me in trouble with either the IRS or the FTC.
2 (2)
==== (k H - 3) ==== H + 2 zeta(2)
\ k \ k - 1
> ----------- = > ------------------ ,
/ 4 or 5 / 2 or 3
==== k ==== k
k ≥ 1 k ≥ 1
i.e. choose 2 with 4 or 3 with 5. (I should try 4 with 6 !) This gives */
2
==== H
\ k 7 zeta(5)
> -- = --------- - zeta(2) zeta(3) ,
/ 3 2
==== k
k ≥ 1
which stands or falls with (*), and
2
==== H
\ k 17 zeta(4)
> -- = ---------- ,
/ 2 4
==== k
k ≥ 1
which I can prove. Note, these last two feature squared ordinary
harmonic numbers, vs. unsquared second order as in (*).
So it looks like maybe
(a) b
==== (H )
\ k
> -------
/ c
==== k
k ≥ 1
will always come out in zetas.
∂17-Apr-89 0752 CLT US-Japan Cooperative Research on Theoretical Computer Science
To: sf@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, jcm@RA.Stanford.EDU, IAM@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
beeson@UCSCC.UCSC.EDU, WALDINGER@KL.SRI.COM, VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
We need to move ahead with the proposal.
Masahiko Sato will be official PI for the Japanese group
and John Mitchell will be official PI for the US group.
I have a copy of the previous proposal. It includes
some general text (which can be partly reused) and
a section (.5 - 1 page) for each participant describing
research interests, with some remarks as to specific
benefits from proposed collaboration. I will endeavor
to put together the surrounding text and budget.
Anyone who wants to read and criticize the result would be
appreciated. I need contributions for the above mentioned
sections from each of you (as computer text please) as well
as current bios to be included at the end. Since
we need to submit this around the 1st of May, I'll need
the contributions by 26-Apr.
∂17-Apr-89 1032 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from argus.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 10:32:49 PDT
Received: from INRIA.INRIA.FR by argus.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon, 17 Apr 89 10:21:34 PDT
Received: by inria.inria.fr (5.61+/89.0.7) via Fnet-EUnet id AA14241; Mon, 17 Apr 89 09:33:56 +0200 (MET)
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 09:30:16 +0200
Received: by ilog.ilog.fr, Mon, 17 Apr 89 09:30:16 +0200
From: padget@ilog.ilog.fr (Julian Padget)
Message-Id: <8904170730.AA08639@ilog.ilog.fr>
To: Dave.Touretzky@CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@b.gp.cs.cmu.edu's message of Sat, 15 Apr 89 02:43:43 EDT <2558.608625823@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: the "N" in "NCONC"
I remember this being discussed on an old lisp mailing list about 5
years ago. KMP (I think) avowed that it was a result of a
misunderstanding which arose as follows: there was a function CONC
which destructively joined two lists together (once upon a time) and
then it was generalised into an N-ary function and renamed NCONC.
Someone else (no names remembered or given) reading the description
decided that the N prefix distinguished it as a destructive operation
and so christened destructive reverse NREVERSE, and so on.
--Julian.
∂17-Apr-89 1120 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 11:20:37 PDT
Received: from BOBOLINK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 578392; Mon 17-Apr-89 14:20:32 EDT
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 14:19 EDT
From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: the "N" in "NCONC"
To: padget@ilog.ilog.fr
cc: Dave.Touretzky@CS.CMU.EDU, common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <8904170730.AA08639@ilog.ilog.fr>
Message-ID: <890417141925.9.KMP@BOBOLINK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 09:30:16 +0200
From: padget@ilog.ilog.fr (Julian Padget)
I remember this being discussed on an old lisp mailing list about 5
years ago. KMP (I think) avowed that it was a result of a
misunderstanding which arose as follows: there was a function CONC
which destructively joined two lists together (once upon a time) and
then it was generalised into an N-ary function and renamed NCONC.
Someone else (no names remembered or given) reading the description
decided that the N prefix distinguished it as a destructive operation
and so christened destructive reverse NREVERSE, and so on.
Yes, you probably heard this from me but I got the story (I think) from
Drew McDermott. When I heard it, I raced to my Lisp 1.5 manual to check
it out, and sure enough it doesn't align. I still tell the story,
though, usually disclaiming it as having come from Drew and observing it
to be `probably apocryphal' just because it's so typical of things that
really -do- happen.
∂17-Apr-89 1245 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 12:45:35 PDT
Received: from aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk by NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id aa09161; 17 Apr 89 20:30 BST
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 20:22:42 BST
Message-Id: <15142.8904171922@subnode.aiai.ed.ac.uk>
From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
To: Julian Padget <padget%ilog.ilog.fr@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>,
Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
In-Reply-To: Julian Padget's message of Mon, 17 Apr 89 09:30:16 +0200
Cc: common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
> I remember this being discussed on an old lisp mailing list about 5
> years ago. KMP (I think) avowed that it was a result of a
> misunderstanding which arose as follows: there was a function CONC
> which destructively joined two lists together (once upon a time) and
> then it was generalised into an N-ary function and renamed NCONC.
> Someone else (no names remembered or given) reading the description
> decided that the N prefix distinguished it as a destructive operation
> and so christened destructive reverse NREVERSE, and so on.
I've long thought that this story was correct, but if you look at the
Lisp 1.5 manual you'll see that CONC is the n-arg version, NCONC is a
2-arg function, and both work without copying.
-- Jeff
∂17-Apr-89 1343 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com a new new-qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 13:42:40 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07411; Mon, 17 Apr 89 13:43:26 PDT
Received: from edsel ([192.9.200.1]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA08762g; Mon, 17 Apr 89 13:42:16 PDT
Received: from kolyma.lucid.com by edsel id AA09173g; Mon, 17 Apr 89 13:41:41 PDT
Received: by kolyma id AA10355g; Mon, 17 Apr 89 13:42:20 PDT
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 13:42:20 PDT
From: Carol Sexton <carol@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904172042.AA10355@kolyma.lucid.com>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: a new new-qlisp
I'll be installing a new new-qlisp this afternoon. Remember that the
syntax of spawn is changed in this new lisp. The new syntax is
(spawn (prop :for-effect t) form) instead of
(spawn prop form).
Also, if a future is no longer pointed to by anything, the process
computing that future will now be killed at the end of a gc, unless the
user has specified that the process has been spawned for effect. One can
spawn a process for effect by either setting the :for-effect keyword in
spawn to a non-nil value or by calling the function execute-for-effect.
The function
(execute-for-effect obj)
takes a future, a process, or a qlambda function as an argument. If the
argument is a future created by SPAWN or QLET, gc is not allowed to kill
the process computing the future. If the argument is a future created by a
call to a QLAMBDA function, then gc will not kill this particular call to a
QLAMDA function. If the argument is a process, gc is not allowed to kill
the process. In the case of a QLAMBDA process, this means that no calls to
the associated QLAMBDA function will be killed by gc. If the argument is
anything else, EXECUTE-FOR-EFFECT just returns NIL. An error is not
signalled in this case because the argument could have been a realized
future that has been replaced by its value.
Let me know of any problems you have with the new new-qlisp.
Carol
∂17-Apr-89 1319 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
To: common-lisp@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, padget@ILOG.ILOG.FR
From: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I believe the term comes from ``Non-consing CONCatenate,'' which predates
Maclisp. Possbly Greenblatt, Gosper, or even Mike Levin came up with it.
The InterLisp equivalent is D- as in ``dreverse.''
-rpg-
∂17-Apr-89 1434 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 14:34:38 PDT
Received: from tribble by gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com id aa03485;
17 Apr 89 14:31 PDT
To: Dick Gabriel <RPG@sail.stanford.edu>
cc: common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu, JMC@sail.stanford.edu,
padget@ilog.ilog.fr, jbarnett@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com
Subject: Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
In-reply-to: Your message of 17 Apr 89 13:19:00 -0700.
<1UPwyf@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 14:30:56 -0700
From: jbarnett@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com
The name, "NCONC" was in existence long before InterLisp was ever thought
about. It appeared in the Q32 LISP 1.5 and I think in the MAC Lisp on the
7094 and PDP 10. I'm sure from my own experience that it was in vogue by
the early 1960's. The N in NCONC may be like the D in DREVERSE, but both
NCONC and DREVERSE were in the same systems. In any event, what is more
curious to me than the fact that the name NCONC starts with an N, is the
fact that the function was never and is not called DAPPEND or even NAPPEND.
∂17-Apr-89 1743 JK
John ---
HP lawyers are telling me that MAD is now
sending them letters .... The guy I talked to over at legal
was fairly amused --- he knew MAD by its reputation. I hear
there is only a handful left in development and the german
branch has formed a labor union.
The company you keep ????
∂17-Apr-89 1911 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com new new-qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 19:11:01 PDT
Received: from [192.26.25.1] by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08919; Mon, 17 Apr 89 19:11:51 PDT
Received: from edsel ([192.9.200.1]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA09337g; Mon, 17 Apr 89 19:10:41 PDT
Received: from kolyma.lucid.com by edsel id AA10590g; Mon, 17 Apr 89 19:10:03 PDT
Received: by kolyma id AA10636g; Mon, 17 Apr 89 19:10:43 PDT
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 19:10:43 PDT
From: Carol Sexton <carol@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904180210.AA10636@kolyma.lucid.com>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: new new-qlisp
I've finally installed the new new-qlisp. The previous
new-qlisp is in /lucid/bin/old-new-qlisp.
Carol
∂17-Apr-89 2237 goldberg@csli.Stanford.EDU Jeff Goldberg is off the net
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Apr 89 22:37:33 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA10765; Mon, 17 Apr 89 22:37:39 PDT
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 89 22:37:39 PDT
From: goldberg@csli.Stanford.EDU (Jeffrey Goldberg)
Message-Id: <8904180537.AA10765@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Jeff Goldberg is off the net
X-Note: This reply is automatically generated.
Apparently-To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I am living in Hungary at the following address.
Jeffrey Goldberg
V'ac
Csillag utca 18
H-2600
Hungary
I will probably be there until the fall of 1990 and will not
be reachable by E-Mail.
This message was sent to you in a response to a message you sent.
If my name is on a mailing list, please try to have my name
removed from that list.
Thank you, and sorry about the junk mail.
If there are problems with this message send a not to
postmaster@csli.stanford.edu.
-jeff goldberg
∂18-Apr-89 0000 JMC
March 24 ideas[1,jmc] on giving
∂18-Apr-89 0231 Common-Lisp-mailer the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from lucid.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 89 02:31:29 PDT
Received: from bhopal ([192.43.178.13]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA09534g; Tue, 18 Apr 89 02:31:09 PDT
Received: by bhopal id AA03330g; Tue, 18 Apr 89 02:31:03 PDT
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 89 02:31:03 PDT
From: Jon L White <jonl@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904180931.AA03330@bhopal>
To: padget@ilog.ilog.fr
Cc: Dave.Touretzky@CS.CMU.EDU, common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: Julian Padget's message of Mon, 17 Apr 89 09:30:16 +0200 <8904170730.AA08639@ilog.ilog.fr>
Subject: the "N" in "NCONC"
re: . . . KMP (I think) avowed that it was a result of a
misunderstanding which arose as follows: there was a function CONC
which destructively joined two lists together (once upon a time) and
then it was generalised into an N-ary function and renamed NCONC.
This explanation doesn't seem very likely to me. The Lisp 1.5 Programmer's
Manual -- which dates to mid 1962 -- shows both CONC and NCONC as being
N-ary operations.
When I first showed up around MIT in the late 60's, the common gossip
was that the "N" stood for "Non-Consing". Interlisp (nee, BBN-Lisp)
had another nomenclature -- a prefix "D" meant "Destructive" rather
than "Non-Consing". Interestingly, there was one exception to the
Interlisp scheme -- NCONC. Possibly, then, it was trying to remain
compatible with Lisp 1.5. But the pattern must have been instituted
after the break in communications between the BBN gang and the MIT
gang, since MacLisp's predecessor on the PDP6 had NREVERSE whereas
Interlisp has DREVERSE.
In the early days of 7094 Lisp (on CTSS), consing "too much" could
be disastrous. People were known even back then to try tricks to
avoid it. Despite the humongous increase in address space that the
7094 afforded over the 650, there was still the likelihood that all
of the nearly 32 thousand cells would be occupied. And the first
garbage collectors were known to "take a while".
Hmmmm, 32 thousand "new cells"; hmmm, we've come a long way, baby.
-- JonL --
∂18-Apr-89 2101 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU a problem in inference
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 89 21:01:47 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA14732; Tue, 18 Apr 89 10:08:40 -0700
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 89 10:08:40 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8904181708.AA14732@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: a problem in inference
Here's a practical problem related to the "thieves paradox":
Can you give axioms and an inference method that will lead to reaching
correct conclusions about whether it is necessary to lock the car or not
in a variety of situations.
This will require "common-sense reasoning" but there is a
certain precision to the problem since the required answer is either
"yes" or "no" (lock the car or don't). Moreover there is some hope of
isolating the relevant factors from the maze of all possible information
about the world.
∂18-Apr-89 2103 tony@cs.UAlberta.CA Hard Copy in mail. Re 6th WCCt
Received: from relay.ubc.ca by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 89 21:03:23 PDT
Received: by relay.ubc.ca (5.59/1.14)
id AA03384; Tue, 18 Apr 89 20:05:46 PDT
Date: 18 Apr 89 21:04 -0600
From: "T.Anthony Marsland" <tony@cs.UAlberta.CA>
To: John McCarthy <jmc@sail.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <874*tony@cs.UAlberta.CA>
Subject: Hard Copy in mail. Re 6th WCCt
Return-Receipt-To: "T.Anthony Marsland" <tony@cs.UAlberta.CA>
April 18, 1989
Prof. John McCarthy
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-2140
U.S.A.
Dear Professor McCarthy:
We are all looking forward to your talk at the CIPS Conference (31 May) and your
presence at the pre-events of the 6th World Computer Chess Championship (28-31 May),
and at the workshop on "New Directions in Game-tree Search" (afternoons, 29 & 30 May).
I hope that you have received all of our advertising material. Now that I have completed
the selection of the 24 participants for the WCCC and the review of the longer presentations
at the workshop, all that remains is to get together the extended abstracts from people who
will make 10 minute presentations. These abstracts and the final papers and the formal
papers will be bound together in a set of workshop preprints. With all this activity, I have
been somewhat negligent in approaching you to be an opening speaker for one of the
sessions at the workshop. Your theme from the 4th World Computer Chess Championship
(New York, 1983) seems to be equally valid now and would again help to stimulate the
computer chess community to greater scientific efforts.
I sincerely hope that you will accept my invitation to address our audience, no
matter how brief, and perhaps to supply an abstract to support your position for including
in the preprints. My absolute deadline for accepting material is the 15th of May, and I am
quite happy to see that electronically.
Looking forward to meeting you again here in Edmonton.
Yours sincerely,
T.A. Marsland
Professor
TAM/klk
enclosure: notice
∂18-Apr-89 2126 eyal@coyote.stanford.edu re: my M.Sc. thesis
Received: from coyote.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 89 21:26:06 PDT
Received: by coyote.stanford.edu; Tue, 18 Apr 89 09:16:06 PST
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 89 09:16:06 PST
From: Eyal Mozes <eyal@coyote.stanford.edu>
Subject: re: my M.Sc. thesis
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
I would still like to meet sometime and discuss this. Particularly,
whether you agree with me or not, I'd like to know if you'd consider
being my advisor in a continuation of this work.
Eyal Mozes
∂18-Apr-89 2128 jonl@lucid.com the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from lucid.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 Apr 89 21:27:58 PDT
Received: from bhopal ([192.43.178.13]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA10500g; Tue, 18 Apr 89 17:16:23 PDT
Received: by bhopal id AA05001g; Tue, 18 Apr 89 17:16:02 PDT
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 89 17:16:02 PDT
From: Jon L White <jonl@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904190016.AA05001@bhopal>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 18 Apr 89 0703 PDT <EQ6s2@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: the "N" in "NCONC"
re: [my remark] ... suggests that LISP was
important on the 650 at some time. I don't believe this was ever true.
Me neither. But IPL-V was important on the 650 for quite some time,
and there were other "List Processing" attempts on it in addition to Lisp.
[One such abortive attempt was Perlis's Formula Algol -- and one of my
college roommates had the task of writing a garbage collector for it;
the plan was to rewrite SAINT, outdoing Slagle and casting the algorithms
into a readable format. Not only did Slagle stumble upon the problem
of FUNCTION in Lisp, but his code, of course, had no need of pretty
printing. They didn't succeed. Moses, in SIN, more-or-less did, and
that led to the cooperative venture with Bill Martin called MacSyma.]
I'm happy to see you respond to this remark, because it is rooted in
one of the most confusing tales of Lisp lore ("confusing" to me that is).
I'm sure that I heard you give a Lisp history talk in a large classroom
at MIT about 1970, at which you described the genesis of garbage
collection as follows. Once upon a time, one of the early programmers
suggested a construction "function" for the Fortran-based lisp, rather
than having to do the three-step operation of allocation, setting of
the "address part" and setting of the "decrement" part. Then, he
(the neophyte) began to wonder if this new-found ease of constructing
new objects would lead to "consing too much"; your reply (so goes the
story) was "My god, my good man, there are 32 thousand new cells on
this machine you can't possibly cons too much". At which point the
neophyte went away perplexed and not convinced. The rest is history.
Oh, well, by 1978 you were abjuring the story. I did remember taking
written notes, in pencil, of that talk but they have since long ceased
to be part of my completely disorder collection of MIT memoribilia. I
only have the strong remembrances of the period from early 70's to
present where I _remember_ having taking the notes.
Dick is writing a book or some such on Lisp history. Heard about it?
-- JonL --
∂19-Apr-89 0428 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM quickie
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 04:28:39 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 375280; Wed 19-Apr-89 07:25:04 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86769; Wed 19-Apr-89 04:21:08 PDT
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 89 04:20 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: quickie
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890419112052.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
inf -n
==== 2
\ x + 1
> ln ------- = ?
/ 2
====
n = 1
Answer (aw, c'mon, this one's easy!): m-X Query Exchange "-" with " " in
-----x- -1-
--ln-
-----ln-x-
Note that whether you "simplify" to ln(x-1) - ln(ln x) or ln(1-x) - ln(-ln x)
depends on the magnitude of x.
∂19-Apr-89 0559 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fibonacho
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 05:59:19 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 375282; Wed 19-Apr-89 08:55:33 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86771; Wed 19-Apr-89 05:51:48 PDT
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 89 05:51 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fibonacho
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890419112052.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890419125136.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Knuth, Vol 0 (Concrete Math) mentions the surprising
Raney lemma: any finite sequence of integers whose sum = 1
has *exactly 1* cyclic shift whereat all the partial sums
are positive.
Since that crazy
n k -n
Sum - ( ) Fib = 1
k=1 n n - k k+1
generates such sequences, what are the Raney shifts?
n = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ... 68, 69, ...
s = 0, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 3, 4, 3, 4, ... 3, 4, ...
I have a crude proof that s will never reach 5. (I.e., the k=6 term
will never be the first positive one majorizing the succeeding term.)
(This is sufficient, since the terms alternate, and the magnitudes
form a smooth hump, whose max, it seems, never moves beyond k=4.)
∂19-Apr-89 0725 CLT JSPS/NSF proposal
To: "@JAPAN.DIS[1,CLT]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Here is the latest from Sato --- FYI
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 89 11:01:36 JST
From: masahiko@nuesun.ntt.jp (Masahiko Sato)
To: clt@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: JSPS/NSF propsal
Japanese particiapnts are decided as follows.
Masahiko Sato (Tohoku University, Professor)
Takayasu Ito (Tohoku Unviersity, Professor)
Akinori Yonezawa (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Professor)
Susumu Hayashi (Ryuukoku University, Assoicate Professor)
Makoto Tatsuta (Tohoku University, Research Associate)
Yukiyoshi Kameyama (Tohoku University, Research Associate)
Aki Yonezawa is interested in concurrent object oriented sytem, and he
says that it would be nice if his friend Gul Agha (agha@yale.edu)
could be added to the list of the US participants. Agha is Assist. Prof.
at Yale's CS Dept. He published "Actors: A Model of Concurrent
Computation in Distributed Systems" from MIT Press in 1987. Of
course, it is OK if it's too late.
Susumu Hayashi moved from Kyoto University to Ryuukoku University on
April 1.
Makoto Tatsuta is my assistant and he solved some of Beeson's open
problems.
We are now preparing our proposal, and I will send it when it is
finished. We are preparing the proposal under the title: "Research in
new foundations of comuter science".
Please send your proposal by the end of this month.
masahiko
∂19-Apr-89 1121 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Questions
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 11:21:24 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05706; Wed, 19 Apr 89 11:22:32 PDT
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 89 11:22:32 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904191822.AA05706@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Questions
A couple of questions:
1. Ilan Vardi has asked if he can use the extra desk in my office for
the next few months. He is going to be working with Mathematica,
using a Sun-3 supplied by Wolfram, and would like to put it there.
I don't object to him being here, but I told him that you would need
to approve this.
2. The maintenance agreement for the Symbolics machine will soon be up
for renewal, but I don't think it's worth it. (About $7K per year.)
The Qlisp project no longer gains any benefit from this machine, but
Ramin would like to keep using it.
3. You presumably saw RPG's message about the Japan trip. I haven't
heard anything further since then. What if anything should we do at
this point? (Sharon Bergman has sent the approval requests to the ONR
office but they haven't come back yet.)
∂19-Apr-89 1359 tony@cs.UAlberta.CA WOrkshop notice (computer chess)
Received: from relay.ubc.ca by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 13:59:36 PDT
Received: by relay.ubc.ca (5.59/1.14)
id AA02098; Wed, 19 Apr 89 13:59:21 PDT
Date: 19 Apr 89 14:56 -0600
From: "T.Anthony Marsland" <tony@cs.UAlberta.CA>
To: John McCarthy <jmc@sail.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <875*tony@cs.UAlberta.CA>
Subject: WOrkshop notice (computer chess)
THE AGT WORLD COMPUTER CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP
AND WORKSHOP ON NEW DIRECTIONS IN GAME-TREE SEARCH
The 6th World Computer Chess Championship, sanctioned and
organized by the International Computer Chess Association,
sponsored by Alberta Government Telephones and hosted by the
Canadian Information Processing Society, will be held at the
Edmonton Convention Centre from Sunday, 28th of May, to
Wednesday, 31st of May inclusive, with an awards luncheon on
Thursday, 1st of June. This event will be the largest in a
series which date back to New York, 1970, and constitutes
one of the longest running experiments in computer science.
Twenty- four of the best chess-programming teams from around
the world will participate. All the major commercial ven-
dors will be there with enhanced experimental versions of
their standard products, including Fidelity Electronics
(Chess Challenger), Hegener & Glaser of Munich (Mephisto and
Rebel) and Novag, and demonstration pieces from Sys-10 Inc.,
of Chicago, and Quest from The Netherlands.
Competing against these successful corporate ventures are
such formidable opponents as the current world champion,
Cray Blitz, two higher ranked serious contenders for the ti-
tle (Hitech and Deep Thought) from Carnegie-Mellon Universi-
ty, the local favourite Phoenix with its multitude of pro-
cessors, and a plethora of micro-computer based systems from
the U.S.A. and The Netherlands. Several other countries are
represented including Sweden, Germany, the USSR, Hungary,
and the United Kingdom. Competition starts on Sunday, 28th
of May (at 1pm and 7pm) in the Edmonton Convention Centre,
and continues on the Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday evenings
at 7 p.m. The event may be viewed by the public at no
charge, and commentators will be at hand both to explain
technical points about the progress, and to describe the
computing systems behind the programs.
During the afternoons of Monday and Tuesday, 29th and 30th
of May, the formal sessions of the workshop occur, also at
the Convention Centre. Many noted computer scientists will
be present, including Donald Michie and John McCarthy, Georg
Adelson-Velsky (and others from the Soviet Union), Hans Ber-
liner (designer of Hitech), and Ken Thompson. The sessions
include some formal papers contrasting different search
problems posed by Chess and Go, and other papers relating
the use of database and multicomputer systems in support of
goal directed search. Ample time has also been set aside
for oral presentations by working groups and the ever popu-
lar panel-oriented discussion.
For information about the workshop contact: Professor Tony
Marsland, Computing Science, University of Alberta, Edmon-
ton, Canada T6G 2H1
Fax: (403)-492-1071 Phone (403)-492-3971 Email
tony@cs.ualberta.ca
∂19-Apr-89 1636 CLT Japan collaboration
To: "@JAPAN.DIS[1,CLT]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I need the following information from each of you to include
in the proposal (in addition to the previously requested paragraph and cv)
(1) The number and title of any current or pending NSF grants that
you are being supported by.
(2) a list of previous professional visits to Japan -- purpose and date
If you follow the format of the sample list below it will help me
in the typesetting.
%%begin sample
Visit to Electrotechnical Lab., Tokyo
4/9--4/12/70
Attend Conference on Mathematical Aspects of Computer science
and IFIP Working Group 2.1, Kyoto
8/23--8/26/78
Visit Nippon Telephone $\&$ Telegraph Co., Tokyo
and University of Tsukuba, Ibaragi
8/27--9/12/78
%%end sample
Thanks,
Carolyn
∂19-Apr-89 1726 susan@nessus.stanford.edu CIS EdCom proposals
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 17:26:35 PDT
Received: from nessus.stanford.edu by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 19 Apr 89 17:21:51 PDT
Received: by nessus.stanford.edu (5.57/inc-1.2)
id AA03765; Wed, 19 Apr 89 17:22:39 PDT
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 89 17:22:39 PDT
From: susan@nessus.stanford.edu (Susan Gere)
Message-Id: <8904200022.AA03765@nessus.stanford.edu>
To: EE-faculty@sierra.stanford.edu, faculty@score.stanford.edu
Subject: CIS EdCom proposals
To: All faculty in CS and EE Departments
>From: CIS Education Committee
Subject: Proposals for Course Development Support
The CIS Education Committee has been established to promote
imaginative initiatives to further the educational/instructional
direction of the Center for Integrated Systems.
The committee is now soliciting proposals from the faculty,
particularly highlighting such areas as:
* New course introduction
* Course development of CIS relevant courses, including:
- Faculty support for textbook development
- TV taping of special seminars
- Development of TV material for course use
- Summer institutes/workshops
- Visiting lecturer programs
- CAD support for classroom use
- Workstations/computing equipment
(insofar as such equipment is not part of department
computer facilities or exclusively research in nature).
The committee seeks especially to create seed/pilot programs that
will eventually become part of a department's ongoing operations
or will in some other fashion be self-funding.
How to respond:
In order to have a proposal considered, the committee needs
a short summary discussing the proposal substance, a statement
of how the program will eventually be incorporated into department
operations or will otherwise become self-funding, and a budget.
Please send questions or proposals to me (ERL 452, or flynn@mimd).
Feel free to discuss your ideas with any of the committee members.
- Mike Flynn
for the CIS Education Committee
Committee members:
Robert Dutton, Mike Flynn, Gene Franklin, John Linvill,
Malcolm McWhorter, Fabian Pease, Stuart Reges, Jeff Ullman.
∂19-Apr-89 1912 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Preliminary Qlisp manual
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 19:12:04 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07752; Wed, 19 Apr 89 19:12:41 PDT
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 89 19:12:41 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904200212.AA07752@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Preliminary Qlisp manual
A very preliminary version of the Qlisp manual is now available on
/qlisp/qlisp.dvi. (The LaTeX source is also there, in qlisp.tex.)
Please give me comments on what needs to be fixed.
∂19-Apr-89 2204 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:okuno@ntt-20.ntt.jp Re: Preliminary Qlisp manual
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Apr 89 22:04:00 PDT
Received: from Argus.Stanford.EDU by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08026; Wed, 19 Apr 89 22:04:45 PDT
Received: from ntt-sh.ntt.jp ([129.60.57.1]) by argus.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Wed, 19 Apr 89 21:51:13 PDT
Received: by ntt-sh.ntt.jp (3.2/ntt-sh-03c) with TCP; Thu, 20 Apr 89 14:00:25 JST
Received: by MECL.NTT.jp (3.2/NTTcs02) with TCP; Thu, 20 Apr 89 14:01:24 JST
Date: 20 Apr 89 13:59:20 JST
From: Hiroshi G. Okuno <okuno@ntt-20.ntt.jp>
Message-Id: <Zmm=IMAP/ELIS283918@Nickel.NTT.JP>
To: Joe Weening <weening@gang-of-four.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Preliminary Qlisp manual
Cc: qlisp@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of <8904200212.AA07752@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
> A very preliminary version of the Qlisp manual is now available on
> /qlisp/qlisp.dvi. (The LaTeX source is also there, in qlisp.tex.)
> Please give me comments on what needs to be fixed.
The file is /qlisp/manual.dvi, not qlisp.dvi.
- Gitchang -
∂20-Apr-89 0723 @SAIL.Stanford.EDU:agha-gul@YALE.ARPA Japan collaboration
Received: from SAIL.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 07:23:12 PDT
Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU (CS-GW.CS.YALE.EDU) by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 07:22:44 PDT
Received: by ELI.CS.YALE.EDU; Thu, 20 Apr 89 10:17:54 EDT
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 89 10:17:54 EDT
From: gul agha <agha-gul@YALE.ARPA>
Full-Name: gul agha
Message-Id: <8904201417.AA01167@ELI.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: by yale-hp-crown (yorkside)
via WIMP-MAIL (Version 1.3/1.5) ; Thu Apr 20 10:20:36
To: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Cc: "@JAPAN.DIS[1,CLT]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Carolyn Talcott's message of 19 Apr 89 1636 PDT <aQzVp@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Japan collaboration
Date: 19 Apr 89 1636 PDT
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I need the following information from each of you to include
in the proposal (in addition to the previously requested paragraph and cv)
(1) The number and title of any current or pending NSF grants that
you are being supported by.
(I don't know if this extends to departmental CER, otherwise my support
comes from DARPA and ONR.) However, I received:
CCR-8814055 for "Object-based Concurrent Programming Workshop" (the
grant is still "current").
(2) a list of previous professional visits to Japan -- purpose and date
If you follow the format of the sample list below it will help me
in the typesetting.
Visit to ICOT
11/24/88
Visit to Tokyo Institute of Technology
11/25/88
Visit to Keio University
11/26/88
Visit to Sony Research Laboratory
11/26/88
Attend International Conference Fifth Generation Computer Systems
11/28--12/1/88
Cheers,
Gul
∂20-Apr-89 0809 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 07:41:39 PDT
Received: from aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk by NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id aa08443; 20 Apr 89 15:31 BST
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 89 15:25:29 BST
Message-Id: <20806.8904201425@subnode.aiai.ed.ac.uk>
From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
To: Jon L White <@sail.stanford.edu:jonl@lucid.com>,
padget%ilog.ilog.fr@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
In-Reply-To: Jon L White's message of Tue, 18 Apr 89 02:31:03 PDT
Cc: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu, common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu
> This explanation doesn't seem very likely to me. The Lisp 1.5 Programmer's
> Manual -- which dates to mid 1962 -- shows both CONC and NCONC as being
> N-ary operations.
Um, JonL, when I look in the Lisp 1.5 manual, I see NCONC (p 62)
described as a 2-argument function. CONC is n-argument, Both are
destructive.
∂20-Apr-89 0900 JMC
Expenses!
∂20-Apr-89 0900 JMC
amex
∂20-Apr-89 1000 JMC
meehan
∂20-Apr-89 0936 Common-Lisp-mailer Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
Received: from Xerox.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 09:36:31 PDT
Received: from Riesling.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 20 APR 89 06:02:17 PDT
Sender: "Larry_Masinter.PARC"@Xerox.COM
Date: 19 Apr 89 09:36:38 PDT (Wednesday)
Subject: Re: the "N" in "NCONC"
From: masinter.PARC@Xerox.COM
To: KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: padget@ilog.ilog.fr, Dave.Touretzky@CS.CMU.EDU,
common-lisp@sail.stanford.EDU, jmc@sail.stanford.EDU
In-Reply-to: KMP%STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics:COM's message of Monday, April
17, 1989 11:49 am
Reply-to: masinter.PARC@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <890420-060217-3764@Xerox>
The convention wasn't universal. While Interlisp had NCONC, it used
DREVERSE (for Destructive REVERSE) , DREMOVE, DSUBST, etc.
∂20-Apr-89 1144 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Performance reviews
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 11:43:55 PDT
Date: Thu 20 Apr 89 11:43:18-PDT
From: Yvette Sloan <SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Performance reviews
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12487696076.23.SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Professor McCarthy--
We are now into salary settig and I still haven't received your performance
apraisal on Pat, Dan Pehoushek, Vladmit Lifschitz, and Ian Mason. Will I
get them *soon*?
--Yvette
-------
∂20-Apr-89 1502 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Performance reviews
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 15:01:53 PDT
Date: Thu 20 Apr 89 15:01:12-PDT
From: Yvette Sloan <SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Performance reviews
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <mRs7z@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12487732100.23.SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Those were the salary recommendation sheets that Carolyn gave me yesterday.
Thanks for getting them to me; however, I still need the "performance
appraisals". These are the sheets that you were to complete on your people
and then sit down and discuss their performance with them. Both parties
are to sign them. I gave you a packet with a form for everyone in your group
except Carolyn; Nils completed one for her. If you can't find them, please
let me know. I'll put another packet together. Thanks.
--Yvette
-------
∂20-Apr-89 1532 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU retreat
Received: from Tenaya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 15:32:01 PDT
Received: by Tenaya.Stanford.EDU (NeXT-0.8/NeXT-0.8)
id AA15587; Thu, 20 Apr 89 15:28:46 PDT
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 89 15:28:46 PDT
From: nilsson@tenaya.Stanford.EDU (Nils Nilsson)
Message-Id: <8904202228.AA15587@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: retreat
Cc: nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU
John,
Would you like to give a 20 min. talk at this year's
faculty retreat? Something like, "here is one of
(some of?) the major problems in AI, and here
is what I think ought to be done about it." If
so, pls send a descriptive title, and I'll put you
on the agenda. Since we have so many new
faculty who have joined us, many people in the
Dept. haven't had a chance to hear you, and,
who knows, you might inspire someone to go
off and solve an important problem.
-Nils
∂20-Apr-89 1835 brooks@Portia.stanford.edu re: Jones and Palmer Cold Fusion Paper (VERY LONG!)
Received: from Portia.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Apr 89 18:34:55 PDT
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA05998; Thu, 20 Apr 89 17:20:59 PDT
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1989 17:20:20 PDT
From: Michael Brooks <brooks@Portia.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Jones and Palmer Cold Fusion Paper (VERY LONG!)
In-Reply-To: Your message of 20 Apr 89 1507 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.609121220.brooks@Portia.stanford.edu>
John,
Any heat pump effects would have to be related to the heat capacity
differences between H2O and D2O. I spent a few minutes digging through
my trusty old CRC, checking everything that could be relevant, but I
could find no data on C(subp) for D20. I did find out that at
30degC: the density of D20 is 1.10323 g/cc, that of H2O is 0.995646g/cc,
and the heat capacity of H2O is 30.0244 cal/g (just as one would expect,
the old 1cal/gxdegC rule). Sorry though, not much helpful stuff to
address your question. Thinking right off the top of my head,
any heat transferred by a purely physical "heat pump" mechanism would
be
Q = deltaC(subp) + C(subp) integrated with respect to temp T over the
range of interest, approximating it`s something like
Q = C(subp)deltaT. If each Q is measured by watching deltaT and
assuming C(subp) is fixed, you`re right that one could get into trouble
if large differences exist in C(subp), from H2O vs. D2O. Since I can`t
find any data on this, I can speculate and assume that a max difference
could be 10%---not enough to account for the differences in the cells.
On the other hand, one could say that a sufficiently large "isotope
effect" in C(subp) could theoretically account for the difference---
bearing in mind that the ratio of C(subp) would have to be huge, like
2:1 D2O:H2O if one believes the "half again" heat difference.
Well, that`s about all I have for you. I could easily be wrong, my
physical chemistry and thermo hasn`t aged well. Finally, I don`t know
if Huggins team gave any consideration to this aspect of the heat
problem. If not, they should have.
Mike.
∂21-Apr-89 0725 siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU SCLC Amendment
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 89 07:25:34 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 21 Apr 89 07:23:01 PDT
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 89 07:23:01 PDT
From: siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman)
To: jmc@sail
Subject: SCLC Amendment
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.609171780.siegman@>
I think your proposed Amendment to the SCLC legislation would be a good
one. However, I believe my focus will be criticizing the legislation on
other grounds, and attempting to defeat it totally; and so I would
rather not volunteer to be responsible for proposing your amendment.
Could you find some other Senator willing to move it for you during
the debate? (I have no idea what the overall sense of the Senate on
the whole SCLC issue may be; rousing some public opinion against it
can do no harm.)
∂21-Apr-89 1348 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: First Amendment
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 89 13:48:53 PDT
Date: Fri 21 Apr 89 13:46:43-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: First Amendment
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9QaLe@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12487980685.147.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Excellent idea!! It essentially nullifies all the pre-totalitarian prose
that is currently found in the SCLC...
Welcome back!
Alex
-------
∂21-Apr-89 1353 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU re: comparative costs
Received: from Tenaya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 89 13:53:17 PDT
Received: by Tenaya.Stanford.EDU (NeXT-0.8/NeXT-0.8)
id AA16487; Fri, 21 Apr 89 13:50:00 PDT
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 89 13:50:00 PDT
From: nilsson@tenaya.Stanford.EDU (Nils Nilsson)
Message-Id: <8904212050.AA16487@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: re: comparative costs
Cc: nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU
Is that 98,000 gross or net square feet?
(Net square feet is also often called "assignable."
It does not include utility space, hallways, elevators,
etc. Net is usually about 2/3 of gross.) -Nils
∂21-Apr-89 1412 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: First Amendment
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 89 14:12:16 PDT
Date: Fri 21 Apr 89 14:10:12-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: First Amendment
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <11Rxq6@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12487984961.147.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
No, but I'm sure Joe Weening would remember since I think he set it up
(the SCLC address).
Alex
-------
∂21-Apr-89 1421 HEMENWAY@Score.Stanford.EDU Evaluation Meeting Request
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 89 14:20:57 PDT
Date: Fri 21 Apr 89 13:54:23-PDT
From: Sharon Hemenway <HEMENWAY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Evaluation Meeting Request
To: jsw@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: jcm@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Reply-To: Hemenway@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12487982082.25.HEMENWAY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
ReSent-Date: Fri 21 Apr 89 14:20:18-PDT
ReSent-From: Sharon Hemenway <HEMENWAY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
ReSent-To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
ReSent-Message-ID: <12487986799.43.HEMENWAY@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Joe:
Each year, the faculty of the Computer Science department evaluates
the progress of each Ph.D. student to ensure that they are making
"reasonable progress" towards the degree (as defined in the Ph.D
Requirements memo available in my office). The chairman of the Ph.D.
Program Committee, Mike Genesereth, and I have gone through the
records of each student and identified those of you who have either
already passed a "reasonable progress" deadline or who are about to
pass your last chance before a hard deadline. I have summarized your
particular situation at the end of this message. Please bear in mind
that the department regards deadlines seriously; if you fail to meet a
deadline and have not made alternate arrangements, the faculty may
decide at the end-of-year Black Friday meeting to recommend that you
not continue in the program.
We are now requesting that those of you who receive this message
schedule a meeting with your advisor, Mike Genesereth and me. At this
meeting, we will discuss your situation in detail and go over possible
avenues of corrective action. In addition to the discussion
opportunity, this meeting will satisfy the University requirement that
the department give students in your situation an opportunity to
discuss the matter before any further action is taken. If there
is *no* doubt that you will be clearing your requirement within a few
weeks (or finishing up totally by the end of this quarter), please
notify me; it will not be necessary for you to schedule a meeting.
Ana Haunga, Mike's secretary, is maintaining a calendar with 15 minute
blocks of time on Tuesday afternoons, beginning with April 25
(Tuesday, May 2 will not be available for meetings). It is your
responsibility to contact your advisor and Ana to reserve a block. We
ask that you try to do this as soon as possible.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sharon
Joe Weening: Candidacy expiring at end of Spring quarter.
-------
∂21-Apr-89 1425 boesch@vax.darpa.mil A survey
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Apr 89 14:24:58 PDT
Received: from sun44.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA04660; Fri, 21 Apr 89 16:06:55 EDT
Posted-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 89 14:56:26 EST
Message-Id: <8904211956.AA17342@sun44.darpa.mil>
Received: from LOCALHOST by sun44.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA17342; Fri, 21 Apr 89 14:56:30 EST
To: isto-pi-list@vax.darpa.mil
Subject: A survey
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 89 14:56:26 EST
From: boesch@vax.darpa.mil
DARPA has been asked to determine the number of Japanese Nationals who
are researchers on DARPA projects or who have direct access to DARPA
projects. These counts will be used to quantify a perception that
there is "balance of research" deficit with respect to Japan, and as
justification for creation of projects involving US researchers
traveling to Japan.
Because there are a large number of researchers on this mailing list,
we would like to minimize duplication and complexity. Please
coordinate with your collegues on this request and select one to
forward agregate results to DARPA. We are asking for agregation at
major department or company level. Thus we anticipate a response from
a typical university of:
University Name
Computer science: 15
Elect Eng: 20
As usual, this is a fairly hot item, so please get responses
in by early next week. An estimate would be much more helpful than
delayed response. Send replies to: blake@darpa.mil.
Thanks for helping in this effort. Any comments would be appreciated.
Brian Boesch
Program Manager
∂21-Apr-89 1900 JMC
Suppes
∂22-Apr-89 0036 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM Huh? Oh!
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Apr 89 00:36:52 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 376201; Sat 22-Apr-89 03:33:37 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 86955; Sat 22-Apr-89 00:29:57 PDT
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 89 00:29 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Huh? Oh!
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890422072943.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
[Here's one for when your wits are particularly dim.]
I just FUNCSOLVEd f(k)-f(k-1)+k for f(k), smugly expecting
%r69 - (k+1)*k/2, and was temporarily dismayed to see instead
%r69 - (k+2)*(k-1)/2. Easy question: Characterize the set
of solutions of the form
%r69 - constant1*(k+rational1)*(k+rational2) .
∂22-Apr-89 1223 minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu Re: Przymusinski
Received: from mimsy.umd.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Apr 89 12:23:09 PDT
Received: from jacksun.cs.umd.edu by mimsy.umd.edu (5.58/4.7)
id AA08381; Sat, 22 Apr 89 15:20:56 EDT
Received: by jacksun.cs.umd.edu (5.58/3.14)
id AA00637; Sat, 22 Apr 89 15:22:52 EDT
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 89 15:22:52 EDT
From: minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu (Jack Minker)
Return-Path: <minker@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
Message-Id: <8904221922.AA00637@jacksun.cs.umd.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Przymusinski
Dear John,
Thanks for sending me your comments on Przymusinski.
They came just in time.
Best regards,
Jack
∂23-Apr-89 0946 VAL reply to message
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, suppes@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from JMC rcvd 21-Apr-89 21:16-PT.]
Lunch Friday 28th is fine. - Vladimir
∂23-Apr-89 1127 JJW HP workstation
According to the Stanford host table, CSLI has a bunch of HP 9000
workstations.
∂23-Apr-89 1130 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Japan trip
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 Apr 89 11:30:29 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07876; Sun, 23 Apr 89 11:31:26 PDT
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 89 11:31:26 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904231831.AA07876@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: rpg@sail
Cc: jmc@sail, clt@sail
Subject: Japan trip
I think we will have to decide this week who is going on the Japan
trip (since Ito wants abstracts of talks by May 8). Has there been
any further word from DARPA?
∂24-Apr-89 0630 JMC
Moscow News
∂24-Apr-89 0837 mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU Ehrlich on energy
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 08:36:56 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu (5.61/6.12)
id AA12480; Mon, 24 Apr 89 08:35:37 -0700
Return-Path: <mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1989 8:25:50 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
Subject: Ehrlich on energy
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <MS-C.609434750.1103527590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
I happen to agree with you on this. I have no objections whatsoever to
cheap, abundant energy and never had. I objected to fission-based energy
because I did not believe the current commercial and government infrastructure
could operate it in a safe manner. A screwup with fission-based energy has
long-term effects for hundreds? thousands? of years (and I realize that
non-nuclear energy has caused more pollution damage -- however that'll be
erased in a matter of years, not centuries).
If cold fusion is real, useful, and safe, we'd be idiots not to abandon
all other fuel-based forms of energy production in its favor.
-------
∂24-Apr-89 0930 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU The original Tak has deep dynamic spawning properties
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 09:29:56 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA09905; Mon, 24 Apr 89 09:30:24 PDT
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 89 09:30:24 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904241630.AA09905@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: pehoushek@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: The original Tak has deep dynamic spawning properties
This message is a moderately long and boring message about the dynamic
spawning properties of the original Tak function. I think that the
original Takeuchi function will be a very challenging program to
parallelize. Of course, it's just a toy program ...
(defun tak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y ;; Note: The Gabriel benchmark version of Tak returns z here.
(tak (tak (1- x) y z)
(tak (1- y) z x)
(tak (1- z) x y))))
The original Takeuchi function returns y instead of z (z, in the
Gabriel benchmarks). It's running time is exponential (possibly
super-exponential) in the absolute differences of its arguments. The
original Tak always returns one of its arguments, after a long
computation. It has an abundance of parallelism, and yet, may be
very difficult for most parallel lisps to greatly speed up.
I first tried always spawning tasks; With roughly balanced tree-like
computations, always spawning tasks tends to minimize both idle-time
and interprocessor communication, at the cost of spending alot of time
pushing and popping tasks into the local queue-stack. The result was
a speed-up of only 3 out of 8, spawning slightly over 6,000,000 tasks.
The average number of interprocessor transfers was small, about 539.
When I went to dynamic spawning, the number of spawns was reduced, but
the number of transfers (one processor getting something from another)
increased dramatically. Using the depth of the local queue the
spawning criterion, I tried spawning when the depth was less than 1,
3, 5 and 8. Explicit results are given below. The best result of
those tried was a dynamic spawning depth of 8, in which the speed-up
was about 7.2.
This is the deepest dynamic spawning depth I've ever needed to get
good speedup results. The Boyer benchmark only needs a dynamic depth
of 2 or 3 to get speed-ups greater than 7 out of 8. From these
results, I suspect that the original Tak function is a highly
unbalanced tree. I don't think either a depth cutoff or a height
cutoff will work very well.
With dynamic spawning, there is a (superficially paradoxical) tendency
that Idle time goes up whenever there is alot of interprocessor
communication (transfer of tasks). This is clearly evident in the
data below. Idle time and transfer time seem to be closely related,
in the dynamic spawning paradigm.
-Dan Pehoushek
> (time (tak 18 12 6))
Elapsed real time = 103620 milliseconds
User cpu time = 102127 milliseconds
System cpu time = 0 milliseconds
Total cpu time = 102127 milliseconds
18
Always spawn tasks into the local queue-stack.
(defun ntak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y
#!(ntak (ntak (1- x) y z)
(ntak (1- y) z x)
(ntak (1- z) x y))))
> (cpu (ntak 18 12 6))
10 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT:34745 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 19 Sw: 17 st: 127596
PT:36487 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 15 Sw: 15 st: 140953
PT:35192 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 16 Sw: 18 st: 131024
PT:35688 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 14 Sw: 13 st: 134832
PT:34457 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 13 Sw: 20 st: 125392
PT:34785 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 12 Sw: 16 st: 127911
PT:35848 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 14 Sw: 15 st: 136057
PT:34328 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 12 Sw: 14 st: 124410
PT:36008 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 13 Sw: 15 st: 137284
PT:34514 Sp:6302431 138653 Id: 12 Sw: 14 st: 125836
#P:8 (NTAK 18 12 6)
CpuT (min mean stddev):34328 35205.2 716.2
Avg Idle Time (mean): 14.5
Spawn (avgcount cost):6302431.5 138653.5
Swap (avgcount cost): 539.9 16.2
18
35205.2
14.480431
138653.5
16.197002
Dynamic Spawning, when queue length is less than 1. Note the large
amount of time spent in interprocessor transfers, and the large Idle
time.
(defun qtak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y
#1?(qtak (qtak (1- x) y z)
(qtak (1- y) z x)
(qtak (1- z) x y))))
> (cpu (qtak 18 12 6) 4)
4 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT:28066 Sp:962799 21181 Id:40837 Sw: 22210 st: 130869
PT:31660 Sp:1191229 26207 Id:51545 Sw: 27535 st: 137355
PT:31346 Sp:1166469 25662 Id:50699 Sw: 27071 st: 136803
PT:30144 Sp:1147645 25248 Id:44880 Sw: 25718 st: 135177
#P:8 (QTAK 18 12 6)
CpuT (min mean stddev):28066 30304.0 1410.5
Avg Idle Time (mean): 46990.7
Spawn (avgcount cost):1117035.5 24574.8
Swap (avgcount cost):854463.7 25633.9
18
30304.0
46990.734
24574.781
25633.914
Dynamic Spawning, when queue length is less than 3.
(defun qtak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y
#3?(qtak (qtak (1- x) y z)
(qtak (1- y) z x)
(qtak (1- z) x y))))
> (cpu (qtak 18 12 6) 4)
4 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT:15674 Sp:255445 5619 Id: 3210 Sw: 2644 st: 108652
PT:15317 Sp:228167 5019 Id: 2884 Sw: 2355 st: 107131
PT:15357 Sp:233363 5133 Id: 2940 Sw: 2399 st: 107224
PT:15248 Sp:221995 4883 Id: 2757 Sw: 2274 st: 106946
#P:8 (QTAK 18 12 6)
CpuT (min mean stddev):15248 15399.0 163.5
Avg Idle Time (mean): 2947.9
Spawn (avgcount cost):234742.5 5164.3
Swap (avgcount cost):80605.5 2418.2
18
15399.0
2947.9482
5164.3354
2418.165
Dynamic Spawning, when queue length is less than 5.
(defun qtak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y
#5?(qtak (qtak (1- x) y z)
(qtak (1- y) z x)
(qtak (1- z) x y))))
> (cpu (qtak 18 12 6) 4)
4 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT:14262 Sp:122753 2700 Id: 805 Sw: 634 st: 105164
PT:14470 Sp:140237 3085 Id: 1058 Sw: 808 st: 105947
PT:14228 Sp:113051 2487 Id: 841 Sw: 614 st: 105101
PT:14220 Sp:112247 2469 Id: 809 Sw: 617 st: 105087
#P:8 (QTAK 18 12 6)
CpuT (min mean stddev):14220 14295.0 102.2
Avg Idle Time (mean): 878.8
Spawn (avgcount cost):122072.0 2685.6
Swap (avgcount cost):22291.0 668.7
18
14295.0
878.8309
2685.5842
668.73004
Dynamic Spawning, when queue length is less than 8.
(defun qtak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y
#8?(qtak (qtak (1- x) y z)
(qtak (1- y) z x)
(qtak (1- z) x y))))
> (cpu (qtak 18 12 6) 4)
4 Trials, on 8 Processors
para number est. est. est. est.
time spawns ms idle ms swap ms serial
PT:14106 Sp:129109 2840 Id: 237 Sw: 212 st: 104819
PT:14273 Sp:155011 3410 Id: 259 Sw: 263 st: 105456
PT:14222 Sp:159059 3499 Id: 300 Sw: 287 st: 104911
PT:14262 Sp:141583 3114 Id: 248 Sw: 237 st: 105704
#P:8 (QTAK 18 12 6)
CpuT (min mean stddev):14106 14215.7 66.0
Avg Idle Time (mean): 261.5
Spawn (avgcount cost):146190.5 3216.2
Swap (avgcount cost): 8349.5 250.5
18
14215.75
261.48166
3216.1912
250.48502
>
∂24-Apr-89 1222 drb@cscfac.ncsu.edu your visit to NC State
Received: from cscosl.ncsu.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 12:20:26 PDT
Received: from cscfac.ncsu.edu by cscosl.ncsu.edu (5.59/1.00)
id AA00695; Mon, 24 Apr 89 15:17:02-3591
Received: by cscfac.ncsu.edu (1.2/Ultrix2.0-B)
id AA18763; Mon, 24 Apr 89 16:16:36 edt
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 89 16:16:36 edt
From: drb@cscfac.ncsu.edu (Dennis R. Bahler)
Message-Id: <8904242016.AA18763@cscfac.ncsu.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: your visit to NC State
Prof. McCarthy:
We at NC State are organizing publicity for your visit next
September as part of our symposium series entitled Toward a Science of
Mind: Problems and Prospects for the Computational Approach.
I need to trouble you (or your secretary) for some details.
(Does she have an email address different from yours?)
You indicated to Joe Levine (chairman of the symposium committee here)
that you could spend several days the week of
Sept. 25 in Raleigh, and I am sure we will find good uses for your time
as long as you want to stay.
Joe may have also told you that we are looking into a couple of possible
avenues to publish the papers presented.
By the way, the other participants in this series are:
Prof. Noam Chomsky (MIT) Sept. 19-20, Prof. Jerry Fodor (CUNY) Oct. 3-4,
and Prof. Gordon Bower (Stanford) Oct. 10-12.
===============================
WE NEED FROM YOU:
1. A title for your general-audience talk.
This talk will be widely advertised and it is unlikely that all audience members
will have extensive technical backgrounds in AI.
The talk is tentatively scheduled for about 1600 Tuesday afternoon, to
be followed by an on-campus reception and then whoever's interested can join
us for dinner.
2. A B/W glossy photo for our publicity brochure.
3. A one-paragraph bio sketch for the brochure.
3. A list of your selected publications. We have tentatively planned a
series of "warm-up" lectures by faculty here to acquaint those
in other disciplines at NCSU with the work of you and the others in
advance of the four visits.
These talks would include a recommended reading list. I can put a list
together myself but I would hate to omit anything inadvertently.
4. Travel arrangements:
I think Joe Levine has already told you about a Pan-Am flight for $718
arriving Monday 9-25 and leaving Wednesday 9-27.
Full fare from SF is > $1000 which would strain our budget a bit.
5. Your preferred room accommodations (smoking/nonsmoking, etc.).
===============================
Aside from the main public talk Tuesday, there are a number of possible
forums you may be interested in while you're here, and which may help
determine the timing/duration of your visit:
1. VIDEO SEMINAR SERIES:
We have an interactive voice/video/data link to 10 research/educational
institutions (among them Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, and UNC-Charlotte) which
broadcasts a number of weekly seminar series from/to TV studios on campus.
We would be more than happy to have you give a 1-hour talk from NCSU during
your visit.
The regular time for the Computer Science series is Mondays at 3 pm, but
given enough advance notice I'm sure we can work out a convenient schedule.
The technical level of these talks is generally quite high.
2. FACULTY CONTACTS:
There are any number of computer scientists, philosophers, and cognitive
psychologists on campus who have already expressed a desire to talk with you
during your visit. We can organize appointments/discussions any way you want,
and in any number.
3. STUDENT/FACULTY GROUPS:
We have an AI Interest Group of a few dozen (mostly graduate students) which
meets monthly or so and could easily organize a meeting around virtually any
format: technical talk, historical talk, tutorial, informal discussion, etc.
4. CLASSES:
AI is a concentration area in the CS graduate program, and an interdisciplinary
minor in the College of Engineering. Cognitive Science is a new
interdisciplinary program for undergraduates. Next fall there will be several
related classes underway:
Undergraduate:
Special Topics in Cognitive Science (0935-1050 T-TH),
Graduate:
Introduction to AI (1420-1535 & 1630-1745 T-TH),
Advanced Seminar in AI (1420-1510 MWF).
Any of these would more than welcome your participation.
===============================
Thanks for coming and I look forward to hearing from you and ultimately
speaking to you in person.
Dennis Bahler
drb@cscadm.ncsu.edu
Dept. of Computer Science Box 8206
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8206
(919) 737-3369
∂24-Apr-89 1228 VAL US-Japan Cooperative Research Project
It seems that none of the Japanese participants works on commonsense reasoning,
so that my participation wouldn't be justified. What do you think?
∂24-Apr-89 1254 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Boyer-Moore in Qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 12:54:13 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA00778; Mon, 24 Apr 89 12:55:10 PDT
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 89 12:55:10 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904241955.AA00778@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail, clt@sail
Subject: Boyer-Moore in Qlisp
I've thought about making the Boyer-Moore Theorem prover run in Qlisp,
as a project for later this year, and over the weekend I sent a
message to Boyer asking if he thinks it is a reasonable thing to do.
He likes the idea, but cautioned that it will take a while to become
familiar with the code, which is what I expected. Matt Kaufmann is
also interested in the idea, and he will be visiting here during the
week of June 12. He sent me the following message:
Good. Is QLISP running to the point where we can do some experiments
while I'm there?
Do you have any opinion about whether we should meet informally
or work out a more formal agreement? Contracts here at CLI can pay
for my time, as long as Lucid wouldn't want to regard as proprietary
work that comes out of what I do.
-- Matt
I explained to him that all the work will become Stanford's property
and there is no problem with Lucid. Should we offer to pay him for
consulting if he comes here and gives some advice?
∂24-Apr-89 1301 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
BELIEF AS DEFEASIBLE KNOWLEDGE
TIME FOR ACTION
Yoav Shoham
Stanford University
Monday, May 1, 3:15pm
MJH 352
I will talk about two things, to the extent that we have time.
Belief as Defeasible Knowledge
We investigate the relation between the notions of knowledge and
belief. Contrary to the well-known slogan about knowledge being
``justified, true belief,'' we propose that belief be viewed as
defeasible knowledge. Specifically, we offer a definition of belief
as knowledge-relative-to-assumptions, and tie the definition to
the notion of nonmonotonicity. (Joint work with Yoram Moses.)
Time for Action
We consider the role played by the concept of action in AI. We
first briefly summarize the advantages and limitations of past
approaches to taking the concept as primitive, as embodied in the
situation calculus and dynamic logic. We also briefly summarize
the alternative, namely adopting a temporal framework, and point
out its complementary advantages and limitations. We then propose
a framework that retains the advantages of both viewpoints, and
that ties the notion of action closely to that of knowledge. Our
definitions shed new light on the connection between time, action,
knowledge and ignorance, choice-making, feasibility, and simultaneous
reasoning about the same events at different levels of detail.
∂24-Apr-89 1349 CLT (non)umbrella
To: schwartz@VAX.DARPA.MIL, marquitz@VAX.DARPA.MIL, squires@VAX.DARPA.MIL,
pullen@VAX.DARPA.MIL, boesch@VAX.DARPA.MIL, isler@VAX.DARPA.MIL,
richer@VAX.DARPA.MIL, rlr@VAX.DARPA.MIL, scherlis@VAX.DARPA.MIL,
simpson@VAX.DARPA.MIL, shiflett@VAX.DARPA.MIL, sowa@VAX.DARPA.MIL,
thorpe@VAX.DARPA.MIL, toole@VAX.DARPA.MIL, wayne@VAX.DARPA.MIL
CC: Cheriton@PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU, Genesereth@SCORE.Stanford.EDU,
Latombe@COYOTE.STANFORD.EDU, DCL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
ZM@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, JCM@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU, Nilsson@SCORE.Stanford.EDU,
Shoham@SCORE.Stanford.EDU, Wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
bscott@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
To: DARPA/ISTO Program Managers
From: Stanford University Computer Science Department Faculty
Re: Umbrella contract
Sent-by: Carolyn Talcott
On February 8 we sent a draft proposal for an umbrella contract for the
next five years of DARPA supported research. It now seems that the
current consensus is that DARPA would rather not have the umbrella. A
copy of the summary page from the umbrella draft was sent to Henry Lum at
NASA-AMES who said he saw no problem with being the `contracting agent'
for tasks that would have come under the umbrella scope. Therefore we
propose to abandon the umbrella and negotiate individual tasks with
Lum at NASA-AMES as they arise.
If there are any questions or objections please contact
Carolyn Talcott
Computer Science Department
Stanford, CA 94305
clt@sail.stanford.edu
415-723-0936
∂24-Apr-89 1359 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU undergraduate seminar
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 13:58:59 PDT
Date: Mon 24 Apr 89 13:58:18-PDT
From: "H. Roy Jones" <JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: undergraduate seminar
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12488769226.25.JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Last week I spoke with you about attending an undergraduate seminar that is
intended to help our undergraduates get to know the department's faculty
better. You said you'd be willing to come, but that I should contact you
this week to set something up. The class meets in 60-61F on Wednesdays from
3:15 - 5:05, and 5/3 and 5/24 are both still open. I don't think any
preparation will be necessary. We're hoping the faculty members will talk
about their view of the field as a whole and their experiences as a computer
scientist.
I'd be very grateful if you could get back to me as soon as possible since
I need to fill the 5/3 spot asap. If you are going to come 5/3, I'd also
appreciate it if you or Pat could send me a resume, bio, or appropriate
level paper so I can have the students read it to get a feel about who
you are before you come.
Many thanks,
Roy Jones
-------
∂24-Apr-89 1541 MPS
I lost the name of the person I was suppose to send your invoice
to at U of Edinburgh. Was it Bundy or Burstall? Thanks
∂24-Apr-89 1638 MPS
Where is Lindley Dorden. I can not find him in the
phone directory. Thanks
∂24-Apr-89 1640 MPS
Roy Jones called today and would like to know which day
you would prefer for the seminar, May 3 or 24
Pat
∂24-Apr-89 1844 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU re: undergraduate seminar
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 18:44:45 PDT
Date: Mon 24 Apr 89 18:43:38-PDT
From: "H. Roy Jones" <JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: undergraduate seminar
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: : ;
In-Reply-To: <aTvEE@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12488821170.12.JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Great. Do you or Pat have a bio and suggested article you could send
me through email or I could come by and pick up?
Thanks,
Roy
-------
∂24-Apr-89 2136 sf@csli.Stanford.EDU Novosibirsk
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 Apr 89 21:36:44 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA11224; Mon, 24 Apr 89 21:36:54 PDT
Date: Mon 24 Apr 89 21:36:54-PDT
From: Sol Feferman <SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Novosibirsk
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <609485814.0.SF@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
I'm planning a trip to Novosibirsk in the latter part of August, for a
meeting. My travel agent at Leo Sides travel, whom I've worked with
for years and I think is terrific, is having trouble coming up with
reasonable schedules. The only flight to Novos. that shows up on his
computer, originates in Leningrad at 3:35 AM! he shows no flights
originating in Moscow. This is very hard to believe. As I recall,
you traveled to Novos. within the last two years.
What were your transit arrangements?
By the way, have you ever heard of anyone going to Omsk? I have some
cousins there I might like to meet. Omsk doesn't show on my agent's
computer at all.
Who do you deal with on Soviet flights?
-------
∂25-Apr-89 0657 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 06:57:48 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 376948; Tue 25-Apr-89 03:19:04 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 87082; Tue 25-Apr-89 00:15:29 PDT
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 00:15 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"stan.k@ai.ai.mit.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"tk@ai.ai.mit.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890425071513.7.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
With MACSYMA+Geometry, I drew a set of Borromean rings,
toruses spared interpenetration by three periods of a sine
in the Z direction. I.e. cyclohexane in the upholstered
chair configuration.
A puzzling consequence is that, from many viewing angles,
the rings look rectangular (like TV screens--mebbe x↑4+y↑4=1.)
It is even possible to put a skewer through diagonally opposite
"corners", twist it 180 deg, and find that it now seems to go
though the midpoints of opposite "sides".
But that's not why I wrote.
I sneaked a smearox of pp 1,2 of Salamin's copy of FOCUS, the
newsletter of the MAA, and the lead article has the title of
this msg. It's about an existence proof for a finite (< 10↑50),
translations-only decomposition of a circular disk into a square,
a la Banach-Tarski, only measure-preserving! (But don't look
for any animations soon. These sets *gotta* be cloud-shaped.)
This is *not* my line of work, and MLB, who was asking about this
stuff recently, has somehow gained an MAA membership, so enough
said. (He probably mistook it for Mayhem Advocates Anonymous, or
something. Right on p2 there's a stabbing with Jordan Scissors.)
∂25-Apr-89 0902 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Condensed Original Tak Data Table
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 09:02:03 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04019; Tue, 25 Apr 89 09:02:42 PDT
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 09:02:42 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904251602.AA04019@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: pehoushek@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Dan Pehoushek's message of Mon, 24 Apr 89 09:30:24 PDT <8904241630.AA09905@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Condensed Original Tak Data Table
Joe suggested that a condensed, more complete table would be more
informative.
The following table summarizes the results of using dynamic spawning
for depths 1-30 (spawn when the local queue-stack has less than Depth
tasks), plus the always spawn (depth=infinity) method. At each depth,
5 trials were averaged together. DSD is the dynamic spawning depth.
Ts/Tp is the serial time divided by the parallel time. The next
column is the average number of spawns. Next is the average number of
interprocessor transfers (swaps). And the last column is the
(estimated) amount of Idle time. The serial time was measured by
running a serial program on one processor, and was 102127
milliseconds. The parallel runs used 8 processors. Sorry for the
insignificant digits.
Avg. Avg.
DSD Ts/Tp #Spawns #Transfers IdleMs
1 3.52 1050694 790324 43025
2 5.11 609462 316419 14527
3 6.58 218232 76683 3225
4 6.75 240026 61181 2261
5 7.15 118155 20645 803
6 7.14 141648 18247 676
7 7.22 128031 10378 341
8 7.18 144586 8131 259
9 7.08 164284 5887 159
10 7.15 187349 4580 122
11 7.12 205628 2734 76
12 6.98 262533 2726 63
13 6.97 308028 1610 35
14 6.90 361849 1247 32
15 6.75 459889 1029 25
16 6.60 539618 579 13
17 6.43 680381 523 14
18 6.22 817782 466 12
19 6.03 1005172 490 13
20 5.85 1169371 459 13
21 5.60 1374645 500 15
22 5.44 1562194 468 12
23 5.16 1821357 462 11
24 5.01 2048918 499 14
25 4.83 2273060 448 13
26 4.71 2460059 499 14
27 4.52 2711817 477 12
28 4.27 2982362 448 12
29 4.21 3232200 426 11
30 3.97 3454729 455 12
...
infty 2.90 6302431 539 15
The program, once again, is one of those "embarassing parallelism"
programs:
(defun tak (x y z)
(declare (fixnum x y z))
(if (not (< y x))
y
#7?(tak (tak (1- x) y z)
(tak (1- y) z x)
(tak (1- z) x y))))
where the #7? form basically expands into:
(qlet (< (local-queue-stack-size) 7)
((a (tak (1- x) y z))
(b (tak (1- y) z x))
(c (tak (1- z) x y)))
(tak a b c))
∂25-Apr-89 0906 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 09:06:54 PDT
Received: from YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 377118; Tue 25-Apr-89 12:04:44 EDT
Received: from WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 452373; Tue 25-Apr-89 12:13:06 EDT
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 12:04 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"stan.k@ai.ai.mit.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"tk@ai.ai.mit.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890425071513.7.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890425160444.7.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 00:15 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I sneaked a smearox of pp 1,2 of Salamin's copy of FOCUS, the
newsletter of the MAA, and the lead article has the title of
this msg. It's about an existence proof for a finite (< 10↑50),
translations-only decomposition of a circular disk into a square,
a la Banach-Tarski, only measure-preserving! (But don't look
for any animations soon. These sets *gotta* be cloud-shaped.)
1. Are the components of the decomposition themselves measurable?
2. I heard about this already. My informant claimed that in two
dimensions, all such decompositions must be measure-preserving.
3. I betcha anything the proof uses the axiom of choice. This makes
some of us uncomfortable.
4. 10↑50 is a big number. I wonder if it can be brought down. After
all, Banach and Tarski use a very small number of pieces. It's less
than a dozen anyway. I can't find the right number in EDM.
∂25-Apr-89 0910 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 09:10:50 PDT
Received: from YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 377127; Tue 25-Apr-89 12:09:41 EDT
Received: from WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 452378; Tue 25-Apr-89 12:17:32 EDT
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 12:09 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: The Circle Squared, Beyond Refutation
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"stan.k@ai.ai.mit.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dek@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "hen@bu-cs.bu.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"tk@ai.ai.mit.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890425071513.7.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890425160914.8.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Oh, by the way. It is well-known that any polygon can be cut up and
reassembled into any other polygon of the same area. This is completely
constructive and does not use choice at all. See Caldwell's excellent
"Topics in Recreational Mathematics" for the construction. ("Topics"
is, in my opinion, an undeservedly-neglected masterpiece.)
How many pieces do you need to change a square into a golden rectangle?
∂25-Apr-89 1015 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU Some naive observations on Dans statistics
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 10:15:36 PDT
Received: from Sail.Stanford.EDU by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04359; Tue, 25 Apr 89 10:16:03 PDT
Message-Id: <aTY0F@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 25 Apr 89 1014 PDT
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Some naive observations on Dans statistics
To: qlisp@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
() Good point Joe, now we can see something of what is going on!
(i) There is a reasonable range of depths over which one gets reasonable Ts/Tp
(ii) The range of (i) seems also to be the range of minimal spawning
(iii) I gather `idle' time is truly idle, so the reason it stays low
as depth increases and Ts/Tp decreases is that there is a lot
of useless work being done (probably in spawning).
Some questions:
(iv) is the computation tree for TAK balanced? I.e. do the three
subcomputations each have roughly the same size?
(v) Were the experiments done in Qlisp or Pehoushek Lisp?
Are processes pre-allocated? If so, how many?
How does this affect the results?
Finally:
I think it would be worthwhile to carryout this experiment
using John's original idea of controlling parallelism by
some local (environment indepependent) predicate
such as recursion depth (probably with both 1 and n stacks).
(i) how sensitive is this to choice of cutoff
(ii) what is the range of Ts/Tp that you get
i.e. we should consider the questions
which method is more sensitive to choice of parameters?
which method provides the finest tuning capabilities?
∂25-Apr-89 1123 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU,@SAIL.Stanford.EDU:weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Some naive observations on Dans statistics
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 11:23:20 PDT
Received: from Sail.Stanford.EDU by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04544; Tue, 25 Apr 89 11:23:41 PDT
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 11:22:27 PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04539; Tue, 25 Apr 89 11:23:29 PDT
Message-Id: <8904251823.AA04539@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Some naive observations on Dans statistics
In-Reply-To: Carolyn's message of 25 Apr 89 10:14:00 -0700.
<aTY0F@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 89 11:23:26 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
(i) There is a reasonable range of depths over which one gets reasonable Ts/Tp
(ii) The range of (i) seems also to be the range of minimal spawning
(iii) I gather `idle' time is truly idle, so the reason it stays low
as depth increases and Ts/Tp decreases is that there is a lot
of useless work being done (probably in spawning).
This is correct. Idle time is when processors have nothing to do and
are waiting for processes to be created or resumed.
Some questions:
(iv) is the computation tree for TAK balanced? I.e. do the three
subcomputations each have roughly the same size?
No, it's very unbalanced. This is one of the interesting things about
this program. For programs with more balanced trees, we never
observed the need for a queue depth of more than 2 or 3 in order to
get close to optimal performance. Here we need a depth of 7 or more.
(v) Were the experiments done in Qlisp or Pehoushek Lisp?
Are processes pre-allocated? If so, how many?
How does this affect the results?
They were done with Dan's extensions to Qlisp. Dan's version is now
mostly built "on top of" Qlisp, instead of replacing parts of Qlisp.
It is similar in some respects to Jim Larus's work, also done by
implementing a lightweight process structure on top of Qlisp. If it
were not for the use of processes that are cheaper to create than
Qlisp's, I don't think these performance results could be achieved.
Finally:
I think it would be worthwhile to carryout this experiment
using John's original idea of controlling parallelism by
some local (environment indepependent) predicate
such as recursion depth (probably with both 1 and n stacks).
Perhaps we should do the experiment to confirm the belief that some of
us (Dan and I, at least) have which is that it will probably not work
well, or if there is a good predicate of this sort, it will take a lot
of work to find it. Recursion depth is unlikely to work since the
tree is so unbalanced. If you cut off at any depth, you will leave
most of the computation running on a single processor.
∂25-Apr-89 1124 tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Congratulations
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 11:24:45 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA04212; Tue, 25 Apr 89 11:26:03 PDT
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1989 11:26:02 PDT
From: TC Rindfleisch <tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: Rindfleisch@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: Congratulations
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.609531962.tcr@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
John, heartiest congratulations on your well-deserved election to the NAS!
Tom R.
∂25-Apr-89 1227 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU NAS
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 12:26:52 PDT
Date: Tue 25 Apr 89 12:24:04-PDT
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: NAS
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12489014217.14.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
COngratulations!
---jdu
-------
∂25-Apr-89 1521 eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu congratulations
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 15:21:06 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA11770; Tue, 25 Apr 89 15:22:21 PDT
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1989 15:22:16 PDT
From: Edward A. Feigenbaum <eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: congratulations
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.609546137.eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
John,
It is a genuine thrill to hear that you ahve been elected to NAS.
Your election is long overdue and well deserved!
Ed
∂25-Apr-89 2235 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: throwing money
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 Apr 89 22:34:55 PDT
Date: Tue 25 Apr 89 22:32:37-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: throwing money
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <11TaxZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12489124998.17.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
All right! I'm on a self-imposed moratorium on bboard chatter, but your
msg is 100% on target (and a bit of fresh air, in a debate that was turning
more and more emotional [hence the gag order]).
Alex
-------
∂26-Apr-89 0513 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM Bernoulli non-factorial generating function [Was: 1,1,5,61,1385,50521,...]
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 05:13:16 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 377717; Wed 26-Apr-89 07:34:52 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 87465; Wed 26-Apr-89 04:29:54 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 04:29 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Bernoulli non-factorial generating function [Was: 1,1,5,61,1385,50521,...]
To: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "dhb@ew11.nas.nasa.gov"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890302105222.1.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890426112936.8.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 89 02:52 PST
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
. . . I.e., there is "always"
an elegant generalization of such a formula which uses Bernoulli
(or Euler) polynomials (in some entirely new variable), instead. It
will be interesting to see how the new variable appears in the above
formulas, ...
1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1
- + ----- ( - + ----- ( - + ----- ( - + ----- ( - + . . .
1 n + 1 2 n + 2 3 n + 3 4 n + 4 5
==== B (a + 1) - a B (a + 1)
(formally) \ k k - 1
= > --------------------------- ,
/ k
==== (n + a)
k>=0
(defining B (x) := 0.)
-1
From the above, one can derive the much simpler:
1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1
- ( - + ----- ( - + ----- ( - + ----- ( - + . . . ))))
n 1 n + 1 2 n + 2 3 n + 3 4
==== B (a + 1)
\ k
= > ---------- .
/ k+1
==== (n + a)
k>=0
Note the intial 1/n, which would be 0/n if it followed the pattern.
I guess both sides got multiplied by infinity. I wonder what sort
of 0 was on the right.
∂26-Apr-89 0925 Mailer Re: throwing money
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 09:25:06 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 09:26:05 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Re: throwing money
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <11TaxZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12489243958.29.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
>From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I will respond to JMC's comments, which are included below. My comments
are capitalized. - R. Steinberger
1. National defense. I think it should remain a government function
supported by taxes and when necessary by a draft. However, many
support functions can be stripped off to good advantage. Weapons
should continue to produced by industry. In short, I generally
support the status quo but am open to arguments about some additional
privatizations.
I GENERALLY AGREE. HOWEVER, WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THE INHERENT CONFLICT
OF INTEREST THAT EXISTS WHEN THE COMPANIES THAT MANUFACTURE WEAPONS ARE
ALLOWED TO LOBBY CONGRESS AND THE DOD. I BELIEVE THAT IN EXCHANGE FOR
BEING ALLOWED TO WORK ON WEAPONS CONTRACTS, COMPANIES SHOULD BE FORBIDDEN
FROM ANY RELATED LOBBYING ACTIVITIES THAT MIGHT LEAD TO MORE OR SIMILAR
CONTRACTS. THERE SHOULD ALSO BE HARSH PENALTIES FOR BRIBING DOD OFFICIALS
TO SUPPLY THEM WITH SECRET INFORMATION TO BIAS THE AWARDS OF CONTRACTS.
2. Public utilities. They should remain private and regulation
should be reduced. In particular, electricity generation should
be separated from electricity distribution, and the generation
should become a competitive unregulated business. This conclusion
is based on present technology. If someone discovers a way to
distribute electricity competitively or to generate it efficiently
in households, that would be even better than a regulated monopoly.
I think the switch to privately owned telephones was a good thing.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PRIVATE UTILITIES IN PRINCIPLE, BUT SOME
MEANS, GOVT REGULATION OR OTHERWISE SHOULD BE EMPLOYED TO 1) INSURE
THAT PRICES ARE SET FAIRLY (A FAIR, BUT NOT EXHORBITANT RETURN, ON
CAPITAL SHOULD BE GUARANTEED IN EXCHANGE FOR GRANTING A "MONOPOLY"
PRIVELEGE. 2) INSURE SANE AND WELL REASONED MANAGEMENT
3. Airlines. They should be private with unregulated fares
and market entry. While our airlines have always been private,
some European countries have recently privatized airlines.
AGREED. HOWEVER WE SHOULD BE CIRCUMSPECT OF GOVT'S ROLE IN SETTLING
AIRLINE LABOR PROBLEMS.
4. Housing should be private, and rent control has proved to
be a disastrous idea.
GENERALLY AGREED. BUT DOES GOVERNMENT HAVE ANY ROLE IN HELPING THE
DISADVANTAGED SECURE MINIMAL FOOD, CLOTHING AND SHELTER?
5. The postal monopoly should go. Maybe Rural Free Delivery
would require continued subsidy; maybe not.
I'M NOT AS DISSATISFIED WITH USPS AS I USED TO BE. NEARLY ALL MY MAIL
IS DELIVERED/RECIEVED WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME. IF USPS IS PRIVATIZED,
IT SHOULD BE REGULATED FOR AT LEAST A FEW YEARS TO ATTEMPT TO MAKE
SURE THAT ONLY "COMPETANT" COMPANIES ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN THIS BUSINESS.
6. Zoning regulations and city planning should go. It has
turned out to be a way of protecting all kinds of monopolies.
MAYBE SO, BUT CONSIDER DALLAS, A CITY WITH NO ZONING REGS. HARDLY A
PRETTY SITE. ISN'T THERE SOME COMPROMISE POSITION THAT WILL HELP
MAINTAIN/PRESERVE COORDINATED PLANNED POPULATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
WHILL ALSO ALLOWING BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS SOME PROFITABLE CHOICES?
7. Some new highways might be privatized. I don't see building
another Bayshore, and a ten cent toll seems extremely low no
matter who builds it. Computer controlled cars going 80 mph
bumper to bumper strikes me as the ultimate solution.
On the other hand, BART was an economic disaster to build
and probably doesn't even support its operating expenses.
THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION IS TO FIND WAYS OF ALLOWING PEOPLE TO WORK AT
OR NEAR WHERE THEY LIVE. SAVES GAS, AND WE WOULDN'T NEED TO RELY ON
COMPUTERS TO DO OUR DRIVING.
I would welcome discussion of these and other specific points.
CARE OF THE ELDERLY IS AN AREA WHERE THE GOVT HAS ENTERED MORE AND MORE
IN THE 20TH CENTURY. NURSING HOMES HAVE PROLIFERATED, AS MORE AND MORE
PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN STATES OF HEALTH WHERE THEY ARE UNABLE TO EITHER
CARE FOR THEMSELVES, OR HAVE THEIR FAMILIES CARE FOR THEM (DUE TO
EITHER SEVERITY OF ILLNESS AND/OR COSTS INVOLVED). THE GOVT'S ROLE HAS
GENERALLY BEEN TO MARGINALLY FUND MANY OF THESE CASES, AND THE COSTS
CONTINUE TO RISE. IN FACT, AS MOST PEOPLE KNOW, NEARLY ALL MEDICAL COSTS
ARE RISING AS THE THE AMOUNT THE GOVERNMENT SPENDS TO COVER SOME PORTION
OF THIS. BASICALLY, GOVT IS THE INSURER OF THE LAST RESORT.
HOW WOULD YOU DEAL WITH THIS? PRIVATIZATION CAN ONLY WORK IF
PEOPLE CAN AFFORD (INDIVIDUALLY) TO PAY FOR IT. WHAT SHOULD GOVT'S
FUTURE POLICIES BE TOWARDS CITIZENS UNABLE TO AFFORD MEDICAL CARE?
-ric steinberger
-------
∂26-Apr-89 1021 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU,@SAIL.Stanford.EDU:pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Some naive observations on Dans statistics
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 10:21:41 PDT
Received: from Sail.Stanford.EDU by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07740; Wed, 26 Apr 89 10:22:19 PDT
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 10:21:05 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07733; Wed, 26 Apr 89 10:22:00 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 10:22:00 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904261722.AA07733@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of Tue, 25 Apr 89 11:23:26 PDT <8904251823.AA04539@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Some naive observations on Dans statistics
Thanks for the questions. Please ask more! Since we are going to
present this stuff in Japan, it's best to iron out answers to the hard
questions here.
>
> (i) There is a reasonable range of depths over which one gets reasonable Ts/Tp
> (ii) The range of (i) seems also to be the range of minimal spawning
> (iii) I gather `idle' time is truly idle, so the reason it stays low
> as depth increases and Ts/Tp decreases is that there is a lot
> of useless work being done (probably in spawning).
>
>This is correct. Idle time is when processors have nothing to do and
>are waiting for processes to be created or resumed.
The Idle time is estimated, and is roughly believable (+/- 10%); it is
based on the number of times each processor looks at another
processor's queue, which in the shared memory environment is fairly
easy/quickly done.
> Finally:
>
> I think it would be worthwhile to carryout this experiment
> using John's original idea of controlling parallelism by
> some local (environment indepependent) predicate
> such as recursion depth (probably with both 1 and n stacks).
>
>Perhaps we should do the experiment to confirm the belief that some of
>us (Dan and I, at least) have which is that it will probably not work
>well, or if there is a good predicate of this sort, it will take a lot
>of work to find it. Recursion depth is unlikely to work since the
>tree is so unbalanced. If you cut off at any depth, you will leave
>most of the computation running on a single processor.
Here's a table of results using recursion depth cutoff. There are
4 recursive calls in Tak. For three of them, the depth is decreased
by one, while the fourth call leaves the depth unchanged. I will
attempt to get some :FIFO and :LIFO results from the current version
of new-qlisp; Joe and I do not expect any comparable results, however.
Recursion depth cutoff code (with n stacks):
(defun dtak (x y z d)
(declare (fixnum x y z d) )
(if (<= d 0)
(tak x y z)
(if (not (< y x))
y
#!(dtak (dtak (1- x) y z (1- d))
(dtak (1- y) z x (1- d))
(dtak (1- z) x y (1- d))
d))))
The serial time for (tak 18 12 6) is 102127 milliseconds.
RDC Ts/Tp #Spawns #Transfers Idle time (ms)
1 1.16 4 12 571000
2 1.38 10 19 460000
3 1.69 22 33 362000
4 2.03 46 52 282000
5 2.45 94 70 217000
6 2.46 190 90 215000
7 2.42 379 104 221000
8 2.85 754 121 172000
9 3.27 1468 142 138000
10 3.93 2830 159 97400
11 4.51 5287 177 69400
12 5.17 9754 200 47400
13 5.87 17398 228 28800
14 6.58 30784 237 11800
15 6.88 52747 270 6700
16 6.82 90550 293 5300
17 6.83 141556 309 5800
18 6.66 218287 334 5400
19 6.61 335458 350 3690
20 6.41 503758 358 2440
21 6.10 738262 367 1090
22 5.74 1046464 393 520
23 5.31 1430293 409 346
24 4.87 1879531 439 122
25 4.45 2382919 447 113
26 4.11 2931502 492 45
27 3.77 3530647 489 51
28 3.48 4161508 582 44
29 3.20 4800160 590 26
30 2.93 5424508 633 27
31 2.78 6016120 554 24
32 2.66 6562495 606 27
33 2.51 7058563 593 24
...
infty 2.05 9453646 833 30
For comparison, the Dynamic Spawning Depth table is reprinted:
Avg Avg
DSD Ts/Tp #Spawns #Transfers IdleMs
1 3.52 1050694 790324 43025
2 5.11 609462 316419 14527
3 6.58 218232 76683 3225
4 6.75 240026 61181 2261
5 7.15 118155 20645 803
6 7.14 141648 18247 676
7 7.22 128031 10378 341
8 7.18 144586 8131 259
9 7.08 164284 5887 159
10 7.15 187349 4580 122
11 7.12 205628 2734 76
12 6.98 262533 2726 63
13 6.97 308028 1610 35
14 6.90 361849 1247 32
15 6.75 459889 1029 25
16 6.60 539618 579 13
17 6.43 680381 523 14
18 6.22 817782 466 12
19 6.03 1005172 490 13
20 5.85 1169371 459 13
21 5.60 1374645 500 15
22 5.44 1562194 468 12
23 5.16 1821357 462 11
24 5.01 2048918 499 14
25 4.83 2273060 448 13
26 4.71 2460059 499 14
27 4.52 2711817 477 12
28 4.27 2982362 448 12
29 4.21 3232200 426 11
30 3.97 3454729 455 12
...
infty 2.90 6302431 539 15
∂26-Apr-89 1321 jqj@hogg.cc.uoregon.edu job hunting at Stanford
Received: from oregon.uoregon.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 13:21:15 PDT
Return-path: jqj@hogg.cc.uoregon.edu
Received: from hogg.cc.uoregon.edu by oregon.uoregon.edu; Wed, 26 Apr 89 13:21
PDT
Received: by hogg.cc.uoregon.edu (4.0/SMI-4.0.1) id AA05988; Wed, 26 Apr 89
13:20:49 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 13:20:49 PDT
From: jqj@hogg.cc.uoregon.edu
Subject: job hunting at Stanford
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <8904262020.AA05988@hogg.cc.uoregon.edu>
John,
My wife and I are planning to be in the Bay Area on sabbatical for
about a year starting September 1, 1989. She'll be at the Center for
Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, so I'm looking for a
position in the Stanford area. It occured to us that since you are a
former Center attendee yourself (not to mention being my former boss as
Director of LOTS) you might be in a position to suggest leads for
jobs.
I'm most interested in doing work in networking or distributed
computing, preferably in a technical leadership capacity. I would also
consider a facilities management position in a sophisticated and
growing computing environment, though. Although there are lots of
industry jobs, I'd much prefer working for Stanford if something was
available. My recent experience has been as Manager of Computing
Facilities for Cornell's Computer Science Department and, currently, as
Director of Network Services at the University of Oregon (sort of Bill
Yundt in a smaller puddle).
I've been in contact with REG, and he is investigating whether he
has need of anyone for a year in his AIR organization. However, there
may be other possibilities at Stanford that I should also be
exploring. Any suggestions for anyone at Stanford (or outside, for
that matter...) who might be interested in seeing my c.v.?
/JQ
JQ Johnson voice: 503-686-4394
Director of Network Services Internet: jqj@oregon.uoregon.edu
Office of University Computing Bitnet: jqj@oregon
University of Oregon UUCP: ...!uoregon!jqj
Eugene, OR 97403 (Internet is preferred)
∂26-Apr-89 1332 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 13:32:08 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08438; Wed, 26 Apr 89 13:32:49 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 13:32:49 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904262032.AA08438@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
I tested Tak depth cutoff in new-qlisp. I tried
(setf *QL-SCHEDULER-METHOD* :FIFO) and
(setf *QL-SCHEDULER-METHOD* :LIFO). Both of these
use a single global queue.
I don't count garbage collection time (in new-qlisp, spawning
generates garbage). The :FIFO scheduler is the current default.
These results are not averaged. nor do I estimate the idle
time.
:FIFO
Depth Ts/Tp #Spawns #Transfers
1 1.17 4 8
2 1.45 10 16
3 1.70 22 32
4 2.00 46 64
5 2.36 94 128
6 2.35 190 256
7 2.35 379 508
8 2.59 754 1008
9 breaks, ran out of processes
:LIFO
Depth Ts/Tp #Spawns #Transfers
1 1.20 4 8
2 1.43 10 16
3 1.69 22 32
4 2.00 46 64
5 2.43 94 128
6 2.25 190 256
7 2.12 379 508
8 2.63 754 1008
9 3.23 1468 1960
10 3.44 2830 3776
11 3.99 5287 7052
12 4.91 9754 13008
13 3.88 17398 23200
14 breaks in GC
∂26-Apr-89 1357 peters@russell.Stanford.EDU [MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem): Returned mail: User unknown]
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 13:57:11 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18218; Wed, 26 Apr 89 14:01:34 PDT
Message-Id: <8904262101.AA18218@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: [MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem): Returned mail: User unknown]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 14:01:22 PDT
From: peters@russell.Stanford.EDU
Oops, my finger slipped.
------- Forwarded Message
>From: MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
To: <peters>
----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 imc@sail... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Return-Path: <peters>
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18182; Wed, 26 Apr 89 13:58:50 PDT
Message-Id: <8904262058.AA18182@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: betsy
Subject: Arkady Blinov
Cc: imc@sail
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 13:58:47 PDT
>From: peters
Betsy,
John McCarthy, who is just back from the USSR, has a visitor coming to
Stanford for two weeks next October. Arkady Blinov would like to give
two talks here, and John thinks one should be at CSLI, on
game-theoretic semantics. John will try to get a title and an
abstract from him, and will also tell you what days are candidates for
the talk here. Could you please reserve a time slot for that talk, or
have whoever's putting together the Fall schedule do so? Thanks.
Stanley
------- End of Forwarded Message
∂26-Apr-89 1519 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Meeting next week
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 15:19:36 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08602; Wed, 26 Apr 89 15:20:18 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 15:20:18 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904262220.AA08602@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Meeting next week
I'd like to have a Qlisp meeting next week. Please tell me if you
have any time constraints, and I'll try to schedule a time that fits
the most people.
Joe
∂26-Apr-89 1724 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Apr 89 17:24:05 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08951; Wed, 26 Apr 89 17:24:42 PDT
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 89 17:24:42 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904270024.AA08951@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Dan's latest results confirm the hypothesis that lightweight processes
are sometimes needed to get good speedup results.
The TAK computation [(tak 18 12 6) using Takeuchi's original function]
takes 102.1 seconds sequentially, so it would take 12.8 seconds with
perfect speedup on 8 processors. Suppose we want a speedup of 7 or
better on this computation.
First we ask how many processes need to be created to avoid excessive
idle time. The answer (as will be seen below) is that we can do it
with only about 300 processes, if we have an oracle that tells us
which 300 out of 6,000,000 potential processes to create.
But no such oracle exists, so we need to use a run-time heuristic.
Dan has compared two of these: creating processes up to a given
recursion depth, or using a multiple-queue scheduler and creating
processes until a given queue depth has been reached.
Each of these heuristics has a single parameter that can be varied,
and at the optimal value, both create many more than 300 processes.
This is because together with creating many "useful" processes (ones
whose creation actually results in some speedup), they also create
many others that satisfy the cutoff criteria. The cost of creating
these extra processes contributes to overhead and lowers the speedup.
We can compute how many extra processes we can afford to create, given
our goal of 7/8 of optimal speedup. This number allows us to have
1.82 seconds of overhead time on each processor, or 14.6 seconds
altogether on 8 processors.
Processes in the current version of Qlisp take about 2000 microseconds
to create, so we can create no more than 7300 of them in this amount
of time. Lightweight processes in Dan's extension to Qlisp take 22
microseconds to create, so we can create 660,000 of them. Both of
these figures are upper bounds; if there is any idle time then fewer
processes can be created.
With lightweight processes, the depth cutoff heuristic gets its best
performance (at a cutoff depth of 15) creating 52,700 processes. Of
these, only 270 actually run on processors other than the ones they
are created on; this is the basis for the claim that an oracle could
choose fewer than 300 processes to create. The dynamic spawning
heuristic gets its best performance (with a queue size of 7) creating
128,000 processes. Its total overhead is still somewhat lower than
the depth cutoff version, because it manages to have less idle time.
When the cost of process creation is much larger, the optimum point
will obviously move. We don't currently have results for a multiple-
queue scheduler using Qlisp processes, but with a depth cutoff, the
best speedup was obtained at a depth of 12, creating 9754 processes.
The speedup was about 5/8 of optimal. Because more than 7300
processes were created, it could not have reached the goal of 7/8.
More than half of the overhead was actually due to idle time, but to
reduce the idle time we have to create more processes. The optimum
point is therefore where the tradeoff between idle time and process
creation time is most favorable, while with lightweight processes, we
can afford to create enough processes to reduce the idle time to
almost zero.
∂27-Apr-89 0602 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu JPL Paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 06:02:44 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1989 9:02:18 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: thomason
Subject: JPL Paper
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.609685338.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
I'm being pressed to deliver copy to the publisher, so we
need to establish whether I should use your most recent draft or
it would be worthwhile to work on the section about context for no
more than another week.
What do you think? My most recent online draft, by the way, is
contained in a message received 25 March. It may well be that you have
a more recent version now.
I had thought that I had sent you a message 10 days ago or so,
but can't find a copy of it. If I didn't, I've been remiss about
communicating.
--Rich
∂27-Apr-89 0700 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM ruler Dirichlet
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 07:00:11 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 378266; Thu 27-Apr-89 09:56:19 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 87940; Thu 27-Apr-89 06:51:27 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 06:51 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: ruler Dirichlet
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890427135108.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Let ruler(k) go 0,1,0,2,0,1,0,3,..., for k = 1,2,3,..., i.e. count
the low order 0s. It is probably in Hardy and Wright somewhere that
==== ruler(k) 2
\ (- 2) π
> ------------- = --,
/ 2 6
==== k
k # 0
but, more generally,
/===\
ruler(k) ! ! π k
(- 2) ! ! (1 + s tan(-----------------))
==== ! ! n + ruler(k) + 1 2
\ n >= 1 2 π
> -------------------------------------------------- = --,
/ 2 6
==== k
k # 0
for some range of s, probably |s| < sqrt(3). These sums suggest
defining ruler(0) := -infinity.
∂27-Apr-89 1045 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: JPL Paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 10:45:38 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1989 13:43:58 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: thomason
Subject: re: JPL Paper
In-Reply-To: Your message of 27 Apr 89 0858 PDT
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.609702238.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
Fixed deadline := now + 1 week.
--Rich
∂27-Apr-89 1143 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 11:43:42 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA00897; Thu, 27 Apr 89 11:44:09 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 11:44:09 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904271844.AA00897@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of Wed, 26 Apr 89 17:24:42 PDT <8904270024.AA08951@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Just a minor clarification. The emphasis of the work that Joe
and I have been doing is on dynamic spawning, and not so much
on lightweight processes, although clearly, lightweight processes
are nice to have.
Vague Summary:
The optimal recursion cutoff depth depends fairly heavily on both the
"shape" of the tree and the "weight" of the computation nodes and on
the number of processors. However, the best dynamic depth depends
mainly on the "shape" of the tree. These facts make dynamic depth
easier to utilize than recursion depth cutoff.
Example:
Assume, for instance, that the Tak function did alot more work at each
function call. The behavior of dynamic spawning would change only
slightly. Since the overhead stays roughly the same, while the amount
of work goes up, the speed-up is significantly enhanced.
The optimal dynamic spawning depth would not significantly change; the
acceptable range of useful dynamic spawning depths would increase
significantly, however. The optimal depth is (nearly) solely
dependent on the "shape" of the computation tree.
In the recursive depth cutoff method, the number of spawns and
transfers also remains the same, with a heavier computation. But the
idle overhead increases, by a factor corresponding to how much work is
done in the new function versus how much work was done in the old one.
If idle time dominates, then speed-up is not significantly enhanced by
costlier nodes, unless you also increase the cutoff depth.
-Dan Pehoushek
∂27-Apr-89 1549 JSW PHIL.TEX[ESS,JMC]
Pat showed me the file PHIL.TEX[ESS,JMC], which doesn't run through
TEX. The problem is that it is still in old TEX (pre-1982) format,
and needs to be converted. It might be possible to instead convert
the file MACRO.TEX[LET,JMC] of macros that it uses, which is also in
old TEX format, but I think it would be better to make PHIL.TEX itself
use standard TEX macros.
∂27-Apr-89 1708 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 17:08:23 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA02729; Thu, 27 Apr 89 17:08:54 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA04073g; Thu, 27 Apr 89 17:07:39 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA01396g; Thu, 27 Apr 89 17:07:30 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 17:07:30 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904280007.AA01396@challenger>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of Wed, 26 Apr 89 17:24:42 PDT <8904270024.AA08951@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Some Tak Results in New-Qlisp
Well, I guess this is relatively interesting information. One of the
pieces of information that is always missing from such analyses is the
actual spawn time in Dan's system. Since I gather his system works by
not spawning tasks when they might otherwise have been, there are some
0 spawning times that figure into the average spawn time that is reported -
at least this is what I assume since no one talks about it.
The question I find more interesting is how this applies to real
programming. For example, is there some measure of the shape of a
computation that can figure into how a programmer would optimize a
larger program? It seems that the structure of the TAK computation -
either JMC's misremembered version or the original - is that the
processes are packed with idle time filling in part of a ``row'' of
computation. This is well-known. But what can we learn about it? How
does it interact with other programs that are written as part of the
overall program?
All of the examples I've seen by everyone, including me, talks about
examples that are so small we could have done them on a simulator
where we really could have seen the fine-grained behavior. I really
wish someone would take a large program and work with it. Are there
no large programs on earth?
-rpg-
∂27-Apr-89 1813 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Spawn times
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 18:13:48 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA03069; Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:14:21 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:14:21 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904280114.AA03069@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Spawn times
Let me give a description of (my understanding of) the implementation
of lightweight processes, which I hope will answer Dick's questions.
Execution of a program begins by spawning some small number of Qlisp
processes. Each of these runs a loop that looks for a "task" (what I
have been calling a lightweight process), runs it, and then looks for
another. At any time there only have to be enough Qlisp processes to
handle all of the processes that are currently running, or are
suspended waiting for children.
The total cost of spawning these Qlisp processes is negligible,
because it is done only once; they are then explictly allocated and
deallocated using a pool of inactive ones.
The things that contribute to spawning cost, in order from most to
least, are:
1. Testing the spawning predicate - most of the time it is NIL, so
this is the only cost. (This isn't always the highest factor,
actually. In well-behaved programs it dominates, but in TAK it
may be slightly less than half of the total overhead.)
2. Creating a task when the predicate is non-NIL. If this task runs
on the same processor as its parent, i.e., reusing the same Qlisp
process, the cost is 22 microseconds. This is what usually happens.
3. Transferring a task to another process (called "swapping" in some
of the statistics). This happens if an idle processor picks up
the task, and costs 30 microseconds.
For example, in the best of the TAK runs, (1) happened about 6,000,000
times, (2) happened 128,000 times and (3) happened 10,000 times. The
most meaningful "actual spawn time", I think, is the sum of (2) and (3):
(128,000 * 22 usec) + (10,000 * 30 usec) = 3.1 seconds. This is for a
program whose serial execution time is 102.1 seconds.
The 22 microsecond figure isn't an average of the cost for some
processes that get spawned and some that don't; it represents the work
that is done on all of the processes that the program decides to spawn
based on its spawning predicates. Some of these then cost 30
microseconds more because they transfer to a new processor. This
raised the average cost by 10% in the TAK example, so you could say
that the spawning cost is 24 microseconds per process. Keeping the
counts of spawned processes and transferred processes separate turns
out to be useful for understanding what's going on, however, which Dan
and I are currently working on.
Joe
∂27-Apr-89 1826 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com Spawn times
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 18:25:59 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA03176; Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:26:31 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA04182g; Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:25:14 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA01534g; Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:25:06 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:25:06 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904280125.AA01534@challenger>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:14:21 PDT <8904280114.AA03069@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Spawn times
This is a good explanation. Now, to further understand what is being
measured, what is the cost of bringing Dan's scheduler up to Common
Lisp specification cost? That is, I understand that there are some
correct Qlisp programs that Dan's stuff fails on (which is ok) and
which the implicit closures of the QLisp implementation handle. If
Dan's were to do the closures, what would be the cost of a spawn?
-rpg-
∂27-Apr-89 2142 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: Spawn times
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 21:41:59 PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA03674; Thu, 27 Apr 89 21:42:43 PDT
Message-Id: <8904280442.AA03674@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Spawn times
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 27 Apr 89 18:25:06 -0700.
<8904280125.AA01534@challenger>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 21:42:35 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Dan and I have talked about this. Implementing closure semantics is
straightforward, but affects performance (see below). A few of the
other things that currently aren't handled (futures, and catch/throw
killing processes) will add the cost of storing into a few more fields
in a data structure each time a process is spawned.
The implementation of these would be fairly easy because a lightweight
process, when running, is using a full-fledged Qlisp process, so it
can be blocked when it has to wait, and do all of the other things
that Qlisp processes do. So all of the Qlisp infrastructure is used
when it is needed.
The reason that closures are not a problem is that you can write the
"closure" version of a spawning form in terms of the "non-closure"
version, and vice versa. For example, consider the two forms:
(spawn-closure (foo (f1 x) (f2 y)))
(spawn-no-closure (foo (f1 x) (f2 x)))
These aren't actual Qlisp forms, but the first one is meant to
represent the style of spawning done by the current Qlisp, while the
second represents the form used by the lightweight process system.
The spawn-closure form evaluates (foo (f1 x) (f2 y)) in the child
process, so it has to create a closure to capture x and y. The
spawn-no-closure form evaluates (f1 x) and (f2 y) in the parent and
passes the values to the child, which then calls the function foo on
these values. We can write each of these in terms of the other as:
(spawn-closure (foo (f1 x) (f2 y)))
= (spawn-no-closure #'(lambda () (foo (f1 x) (f2 y)))).
(spawn-no-closure (foo (f1 x) (f2 y)))
= ((lambda (v1 v2) (spawn-closure (foo v1 v2))) (f1 x) (f2 y))
So the systems are equally powerful from a semantic viewpoint. The
first of these transformations doesn't add any inefficiency, but the
second one does, because a closure is allocated at runtime to handle a
case that doesn't need one.
Back to the original question, which was how much it would cost to
change the lightweight process system to use the spawn-closure
semantics of Qlisp. I'll leave this for Dan to answer, because he can
run some experiments to determine this. I think that it will slow
down the lightweight process creation considerably.
What this suggests to me is that we should try to get the best of both
worlds by deferring the creation of a closure to the time that a
process is transferred (run by a processor other than its parent), if
the closure is not needed in the more common case of the child running
on the same processor as the parent. This would avoid creating over
90% of the closures in the TAK example.
∂27-Apr-89 2312 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com Spawn times
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Apr 89 23:12:29 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04147; Thu, 27 Apr 89 23:13:06 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA04531g; Thu, 27 Apr 89 23:11:48 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA01884g; Thu, 27 Apr 89 23:11:41 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 23:11:41 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904280611.AA01884@challenger>
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Joe Weening's message of Thu, 27 Apr 89 21:42:35 PDT <8904280442.AA03674@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Spawn times
There are two points:
1. When comparing two systems, one should try to avoid comparing apples
and oranges.
2. It is clear that we are studying a parallel Common Lisp, which
means that such things as the semantics of spawned processes should be
well-specified and not unlike what is consistent with Common Lisp.
Nothing like SPAWN-CLOSURE and SPAWN-NO-CLOSURE is consistent Common
Lisp in the context we are discussing, though something like them
might form an implementation substrate. It is unclear that
implementationally it is easy to provide what could be the fastest
solution in a system that must guarantee correctness, except in cases
where the compiler can safely omit closure-like capture. That is, late
binding of the decision might not gain as much as you think because
the lexical possibility of capture affects allocation.
-rpg-
∂28-Apr-89 0049 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:arg@lucid.com assumptions underlying "lightweight" processes
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 00:49:34 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04374; Fri, 28 Apr 89 00:50:21 PDT
Received: from bhopal ([192.43.178.13]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA04578g; Fri, 28 Apr 89 00:49:06 PDT
Received: by bhopal id AA17876g; Fri, 28 Apr 89 00:49:02 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 00:49:02 PDT
From: Ron Goldman <arg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904280749.AA17876@bhopal>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: assumptions underlying "lightweight" processes
There is a major assumption that needs to be true for the proposed
"lightweight" process scheme to work. That being the desirability
of evaluating the computation in a depth first manner. For strict
AND-parallelism that seems fine, but if we try any problem where we
wish to do a breadth first evaluation, e.g. search, then the method
Dan & Joe are proposing breaks down.
I'm also not sure how well it will perform if the child tasks need to
cooperate with each other, as opposed to being totally independent
computations. All of the cooperating tasks would need to become
full fledged processes, so the advantage of "lightweight" tasks
would be nil.
∂28-Apr-89 0231 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM unruly Dirichlet
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 02:31:09 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 378764; Fri 28-Apr-89 05:27:50 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 88249; Fri 28-Apr-89 02:22:34 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 02:22 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: unruly Dirichlet
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890427135108.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890428092212.5.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 89 06:51 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Let ruler(k) go 0,1,0,2,0,1,0,3,..., for k = 1,2,3,..., i.e. count
the low order 0s. It is probably in Hardy and Wright somewhere that
==== ruler(k) 2
\ (- 2) π
> ------------- = -- .
/ 2 6
==== k
k # 0
Empirically,
==== ruler(k) n
\ (- 2) 2 - 1
> ------------- = ------ zeta(n) ,
/ n n
==== k 2 + 2
k >= 1
even for noninteger n. (Show that the series with 2 instead of (-2)
nevertheless converges for n arbitrarily near 1, and thus the sign
changes don't help.)
. . .
/===\
ruler(k) ! ! π k
(- 2) ! ! (1 + s tan(-----------------))
==== ! ! n + ruler(k) + 1 2
\ n >= 1 2 π
> -------------------------------------------------- = --,
/ 2 6
==== k
k # 0
for some range of s, probably |s| < sqrt(3). These sums suggest
defining ruler(0) := -infinity.
I just rechecked my derivation, and now claim
/===\
ruler(k) ! ! π k
(- 2) ! ! (1 + s tan(--------------------))
==== ! ! n + ruler(k) + 1 2
\ n >= 1 (-2) π
> ----------------------------------------------------- = -- ,
/ 2 6
==== k
k # 0
even though the previous seemed to check out numerically (as does this).
But "theory" sez the sum should suddenly vanish for |s|=sqrt(3), which is
definitely the case for the latter (the product telescopes), and perhaps
unverifiable for the former (for lack of discernable convergence).
It would be amazing if this crazy tan product also preserved the higher
zetas.
∂28-Apr-89 0752 Mailer Re: democracy
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 07:52:05 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 07:52:49 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Re: democracy
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <11Ub59@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12489751268.18.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
> The point I want to make from
>this experience and from reading the
>newspapers about the Soviet Union, Poland
>and China is this. There is only one
>kind of democracy. We have it and the
>people of communist countries want it.
>Their chances of getting it look pretty
>good now. [- JMC]
There are at least two kinds of democracy, probably more. What we have is
America is representative democracy. In smaller countries, or states,
a more direct democracy is possible where every adult citizens plays
a role in the country's decision making. Ours is a far from perfect
democracy. Many organizations are able to exert great influence over
the choice of a candidate or piece of legislation. Barely 50% of
our citizens vote in national elections. Many laws exist only to provide
tax advantages to the very wealthy.
I believe that you are correct in asserting that most citizens of
communist countries would prefer far more democratic governments where
power is more equitably distributed. Many citizens of the United States
would prefer this too.
-ric steinberger
-------
∂28-Apr-89 0951 CLT spring clean up
Tomorrow is Peninsula Sanitary's spring clean up.
The will haul away (free) anything stacked on the curb.
Hazel and I will go over to the old house tonight and
haul up all the collected trash. Maybe you should
try to make a pass too. Particularly anything that is bulky.
∂28-Apr-89 1008 Mailer re: democracy
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 10:07:58 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:08:50 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: re: democracy
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <mV8q#@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12489776028.24.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
I don't have time at the moment to give a complete response to JMC's
inquiry about what institutional changes I would make in the US federal
govt. My general feeling is that we have a room for improvement in the
area of distribution of political and economic power. In essense,
too much power and money has been allowed to accumulate into what I consider
too few hands. The feedback mechanisms that are supposed to work in
a democracy haven't worked well enough, or have been subverted through
greed, bribery, corruption and, as JMC notes, excess beaurocracy.
I would probably "start" by limiting the influence corporations and
individuals have in selecting who wins congressional elections and
what statutes are passed. Lobbying and PAC money would be sharply curtailed.
Federal agencies that work under budget would be rewarded instead of, as
is current, have their budgets further slashed.
The US govt should, I believe, work to maintain a dynamic balance of
political and economic power between the many diverse individuals
and groups in America. No one organization should "win" merely because
they have the most money, best lobbyists, highest-paid lawyers.
When economic power becomes "too concentrated" (a highly debatable
concept), a situation is present that is neither good for the citizenry
or the government. If there is argument about this point, I believe it
should be about what "too concentrated" means and not whether or not
large and concentrated accumulations of wealth are inherently good
for the possessors or society in general.
-ric steinberger
BTW - John, How was the food in the USSR? Are they interested in having
US fast food chains locate there?
-------
∂28-Apr-89 1014 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: larger programs, behavioral questions
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 10:14:07 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05449; Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:14:53 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:14:53 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904281714.AA05449@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Dick Gabriel's message of 28 Apr 89 0926 PDT <AV8CD@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: larger programs, behavioral questions
There are two simple ideal parallelism principles that can applied to
derive depth first scheduling (and something that behaves like dynamic
spawning). I can't find my original message about it, but it went
something like this:
Given two programs P1 and P2, and a third program P3 = P1 || P2
(meaning run P1 and P2 in "parallel"):
Robustness Principle
If P1 and P2 don't break, then P3 shouldn't break.
Efficiency Principle
P3 should at LEAST as fast as running P1 followed by running P2.
These are ideal composition principles, that form the base case of
some form of an induction; They help describe the desired behavior for
very large programs composed of many independent smaller programs.
With sufficient penetration, these principles clearly eliminate breadth first
as a viable scheduling strategy. With further understanding, it becomes
clear that depth first scheduling yields a fair approximation to the
ideal parallelism behavior principles.
-Dan Pehoushek
∂28-Apr-89 1056 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com larger programs, behavioral questions
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 10:56:41 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05525; Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:56:52 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA04921g; Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:55:36 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA02510g; Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:55:27 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:55:27 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904281755.AA02510@challenger>
To: pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Dan Pehoushek's message of Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:14:53 PDT <8904281714.AA05449@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: larger programs, behavioral questions
We must be talking about different things, then, because I don't see
how these principles say anything about breadth-first scheduling.
Maybe you should define what you mean by these terms. It seems
intuitively obvious to me that given a fixed scheduling algorithm of
any sort, I can produce a program that would have better performance
with a different algorithm. However, it might be possible that your
definitions simply imply your statement somehow.
-rpg-
∂28-Apr-89 1035 CLT Timothy's message
Yes, I got it.
∂28-Apr-89 1106 MPS
queenie of AIR called 3-1735
∂28-Apr-89 1308 pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU larger programs, behavioral questions
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 13:08:47 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05886; Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:09:19 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:09:19 PDT
From: Dan Pehoushek <pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904282009.AA05886@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: rpg@lucid.com
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Richard P. Gabriel's message of Fri, 28 Apr 89 10:55:27 PDT <8904281755.AA02510@challenger>
Subject: larger programs, behavioral questions
>It seems intuitively obvious to me that given a fixed scheduling
>algorithm of any sort, I can produce a program that would have better
>performance with a different algorithm.
I tend to agree. But I don't think I was talking about overall
performance, precisely, but overall behavior.
You wanted to talk about the behavior of large programs. Well, that's
a tall order; What I can talk about are certain classes of large
programs, constructed hierarchically: Large programs that are composed
from two or more independent smaller programs, each of which may be
the composition of smaller programs, ad finitem. For this class, it's
intuitively obvious that depth-first scheduling is better on this
class of programs than breadth-first scheduling, at least in the
Robustness sense. Proving it formally would might involve showing
that many programs in this class break with one method, and but very
few break with the other scheduling tactic.
I haven't done much studying of large programs, but the assumption that
they are hierachically constructed does not seem implausible.
-dan
∂28-Apr-89 1315 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:rpg@lucid.com larger programs, behavioral questions
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 13:15:13 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05899; Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:15:44 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA05053g; Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:14:27 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA02770g; Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:14:19 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:14:19 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8904282014.AA02770@challenger>
To: pehoushe@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Cc: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Dan Pehoushek's message of Fri, 28 Apr 89 13:09:19 PDT <8904282009.AA05886@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: larger programs, behavioral questions
One large program that we could study that is the dumb simulator I
wrote for early Qlisp. I think there are two aspects we can look at.
One is how to speed up every step that the simulator does - which
would emphasize techniques such as the ones you're developing (by the
way, I think at some point we will incorporate some of that stuff into
the compiler to be able to hide the closure/no-closure selections from
the user in parent-process uses happen).
The other aspect is how to differently structure a simulator that does
the same sorts of things, getting the same information but with a
different approach. This would make a good study, I think.
-rpg-
∂28-Apr-89 1404 MPS
Did you call Alex Jacobson - 213-417-7997? He said
it was important. I forgot to tell you before I went
to lunch.
Pat
∂28-Apr-89 1424 binford@Boa-Constrictor.Stanford.EDU congratulations
Received: from Boa-Constrictor.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 14:24:28 PDT
Received: by Boa-Constrictor.Stanford.EDU.stanford.edu (4.0/SMI-DDN)
id AA00792; Fri, 28 Apr 89 14:18:49 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 14:18:49 PDT
From: binford@Boa-Constrictor.stanford.edu (Tom Binford)
Message-Id: <8904282118.AA00792@Boa-Constrictor.Stanford.EDU.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: congratulations
John
Congratulations on being elected to the National
Academy of Sciences.
Best regards
Tom
∂28-Apr-89 1713 CLT
garbage collection started
∂28-Apr-89 1724 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
BELIEF AS DEFEASIBLE KNOWLEDGE
TIME FOR ACTION
Yoav Shoham
Stanford University
Monday, May 1, 3:15pm
MJH 352
I will talk about two things, to the extent that we have time.
Belief as Defeasible Knowledge
We investigate the relation between the notions of knowledge and
belief. Contrary to the well-known slogan about knowledge being
``justified, true belief,'' we propose that belief be viewed as
defeasible knowledge. Specifically, we offer a definition of belief
as knowledge-relative-to-assumptions, and tie the definition to
the notion of nonmonotonicity. (Joint work with Yoram Moses.)
Time for Action
We consider the role played by the concept of action in AI. We
first briefly summarize the advantages and limitations of past
approaches to taking the concept as primitive, as embodied in the
situation calculus and dynamic logic. We also briefly summarize
the alternative, namely adopting a temporal framework, and point
out its complementary advantages and limitations. We then propose
a framework that retains the advantages of both viewpoints, and
that ties the notion of action closely to that of knowledge. Our
definitions shed new light on the connection between time, action,
knowledge and ignorance, choice-making, feasibility, and simultaneous
reasoning about the same events at different levels of detail.
∂28-Apr-89 1922 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Hagelstein papers
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Apr 89 19:22:38 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07073; Fri, 28 Apr 89 19:23:28 PDT
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 89 19:23:28 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8904290223.AA07073@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Hagelstein papers
I've put the second and third Hagelstein papers on your desk. These
are copies; the originals are on my desk.
∂30-Apr-89 2102 P.REDLICH@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU GSB PhD program
Received: from GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 Apr 89 21:02:00 PDT
Date: Sun 30 Apr 89 21:04:37-PDT
From: Warren Redlich <P.REDLICH@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: GSB PhD program
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12490419698.15.P.REDLICH@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU>
John,
The PhD program I am in is not training for business, unlike the
MBA program. It is training for academic careers. The Marketing, Finance,
Accounting, and Org. Behavior fields are mainly for Business schools,
but their research is not, to my knowledge, oriented towards problems like
international trade. Something like that would be most studied in an
Economics department, and I can't even think of who in that department
here works in international trade. I would think it would be a problem
for macroeconomics, but I don't think Sargent deals with that, and he is
the whiz at Macro, along with Hall and Taylor.
I honestly can't think of any serious work in Economics that has
been directed at the question of competitiveness. I think it is just a
popular word for the media.
By the way, I am in the Political Economics field, which seems
more like Political Science. The closest we get to business is when we
work on regulation. I am most interested in abstract social choice
theory, and I hope to do work related to Arrow's Impossibility Theorem.
It says that democracy really doesn't work. I hope to show that it does.
So anyway, if I seem uninformed on matters that are important in
business, you needn't be surprised. I do have a good grasp of Economics,
and I try to apply it on the bboards. Given the state of Economics, it
should be no wonder why I often sound like a fool.
Warren
-------
∂01-May-89 0153 @CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:GOLUMBIC@ISRAEARN.BITNET
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 01:52:59 PDT
Received: from ISRAEARN.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 6238; Mon, 01 May 89 04:52:54 EDT
Date: Mon, 01 May 89 11:51:04 IDT
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: GOLUMBIC%ISRAEARN.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Date: 1 May 89, 11:39:52 IDT
From: Martin Charles Golumbic 972 4 296282 GOLUMBIC at ISRAEARN
To: JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Prof. McCarthy,
I am making up the schedule of talks for the Bar-Ilan symposium.
There will be 5 hour lectures and 23 twenty minute talks. I want to
confirm that Monday June 19 is okay for your invited lecture.
I will send the full program later this week.
I will be in Toronto May 8-18, so any email correspondence
that you may have starting next week, in advance of your trip, should
be sent to Ariel Frank (ariel@bimacs.bitnet)
Regards, Marty Golumbic
∂01-May-89 0700 JMC
Pullen 5051
∂01-May-89 0938 JMC
Call Jobs.
∂01-May-89 0938 JMC
trunks
∂01-May-89 1025 ATM@UWACDC.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU Congratulations!
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 10:24:57 PDT
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Mon, 1 May 89 10:23:55 PDT
Received: from UWACDC.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU (ATM) by UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU
(Mailer R2.02) with BSMTP id 1324; Mon, 01 May 89 10:20:49 PDT
Date: Mon, 01 May 1989 10:21 PDT
From: Alice terMeulen <ATM@UWACDC.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Congratulations!
To: <JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Dear John -
The Sunday NY Times brought us the terrific news of your election
to the National Academy. This is GREAT!!!
"Congratulations" seems like too small a thing to say here...
I am sure that in this environment you can make a lot of difference
and bring in new ideas, plans and developments. I wish you all the
best!
Yours,
Alice
∂01-May-89 1034 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM locus pocus
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 10:34:25 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 379603; Mon 1-May-89 13:29:29 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 88621; Sun 30-Apr-89 00:44:58 PDT
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 89 00:44 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: locus pocus
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890429134502.9.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890430074438.2.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 89 06:45 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I actually needed this. What complex z satisfy
D D
2 |z/2| + |1-z| = 1
as D goes to infinity? (D is the dimension of dragon skin
made by recursively replacing the segment 0 -> 2 with the
segments 0 -> z -> 2-z -> 2. When D=2 (spacefilling), the
possible z form the circle |z - sqrt(2/3)| = sqrt(2/3).
Answer: The only possible outcomes from infinite powers are
0, 1, infinity, and batshit. Thus, the only possible solution
must look like 2*0 + 1 = 1. I.e. |z/2| < 1 and |1-z| = 1.
This is the unit circle around z=1, minus the point z=2.
Viewed as a surface for continuous D, you start with a degenerate
ellipse at D=1, reach the circle at D=2, and a finally a larger
circle at D=infinity. A chthonian chisel.
Further restricting the middle segment length to equal
the outer two (|z| = |2-2z|) determines z = 1 +- 1/sqrt(3),
Oops! That's 1 +- 1/sqrt(-3).
which is Knuth's triadic dragon, i.e. 1/3 of the fudgeflake
sweep on the MAA cover. The reason I wan't "infinite"
dimension is those are the z where (I think) the Fourier
kernel telescopes.)
The kernel is Prod 1 - 2 z (sin x/3↑n)↑2 . This telescopes
n>=1
for z = 2/3 (with a neat balanced ternary radix effect!), but
that's not the z I'm looking for.
∂01-May-89 1323 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Qlisp meeting this week
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 13:23:48 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05195; Mon, 1 May 89 13:24:23 PDT
Date: Mon, 1 May 89 13:24:23 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905012024.AA05195@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Qlisp meeting this week
I've scheduled MJH 301 for us at 2:15 on Wednesday, May 3.
See you there.
∂01-May-89 1400 JMC
charge slips to piggott, val about ltr of invitation
∂01-May-89 1400 JMC
val about invitation.
∂01-May-89 1533 NA.PHL@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 15:33:29 PDT
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Mon, 1 May 89 15:30:21 PDT
Date: Mon, 1 May 89 15:29:33 PDT
To: ee-faculty@sierra
From: "Portia Leet" <NA.PHL@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
TO: Sunrise Club
FROM: Portia Leet
RE: Meeting, May 23rd
The last Sunrise Club meeting for the 1988-89 year will be on
Tuesday, May 23rd, at 7:30 a.m. Dr. Robert L. Byer from the
Applied Physics Department will speak on "Solid State Lasers -
The Next Ten Years." Note: The breakfast will be served in the
Cypress Room which is down the hall from the Oak Lounge West
where we usually meet. The School of Earth Sciences is having a
television presentation later in the day in the Oak Lounge and
the equipment has to be set up.
Please R.S.V.P. to me at na.phl@forsythe, leet@sierra, or 5-1585.
To: SUNRISE(CT.JAC,CT.JFK,CT.MJF,CT.PAC,GD.WRK,NA.ADP,DOWN@SIERRA,
EE-FACULTY@SIERRA,FACULTY@SCORE,FULLERTON@SIERRA,GIBBONS@SIERRA,
HAGSTROM@SIERRA,JHILL@SIERRA,KINO@SIERRA,KRUGER@SIERRA,
LEVINTHAL@SIERRA,PHD@SCORE,RAS@SCORE,REIS@SIERRA,TAJNAI@SCORE)
∂01-May-89 1819 Mailer re: democracy
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Robert W Floyd <RWF@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from JMC sent Fri, 28 Apr 89 07:52:49 PDT.]
John, or anyone else who knows, how do the Russians and Chinese
learn about our constitutional system? Are they still limited
to what they find in periodicals, or can they read our
constitution, supreme court opinions, etc? And how about
Locke, Mill, Bentham, the Federalist Papers, Jefferson, etc?
I am wondering if they know, for example, as many of our
citizens do not, why the founders chose representative
rather than direct democracy, and systematically avoided
one-man-one-vote except for the House of Representatives,
to which on the other hand many special powers were granted.
I think it's great that so many are demanding democracy,
but I would hate to see them try something that can't work.
Maybe a successful democracy has to begin with an Articles
of Confederation and a Continental Congress, followed by
a constitutional convention, and a taboo against having another
for two hundred years.
In particular, a free press and free assembly probably
have to exist for a good long time before free elections
will serve the public interest effectively. The heroes
of our revolution were most of them its scribblers, not
its fighters.
∂01-May-89 1857 gurevich@polya.Stanford.EDU English
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 18:57:18 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA09147; Mon, 1 May 89 18:57:27 -0700
Date: Mon, 1 May 89 18:57:27 -0700
From: Yuri Gurevich <gurevich@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905020157.AA09147@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 01 May 89 1437 PDT <AXrfS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: English
Thank you very much. I thought that I had a legitimate abbreviation
for "We remind you basics of datalog". But I trust your sense of English.
-Yuri
∂01-May-89 2017 ACT Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 May 1989
Previous Balance 13.63
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.14
Current Charges 4.00 (bicycle lockers)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 17.77
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 1/10/89.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂01-May-89 2215 gurevich@polya.Stanford.EDU English
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 May 89 22:15:04 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA17594; Mon, 1 May 89 22:15:13 -0700
Date: Mon, 1 May 89 22:15:13 -0700
From: Yuri Gurevich <gurevich@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905020515.AA17594@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 01 May 89 1901 PDT <iXvzI@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: English
Thank you. -Yuri
∂02-May-89 0256 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM log smog
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 May 89 02:56:44 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 379971; Tue 2-May-89 05:52:19 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 88897; Tue 2-May-89 02:46:07 PDT
Date: Tue, 2 May 89 02:45 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: log smog
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "bruce@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890502094543.3.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Suppose you could find polynomials satisfying (for all z)
2 2 4 2
(D1385) (a2 z + a1 z + a0) (b2 z + b1 z + b0) = a0 z + a1 z + a2
. Then
4 2 4 2 8 4
(D1386) (a0 z + a1 z + a2) (b0 z + b1 z + b2) = a2 z + a1 z + a0
, etc., so that
m
a2 (- 2)
----------- + a1 z + 1
m - 1 m + 1
/===\ n (- 2)
! ! b2 (- 2) z
! ! (----------- + b1 z + b0) = ----------------------------------
! ! n + 1 m
n = 0 (- 2) 4 ((- 2) - 1)
z --------------
3 2
z (a2 z + a1 z + 1)
. In particular, (reversing, normalizing, and limiting the product, and
bowing to Roman imperialism regarding lowercase "pi")
i pi i pi
i pi - ---- ---
i pi --- 3 3
inf - ---- i pi 3 2 e e 2/3
/===\ 3 - n - 1 ---- e (--------- - ----- + 1) z
! ! e (-2) 3 sqrt(z) z
! ! (- -------- + 2 z - e ) = ----------------------------------
! ! - n 3
n = 1 (-2)
z
and
i pi i pi
inf --- - n - 1 - ----
/===\ 3 (- 2) 3
! ! e z e
! ! (----------- + ------------- + -------) =
! ! - n 2 2
n = 1 (- 2)
2 z
i pi i pi
5 i pi ---- - ----
- ----- 3 3
6 e e 2/3
2 e (------- + ------- - 1) z
sqrt(z) z
----------------------------------------
sqrt(3) ln(z)
. Checking at z = the canonical random number, .69105, I was startled
by the two products coinciding to 6 places in the real part. Stripping
away the irrelevant, and cosmetically reciprocating z, the difference is
z - 1 z + 1 2 sqrt(z)
(D1393) ----- - ----- - ---------
ln(z) 6 3
(C1394) taylor(%,z,1,5);
Time= 492 msecs
4 5
(z - 1) (z - 1)
(D1394)/T/ - -------- + -------- + . . .
2880 1920
. Solving for the log,
6 (z - 1)
(D1395) ln(z) = -----------------
z + 4 sqrt(z) + 1
(C1396) taylor(%,z,1,5);
Time= 383 msecs
2 3 4 5
(z - 1) (z - 1) (z - 1) (z - 1)
(D1396)/T/ z - 1 - -------- + -------- - -------- + -------- + . . . =
2 3 4 5
2 3 4 5
(z - 1) (z - 1) (z - 1) 115 (z - 1)
z - 1 - -------- + -------- - -------- + ------------ + . . .
2 3 4 576
(C1397) lhs(%)-rhs(%);
5
(z - 1)
(D1397)/T/ -------- + . . .
2880
. So, (D1395) is a very nice approximation to ln near 1.
The (1+4+1)/6 recalls the generic volume-of-solid formula, i.e.
1 step of Simpson's rule for Integrate(z↑x,x,0,1)=(z-1)/ln z.
But the next refinement, 12*(z-1)/(z+4*z↑(3/4)+2*sqrt(z)+4*z↑(1/4)+1),
merely shrinks the (z-1)↑5 error coefficient to 1/46080, instead of 0.
∂02-May-89 0933 Mailer re: Pat Buchanan has gone off the deep end
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 May 89 09:32:41 PDT
Date: Tue, 2 May 89 09:33:20 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: re: Pat Buchanan has gone off the deep end
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: P.REDLICH@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <eXWK5@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12490818144.12.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Represents message from JMC.
>Let us begin with the fact that a poll of New York blacks showed
>that 47 percent thought Bernard Goetz "did the right thing" in
>shooting the four black thugs he thought were about to attack
>him and only 16 percent thought he did the wrong thing. Then
>consider the further fact that the largest cause of death
>among teen-age and other young black men is murder and that
>middle class blacks not living in the "ghetto" are not much
>more likely to be murdered than whites.
Whether 47% or 97% percent of people think Goetz did "the right thing"
neither makes hsi actions right or wrong. We still are a country of
laws aren't we? It is up to a judge and and a jury to decide
his innocence or guilt.
>These facts lead me to the conclusion that Buchanan might
>do these communities some good, whereas Redlich and Steinberger
>can only do them harm.
I don't know where you get this idea. I had made no suggestions re:
impoverished communities, only a criticism of Buchanan's "frontier
justice." Whatever actions are taken ought to be as the result of
legislation, and not the kind of "form a posse and kill the niggers"
attitude that Buchanan suggests.
>The problem is that a predatory culture has developed since
>the early 1960s among certain black young men. The history
>of earlier predatory cultures, Northmen, Goths, Moghuls, Mongols
>Aztecs doesn't suggest much optimism. They were either
>smashed or conquered everything in sight and mellowed over
>hundreds of years. The "ghetto" culture isn't going to
>conquer America.
If there is such a predatory culture (and I don't think most anthropologists
or sociologists would accept that idea), then it is just as likely to
be formed as a reaction to decades of predation from outside these
"ghettos." This is no justification of any murders or violence that
has incubated there - I only wish to point out that conditions in these
communities did not arise in a vaccuum. Clearly, murders and other
criminals should be tried in a court of law, and, if guilty, receive
punishment.
Traping and punishing criminals should be pursued, but it attacks
a symptom of deeper problems in American society: injustice and
inequality. Until these are more fairly addressed by our citizenry
and legislatures, what you call "ghetto violence" is likely to
continue. Until impovrished urban kids have something to say YES to,
it will be dufficult to just say NO.
>The resources of a modern society are far greater
>than those of older societies so maybe something can be done.
>However, it won't be done by knee-jerk liberalism.
Knee-jerk anythingism won't work. Buchanan's column is an example
of knee-jerk (i.e. non-thinking) conservatism. There is room in the
debate for well-reasoned carefully-argued conservative opinion.
Pat Buchanan's article wasn't even close.
Duty calls.
-ric s.
-------
∂02-May-89 1130 MPS
David Leighton of Boeing Computer Services called.
818 781-1987. They are starting an AI section of
their computing and would like your recommendation
of a manager for that division.
Pat
∂02-May-89 1343 VAL seminar
Rathmann found a bug in his proof and wants to postpone his talk. I remember
you promised us a new context talk; would you like to speak next time, May 8?
∂02-May-89 1518 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Parallel Evaluation of Game Trees
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 May 89 15:18:47 PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA09572; Tue, 2 May 89 15:19:16 PDT
Message-Id: <8905022219.AA09572@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Parallel Evaluation of Game Trees
Date: Tue, 02 May 89 15:19:14 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
This talk may be of interest to some of us. It is in MJH 301 on
Friday, May 5.
------- Forwarded Message
Date: Tue, 2 May 89 10:55:07 PDT
From: Joseph Naor <naor@wolvesden.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905021755.AA00308@wolvesden.Stanford.EDU>
To: paco@polya.stanford.edu
Subject: PACO this week
PACO will resume this Friday at 11am, seminar room 301. The
speaker is Yan-jun Zhang from UC Berkeley.
On Parallel Evaluation of Game Trees
-------------------------------------
A game tree is a finite rooted tree in which each leaf has a real value,
the root is a MAX-node, the internal nodes at odd distance from the root
are MIN-nodes and the internal nodes at even distance from the root are
MAX-nodes. The evaluation of a game tree is to determine the value of the
root from the given values on the leaves. The best known heuristic in
practice for evaluating game trees is the sequential Alpha-Beta pruning
procedure.
In this talk we present a simple parallel algorithm, called Parallel
Alpha-Beta, for evaluating game trees. Parallel Alpha-Beta parallelizes
the sequential Alpha-Beta pruning procedure. We show that, on *every*
instance of a uniform tree, Parallel Alpha-Beta achieves a linear speed-up
over the sequential Alpha-Beta pruning procedure, if the number of
processors used is close to the height of the input tree. This is the first
non-trivial speed-up bound known for the sequential Alpha-Beta pruning
procedure.
------- End of Forwarded Message
∂02-May-89 1546 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU undergraduate seminar
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 May 89 15:40:33 PDT
Date: Tue 2 May 89 15:40:16-PDT
From: "H. Roy Jones" <JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: undergraduate seminar
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: : ;
Message-ID: <12490884941.50.JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Just a reminder that you are meeting with 15 or so undergraduates for an
informal discussion on this Wednesday, May 3rd, from 3:15-5:05, in 60-61F.
Roy
-------
∂02-May-89 1600 JMC
val about invitation
∂02-May-89 1800 JMC
Fredkin, Robinson
∂02-May-89 1803 peyton@polya.Stanford.EDU democracy
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 May 89 18:03:24 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA04667; Tue, 2 May 89 18:03:09 -0700
Date: Tue, 2 May 1989 18:03:07 PDT
Sender: "Liam H. Peyton" <peyton@polya.stanford.edu>
From: "Liam H. Peyton" <peyton@polya.stanford.edu>
To: su-etc@polya.Stanford.EDU
Cc: jmc@sail
Subject: democracy
Message-Id: <CMM.0.87.610160587.peyton@polya.stanford.edu>
This is a little late, but I havent read this bboard for awhile.
JMC states (this is a paraphrase) given that soviet citizens voted against
the old guard, what people now thought who had claimed that communist
governments were popular and would be supported if an election were held -
especially in countries like Cuba and Nicaragua.
As someone who has posted a lot on Nicaragua, I assume that I am one
of the people being referred to, although the statement as it stands
is both inaccurate about Nicaragua and my position.
The popularity of the Sandinistas has been affirmed on two separate
occassions. In 1979, Nicaraguans voted with their guns and their lives when
they overthrew the US backed military dictatorship of Samoza in a popular
rebellion led by the Sandinistas. It was a popular rebellion, in that people
from all economic classes and all political persuasions joined the revolution
althought the military campaign was run by the Sandinistas. In 1984, the
popularity of the Sandinistas was affirmed by a popular election that was
monitored by an international group of observers. THe Sandinistas won
62% of the popular vote and control of the legislature in an election that
sent representatives from 7 parties to the legislature. After a visit there
in 1986, I was of the impression that the Sandinistas were still quite popular
in spite of the economic and military hardships suffered by the people.
Regardless of my opinion, the popularity of the Sandinistas will be put to
the test again in another election either this year or in 1990.
My opinion, was that the will of the Nicarguan people as expressed in the
1986 election should be respected by the US government and that it should cease
the funding of terrorist activities against Nicaraguans.
My question for JMC is this, if it turns out that the political will
of the chinese people is not to have the economic reforms that the
chinese hierarchy have been experimenting with, would he support the
US applying pressure for democratization that would help the expression
of this will, or would he support the US encouraging the chinese hierarchy
to pre-empt the democratic process in order to carry out the economic
reforms? Or have you fallen into the intellectual trap of thinking
that it is impossible for the chinese people not to want your economic
system? That is, at least after they have been properly educated.
I bring this up because it seems that recent events in China (student
and labour demonstrations) indicate that a significant part of the
population is not happy with the reforms.
---Liam
∂02-May-89 1900 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:STICKEL@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM CADE Call for Papers
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 May 89 19:00:02 PDT
Received: from AI.AI.MIT.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 2 May 89 18:59:45-PDT
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (CHAOS 3131) by AI.AI.MIT.EDU 2 May 89 21:33:50 EDT
Received: from Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM (TCP 20004401401) by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 2 May 89 21:29:20 EDT
Date: Tue 2 May 89 18:23:55-PDT
From: STICKEL@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM (Mark Stickel)
Subject: CADE Call for Papers
To: ikbsbb@inf.rl.ac.uk, types@theory.mit.lcs.edu,
logic@theory.mit.lcs.edu, theorem-provers@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,
info-hol@CLOVER.UCDAVIS.EDU, ailist@AI.AI.MIT.EDU,
rewriting@crin.crin.fr,
mod-ki%gmdzi.uucp%unido.uucp@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM
cc: STICKEL@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM
Message-ID: <610161836.0.STICKEL@AI.SRI.COM>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(229)+TOPSLIB(126)@AI.SRI.COM>
Reply-To: STICKEL@Warbucks.AI.SRI.COM
CADE-10
10th International Conference on Automated Deduction
West Germany
July 23-27, 1990
Call for Papers
CADE is the major forum at which research on all aspects of automated
deduction can be presented. Papers on automated deduction (for classical
and nonclassical logics) in the following and related fields are invited:
Theorem Proving Decision Procedures Logic Programming
Unification Program Verification/Synthesis Inference Systems
Term Rewriting Deductive Databases Applications
Program Committee
Peter Andrews Claude Kirchner William Pase
Wolfgang Bibel Jean-Louis Lassez Lawrence Paulson
W.W. Bledsoe Donald Loveland Fernando Pereira
Alan Bundy Ewing Lusk David Plaisted
Robert Constable Michael McRobbie Joerg Siekmann
Jean-Pierre Jouannaud Dale Miller Mark Stickel, Chairman
Deepak Kapur Hans Juergen Ohlbach Richard Waldinger
Matt Kaufmann Ross Overbeek Christoph Walther
Original research papers (up to 5,000 words; 15 proceedings pages, 6 X 9
inches, 12 point type, will be allotted) are solicited. Also solicited
are system summaries that describe working reasoning systems (2
proceedings pages) and problem sets that provide realistic, interesting
challenges for automated reasoning systems (5 proceedings pages). The
title page of the submission should include author's name, address,
phone number, and E-mail address. Papers must be unpublished and not
submitted for publication elsewhere. Late papers and papers that
require major revision, including submissions that are too long, will be
rejected.
Submission receipt deadline: November 27, 1989
Author notification date: February 15, 1990
Camera-ready copy receipt deadline: April 2, 1990
Six paper copies should be sent to arrive by November 27, 1989 to
Mark E. Stickel
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, CA 94025 U.S.A.
Inquiries about CADE can also be sent by electronic mail to
Stickel@AI.SRI.COM
*************************** PLEASE POST ***************************
-------
∂03-May-89 0803 Mailer re: Pat Buchanan has gone off the deep end
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 May 89 08:03:37 PDT
Date: Wed, 3 May 89 08:04:08 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: re: Pat Buchanan has gone off the deep end
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: paulf@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9X$#C@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12491064047.10.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
>[In reply to message from STEINBERGER@kl.sri.com sent Tue, 2 May 89 13:58:10 PDT.]
> [from JMC]
>Here's what I conclude from 47 percent of blacks thinking Goetz did
>the right thing and only 16 percent opposed, although the "black
>leaders" took the opposite position. The average New York black
>more often imagines himself in Goetz's position of being
>menaced by 4 black thugs than in the position of being shot by
>a crazy white man who misinterprets something he says.
The point is that US courts of law should be uninfluenced in this or any
other criminal case by what 47% of New Yorkers think. The punishment
Goetz receives, if any, should not be decided by opinion polls.
>I think Steinberger's "knee jerk liberal position" is wrong in
>saying that the main cause ghetto violence is social injustice
>and that the main solution is to reduce this injustice.
I wish we could stop using the term "knee-jerk." In any case, my
position is that social, political and economic injustice are one factor
that ought not be neglected if one desires to understand the roots of
urban violence. I have never claimed that law enforcement agencies should
make any exceptions based on the race or background or either the victim
or alleged pertetrators of a crime.
> 1. Well-intentioned measures that made law enforcement
> harder.
Could you be specific here?
> 2. Rules preventing eviction of violent people from
>housing projects resulting in their being taken over by gangs.
I'm sure whatever rule(s) you're refering to doesn't apply to only "violent"
people. When housing projects are "taken over" by gangs, as they have been
in my native Washington, DC, the appropriate short term response is to
arrest and imprison violators. The if existing laws make this difficult,
the appropriate action is to change the law, hire more enforcement agents,
build more prisons, which implies more money. It is also not inappropriate
to try to improve society so that in the long run housing projects are
not necessary, not built, not needed. This also will cost in terms of
time and money and require some long-term vision of a better society.
There's not much of a premium on vision these days, though.
> 3. Rent control measures that benefitted a random
>selection of the middle class but caused housing in poor areas to
>be abandoned and destroyed. This helped promote homelessness.
I don't think long-term rent control is a great idea. Whether it actually
promotes homelessness or not is certainly debatable.
>What about the solution?
>I don't believe anything will work but law enforcement to whatever
>degree may be required. I would like to relax civil rights
>protections as little as possible but as much as necessary.
>I would like to restore the protections as soon as possible.
>What relaxations may be required?
>1. Imprisonment in whatever prisons society chooses to afford
>for whatever period is necessary to incapacitate criminals, i.e.
>to keep most (say 80 percent) of them off the streets. If the
>prisons can be kept nice, fine. If the only way to keep the
>convicted violent criminals in prison is to rent them to
>the Soviet or Chinese gulag, let that be done.
"as soon as possible" can turn into a long time. Before you go dissolving
civil liberties, let there be an ample public discussion of the
ramifications of such decisions. Let legislatures make/change laws
and not public opinion polls. Let us not have justice Iranian style.
>2. It may be necessary to give police the power to use their
>nightsticks at the cost of occasional injustice.
This violation of law can easily lead to more serious illegalities
like searches without warrants and the requirement of national identity
cards and the beginnings of the establishment of a police state.
>3. Removing the Miranda rule is worth doing, although by itself
>it won't do much.
I share your frustrations when perpetrators of crimes have been freed
by failure to give "Miranda rights" or other "technicalities." But
if we allow law-breakers to be prosecuted in violation to our own
laws what form of justice is served.
I believe the Miranda law (and others) is one of the prices we pay
for maintaining a free society. If police officers cannot properly
use it, they need better training, which, of course costs money. In an
age of "no new taxes", money for this sort of thing is hard to come by.
>4. Executing gang leaders when gang members commit murder requires
>no change in present law and should be done.
I don't favor the death penalty, but agree that stong and harsh punishment
is necessary (obviously!).
>All the above follows from the "predatory society" theory and
>the historical fact that predatory societies in the past
>have either conquered or been violently suppressed.
I find the concept of "predatory society" with (previously mentioned)
analogies to Goths sacking Rome inappropriate. (Rome was essentially
well into decline before invading bands like the Vandals [love that name]
and the Visigoths delivered the final blows).
-ric s.
-------
∂03-May-89 1329 VAL re: invitation requirements
[In reply to message rcvd 02-May-89 20:25-PT.]
The consulate has a standard form (I may have a copy at home). It should be
signed in the presence of a notary public, registered at the consulate and
mailed to Natasha, who should submit it along with some other papers to the
local OVIR.
∂03-May-89 1330 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 May 89 13:29:54 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA14711; Wed, 3 May 89 13:29:45 -0700
Date: Wed, 3 May 1989 13:29:43 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: binford@coyote, feigenbaum@sumex-aim, rwf@sail, golub@patience,
guibas@dec.com, jlh@amadeus, dek@sail, zm@sail, jmc@sail, ejm@sierra,
nilsson@tenaya, oliger@pride, pratt@polya.Stanford.EDU, ullman@score
Cc: chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU, ejm@shasta
Subject: Faculty Meeting
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.610230583.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
Please hold Tuesday, May 16 from 2:30 to 4:00
p.m. for a meeting of the full professors of the
Department to consider a recommendation to
promote Associate Professor Terry Winograd
to Full Professor. You can stop by my office
anytime before the meeting to look over the
evaluation letters that we have received.
∂03-May-89 1400 JMC
Inference
∂03-May-89 1423 VAL borrowed books
Hogger, Introduction to Logic Programming
Kowalski, Logic for Problem Solving
∂03-May-89 1541 levinth@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Janapense Trip
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 May 89 15:41:33 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 3 May 89 15:41:24 PDT
Date: Wed, 3 May 89 15:41:24 PDT
From: levinth@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Elliott C. Levinthal)
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Janapense Trip
John , spoke to Mark Pullen. there seems to be no security or
classification issue with regard to your trip to Japan . The only
question was money. they felt that 6 people from Lucid and Stanford
was more than they wanted to pay for. You will receive, by the end of
this week, ( check with Pullen if this doesn't happen-
Pullen@vax.darpa.mil ) for yourself and two other people, one from
Stanford and one from Lucid. Let me know if there is anything further
you wish me to do.
Elliott
∂03-May-89 1552 VAL seminar
We don't have a speaker for next Monday. Would you like to give a talk on
contexts?
∂03-May-89 1702 debra@russell.Stanford.EDU FACULTY MEETING
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 May 89 17:02:19 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA12183; Wed, 3 May 89 17:06:51 PDT
Message-Id: <8905040006.AA12183@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, nilsson@score.stanford.edu,
shoham@score.stanford.edu, winograd@score.stanford.edu,
greeno.pa@xerox.com, bresnan@russell.Stanford.EDU, kay.pa@xerox.com,
kiparsky@russell.Stanford.EDU, poser@russell.Stanford.EDU,
sag@russell.Stanford.EDU, wasow@russell.Stanford.EDU,
barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU, bratman@russell.Stanford.EDU,
etch@russell.Stanford.EDU, julius@russell.Stanford.EDU,
john@russell.Stanford.EDU, herb@psych.stanford.edu,
der@psych.stanford.edu, sells@russell.Stanford.EDU
Cc: debra@russell.Stanford.EDU, kuder@russell.Stanford.EDU,
trip@russell.Stanford.EDU
Subject: FACULTY MEETING
Date: Wed, 03 May 89 17:06:48 PDT
From: Debra Alty <debra@russell.Stanford.EDU>
Stanley would like to set up a FACULTY MEETING for Wednesday, May
10th @ 3:30.
Can you attend? Please offer alternative time, if you cannot.
Thanks,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEBRA ALTY | CCC SSS LL IIII The Center for
Stanford University | CCCCC S S LL II
Ventura Hall 20 | C C S LL II the Study of
Stanford, CA 94305-4115 | C SSSSS LL II
| C C S LL II Language and
debra@csli.stanford.edu | CCCCC S S LL II
(415) 723-3084 | CCC SSS LLLLL IIII Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
∂03-May-89 1729 CLT david chud
is in santa clara -- 408-747-0999 room 517
$
∂03-May-89 1741 Mailer@Score.Stanford.EDU Message of 3-May-89 11:58:50
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 May 89 17:41:22 PDT
Date: Wed 3 May 89 17:40:13-PDT
From: The Mailer Daemon <Mailer@Score.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Message of 3-May-89 11:58:50
Message failed for the following:
reid@glacier.Stanford.EDU.#Internet: 550 <reid@glacier.Stanford.EDU>... User unknown
------------
∂03-May-89 1801 JMC
A year and a half ago David Chudnovsky gave Gorbachev a year and a half.
∂03-May-89 1837 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU undergraduate seminar
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 May 89 18:37:20 PDT
Date: Wed 3 May 89 18:37:19-PDT
From: "H. Roy Jones" <JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: undergraduate seminar
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12491179317.12.JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Thanks for coming to the undergraduate seminar. I know they really enjoyed
your talk.
I forgot to ask one thing? What are you going to use when SAIL goes away?
Thanks again,
Roy
-------
∂03-May-89 1900 JMC
Sterling for VAL
∂03-May-89 2000 JMC
Spectator for Patashnik
∂04-May-89 0019 JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU re: undergraduate seminar
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 00:19:12 PDT
Date: Thu 4 May 89 00:19:10-PDT
From: "H. Roy Jones" <JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: undergraduate seminar
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <11YCS5@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12491241549.9.JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU>
The three I'd think of off the top of my head are Mac, Sun, and NeXT.
The Mac is great for day to day administrative things because there's lots
of off the shelf software, but somehow I don't think this is what you're
looking for.
Suns seem like good unix boxes, but have almost no good non-unix software. They
do have some powerful high-end machines if your need is for something more.
NeXT is another interesting option. The software isn't there right now, but
maybe in the future. It has some nice features: sound, automatic indexing,
and a nice lisp (allegro I believe).
I don't know how many Megs of stuff you have, but at least storage has gotten
to the point that I can't imagine you'll have any problem keeping all of it;
they're beginning to measure it in gigabytes... Furthermore, your hardware
costs will drop so much that you'll be able to afford to pay some good people
to make your transition as painless as possible.
Good luck and thanks again.
Roy
-------
∂04-May-89 0759 perlis@cs.rochester.edu Academy of Sciences
Received: from cayuga.cs.rochester.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 07:59:48 PDT
Received: from procyon.cs.rochester.edu by cayuga.cs.rochester.edu (5.59/m) id AA10142; Thu, 4 May 89 10:59:44 EDT
Received: by procyon.cs.rochester.edu (3.2/m) id AA09100; Thu, 4 May 89 10:59:37 EDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 89 10:59:37 EDT
From: perlis@cs.rochester.edu
Message-Id: <8905041459.AA09100@procyon.cs.rochester.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Academy of Sciences
John, I just heard you have been nominated for membership
in the Academy of Sciences! That's great, and well deserved!
Don
∂04-May-89 0830 JMC
trunks
∂04-May-89 0845 CLT
Wilcoxson,Harold DDS. (dentist) 325-8647
888 Oakgrove Ave. MP
∂04-May-89 1050 levinth@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Janapense Trip
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 10:50:12 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 4 May 89 10:49:47 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 89 10:49:47 PDT
From: levinth@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Elliott C. Levinthal)
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 03 May 89 1733 PDT <eYuKI@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Janapense Trip
John, Pullen made the comment that he just didn't think "he should be
telling John McCarthy where to travel." Elliott
∂04-May-89 1343 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: GNU compiler and the Free Software Foundation
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 13:43:01 PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08773; Thu, 4 May 89 13:43:20 PDT
Message-Id: <8905042043.AA08773@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Cc: charron@angelo.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
tiemann@yahi.stanford.edu, deyoung@vax.darpa.mil, PUCCI@vax.darpa.mil
Subject: Re: GNU compiler and the Free Software Foundation
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 26 Apr 89 11:13:53 -0400.
<609610433.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Date: Thu, 04 May 89 13:43:13 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Iris Brest, Stanford's Associate General Counsel, has sent the
following letter to the Free Software Foundation:
Stanford University hereby disclaims all copyright
interest in the changes and enhancements made by Joseph
S. Weening to the program "GNU C Compiler."
As you know, Mr. Weening did this work as a research
assistant under a DARPA contract. It is our
understanding that DARPA has agreed that its
requirements are met by Free Software Foundation's
license arrangements. The disclaimer above is premised
on that understanding, so please let us know at once if
it is not correct.
Sincerely, etc.
This satisfies FSF's requirements, I believe, so the issue is
finally resolved.
Joe
∂04-May-89 1420 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil Re: GNU compiler and the Free Software Foundation
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 14:20:18 PDT
Received: from sun45.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA06799; Thu, 4 May 89 17:19:47 EDT
Posted-Date: Thu 4 May 89 17:12:56-EDT
Received: by sun45.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA04676; Thu, 4 May 89 17:12:58 EDT
Date: Thu 4 May 89 17:12:56-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Re: GNU compiler and the Free Software Foundation
To: weening@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
Cc: SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil, charron@angelo.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
tiemann@yahi.stanford.edu, deyoung@vax.darpa.mil, PUCCI@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <610319576.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
In-Reply-To: <8905042043.AA08773@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Joe --
This looks good. Thanks,
Bill Scherlis
-------
∂04-May-89 1447 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Thesis
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 14:47:36 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA09140; Thu, 4 May 89 14:48:20 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 89 14:48:20 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905042148.AA09140@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Thesis
Will you be here later this afternoon? In an hour or two I should
have a draft of my thesis ready to give you. If you're not coming
back to MJH and there's time before you leave, I can bring it to your
house.
∂04-May-89 1649 I.IONLYONTUES@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU re: OK. I think I found the problem
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 16:48:58 PDT
Date: Thu 4 May 89 16:45:33-PDT
From: Perry Friedman <I.iONLYonTUES@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: OK. I think I found the problem
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <1yYzYB@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12491421112.89.I.IONLYONTUES@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Actually, I have not yet found the problem, believe it or not.
I have been trying to help the folks at labrea and see exactly why
the messages are failing and see which ones get through.
The last test, so far, has been inconclusive at best.
I have still not been able to track down the orginal source of the problem.
Please have patience.
-------
∂04-May-89 1720 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Prolog in TeX
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 17:20:46 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA09689; Thu, 4 May 89 17:21:35 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 89 17:21:35 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905050021.AA09689@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Prolog in TeX
This seems to work reasonably well, except it ignores spaces at the
beginning of lines. It also doesn't put any space before or after the
program.
This is a line preceding the program.
{\tt\obeyspaces\obeylines
foo :- bar.
baz(a,b) :- quux(b,a).
}
This is the rest of the paragraph.
∂04-May-89 1742 munnari!yarra-glen.aaii.oz.au!root@uunet.UU.NET Dartmouth Conference???
Received: from uunet.uu.net by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 17:42:35 PDT
Received: from munnari.UUCP by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with UUCP
id AA14577; Thu, 4 May 89 20:42:28 -0400
Received: from yarra-glen.aaii.oz by munnari.oz with SunIII (5.5)
id AA05000; Fri, 5 May 89 09:49:06 EST
(from root@yarra-glen.aaii.oz for uunet!jmc@sail.stanford.edu)
Received: from RUTHERGLEN.aaii.oz by yarra-glen.aaii.oz (4.0)
id AA02283; Fri, 5 May 89 09:48:49 EST
Return-Path: <georgeff@aaii.oz>
Reply-To: <georgeff%aaii.OZ@uunet.UU.NET>
Date: Fri, 5 May 89 09:49 EAST
From: Michael Georgeff <munnari!aaii.oz.au!georgeff@uunet.UU.NET>
Subject: Dartmouth Conference???
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Fcc: GE:MAIL;MAIL.OUT.NEWEST
Message-Id: <19890504234923.7.GEORGEFF@RUTHERGLEN.aaii.oz>
John,
I am currently delving around into the beginnings of AI, and recollect
that one of the first AI meetings (?) was at Dartmouth or somewhere in
England (?) sometime in the 60s, and that you were there plus other
founding fathers of the field. Have I got it all wrong? Do you know
the meeting I am talking about? If so, who was there? when was it held?
what did you talk about (what were the issues)? If you don't know the
meeting I mean, where did the AI community get together prior to the first
IJCAI in 69?
Thanks,
Mike.
∂04-May-89 1801 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Re: paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 18:01:48 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 1989 21:00:30 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: paper
In-Reply-To: Your message of 04 May 89 1757 PDT
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.610333230.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
OK, I'll stand by.
--Rich
∂04-May-89 1857 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:arg@lucid.com really new qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 18:57:43 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA00190; Thu, 4 May 89 18:58:13 PDT
Received: from bhopal ([192.43.178.13]) by heavens-gate id AA06036g; Thu, 4 May 89 18:56:54 PDT
Received: by bhopal id AA21520g; Thu, 4 May 89 18:56:44 PDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 89 18:56:44 PDT
From: Ron Goldman <arg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8905050156.AA21520@bhopal>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: really new qlisp
A new version of Qlisp, named really-new-qlisp, is now available that
automatically will grab more stack for a process when needed. Stack
overflow should no longer be a problem. Each function when called
now checks if there is sufficient stack remaining, and, if not, a new
chunk of stack is allocated for the function to use. When the
function eventually returns, the extra stack is released for reuse.
Currently the default stack size is 2048 32-bit words. There is a
cushion of 256 words at the end; when the frame for a function would
cross into the cushion, a new chunk of stack is allocated for the
function. With the default stack size you can now have a maximum of
2941 processes existing at one time.
Let me know if you encounter any problems using it. Also let me know
if you don't....
Ron
∂04-May-89 2032 @REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU:hewitt@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU Gul Agha
Received: from REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 May 89 20:32:33 PDT
Received: from DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU by REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 203491; Thu 4-May-89 23:31:01 EDT
Date: Thu, 4 May 89 23:30 EDT
From: Carl Hewitt <hewitt@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Gul Agha
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: Hewitt@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <19890505033035.3.HEWITT@DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU>
John:
I would like to STRONGLY recommend Gul Agha for a tenure track position
at Stanford.
Gul Agha has by far done the best work on the foundations of concurrent
systems in the last decade. His work is UNIQUE in that it is directly
applicable to theoretical and practical issues in concurrency. His analysis
of crucial theoretical issues such as unbounded nondeterminism, the
Brock-Ackerman anomaly, and observation equivalence has been outstanding in
clarifying relationships and delineating important practical systems issues.
Gul's work is a fundamental advance in power, conception, and clarity over
other process models developed by Milner, Hoare, Dijkstra, etc.
At the same time his work has been extremely influential in the design of
practical actor programming languages such as PRACT (at MIT) and CANTOR (at
Caltech). Gul has been a key player for the concurrent architecture being
developed at MCC. The special issue of SIGPLAN Notices on the workshop on
concurrent object oriented systems amply illustrates his strong influence. In
these respects Gul has become an extremely influential participant in a field
of endeaver of rapidly increasing importance.
Gul is an excellent teacher and expositor. His strong grounding in
mathematics and ablity to create and apply mathematical theory to practical
problems in concurrent systems is unequalled in the field.
I recommend him to you MOST WARMLY.
Sincerely,
Carl Hewitt
∂05-May-89 0343 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Re: Japan
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 03:42:54 PDT
Received: from sun30.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA08029; Fri, 5 May 89 06:42:30 EDT
Posted-Date: Fri 5 May 89 06:43:08-EDT
Received: by sun30.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA11408; Fri, 5 May 89 06:43:09 EDT
Date: Fri 5 May 89 06:43:08-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Re: Japan
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: pullen@vax.darpa.mil, JSW@sail.stanford.edu, PUCCI@a.isi.edu
Message-Id: <610368188.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
In-Reply-To: <1QY#LC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
John,
It's your choice. Dan may go if you prefer.
Mark
-------
∂05-May-89 0504 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 05:04:35 PDT
Date: Fri, 5 May 1989 8:04:17 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: paper
In-Reply-To: Your message of 04 May 89 1949 PDT
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.610373057.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
Got it. I'll be working on it this weekend, may send you messages
if there are problems.
--Rich
∂05-May-89 0522 @CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU:GOLUMBIC@ISRAEARN.BITNET BISFAI-8 Schedule
Received: from CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 05:21:56 PDT
Received: from ISRAEARN.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 8775; Fri, 05 May 89 08:21:53 EDT
Date: Fri, 05 May 89 15:11:04 IDT
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: GOLUMBIC%ISRAEARN.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Subject: BISFAI-8 Schedule
Bar-Ilan Symposium on the
Foundations of Artificial Intelligence
19-21 June 1989
Sponsored by the Research Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
with additional support from IBM Israel
Martin Golumbic, Symposium Chair Ariel Frank, Organizing Chair
Monday, June 19, 1989
9:00 AM- 9:30 AM: Registration and Opening ceremonies
9:30 AM- 10:30 AM: Invited Hour Address
Reasoning about Knowledge and Probability
Joseph Halpern, IBM Almadin Research Center
10:30 AM-11:00 AM: Break
11:00 AM-12:35 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Logic and Reasoning
Pattern-directed invocation with changing equalities
Yishai A. Feldman, Weizmann Institute of Science
Charles Rich, M.I.T.
Abstract Belief Logics for AI : An Approach via Knowledge Automata
Larry M. Manevitz, Courant Institute (New York) and Haifa Univ.
Computing with prototypes
L. Thorne McCarty, Rutgers University
A Distributed Algorithm for ATMS
Rina Dechter, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
12:45 PM- 1:45 PM: Lunch
2:00 PM- 3:00 PM: Invited Hour Address
Formalized Common Sense Knowledge and Reasoning
John McCarthy, Stanford University
3:00 PM- 3:30 PM: Break
3:30 PM- 4:40 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Logic and Reasoning
All we believe fails in impossible worlds:
A possible-world semantics for a "knowing at most" operator
Shai Ben David, Yael Gafni, Technion - Israel Inst. of Tech.
Using hypersequents in proof systems for non-classical logic
Arnon Avron, Tel Aviv University
The logic of time structures: temporal and nonmonotonic features
Neil V.Murray, SUNY at Albany
Mira Balaban, Ben Gurion University
Tuesday, June 20, 1989
9:30 AM- 10:30 AM: Invited Hour Address
Recent Developments in Machine Learning Theory
Ronald Rivest, M.I.T.
10:30 AM-11:00 AM: Break
11:00 AM-12:35 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Learning and Reasoning
A logical framework for integrating explanation-based
learning and similarity-based learning
Moshe Koppel, Bar-Ilan University
Qualitative analysis of continuous dynamic systems by
intelligent numeric experimentation
Elisha Sacks, Princeton University
On the learnability of infinitary regular sets
Oded Maler, Amir Pnueli, Weizmann Institute of Science
Barriers, Tools, and the Qualitative Complexity of Processes
Yoram Moses and Moshe Tennenholtz, Weizmann Inst. of Science
12:45 PM- 1:45 PM: Lunch
2:00 PM- 3:00 PM: Invited Hour Address
The architecture of concepts
Johann A. Makowsky, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
3:00 PM- 3:30 PM: Break
3:30 PM- 5:00 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Learning and Reasoning
Concept Learning via Conceptual Clustering
Yoelle S. Maarek, IBM Watson Research Center
Reconstruction of polygonal sets by constrained and
unconstrained double probing
M. Lindenbaum, A. Bruckstein, Technion - Israel Inst. of Tech.
Recovering the shape of visible surfaces from stereo shading
and texture modules
Ignatios E. Vakalis, Western Michigan University
The representation and manipulation of the algorithmic
probability measure for problem-solving
Alex Gammerman, Heriot-Watt University
Wednesday, June 21, 1989
9:30 AM- 10:30 AM: Invited Hour Address
Graphoids and the representation of dependencies
Judea Pearl, U.C.L.A.
10:30 AM-11:00 AM: Break
11:00 AM-12:35 PM: 20 minute presentations - probabilistic and algorithmic
Search of the best decision rules with the help of a
probabilistic estimate
Victor Brailovsky, Tel Aviv University
The whole is faster than its parts: efficient algorithm
for the small matching problem
Amihood Amir, Martin Farach, University of Maryland
Partial orders as a basis for KBS semantics
Simon P. H. Morgan, University of Exeter
John G. Gammack, Steven A. Battle, University of Bristol
A set expression based inheritance system
Ido Dagan, Alon Itai, Technion - Israel Institute of Tech.
12:45 PM- 1:45 PM: Lunch
2:00 PM- 3:10 PM: 20 minute presentations -- applications
An Incremental approach to automating software project scheduling
Ali Safavi, Carnegie Mellon University
A theoretical framework for incremental scheduling
Nicola Muscettola, Carnegie Mellon University
Towards an intelligent finite element training system
Alex Bykat, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
3:10 PM- 3:40 PM: Break
3:40 PM- 5:00 PM: 20 minute presentations -- language
Ontology, sublanguage, and semantic networks:
three keys to formal foundations of meaning representation in
natural-language artificial intelligence (natural language processing)
Victor Raskin, Purdue University
Theory formation for interpreting an unknown language:
a domain metamodel of etruscologists' trials
Ephraim Nissan, Ben Gurion University
to be announced
Ingrid Zukerman, Australia
............ REGISTRATION AND HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS ........
We have reserved a block of hotel accommodations at the
Kfar Hamaccabia Hotel in Ramat Gan, a first-class hotel which also
has sports facilities available gratis for the Symposium participants.
The Symposium will take place at the University, which is a short ride,
or a half-hour walk, from the hotel. The room rate is $44 single or
$54 double (including breakfast). Reservations must be made DIRECTLY
WITH THE AGENT
Sharon Tours, Attn: Ms. Dennis, P.O.Box 2605, Ramat Gan, Israel
Tel: 972-3-738144 FAX: 972-3-724365
mentioning the Bar-Ilan Symposium.
To allow the organizers to reserve sufficient lecture room space,
please fill in and return this portion of the form to
Dr. Ariel Frank, BISFAI-89 Organizing Chair
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, ISRAEL
(email: ariel@bimacs.bitnet)
________________________________________________________________
****** PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM *********
Name: ________________________________________________________
Affiliation: _________________________________________________
Address: _____________________________________________________
Electronic mail: ____________________________________________
_____ I will attend the Bar-Ilan Symposium June 19-21, 1989
∂05-May-89 0748 MPS
∂04-May-89 0057 JMC
To: MPS
What is your present home phone number?
415 967-5767
∂05-May-89 0945 ARK SAIL going private
To: JMC
CC: ARK
I assume you've heard that CSD-CF is being disbanded, sort of. And that
the powers that be are going to shut down Score soon. Is SAIL going to go
private or die? If SAIL goes private, what sort of allocation scheme are
we going to use for costs? If Score goes away, and SAIL goes private, can
SAIL obtain Score's RP07's so we don't run out of disk space soon? Please
let me know if there is anything I can do on this.
Arthur
∂05-May-89 1056 VAL Nonmonotonic Seminar: No Meeting
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
There will be no meetings on 5/8 and 5/15.
--Vladimir
∂05-May-89 1405 ARK re: SAIL going private
∂05-May-89 1304 JMC re: SAIL going private
[In reply to message rcvd 05-May-89 09:45-PT.]
My inclination is to let SAIL die according to the original schedule
of January. Do you have another idea?
ARK - Well, CSD-CF is going away, and the dept is inclined to let you
take SAIL private, whenever you want. It might lower our charges in
the interim, and we can make deals on who pays for what if you wish.
There isn't a problem with January, but will you and Don be ready for
it to go then?
Arthur
∂05-May-89 1451 saraswat@cascade.Stanford.EDU Seminar on Intels's Microprocessor 80486
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 14:50:53 PDT
Received: from cascade.Stanford.EDU by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 5 May 89 14:47:53 PDT
Received: by cascade.Stanford.EDU (5.59/inc-1.0)
id AA15934; Fri, 5 May 89 14:44:05 PDT
Date: Fri, 5 May 89 14:44:05 PDT
From: saraswat@cascade.Stanford.EDU (Krishna Saraswat)
Message-Id: <8905052144.AA15934@cascade.Stanford.EDU>
To: cis-people@glacier.stanford.edu, ee-faculty@sierra.stanford.edu
Subject: Seminar on Intels's Microprocessor 80486
EE 310 SEMINAR
ON: 80486 Overview
BY: Pat Gelsinger, Intel
IN: McCullough 134
ON: May 9, 1989
AT: 4:15 P.M.
In this seminar an overview of Intel's latest microprocessor 80486 will
be given.
∂05-May-89 1602 peters@russell.Stanford.EDU CSLI Faculty Meeting
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 16:02:46 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA21730; Fri, 5 May 89 16:06:04 PDT
Message-Id: <8905052306.AA21730@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU, bratman@russell.Stanford.EDU,
bresnan@russell.Stanford.EDU, herb@psych.stanford.edu,
etch@russell.Stanford.EDU, greeno.pa@xerox.com, kay@xerox.com,
kiparsky@russell.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
julius@russell.Stanford.EDU, nilsson@score.stanford.edu,
john@russell.Stanford.EDU, poser@russell.Stanford.EDU,
der@psych.stanford.edu, sag@russell.Stanford.EDU,
sells@russell.Stanford.EDU, shoham@score.stanford.edu,
wasow@russell.Stanford.EDU, winograd@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: CSLI Faculty Meeting
Cc: betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU, debra@russell.Stanford.EDU
Date: Fri, 05 May 89 16:06:02 PDT
From: peters@russell.Stanford.EDU
One and all,
To those of you who responded to Debra's query about scheduling the
CSLI Faculty Meeting we need for Wednesday afternoon, ... thanks.
Enough of us can't make it then that it seems necessary to postpone
the meeting a short while.
It's now scheduled for noon the following Tuesday, May 14th. Please
do try to make it to Cordura 100 then. To end promptly by 1:00, we
need to start promptly at 12:00. Bring a sandwich, or you can buy one
at CSLI.
Stanley
∂05-May-89 1656 peters@russell.Stanford.EDU Correction
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 16:56:01 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA22339; Fri, 5 May 89 17:00:23 PDT
Message-Id: <8905060000.AA22339@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: barwise@to.stanford.edu, bratman@russell.Stanford.EDU,
bresnan@russell.Stanford.EDU, herb@psych.stanford.edu,
etch@russell.Stanford.EDU, greeno.pa@xerox.com, kay@xerox.com,
kiparsky@russell.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
julius@russell.Stanford.EDU, nilsson@score.stanford.edu,
john@russell.Stanford.EDU, poser@russell.Stanford.EDU,
der@psych.stanford.edu, sag@russell.Stanford.EDU,
sells@russell.Stanford.EDU, shoham@score.stanford.edu,
wasow@russell.Stanford.EDU, winograd@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU, debra@russell.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Correction
Date: Fri, 05 May 89 17:00:21 PDT
From: peters@russell.Stanford.EDU
The CSLI Faculty Meeting will be May 16th (a Tuesday) at noon. My
previous message had a typo in the date. Sorry to create confusion.
Stanley
∂05-May-89 2212 munnari!yarra-glen.aaii.oz.au!root@uunet.UU.NET re: Dartmouth Conference???
Received: from uunet.uu.net by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 May 89 22:12:32 PDT
Received: from munnari.UUCP by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with UUCP
id AA05432; Sat, 6 May 89 01:12:38 -0400
Received: from yarra-glen.aaii.oz by munnari.oz with SunIII (5.5)
id AA28106; Sat, 6 May 89 14:45:19 EST
(from root@yarra-glen.aaii.oz for uunet!jmc@sail.stanford.edu)
Received: from RUTHERGLEN.aaii.oz by yarra-glen.aaii.oz (4.0)
id AA28721; Sat, 6 May 89 14:44:54 EST
Return-Path: <georgeff@aaii.oz>
Reply-To: <georgeff%aaii.OZ@uunet.UU.NET>
Date: Sat, 6 May 89 14:45 EAST
From: Michael Georgeff <munnari!aaii.oz.au!georgeff@uunet.UU.NET>
Subject: re: Dartmouth Conference???
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Fcc: GE:MAIL;MAIL.OUT.NEWEST
In-Reply-To: <9Y#Wu@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <19890506044533.1.GEORGEFF@RUTHERGLEN.aaii.oz>
Thanks John, I will try to dig up the book. Do you remember who the
main players were at the conference? Yourself, Minsky, Papert, Newell,
Simon?
Mike.
∂06-May-89 0832 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM a neat one
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 May 89 08:32:37 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 381887; Sat 6-May-89 10:09:34 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 89637; Sat 6-May-89 07:03:54 PDT
Date: Sat, 6 May 89 07:03 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: a neat one
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "bruce@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890506140329.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
inf
/===\
! ! t t t
! ! (1 + 2 sin(------)) = cos(-) - sin(-)
! ! n 2 2
n = 1 (- 3)
∂06-May-89 0835 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:wilf@CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Re: a neat one
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 May 89 08:35:45 PDT
Received: from CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via INTERNET with SMTP id 381894; 6 May 89 11:32:00 EDT
Received: from CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU by central.cis.upenn.edu
id AA11807; Sat, 6 May 89 11:26:06 -0400
Posted-Date: Sat, 06 May 89 11:26:05 -0400
Message-Id: <8905061526.AA11807@central.cis.upenn.edu>
To: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM,
"bruce@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Subject: Re: a neat one
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sat, 06 May 89 07:03:00 -0700.
<19890506140329.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Sat, 06 May 89 11:26:05 -0400
From: wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu
Finally there's one I can do. Replace t by -t and multiply, to get
(**) \prod_{n\ge 1}(1-4sin↑2{t/{3↑n}})=cos t
and so
(cos t)/(cos t/3)= 1-4sin↑2(t/3)
which is presumably a well known trig identity. The whole thing works
backwards too. I like the form **.
∂07-May-89 0053 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM stop me if you've heard this one
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 May 89 00:53:49 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 381990; Sun 7-May-89 03:52:02 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 89762; Sun 7-May-89 00:45:32 PDT
Date: Sun, 7 May 89 00:45 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: stop me if you've heard this one
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: "bruce@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890506140329.4.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890507074506.9.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
inf π
/===\ sin(t + -)
! ! t π 2 t 2 π 5
! ! 4 cos(------ + -) cos(------ + ---) = ----------
! ! n 5 n 5 π
n = 1 (- 4) (- 4) sin(-)
5
∂07-May-89 0318 ariel%bimacs.bitnet@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU making contact
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 May 89 03:17:38 PDT
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Sun, 7 May 89 03:16:34 PDT
Received: from bimacs.bitnet (ARIEL) by VM1.BIU.AC.IL (Mailer R2.03B) with
BSMTP id 9616; Sun, 07 May 89 13:16:54 P
From: Ariel J. Frank <ariel%bimacs.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Sun, 7 May 89 13:15:41 +0200
To: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.edu
Subject: making contact
Hello Prof. John McCarthy. Prof. Golumbic asked me to contact you. Would
you be kind enoungh to E-mail me your SS#. I'm including the final
BISFAI-89 announcement. You will have on your arrival here an American
check for $1000 and an Israeli one worth $500 in IS (Israeli Shekalim)
which you can cash at the bank. You have booked reservations at Kfar
Hamacabia for 18-21/6. Please contact Sharon Tours agent for any other
help/details or travel arrangements (if you need). We would be glad to
be notified of your final (travel) schedule. Thanks, Ariel.
BISFAI-89
Bar-Ilan Symposium on the
Foundations of Artificial Intelligence
19-21 June 1989
Sponsored by the Research Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
with additional support from IBM Israel
Martin Golumbic, Symposium Chair Ariel Frank, Organizing Chair
Monday, June 19, 1989
09:00 AM - 09:30 AM: Registration and Opening ceremonies
09:30 AM - 10:30 AM: Invited Hour Address
Knowledge, Probability and adversaries
Joseph Halpern, IBM Almaden Research Center
10:30 AM - 11:00 AM: Coffee Break
11:00 AM - 12:35 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Logic and Reasoning
Pattern-directed invocation with changing equalities
Yishai A. Feldman, Weizmann Institute of Science
Charles Rich, M.I.T.
Abstract Belief Logics for AI: An Approach via Knowledge Automata
Larry M. Manevitz, Courant Institute (New York) and Haifa Univ.
Computing with prototypes
L. Thorne McCarty, Rutgers University
A Distributed Algorithm for ATMS
Rina Dechter, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
12:45 PM - 01:45 PM: Lunch
02:00 PM - 03:00 PM: Invited Hour Address
Formalized Common Sense Knowledge and Reasoning
John McCarthy, Stanford University
03:00 PM - 03:30 PM: Coffee Break
03:30 PM - 04:40 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Logic and Reasoning
All we believe fails in impossible worlds:
A possible-world semantics for a "knowing at most" operator
Shai Ben David, Yael Gafni, Technion - Israel Inst. of Tech.
Using hypersequents in proof systems for non-classical logic
Arnon Avron, Tel Aviv University
The logic of time structures: temporal and nonmonotonic features
Neil V. Murray, SUNY at Albany
Mira Balaban, Ben Gurion University
Tuesday, June 20, 1989
09:30 AM - 10:30 AM: Invited Hour Address
Recent Developments in Machine Learning Theory
Ronald Rivest, M.I.T.
10:30 AM - 11:00 AM: Coffee Break
11:00 AM - 12:35 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Learning and Reasoning
A logical framework for integrating explanation-based
learning and similarity-based learning
Moshe Koppel, Bar-Ilan University
Qualitative analysis of continuous dynamic systems by
intelligent numeric experimentation
Elisha Sacks, Princeton University
On the learnability of infinitary regular sets
Oded Maler, Amir Pnueli, Weizmann Institute of Science
Barriers, Tools, and the Qualitative Complexity of Processes
Yoram Moses and Moshe Tennenholtz, Weizmann Inst. of Science
12:45 PM - 01:45 PM: Lunch
02:00 PM - 03:00 PM: Invited Hour Address
The architecture of concepts
Johann A. Makowsky, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
03:00 PM - 03:30 PM: Coffee Break
03:30 PM - 05:00 PM: 20 minute presentations -- Learning and Reasoning
Concept Learning via Conceptual Clustering
Yoelle S. Maarek, IBM Watson Research Center
Reconstruction of polygonal sets by constrained and
unconstrained double probing
M. Lindenbaum, A. Bruckstein, Technion - Israel Inst. of Tech.
Recovering the shape of visible surfaces from stereo shading
and texture modules
Ignatios E. Vakalis, Western Michigan University
The representation and manipulation of the algorithmic
probability measure for problem-solving
Alex Gammerman, Heriot-Watt University
Wednesday, June 21, 1989
09:30 AM - 10:30 AM: Invited Hour Address
Graphoids and the representation of dependencies
Judea Pearl, U.C.L.A.
10:30 AM - 11:00 AM: Coffee Break
11:00 AM - 12:35 PM: 20 minute presentations - probabilistic and
algorithmic Search of the best decision rules with the help
of a probabilistic estimate
Victor Brailovsky, Tel Aviv University
The whole is faster than its parts: efficient algorithm
for the small matching problem
Amihood Amir, Martin Farach, University of Maryland
Partial orders as a basis for KBS semantics
Simon P. H. Morgan, University of Exeter
John G. Gammack, Steven A. Battle, University of Bristol
A set expression based inheritance system
Ido Dagan, Alon Itai, Technion - Israel Institute of Tech.
12:45 PM - 01:45 PM: Lunch
02:00 PM - 03:10 PM: 20 minute presentations -- applications
An Incremental approach to automating software project scheduling
Ali Safavi, Carnegie Mellon University
A theoretical framework for incremental scheduling
Nicola Muscettola, Carnegie Mellon University
Towards an intelligent finite element training system
Alex Bykat, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
03:10 PM - 03:40 PM: Coffee Break
03:40 PM - 05:00 PM: 20 minute presentations -- language
Ontology, sublanguage, and semantic networks: three keys
to formal foundations of meaning representation in natural-language
artificial intelligence (natural language processing)
Victor Raskin, Purdue University
Theory formation for interpreting an unknown language:
a domain metamodel of etruscologists' trials
Ephraim Nissan, Ben Gurion University
to be announced
Ingrid Zukerman, Australia
.......... REGISTRATION AND HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS ........
We have reserved a block of hotel accommodations at the
Kfar Hamaccabia Hotel in Ramat Gan, a first-class hotel which also
has sports facilities available gratis for the Symposium participants.
The Symposium will take place at the University, which is a short ride,
or a half-hour walk, from the hotel. The room rate is $44 single or
$54 double (including breakfast). Reservations must be made DIRECTLY
WITH THE AGENT
Sharon Tours, Attn: Ms. Dennis, P.O.Box 2605, Ramat Gan, Israel
Tel: 972-3-738144 FAX: 972-3-724365
mentioning the Bar-Ilan Symposium.
To allow the organizers to reserve sufficient lecture room space,
please fill in and return this portion of the form to
Dr. Ariel Frank, BISFAI-89 Organizing Chair
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, ISRAEL
(email: ariel@bimacs.bitnet)
E-mail facilities will be available to all Symposium participants.
________________________________________________________________
****** PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM *********
Name: ________________________________________________________
Affiliation: _________________________________________________
Address: _____________________________________________________
Electronic mail: ____________________________________________
_____ I will attend the Bar-Ilan Symposium June 19-21, 1989
Ariel J. Frank
Deputy Chairperson
Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan, Israel 52100
Tel: (972-3) 5318407/8
ariel@bimacs.biu.ac.il
BITNET: ariel@bimacs (also F68388@barilan)
ARPA: ariel%bimacs.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
CSNET: ariel%bimacs.bitnet%cunyvm.cuny.edu@csnet-relay
UUCP: uunet!mcvax!humus!bimacs!ariel
∂07-May-89 0649 op@polya.Stanford.EDU Go left, young censor
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 May 89 06:49:39 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA22240; Sun, 7 May 89 06:49:50 -0700
Date: Sun, 7 May 1989 6:49:48 PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <op@polya.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Go left, young censor
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.610552188.op@polya.stanford.edu>
If you didn't see Lee Dembart's Op-ed piece in Friday's NYTimes,
you should check it out.
--Oren
∂07-May-89 1457 op@polya.Stanford.EDU re: Go left, young censor
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 May 89 14:57:52 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA02703; Sun, 7 May 89 14:58:00 -0700
Date: Sun, 7 May 1989 14:57:59 PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <op@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Go left, young censor
In-Reply-To: Your message of 07 May 89 1445 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.610581479.op@polya.stanford.edu>
> I saw it. Do you know him?
I do now (I called him on the phone to discuss it).
--Oren
∂07-May-89 2009 CLT $5K
I don't suppose they would consider paying in advance?
∂08-May-89 0600 JMC
nsf
∂08-May-89 0823 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 08:23:24 PDT
Date: Mon, 8 May 89 08:22:17 PDT
To: jmc@sail
From: "Arthur P Coladarci" <CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
John: For your information, the following extract from the minutes
of the last Senate session:
"Osserman offered a question on behalf of John McCarthy: The first
formulation [of the proposal] proposed to go outside the First
Amendment in imposing restrictions on speech. Does the present
formulation intend to stay within the provisions of that amendment?
If so, McCarthy suggests the addition of a statement to that
effect. Parker said that the point was not debated in SCLC, where
reference was only to what is right for Stanford. He invited Grey,
who drafted the proposal, to respond further.
"In drawing up the second draft, Grey said, he was attempting to
make a provision that would be acceptable under the First Amendment
properly interpreted. He believes that he has succeeded. There may
be lawyers who disagree, but, he added (with a lawyerish twinkle),
an article he plans to publish next year will settle the question
beyond any doubt. Would Grey, asked Osserman, be willing to add a
statement that the intention in the proposed interpretation is to
stay within First Amendment provisions? Grey responded that he is
not sure that the Fundamental Standard itself is in compliance.
Speaking for himself and as a lawyer, Grey said that he is not sure
that Stanford should bind itself, in its disciplinary procedures, to
every detail of curretn judicial interpretations of the First
Amendment. One of the privileges of a private university is not to
be stuck with whatever courts happen to be doing in a particular
decade. If McCarthy's question is whether the proposal is
consistent with the broad principles of freedom of expression that
are at the core of the First Amendment, there would be no objection
to saying so, but those principles are implicit in the statement of
University policy in the draft proposal.
Amendment?
∂08-May-89 0900 CLT
call nafeh, cate 15k
∂08-May-89 1004 @b.nsf.gov:hhamburg@nsf.GOV e-mail, budget
Received: from note.nsf.gov by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 10:04:24 PDT
Received: from b.nsf.gov by note.nsf.gov id aa15771; 8 May 89 12:41 EDT
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
bcc:
Subject: e-mail, budget
Date: Mon, 08 May 89 12:37:41 -0400
From: "Henry J. Hamburger" <hhamburg@nsf.GOV>
Message-ID: <8905081237.aa18053@b.nsf.gov>
This will establish e-mail contact.
Also, I meant to mention on the phone that
it is part of NSF's mission to build "infra-structure"
and this is taken to include, where appropriate, the
involvement of graduate students. I realize this
trades off against your wish to re-involve Rabinov.
The decision is ultimately in your hands.
-- HH.
∂08-May-89 1004 @b.nsf.gov:hhamburg@nsf.GOV more on budget
Received: from note.nsf.gov by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 10:04:33 PDT
Received: from b.nsf.gov by note.nsf.gov id aa16170; 8 May 89 12:52 EDT
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
bcc:
Subject: more on budget
Date: Mon, 08 May 89 12:49:39 -0400
From: "Henry J. Hamburger" <hhamburg@nsf.GOV>
Message-ID: <8905081249.aa18120@b.nsf.gov>
Additional comments that will affect your budget:
1. It's general practice around here to limit salary to two
months for those who have 9-month academic appointments.
Typically, this is taken in the summer, but that's not essential.
2. At least for FY89, which means year 1 of your budget, there is
a monthly cap on salaries of $95,000 / 12 = $7,916.
3. I have a particular crunch in the current fiscal year, so if
you can defer anything into year 2 or 3, that will help a lot.
∂08-May-89 1008 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 10:08:50 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA28507; Mon, 8 May 89 10:08:43 -0700
Date: Mon, 8 May 1989 10:08:39 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: binford@coyote, feigenbaum@sumex-aim, rwf@sail, golub@patience,
guibas@dec.com, jlh@amadeus, dek@sail, zm@sail, jmc@sail, ejm@sierra,
nilsson@tenaya, oliger@pride, pratt@polya.Stanford.EDU, ullman@score
Cc: chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Faculty Meeting
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.610650519.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
The faculty meeting date has now been confirmed for Tuesday, May 16 from 2:30
to 4:00 p.m. in MJH-146 to consider the recommendation to promote Terry
Winograd from Associate Professor to Full Professor, to consider and act on
the recommendation from the Theory Committee to appoint Dick Karp and to
begin initial discussions on appointing Zvi Galil. Their papers/letters are
available in my office. Feel free to stop by and read them.
∂08-May-89 1018 dicker@opus.Stanford.edu TODAY'S SEMINAR
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 10:18:00 PDT
Received: from opus.Stanford.edu by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Mon, 8 May 89 10:14:45 PDT
Received: by opus.Stanford.edu (1.2/Ultrix2.0-B-eef) id AA09267; Mon, 8 May 89 10:15:11 pdt
Date: Mon, 8 May 89 10:15:11 pdt
From: cathy dicker <dicker@opus.Stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8905081715.AA09267@opus.Stanford.edu>
To: ee-faculty@sierra
Subject: TODAY'S SEMINAR
Title: Trends and Application in Non-contact Probing of Integrated Circuits
Dr. Neil Richardson - Schlumberger Technologies, San Jose CA
Monday, May 8,1989
Applied Physics Room 200
4:15 p.m
Abstract:
Dr. Richardson will discuss state-of-the-art techniques for internal probing
and diagnosis of failures in VLSI devices.Techniques, including laser and
electron-beam technology and applications, range from VLSI to large hybrids and
printed circuit boards.
∂08-May-89 1050 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU DARPA ISTO BAA
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 10:50:28 PDT
Date: Mon 8 May 89 10:47:47-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: DARPA ISTO BAA
To: Cheriton@Pescadero.Stanford.EDU, Genesereth@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Latombe@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, DCL@Sail.Stanford.EDU, ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU, JCM@Polya.Stanford.EDU, Nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU,
Shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU, Wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12492404560.15.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
As all of you know by now, per electronic mail from Carolyn Talcott, we will
not have another DARPA umbrella contract. Instead, individual PIs will submit
abstracts and proposals to DARPA Program Managers. DARPA has extended the
due date on its 12/88 BAA to June 2, 1989. If any of you plan to submit
abstracts for consideration, you should do so by this date. If you need a
copy of the BAA, let me know.
Betty
-------
∂08-May-89 1100 JMC
expenses to inference
∂08-May-89 1101 VAL new NSF budget
[In reply to message rcvd 08-May-89 09:41-PT.]
How is it related to the budget submitted with the proposal? Have you heard
from the NSF?
∂08-May-89 1159 VAL re: new NSF budget
[In reply to message rcvd 08-May-89 11:43-PT.]
Apparently, $130K won't be enough even to support me alone full time:
adding benefits and indirect costs amounts to multiplying a salary by
more than 2 ...
∂08-May-89 1422 MPS
I need a check for 99.00 made out to
Research Libraries Group, Inc. This will give
us another 10 hours of usage.
Chris Nelson, Consultant of Teramura International
202 429-0360.
He is doing some work for the State of Kyoto and they
have asked him to get in touch with you. If he is not
there, then he said to ask for a Keiko Nishimoto. She
is in charge of the job and he is helping her.
Pat
∂08-May-89 1552 eyal@coyote.stanford.edu my M.Sc. thesis
Received: from coyote.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 15:52:14 PDT
Received: by coyote.stanford.edu; Mon, 8 May 89 15:53:19 PDT
Date: Mon, 8 May 89 15:53:19 PDT
From: Eyal Mozes <eyal@coyote.stanford.edu>
Subject: my M.Sc. thesis
To: jmc@sail.Stanford.EDU
About a month ago you sent me a message, indicating that you've read my
M.Sc. thesis and that you disagree with my basic argument.
As I said in my answer then, I would like to know whether you would
still consider advising a research project continuing this work. I
don't regard agreement with the advisor as essential (Amir Pnueli also
disagrees with some things in the thesis), and I consider myself
capable of working independently with only minimal guidance from the
advisor. If you do have some interest, I would like to meet and discuss
this.
Thanks in advance.
Eyal Mozes
∂08-May-89 2056 DEK retreat talk
Thanks for the great talk you gave, and for helping make last
weekend so instructive for me. What a luxury it is to learn CS
from such teachers!
∂08-May-89 2210 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com futures
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 May 89 22:10:01 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA05702; Mon, 8 May 89 22:10:29 PDT
Received: from edsel ([192.9.200.1]) by heavens-gate.lucid.com id AA00394g; Mon, 8 May 89 15:56:18 PDT
Received: from kolyma.lucid.com by edsel id AA25999g; Mon, 8 May 89 15:52:30 PDT
Received: by kolyma id AA07988g; Mon, 8 May 89 15:54:34 PDT
Date: Mon, 8 May 89 15:54:34 PDT
From: Carol Sexton <carol@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8905082254.AA07988@kolyma.lucid.com>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: futures
In the file ~carol/futures.text (both on go4 and back here at Lucid),
I've tried to clarify some issues related to futures. Please
look this file over and send me your comments.
Carol
∂09-May-89 0738 STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM Re: "nuclear information"
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 07:38:04 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 May 89 07:38:05 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Re: "nuclear information"
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@shelby.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <9wbzu@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12492632171.11.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Mr. Mariotte's beliefs about CO2-less burning of coal and JMC's support
of the nuclear industry are perhaps valid debating points. But the fact
remains that the least expensive technology related to electricity
production is still conservation. It's almost always cheaper to
design buildings, hot water heaters, refrigerators, lights, motors,
etc. to use less electricity than to build increased generating
capacity into power plants (and then pay for the power for years).
If conservation is to have any major impact in America, it will
require some forms of federal legislation (libertation alert!). If the
federal government is not prepared to require appliance makers to
meet more stringent energy standards, or prepared to require more
energy-efficient buildings, then we will likely continue to build
more and more power plants. The debate over which is worse, nuclear
or fossil, will continue, and we will be missing the opportunity to
save energy and protect the environment.
Sadly, if the auto mileage standards, recently rolled back by Mr.
Reagan, are any indicator of what may happen with energy conservation
legislation, we shall all be a lot warmer, or a lot hotter.
-ric steinberger
-------
∂09-May-89 0907 MPS Visa Views
Good Morning
That form has several items to check. Which ones
do you want? Thanks
Pat
∂09-May-89 0923 Mailer re: "nuclear information"
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 09:23:39 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 May 89 09:23:40 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: re: "nuclear information"
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <11x7pE@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12492651390.28.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
I'm not going to argue chemistry and/or defend NIRS or Brookhaven, although
it's only fair to see what they have to say before claiming it's
impossible to oxidize coal without producing CO2. It's at least conceivable
that CO2 may be caused to react with another chemical, etc., etc.
In any case I believe the issue should be, in this case, how can the
United States reduce its demand for electric power and thus reduce
the environmental impacts or either coal or nuclear power.
Do you have any suggestions for this?
-ric steinberger
-------
∂09-May-89 1024 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU rabbits
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 10:24:27 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA23118; Tue, 9 May 89 10:25:38 -0700
Date: Tue, 9 May 89 10:25:38 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8905091725.AA23118@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU
Subject: rabbits
Why wouldn't the rabbits in the "good places" just migrate to the
river basins when it started to get too hot to live in the "good places"
any more? Your argument depends on "pockets" of organisms that are
so isolated that such migration could not take place, it seems to me.
∂09-May-89 1244 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: "nuclear information"
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 12:44:28 PDT
Date: Tue 9 May 89 12:41:10-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: "nuclear information"
To: STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM
cc: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@shelby.stanford.edu,
s.salut@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12492632171.11.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Message-ID: <12492687344.1.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
> From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
> If conservation is to have any major impact in America, it will
> require some forms of federal legislation (libertation alert!).
Well, at least we've got you THINKING about freedom issues, that's
quite a plus!
Now, if you spent half your time and brainpower in developping new
TECHNOLOGIES or SYSTEMS which conserve energy than you spend developping
new LAWS for the rest of the world, the result would be:
- People would willingly buy into your ideas, instead of being
coerced into them.
- The world would be better off, because more people would conserve.
- You probably would be rewarded for your usefulness to others (i.e.
you'd become wealthy!)
Give it a try: 50% of your time legislating, 50% of your time creating
technological progress consistent with your philosophy! And see which turns
out more effective...
Alex
-------
∂09-May-89 1352 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 13:52:52 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 May 89 13:51:47 PDT
To: jmc@sail
From: "Arthur P Coladarci" <CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
John, anent your query about an addendum to the SCLC proposed
language: The Senate's opportunity to comment on the proposal
--i.e., the mandated "open window"--expires tomorrow, and the
Senate will not meet until next week. Because the Senate did not
respond to Osserman's suggestion (on your behalf), my assumption is
that it was persuaded by Parker's judgment that the addition would
be redundant to what is implied in the proposed statement. However,
if you wish to advance your suggestion, the best address for it is
George Parker at GSB. His SCLC meets Wednesay at noon. Cheers,
Coladarci.
∂09-May-89 1522 Mailer re: "nuclear information"
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 15:22:43 PDT
Date: Tue, 9 May 89 15:22:05 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: re: "nuclear information"
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <sxrgi@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12492716638.27.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
There is some virtue, if that's what you want to call it, in saving
energy. Every energy conversion is less than 100% efficient and there
are always by-products, either chemical or thermal. Usually these
by-products are at best undesireable and at-worst highly toxic.
Furthermore, power production, whether coal or nuclear, requires some
type of mining with varying degrees of environmental impacts. And
both types of generation produce wastes of varying lethality.
Using less fossil fuel, producing less electrical power is basically
a conservative approach. It stresses conservation of the environment
and encourages living more within natural limits - not necessarily an
evil or uneconomic prospect.
JMC has raised an important issue: Why bother to conserve energy
(or resources, or anything else for that matter)? I'm sure my answer,
with perhaps more forthcoming, will not change many opinions, but I
believe that it is one of the issues that our society will be
facing in the 1990s.
-ric steinberger
-------
∂09-May-89 1612 MPS
I was asked to sit in Nils office until 1:30 tomorrow.
Joyce is having minor surgery and he needs someone
there. She does not have Sail, but her number is
5-1430 if you need to reach me.
Pat
∂09-May-89 1953 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU interview
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 19:53:05 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA08227; Tue, 9 May 89 19:53:23 PDT
Date: Tue 9 May 89 19:53:21-PDT
From: Reid Hoffman <HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: interview
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <610772001.0.HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
The stanford referee for a new journal of the IEEE has approached me and asked
if I would interview either you or Nilsson about the current and future
direction of AI. This journal will be written by and oriented towards students
and so it would be a good way to present your views to "the next generation."
It's not entirely clear that the interview will come off, but if so, are you
interested?
thanks
reid
-------
∂09-May-89 2149 wada%tomo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp@relay.cs.net your schedule in Tokyo
Received: from argus.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 21:49:00 PDT
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by argus.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Tue, 9 May 89 21:36:25 PDT
Received: from [128.167.64.2] by RELAY.CS.NET id aa09641; 10 May 89 0:48 EDT
Received: from relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (junet-relay.gw.u-tokyo.ac.jp) by mtfuji.gw.u-tokyo.ac.jp (3.2/WIDE/JUNET-0.9)
id AA10315; Wed, 10 May 89 00:49:05 EDT
Received: from ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (ccutrd) by relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA16899; Wed, 10 May 89 13:48:33 JST
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA10025; Wed, 10 May 89 13:46:14 JST
Received: from tomo.t.u-tokyo.junet by wadalab.wadalab.t.u-tokyo.junet (1.1/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA00308; Wed, 10 May 89 13:47:09 JST
Received: by tomo.t.u-tokyo.junet (3.2/6.3Junet-BETA)
id AA00412; Wed, 10 May 89 13:55:50 JST
Date: Wed, 10 May 89 13:55:50 JST
From: Eiiti Wada <wada%tomo.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp@relay.cs.net>
Return-Path: <wada@tomo.t.u-tokyo.junet>
Message-Id: <8905100455.AA00412@tomo.t.u-tokyo.junet>
To: JMC%SU-AI.STANFORD.EDU@relay.cs.net
Subject: your schedule in Tokyo
Professor McCarthy:
In Kyoto, last November, I said that there may be a chance
for me to visit California this summer. But I realized
IFIP WG 2.1 meeting will be in the week of September 4
when we have the entrance examination at out Graduate
School which inhibits me to attend WG2.1.
I heard that in Sendai, Lisp workshop will be held in June.
Are you to come? If so, would you tell me your schdule in
Tokyo so that we may see at that chance?
Eiiti Wada
(wada@ccut.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp)
..
∂10-May-89 0742 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU now I get it about the rabbits
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 07:42:45 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA09330; Wed, 10 May 89 07:43:59 -0700
Date: Wed, 10 May 89 07:43:59 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8905101443.AA09330@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: now I get it about the rabbits
I was a little slow. The point of course is that the
rabbits who have been in the river beds all along are better adapted
to live there, so even if the other rabbits do migrate there,
the ones who have been there will have a slight advantage and
survive in greater proportion.
∂10-May-89 0823 MPS Announcement
I have the announcement (nation) done. It is on
my desk if you need it before I am through downstairs.
Pat
∂10-May-89 1009 CLT
don't forget to take the deposit to the bank.
∂10-May-89 1259 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: "nuclear information"
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 12:58:55 PDT
Date: Wed 10 May 89 12:55:50-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: "nuclear information"
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <mxwpo@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12492952158.13.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
When you get the time, you should write a book, not on CS or AI, but your
views on Govt AND reasoning behind them. (Your last msg being a perfect
example of possible contents.) Then you should find a catchy title, so
the AVERAGE man reads it.
By the way, now I'm thinking about it, you could combine it with your
views on scientific progress (like your VTSS class)... See you could
even use it as a textbook! So QED, you can even do it on Stanford's time!
Alex :)
-------
∂10-May-89 1307 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: "nuclear information"
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 13:07:33 PDT
Date: Wed 10 May 89 13:04:28-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: "nuclear information"
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <QxwMj@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12492953731.13.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
It's cute, but I wouldn't have bought it if I just passed by it in a bookstore.
How about : "Progress versus Government" ?
(or "Human progress vs... " or "Mankind progress vs..."
Alex
-------
∂10-May-89 1313 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: "nuclear information"
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 13:13:48 PDT
Date: Wed 10 May 89 13:10:41-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: "nuclear information"
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <QxwMj@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12492954861.13.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Or, if you don't want to be as agressive as me (against Government) then:
"Progress by Science versus by Legislation"
(or a more elegant phrasing of the same idea, which I think is closer to
your point of view)
A.
-------
∂10-May-89 1820 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU rec.humor.funny
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 18:20:27 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA02152; Wed, 10 May 89 18:21:09 PDT
Date: Wed, 10 May 89 18:21:09 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905110121.AA02152@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: rec.humor.funny
Today was the Steering Committee meeting to decide what to do with the
Library Committee report on rec.humor.funny. Hopefully they decided
to put it on the agenda for next Thursday's senate meeting, but I
haven't yet found out what has actually happened.
∂10-May-89 1855 VAL Report: please approve
John McCarthy visited the Institute of Philosophy in Moscow from April 2 to
April 15. He gave the following lectures:
1. What philosophy should be built into robots?
2. Formalization of common sense knowledge and reasoning.
3. Mathematical problems of formalizing commonsense knowledge and reasoning
(at the Steklov Institute).
4. New features of programming languages (at the Institute of Program Systems).
Vladimir Lifschitz visited the Institute of Philosophy from April 4 to April
18. He gave the following lectures:
1. Mathematical models of default reasoning.
2. Mathematical models of introspection.
3. Reasoning about action and change.
4. Difficult ptoblems in the theory of nonmonotonic reasoning.
McCarthy and Lifschitz have also met with the faculty and graduate students
of the Department of Philosophy of the Moscow University and with the Editorial
Board of the journal Voprosy Filosofii.
∂10-May-89 2030 ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp Workshop on Parallel Lisp
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 20:30:38 PDT
Received: from [128.167.64.2] by RELAY.CS.NET id aa07196; 10 May 89 23:30 EDT
Received: from relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (junet-relay.gw.u-tokyo.ac.jp) by mtfuji.gw.u-tokyo.ac.jp (3.2/WIDE/JUNET-0.9)
id AA00977; Wed, 10 May 89 23:30:40 EDT
Received: from ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (ccutrd) by relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA18812; Thu, 11 May 89 12:30:06 JST
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA19985; Thu, 11 May 89 12:27:45 JST
Received: by hirose.cc.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA00371; Thu, 11 May 89 11:17:54 JST
Received: from aoba.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet by maia.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (4.0/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA02277; Wed, 10 May 89 21:43:59 JST
Received: by aoba.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (4.0/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA01323; Wed, 10 May 89 21:45:21 JST
Received: by ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA23441; Wed, 10 May 89 21:37:51+0900
Date: Wed, 10 May 89 21:37:51+0900
From: Takayasu ITO <ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
Return-Path: <ito@ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet>
Message-Id: <8905101137.AA23441@ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu%relay.cs.net@u-tokyo.ac.jp
Subject: Workshop on Parallel Lisp
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I would like to know if you would be able to come to the workshop.
Your participation would be a very good excitement for young participants.
Best regards,
Takayasu Ito
∂10-May-89 2119 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU self-reproducing automata
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 21:19:07 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA20282; Wed, 10 May 89 21:20:22 -0700
Date: Wed, 10 May 89 21:20:22 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8905110420.AA20282@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: self-reproducing automata
That 29-state machine which I mentioned to you is pictured on the
cover of the most recent Caltech alumni magazine (Engineering and
Science), which I just got around to reading. However, there it is
attributed not to von Neumann, but to someone else. (It was Rudy
Rucker who told me it was due to von Neumann.)So perhaps you were
right about the size of the self-reproducing configuration in von
Neumann's machine.
∂11-May-89 0053 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of March computer charges.
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 May 89 00:53:47 PDT
Date: Thu 11 May 89 00:35:14-PDT
From: Billing Editor <BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Summary of March computer charges.
To: MCCARTHY@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12493079480.9.BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Mr. McCarthy,
Following is a summary of your computer charges for March.
Account System Billed Pct Cpu Job Disk Print Adj Total
JMC SAIL 2-DMA804 100 640.63 18.23 ***.** 38.49 5.00 2865.21
MCCARTHY SCORE 2-DMA804 100 .00 .00 30.47 .00 5.00 35.47
jmc LABREA 2-DMA804 100 .00 .00 105.90 .00 5.00 110.90
Total: 640.63 18.23 ***.** 38.49 15.00 3011.58
University budget accounts billed above include the following.
Account Princip Inv Title Comment
2-DMA804 McCarthy N00039-84-C-0211 Task 16, AI
The preceding statement is a condensed version of the detailed summary sheet
sent monthly to your department.
Please verify each month that the proper university budget accounts are paying
for your computer usage. Please also check the list of account numbers below
the numeric totals. If the organizations/people associated with that account
number should NOT be paying for your computer time, send mail to BEDIT@SCORE.
Please direct questions/comments to BEDIT@SCORE.
-------
∂11-May-89 0213 @ntt-20.NTT.JP:okuno@ntt-20.NTT.JP Message from Tak
Received: from ntt-20.NTT.JP by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 May 89 02:11:33 PDT
Received: from Nickel.NTT.JP by ntt-20.NTT.JP with TCP; Thu, 11 May 89 18:02:38 I
Date: 11 May 89 17:58:24 JST
From: Hiroshi G. Okuno <okuno@ntt-20.NTT.JP>
message-id: <Zmm=IMAP/ELIS344876@Nickel.NTT.JP>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Message from Tak
cc: tak@nuesun,okuno@ntt-20
This is a message from Tak to you.
- Gitchang -
----------------------------------------
John,
You told me that you would like to use ELIS machines when
I met you in Kyoto. Fortunately, we have two free ELISs
at Stanford.
As you know, two ELIS machines (VLSI version) are installed
at KSL, but have not been used at all now since Hiroshi
Okuno went back to Japan. In addition, Professor Feigenbaum
recently asked us to move them from KSL.
I'm writing you to ask you whether you still want to use
ELIS machines. To be frank, we would like to ask you
to keep them till next February when the Temporary Import
Bond for them will expire. There is no duties and the cost
to move them from KSL to your places will be paid by NTT.
It will be wonderful if one machine is used by you and
the other by your students.
The current software for ELIS contains
Zen Emacs-like editor
Kanzen Romaji-Kanji conversion embedded in Zen
Compiler for Lisp, Object-Oriented programming and
logic programming
Multiprogramming
Stepper
Tracer
Inspector
Telnet server and client
FTP server and client
SMTP server and client
Finger
NSF
MM Magic mailer
Znews News reader embedded in Zen using NNTP
Zmm Mail reader embedeed in Zen using IMAP2
NueX X client
Window System
Some of them, however, is still alpha or beta version.
We believe that ELIS is one of the most excellent workbench
to manipulate Japanese documents as well as to experiment
concurrent programming.
I hope that you will consider our offer.
Regards,
Ikuo Takeuchi
∂11-May-89 0812 MPS Books
Good Morning
I am not so sure you will want Andre to take care
of your books. In the first place, he will not
use his car, and secondly he will not take them
out of the boxes. One other thing, he is rather
dense, and I am not so sure he knew what I was talking
about, plus he will not do it on the weekend or before
5:00.
Let me see if I can get Mike for you. You will be
much more satisfied. Give me the go ahead before
I do anything.
Pat
∂11-May-89 1105 MPS
At the administrative staff meeting today, it
was suggested that an award be named after you. Nils
asked me to ask you if you would like it named after
you.
The John McCarthy award for Bureaucratic Red Tape.
Of course, it was all in fun.
Pat
∂11-May-89 1340 MPS George Rife, Edmonton
He called just after you left. I gave him your home phone.
He will try to get you around 8-9 our time tonight. He
gave me his home phone 403-466-4404. He is also going out
tonight, and will be home around 7:30 their time. One hour
ahead of us.
Pat
∂11-May-89 1359 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Meeting to discuss retirement of SAIL
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 May 89 13:59:25 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA11819; Thu, 11 May 89 13:59:28 -0700
Date: Thu, 11 May 1989 13:59:26 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: wheaton@athena
Cc: jmc@sail, nilsson@tenaya
Subject: Meeting to discuss retirement of SAIL
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.610923566.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
A meeting has tentatively been set for Tuesday, May 16 at 4:00 (immediately
following the faculty meeting) to discuss the retirement of SAIL. I will
confirm this meeting when John McCarthy's secretary has confirmed it to me.
∂11-May-89 1528 VAL New budget for the NSF proposal
The latest version is about $150K, and I need your advice on what to cut next.
When can we discuss it?
∂11-May-89 1604 VAL re: paradox?
[In reply to message rcvd 11-May-89 15:47-PT.]
What we have here is worse than "unintended minimal models". Unintended
models tell us that a circ'n is too weak. But this circ'n is too strong, it
allows us to derive undesirable consequences. It's more like what happened
with one of your formalizations of flying birds, where you can prove that
there are no penguins.
∂11-May-89 1617 MPS meeting
Hi
I scheduled a meeting for you with George and Nils
concerning the retiring of Sail.
It will be at 4:00 next Tuesday, the 16th. I
hope that is alright with you.
Pat
∂11-May-89 1727 @ntt-20.NTT.JP:okuno@ntt-20.NTT.JP re: Message from Tak
Received: from ntt-20.NTT.JP by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 May 89 17:26:57 PDT
Received: from Nickel.NTT.JP by ntt-20.NTT.JP with TCP; Fri, 12 May 89 09:26:28 I
Date: 12 May 89 09:21:00 JST
From: Hiroshi G. Okuno <okuno@ntt-20.NTT.JP>
message-id: <Zmm=IMAP/ELIS346722@Nickel.NTT.JP>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Message from Tak
Cc: okuno@NTT-20.NTT.JP
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of <EypxH@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
John,
Two ELIS machines are to be returned to Japan, because
Temporary Import Bond will expire in February. However,
another ELIS (MacElis) may be exported to you as
replacement.
Thanks,
- Gitchang -
∂12-May-89 0838 MPS Proposal
Good Morning
Yes
∂12-May-89 0933 VAL
Would you like me to make reservation for lunch today?
∂12-May-89 1020 MPS
Hi,
Sidney Hook called to tell me that the UPS package was
sent to you. It has not arrived yet. He also
wanted me to remind you about meeting with him at 1:00 sharp
(as he put it). He also asked about the announcement
you made. He will pay for the postage, and have someone
address the envelopes I have here in the office that
have your name imprinted on them.
Pat
∂12-May-89 1104 VAL Budget
To: JMC, CLT
7/1/89-
6/30/90
Salaries
Professor John McCarthy
2 months, summer quarter 16956
Vladimir Lifschitz
Senior Research Associate
33% calendar year 23108
Carolyn Talcott, Research Associate
5% calendar year 3097
Secretary
5% calendar year 629
Administrative Assistance
5% of above salaries 2190
___________
Subtotal Salaries 45980
Staff benefits 12723
27.0% 9/1/88-8/31/89
27.8% 9/1/89-8/31/90
Travel-domestic
(3 East Coast trips per year @
$1200, 6 West Coast trips per year
@ $600) 7200
Foreign Travel 5000
Computer time costs 3000
Expendable materials
(publications, supplies, telephone,
misc. supplies) 810
___________
Subtotal, Direct Costs 74713
Indirect Costs, 74% MTDC 55287
___________
130000
===========
∂12-May-89 1139 jussi%hpljak@hplabs.hp.com More MADness
Received: from hplms2.hpl.hp.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 May 89 11:39:22 PDT
Received: from hpljak.HPL.HP.COM (hpljak.hpl.hp.com) by hplms2.hp.com; Fri, 12 May 89 11:38:09 pdt
Received: from loopback by hpljak.HPL.HP.COM; Fri, 12 May 89 11:39:17 pdt
Full-Name: Jussi A. Ketonen
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Cc: ketonen%hplabs@hplabs.hp.com
Subject: More MADness
Date: Fri, 12 May 89 11:39:13 PDT
Message-Id: <9587.611001553@hpljak>
From: Jussi A. Ketonen <jussi%hpljak@hplabs.hp.com>
Oh dear.
I just heard that Nafeh is now threatening
to sue Clippinger, Konsynski and others for supposed "fraud" in the
context of the Brattle takeover. In addition, they say that
Nafeh has been going around saying things about them (both
Clippinger and Konsynski) that can be damaging to their
professional reputations --- thus they are considering suing
him for defamation. Since (how can we put this delicately?)
Nafeh is not known for paying his bills, the board may get
tangled with this one, too.
Is there some way you could calm down our egyptian friend?
This is going a bit far.
∂12-May-89 1630 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM wiggly
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 May 89 16:30:11 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 383699; Fri 12-May-89 09:27:00 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 90782; Fri 12-May-89 06:05:05 PDT
Date: Fri, 12 May 89 06:04 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: wiggly
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "bruce@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890512130459.0.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
It is clear that, for large x,
Prod(2 e↑-2↑(x-k) - 1, k>=1)
should change sign with "period" 1, but why does it
*ferociously* approach a periodic function, viz.,
a cos((x-b) pi),
where a is about .013113608... and b = .97123638... ?
(Looks like the next harmonic (3rd?) is well below 10↑-7
for x>3.5)
"Answer": For a given, largish x, there is only a brief
interval of k during which the prodand climbs from very
nearly -1 to very nearly 1. Shifting x by 1 can't do
much except multiply by -1.
This function first arose in the form
Prod(2 t↑2↑-k - 1, k>=1),
which, like sin 1/x, buzzes its brains out near 0,
but ungraphably, since the frequecy goes up like a double
exponential. Thus, even though the amplitude is nearly
constant, you can only observe 1 or 2 sign changes at any
given magnification. All the rest are inside the pixel at
the origin!
∂12-May-89 1630 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM ('int,'int)
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 May 89 16:30:11 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 383665; Fri 12-May-89 00:29:06 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 90731; Thu 11-May-89 21:12:07 PDT
Date: Thu, 11 May 89 21:11 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: ('int,'int)
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "bruce@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890512041158.5.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Those telescoping products I've been sending can easily be
changed into integrals. A double product became
B A 3 B 2 A U V
/ / / / LOG(SIN(---))
[ [ LOG(2 COS(U V) - 1) [ [ 2
I I ------------------- dU dV = I I ------------- dU dV
] ] U V ] ] U V
/ / / /
0 0 B A
SQRT(3) A B
- LOG(2) LOG(3) LOG(-----------) .
SQRT(2)
∂12-May-89 1806 VAL McCarthy's proposal
To: hhamburg@B.NSF.GOV
CC: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Dr. Hamburger,
John McCarthy asked me to send you the following new version of the
first year budget for our proposal.
--Vladimir Lifschitz
7/1/89-
6/30/90
Salaries
Professor John McCarthy
2 months, summer quarter 16956
Vladimir Lifschitz
Senior Research Associate
33% calendar year 23108
Carolyn Talcott, Research Associate
5% calendar year 3097
Secretary
5% calendar year 629
Administrative Assistance
5% of above salaries 2190
___________
Subtotal Salaries 45980
Staff benefits 12723
27.0% 9/1/88-8/31/89
27.8% 9/1/89-8/31/90
Travel-domestic
(3 East Coast trips per year @
$1200, 6 West Coast trips per year
@ $600) 7200
Foreign Travel 5000
Computer time costs 3000
Expendable materials
(publications, supplies, telephone,
misc. supplies) 810
___________
Subtotal, Direct Costs 74713
Indirect Costs, 74% MTDC 55287
___________
130000
===========
∂12-May-89 2028 ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp R
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 May 89 20:28:36 PDT
Received: from [128.167.64.2] by RELAY.CS.NET id aa17012; 12 May 89 23:28 EDT
Received: from relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (junet-relay.gw.u-tokyo.ac.jp) by mtfuji.gw.u-tokyo.ac.jp (3.2/WIDE/JUNET-0.9)
id AA05187; Fri, 12 May 89 23:29:21 EDT
Received: from ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (ccutrd) by relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA24714; Sat, 13 May 89 12:28:44 JST
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA17713; Sat, 13 May 89 12:26:19 JST
Received: by hirose.cc.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA02364; Sat, 13 May 89 11:47:35 JST
Received: from aoba.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet by maia.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (4.0/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA00614; Sat, 13 May 89 11:45:24 JST
Received: by aoba.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (4.0/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA00523; Sat, 13 May 89 11:45:20 JST
Received: by ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA26983; Sat, 13 May 89 11:47:53+0900
Date: Sat, 13 May 89 11:47:53+0900
From: Takayasu ITO <ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
Return-Path: <ito@ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet>
Message-Id: <8905130147.AA26983@ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet>
To: JMC%sail.stanford.edu%relay.cs.net@u-tokyo.ac.jp
Subject: R
Thanks for your reply,but I regret your absence at the workshop.I look forward to seeing Weening and Pehoushek at Sendai.
At the time you come to Japan by your "business" trip in July, please try to come to Sendai if you have free time.
Masahiko and I will be delighted to have your visit to Sendai.
I hope that NSF-JSPS proposal by you and Masahiko will get support.
Sincerely,
Takayasu Ito
∂13-May-89 0637 CLT powow
I you want to take Timothy today, then it
would be best if you take him in the afternoon
so Hazel can leave when ever she gets ready
if she wants. You should also let her know
so she can make some plans if she wants.
∂13-May-89 1028 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Re: paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 May 89 10:28:15 PDT
Date: Sat, 13 May 1989 13:26:57 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: paper
Cc: thomason
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.611083617.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
I've finished formatting your paper to look like a JPL
production.
Time is short, but I hope that there is enough for you to
look over the printed copy I mailed you this morning, to see if
it looks OK to you.
The major formatting constraints were JPL conventions about
running heads, section heads, your institution at the end, and page
size. The last entailed having to break some of your formulas; also,
to get the Prolog programs on a single page I set them in \small\tt.
TWO MATTERS THAT YOU CAN ANSWER RIGHT AWAY.
1. Search your text for "Daedaelus". I think you meant to say
that:
the examples are given more precisely in the present paper,
since {\it Daedalus} allows no formulas.
but I couldn't tell from your wording. Do you want me to change this?
2. Search for "general rule". I think you want to delete "asking",
i.e. you want:
general rule about birds flying
Is this right?
*****************************************************************************
I did some minor formatting that you may notice in the printed
version. The main things are
1. Italics for math mode for English words in $$ environments.
2. Italics for topic headings line "Meta-epistemology."
3. Some extra thin spaces around displays and at topic breaks.
*****************************************************************************
I deleted your copyright notice because the publisher puts that
in. But I will ask them to put the notice in your name, not in theirs.
So far, they have never failed to do this.
--Rich
∂13-May-89 1640 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 May 89 16:40:32 PDT
Date: Sat, 13 May 1989 19:40:02 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: paper
In-Reply-To: Your message of 13 May 89 1249 PDT
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.611106003.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
OK, it looks as if we're about done. Let me know if the printed
version looks bad. I'm leaving tomorrow for KR89, back on Thursday probably.
--Rich
∂14-May-89 1144 VAL Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
OPEN PROBLEMS ON THE BORDER OF LOGIC AND AI
Vladimir Lifschitz
Stanford University
Monday, May 22, 3:15pm
MJH 352
We will discuss a few outstanding problems related to the logic approach
to AI, including some of the following:
1. Describe the declarative extensions of pure Prolog.
2. Develop formalisms for proving imperative sentences.
3. Formalize reasoning about finite sequences of actions.
4. Investigate limitations of the situation calculus formalism.
5. Interpret nonmonotonic reasoning in terms of probabilities.
6. Formalize counterfactual causal reasoning.
∂14-May-89 1255 ARK SAIL survey
Here's the result of responses to the SAIL survey I did. It appears most
people will either switch to SUNs (including myself) or to more
departmental largess. It is unclear what Zohar will do. I understand Don
Knuth plans to move to a SUN, having finished (I think) the major project
that was using SAIL. There are a few things on SAIL that aren't anywhere
else, and we should put effort into moving them. In particular, these
include the news service and the Pony. I don't know what else.
Arthur
∂09-May-89 0605 op@polya.Stanford.EDU SAIL survey
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 May 89 06:05:19 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA22111; Tue, 9 May 89 06:05:29 -0700
Date: Tue, 9 May 1989 6:05:28 PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <op@polya.stanford.edu>
To: ark@sail
Subject: SAIL survey
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.610722328.op@polya.stanford.edu>
I almost always log on to SAIL just once a day (early in the morning)
and just for a few minutes, so that when I really have to do something
on it, I'll remember how to do simple things. So it won't affect my
usage very much when it goes away. (I'm sending this from polya so
that, in case you want to ask me something further, we can conduct
an exchange at a higher rate than one message a day.)
--Oren
∂09-May-89 0654 IAM after sail
i'll probably use a sun workstation.
-iam-
∂09-May-89 1327 RWF sail away into the sunset
When marooned, I will need a terminal mainly for
email and tex, and will live with any reasonable
system. I have some knowledge of unix, and could
live with it. The other modern operating systems
I don't know, but they can't be worse than what's
on sail.
∂10-May-89 0913 DAMON@Score.Stanford.EDU SAIL Users
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 May 89 09:12:59 PDT
Date: Wed 10 May 89 09:12:49-PDT
From: Damon Koronakos <DAMON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: SAIL Users
To: ark@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12492911560.40.DAMON@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Hi Arthur,
Following is a report of SAIL users who incurred more than $50.00 in chgs
for the months of Jan, Feb, Mar 1989. Sorted by descending cost.
These figures do not include printing charges (that is more complicated
to include - and printing is probably relatively constant whatever machine
you are on). Also these figures do not include accounts charged to
9-DMA078 (facilities), 1-DMA602 (a departmental account), or 1-DMA101
(outside user accounts).
Cheers,
Damon
-------
∂11-May-89 1127 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU SAIL replacement
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 May 89 11:25:38 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04840; Thu, 11 May 89 11:26:20 PDT
Date: Thu, 11 May 89 11:26:20 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905111826.AA04840@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: ark@sail
Subject: SAIL replacement
JMC has asked me to recommend what people in our group should do. My
recommendation is based on what works best for me, but I think it is
also a good scheme for other people. At the moment, I'm using a
department Sun-2 as an X Window System server, and opening windows on
timesharing machines (mostly Gang-of-Four) to do actual work. All of
the significant computation and file storage is done on the
timesharing host. We are paying about $300/month to CSD-CF for the
Sun-2, and about $35K per year to Alliant for maintenance.
As soon as possible, I want to replace the Sun-2 with an X terminal.
The NCD terminals looks quite reasonable. I think they currently cost
$1750 to Stanford, plus a few hundred more to expand the memory. I'd
like to see CSD-CF offer maintenance on these for a monthly fee, which
I feel should be no more than $100 or so. This would involve making
the Ethernet connection, repairing them when they break, doing
software upgrades when necessary, and providing TFTP service on a file
server for booting and downloading fonts. JMC also wants to have such
terminals at home, which may be possible using 9600 baud modems.
(Keith Hall tells me that the NCD's don't really perform well at that
speed, but that another company makes a somewhat more expensive
terminal that does data compression over the serial line. We could
also continue to use standard serial terminals at home.)
With an X terminal one still needs a host to do actual work on. Our
group is somewhat special in that the Qlisp project's research needs
provide a host (the Alliant) that can serve general timesharing as
well. We might not have this machine forever, though, so we would
then migrate to departmental machines instead.
The main alternative to this scheme is individual workstations. At
this point, I think the X terminal/timesharing alternative is more
cost-effective, especially since it can make use of machines like
Gang-of-Four and Polya that we already have. But that might change in
the future, so I wouldn't rule out eventually getting workstations.
∂14-May-89 1728 PSTINSON@GSB-WHAT.STANFORD.EDU Re: Elephant query
Received: from GSB-WHAT.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 May 89 17:28:32 PDT
Date: Sun 14 May 89 17:29:29-PST
From: Christopher Stinson <PSTINSON@GSB-WHAT.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: Elephant query
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-ID: <611195369.0.PSTINSON@GSB-WHAT.STANFORD.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(228)+TOPSLIB(132)+PONY(228)@GSB-WHAT.STANFORD.EDU>
You may be looking for the phrase "An elephant's faithful one hundred
percent" which I believe is from Dr. Seuss's "Horton Hatches A Who".
Horton is an elephant who faithfully sits with (on?) a long-incubating
egg.
Chris Stinson
-------
∂14-May-89 1828 Mailer Faithful Elephants
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Hans Moravec <HPM@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
> To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
> From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
>
> Does anyone know of some bit of literature (perhaps children's or humorous)
> with a saying in praise of the elephant like "The elephant is loyal ...".
> Perhaps some other animal was referred to though not dogs.
From the Dr. Seuss saga of Horton the Elephant, Horton's refrain:
I meant what I said, and I said what I meant.
An elephant's faithful, one hundred percent!
∂14-May-89 1915 op@polya.Stanford.EDU
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 May 89 19:15:27 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA21864; Sun, 14 May 89 19:15:41 -0700
Date: Sun, 14 May 1989 19:15:39 PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <op@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 14 May 89 1428 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611201739.op@polya.stanford.edu>
Ok, I'll try to drop by tomorrow.
--Oren
∂14-May-89 1918 larrabee@polya.Stanford.EDU Re: elephant query
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 May 89 19:18:16 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA22070; Sun, 14 May 89 19:18:26 -0700
Date: Sun, 14 May 89 19:18:26 -0700
From: Tracy Larrabee <larrabee@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905150218.AA22070@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: elephant query
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <mzyEZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Stanford University
Cc:
See Dr. Seuss's "Horton Hatches the Egg" (Dr. Seuss is the sobriquet
of Theodore Geisel).
"Horton Hears a Who" is pretty good too.
Those two books were among my favorites when I was less a tot. I even
taught myself to read with a small collection including "Horton Hatches
the Egg."
Tracy
∂15-May-89 0733 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 07:33:45 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA05818; Mon, 15 May 89 07:33:57 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 7:33:54 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 12 May 89 1646 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611246034.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
ok, John....I'll get back to you after I talk to George Wheaton. Thanks for
your response.
∂15-May-89 0823 MPS
Good Morning
James Greeno (321-1613) called re: symbolics
systems program
∂15-May-89 0858 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 08:58:18 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA08761; Mon, 15 May 89 08:58:32 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 8:58:29 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 12 May 89 1646 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611251109.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
Can you meet George and Nils to discuss retirement of SAIL on Wednesday, May
17.....between 9 and noon?
∂15-May-89 0908 john@russell.Stanford.EDU
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 09:08:19 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA23625; Mon, 15 May 89 09:13:07 PDT
Message-Id: <8905151613.AA23625@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of 14 May 89 22:48:00 PDT.
<szd3D@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Mon, 15 May 89 09:13:05 PDT
From: John Perry <john@russell.Stanford.EDU>
Phil Cohen and Ray Perrault at SRI
Reachable as
pcohen@russell
perrault@russell
Cheers, JP
∂15-May-89 0913 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Tomorrow's faculty meeting
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 09:13:12 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA09422; Mon, 15 May 89 09:13:10 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 9:13:05 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: binford@coyote, feigenbaum@sumex-aim, rwf@sail, golub@patience,
jlh@amadeus, dek@sail, am@sail, jmc@sail, nilsson@tenaya, oliger@pride,
pratt@polya.Stanford.EDU, ullman@polya.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Tomorrow's faculty meeting
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611251985.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
Just to remind you of the faculty meeting tomorrow at 2:30 in MJH-146.
∂15-May-89 0930 JMC
Rindfleisch re Elis
∂15-May-89 0948 debra@russell.Stanford.EDU CSLI FACULTY MEETING
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 09:48:39 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA23909; Mon, 15 May 89 09:53:26 PDT
Message-Id: <8905151653.AA23909@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, nilsson@score.stanford.edu,
shoham@score.stanford.edu, winograd@score.stanford.edu,
greeno.pa@xerox.com, bresnan@russell.Stanford.EDU, kay.pa@xerox.com,
kiparsky@russell.Stanford.EDU, poser@russell.Stanford.EDU,
sag@russell.Stanford.EDU, wasow@russell.Stanford.EDU,
barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU, bratman@russell.Stanford.EDU,
etch@russell.Stanford.EDU, sells@russell.Stanford.EDU,
julius@russell.Stanford.EDU, john@russell.Stanford.EDU,
her@psych.stanford.edu, der@psych.stanford.edu,
peters@russell.Stanford.EDU, betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU
Cc: kuder@russell.Stanford.EDU, trip@russell.Stanford.EDU,
debra@russell.Stanford.EDU, ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU
Subject: CSLI FACULTY MEETING
Date: Mon, 15 May 89 09:53:20 PDT
From: Debra Alty <debra@russell.Stanford.EDU>
REMINDER
There will be a CSLI FACULTY MEETING on Tuesday, May 16th @ 12:00 noon
-- Cordura Conference Room.
∂15-May-89 1000 JMC
toy stores
∂15-May-89 1007 MPS Rubber Stamp
The stamp you ordered is at the bookstore.
I will be leaving shortly for my annual
physical. I do not know if I will be back in.
I will call you.
Pat
∂15-May-89 1009 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Re: reply to message
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 10:08:52 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA12122; Mon, 15 May 89 10:09:03 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 10:08:58 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: reply to message
In-Reply-To: Your message of 15 May 89 0957 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611255338.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
11 is terrific. See you in Nils' office at 11 on Wednesday...and thanks for
the quick response.
∂15-May-89 1044 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Faculty Meeting
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 10:43:59 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA12154; Fri, 12 May 89 14:15:52 -0700
Date: Fri, 12 May 1989 14:15:49 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: binford@coyote, feigenbaum@sumex-aim, rwf@sail, golub@patience,
jlh@amadeus, dek@sail, zm@sail, jmc@sail, oliger@pride,
pratt@polya.Stanford.EDU, ullman@polya.Stanford.EDU
Cc: nilsson@tenaya, chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Faculty Meeting
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611010949.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
Just to remind you of next Tuesday's faculty meeting - May 16 at 2:30 in
MJH-146 to consider the recommendation to promote Terry Winograd from
Associate Professor to Full Professor, to consider and act on the
recommendation from the Theory Committee to appoint Dick Karp and to begin
initial discussions on appointing Zvi Galil. Their papers/letters are
available in my office for you to read.
∂15-May-89 1054 bloom@opus.Stanford.edu SEMINAR
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 10:54:40 PDT
Received: from opus.Stanford.edu by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Mon, 15 May 89 10:51:07 PDT
Received: by opus.Stanford.edu (1.2/Ultrix2.0-B-eef) id AA22635; Mon, 15 May 89 10:51:44 pdt
Date: Mon, 15 May 89 10:51:44 pdt
From: Dave Bloom <bloom@opus.Stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8905151751.AA22635@opus.Stanford.edu>
To: ee-faculty@sierra
Subject: SEMINAR
TODAY
MONDAY MAY 15, 4:15 pm
in
APPLIED PHYSICS ROOM 200
Dr. Rick Lytel
Lockheed PARL
"ELECTROOPTIC POLYMER WAVEGUIDE DEVICES"
∂15-May-89 1127 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Tenaya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 11:27:14 PDT
Received: by Tenaya (NeXT-0.8/25-eef) id AA01629; Mon, 15 May 89 10:05:02 PDT
Date: Mon, 15 May 89 10:05:02 PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <nilsson@tenaya.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8905151705.AA01629@Tenaya>
To: binford@coyote.stanford.edu, feigenbaum@sumex-aim.stanford.edu,
rwf@sail.stanford.edu, golub@patience.stanford.edu,
jlh@amadeus.stanford.edu, dek@sail.stanford.edu, am@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: faculty meeting tomorrow
cc: nilsson
I'd like to remind you all of the faculty meeting tomorrow
of the full professors of the Department at 2;30 pm
tomorrow, May 16.
The meeting will have three agenda items:
1) Consideration of a recommendation for promoting
Associate Professor Terry Winograd to Full Professor.
(Please see the note from Leo Guibas, attached,
concerning this matter. Leo is a member of the
promotion committee and cannot attend tomorrow's
meeting; hence his note.)
2) Consideration of a recommendation from theTheory search committee to offer a faculty position to Dick
Karp.
3) Initial discussion of a recommendation from the
Theory search committee to offer a faculty position
to Zvi Galil. (It should be noted that Zvi is also
being "romanced" about being the next CSD Department
Chairman. Zvi is visiting Stanford this coming Thursday
and Friday; Joyce Chandler is arranging his calendar.)
Please see Joyce about reading papers and letters
on all of these people before the meeting.
Here is Leo's note about Terry:
----
From: guibas@src.dec.com (Leonidas Guibas)
Date: 8 May 1989 1811-PDT (Monday)
To: nilsson@score.Stanford.EDU
Cc: guibas@src.dec.com
Subject: Terry Winograd promotion
Dear Nils,
Unfortunately I cannot make the faculty meeting next Tuesday, May
16, because I have to speak at the ACM STOC Symposium in Seattle.
With this message I would like to summarize the reasons why I feel
that Terry deserves this (long delayed) promotion.
During the past few years Terry has played a key role in the emergence
of a new area of computer research, which (for lack of a better term)
has come to be called ``computer-supported cooperative work.'' The
intellectual task is to provide a foundation for the design of computer
systems from the perspective of the work in which they play a role.
In some sense this overlaps with the established areas of "user
interface design," "human factors" and "human-computer interaction."
But it differs drastically in the paradigm for analysis and theory
development. The focus is away from the immediate cognitive factors
of an individual user and towards the larger context of action that
constitutes the social activity of a group or organization.
Terry's book with Flores may be considered the first classic in this
new paradigm. It has been widely translated and reviewed. Since the
book, Terry has developed a series of articles moving beyond the
initial statement, towards fleshing out the directions for research
and development. A good example is the paper ``A language/action
perspective on the design of cooperative work,'' originally presented
at the first conference on computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW),
later published in the journal Human-Computer Interaction, and then
included in Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings,
edited by Irene Greif.
On the basis of that work, Terry was asked to develop a special issue
of the ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems} (April, 1988),
on ``A language/action perspective,'' and was invited to join the
editorial boards of that journal and of Human-Computer Interaction.
More recently, he has continued to produced some of the most often
cited papers in the field, presented at the 1988 CSCW Conference and
elsewhere.
I think the above discussion makes it clear that Terry is one of
the world leaders in the CSCW area, and, as his letters indicate,
he is quite comparable to the very best people in this and related
areas who have already attained the rank of Professor.
The remaining questions for us to address is whether this relatively
new area has sufficient intellectual depth, and whether it properly
belongs to Computer Science.
On the former question, I believe, the verdict is still out. It remains
a very challenging question how to properly validate such ``conceptual
structures'' work, given that it may be several years before actual
organizations adopt computer systems based on these CSCW ideas in
a large-scale fashion. But on the latter question, I am convinced
that CSCW is properly part of Computer Science. My own sense is that
there is a relative saturation in the core areas of our field, and
that some of the most exciting problems ahead lie in tying Computer
Science to other fields of human endeavor, including the physical
and social sciences. Another way to say this is that Computer Science
will be pushed forwards in part by the needs of communities other
than those of the computer scientists themselves. Such
``bridge-building'' work as Terry's, at the border between Computer
Science, Psychology, and Sociology, can present significant new
challenges to Computer Science itself.
Well, this is starting to get into religious waters, so I'd better
stop. My bottom line is that Terry is a world leader in an area that
has a very good chance of making significant contributions to Computer
Science. When you add to that his past excellent work in Computational
Linguistics, the general wisdom he has to offer our Department on
almost any matter, and the fact that he is already here with tenure,
I feel the verdict must be that he should be promoted.
Leo G.
∂15-May-89 1141 op@polya.Stanford.EDU
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 11:41:29 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA19077; Mon, 15 May 89 11:41:42 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 11:41:40 PDT
From: Oren Patashnik <op@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 14 May 89 1428 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611260900.op@polya.stanford.edu>
> I have an American Spectator for you.
I missed you this morning, and I'll be working at home this afternoon
and all day tomorrow except for early morning, so it might be best to
leave the American Spectator, along with an indication of which
article(s) to read, in my mail folder (upper right drawer) in the
2nd-floor reception area.
--Oren
∂15-May-89 1401 JMC
Can NAS subscribe to Campus Report?
∂15-May-89 1449 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU Pat
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 14:49:26 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA00807; Mon, 15 May 89 14:49:37 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 14:49:34 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Pat
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611272174.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
I just talked to Pat (she just returned home from her doctor's appointment).
She won't be coming in for the rest of the day.
∂15-May-89 1922 cwitty@csli.Stanford.EDU Re: elephant query
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 19:21:55 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA25879; Mon, 15 May 89 19:22:18 PDT
Date: Mon, 15 May 89 19:22:18 PDT
From: cwitty@csli.Stanford.EDU (Carl Witty)
Message-Id: <8905160222.AA25879@csli.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: elephant query
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <mzyEZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Cc:
It probably comes from a Dr. Seuss book. I believe the elephant in
question is named Horton.
"An elephant is faithful, 100%."
(I'm not sure whether it's faithful or loyal.)
Carl Witty
cwitty@csli.Stanford.EDU
∂15-May-89 2313 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 23:13:37 PDT
Date: Mon 15 May 89 23:13:10-PDT
From: sun bear <T.TEDEBEAR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: demonstrations and aggression
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <m#szf@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12494375262.89.T.TEDEBEAR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
i'm curious. what is your position on these demands?
it strikes me as outrageous that stanford can find the money
for new road signs and a new museum and other things while cutting
TA budgets (*before* the TA cuts, i had a class that had 100 students
and 2 TA's), refusing to support asian studies, meet the needs of
minority students, and so forth. i don't support the creation of a
committee to deal with allegations of discrimination but i DO feel that
the university is not placing the students very high on its list of
priority. witness the fact that undergraduate housing was dropped from
the centennial campaign. stanford does NOT exist for the administration.
it exists for US, the students. WE are the ones who are paying $20K
per year to attend this school. and what happens when we try to get
some of that education we paid for? they sic the cops on us. yep,
that's the way to go. sure.
ok, maybe i'm not being fair. we were disrupting the normal functioning
of the school. but it really seems like the administration needs prodding.
-------
∂15-May-89 2349 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 23:49:07 PDT
Date: Mon 15 May 89 23:48:44-PDT
From: sun bear <T.TEDEBEAR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: demonstrations and aggression
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <m#szf@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12494381736.89.T.TEDEBEAR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
no, i wasn't one of the people who got arrested. i had to go to a class,
and when i got back they had closed the building and were arresting people.
the cops were jerks. while they were putting people on the bus, i stood
at the police line. this cop comes up to me and pushes me. didn't even
hear him tell me to move back. anyway, i resisted being pushed. and he
suddenly changes his stance and grabs this plastic handcuff out of his
belt. and reaches for my arm. i guess he decided he didn't have enough
justification, though, because he relaxes, folds his arms, and fixes me
with his patented steely cop stare. ooooooh. i was quaking in my shoes.
at any rate, i stayed there. people were ripping down the police lines
and the cops were putting them back up. after several breaks occur
near where i am standing, this sergeant and another cop come up to me.
standing real close, in that macho cop stance, of course. they both
rivet me with their cop stares. then the sergeant leans forward and
sticks his face about two inches away from mine. and says, "i'm warning
you, asshole. if that line breaks again we're gonna bust your ass."
of course, it broke again. and they came for me again. and again they
didn't do anything. anyway, they spent a lot of time threatening me...
and THIS is what i pay for?
p.s. did i ever rip down the line? i'll have to plead the 5th on that. :)
-------
∂15-May-89 2353 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 May 89 23:53:41 PDT
Date: Mon 15 May 89 23:53:18-PDT
From: sun bear <T.TEDEBEAR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Re: demonstrations and aggression
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
In-Reply-To: <m#szf@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12494382568.89.T.TEDEBEAR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
oh, yeah, and i don't think i need to mention how the cops started hitting
people with nightsticks at the front entrance... people who weren't hitting
back, but just staying there and blocking the road. i understand that the
cops wanted to get them out of the way, but i feel that the use of nightsticks
was wholly unjustified.
-------
∂16-May-89 0537 cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU Re: demonstrations and aggression
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 May 89 05:37:49 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA09269; Tue, 16 May 89 05:38:11 PDT
Date: Tue, 16 May 89 05:38:11 PDT
From: cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU (Chris Phoenix)
Message-Id: <8905161238.AA09269@csli.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: demonstrations and aggression
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <m#szf@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Cc:
Have you heard about the tuition protests at Rutgers (I think) U? From what
I read on soc.college, some students are walking around in leg braces from
police brutality. And then there's the way they treat Operation Rescuers...
Whether or not you agree with the Rescuers, the police are way too brutal
(they almost killed someone)!
Unless I felt pretty strongly, I wouldn't join a protest that I thought had
a high probability of unwise police action.
--
Chris Phoenix | "I was afraid of worms! Worms, Roxanne!"
cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU | "More input! More input!"
Usenet: The real source of the "Tastes Great" vs. "Less Filling" debate.
Disclaimer: Don't mind me, I'm just a student!
∂16-May-89 0740 Mailer Re: demonstrations and aggression
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 May 89 07:40:28 PDT
Date: Tue, 16 May 89 07:40:11 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Re: demonstrations and aggression
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <m#szf@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12494467561.16.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
While I agree with JMC that occupation of a University President's office
is usually a poor tactic to use in working for possibly justifiable goals,
I find the analogy with tribal societies pathetic. There simply is no
reason to conclude that tribal conditions, historical or present, are
in any way, shape or fashion analogous to campus life.
While I'm pleased to see that he agrees with the justifications of the Peking
students, I wonder if he would care to comment of what types of actions,
legal or otherwise, that students should participate in if/when they
find social/policical conditions unjust.
-------
∂16-May-89 0800 JMC
call iii
∂16-May-89 0831 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU pill problem
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 May 89 08:31:13 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA13679; Tue, 16 May 89 08:32:31 -0700
Date: Tue, 16 May 89 08:32:31 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8905161532.AA13679@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: pill problem
You didn't remember the answer, but the answer is really quite
memorable: the expected number of half-pills starting with n whole
pills is the harmonic number H_n = 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/n.
I haven't proved it but the numerical evidence is convincing.
∂16-May-89 0912 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU complete solution of pill problem
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 May 89 09:12:02 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA14410; Tue, 16 May 89 09:13:20 -0700
Date: Tue, 16 May 89 09:13:20 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8905161613.AA14410@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: complete solution of pill problem
Cc: ucdavis!caldwr!haiku.uucp!mike
Let E(u,v) be the expected number of half-pills when
starting with u whole pills and v half pills, after all the u whole
pills are used up. Then
E(u,v) = H(u+1) + (v-1)/(u+1) for v positive
E(u,0) = H(u)
where H(u) is the harmonic number 1 + 1/2 + ... + 1/u.
The desired answer is E(n,0) = H(n).
The above formula for E(u,v) can be verified by a simple induction
using the recursion equations
E(0,v) = v; E(u,0)= E(u-1,1);
E(u,v) = (u/(u+v)) E(u-1,v+1) + (v/(u+v)) E(u,v-1);
I am indebted to my friend Mike Pallesen for the numerical observation
that H(n) = E(n,0); his oervation stimulated me to look for the
formula for E(u,v).
∂16-May-89 1016 MPS library book
the library needs the book
Cryptology yesterday, today, and tomorrow
returned.
∂16-May-89 1018 MPS Paper
Do you want copies made to AI, Logic and
Formalizing Common Sense? Also, should it be
kept in your reprint file? Is there a place for it
or do I have to set up a new file?
Pat
∂16-May-89 1630 MPS Chereshkin
Hi
Boy, it was very hard to make him understand what I
wanted. It might be better if you call him at the Holiday
Inn, 328-2800 or at his office, Ventura Hall, 3-0528
tomorrow. He will be in his office at 9:30. I think
he partially understood me, but I am not sure.
I have made a reservation for you at the Faculty Club.
Pat
∂16-May-89 1737 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:carol@lucid.com implicit futures
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 May 89 17:37:01 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA06245; Tue, 16 May 89 17:37:14 PDT
Received: from edsel ([192.9.200.1]) by heavens-gate id AA07582g; Tue, 16 May 89 17:35:49 PDT
Received: from kolyma.lucid.com by edsel id AA25799g; Tue, 16 May 89 17:33:18 PDT
Received: by kolyma id AA14430g; Tue, 16 May 89 17:36:38 PDT
Date: Tue, 16 May 89 17:36:38 PDT
From: Carol Sexton <carol@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8905170036.AA14430@kolyma.lucid.com>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: implicit futures
/lucid/bin/fqlisp is a qlisp which contains support for implicit future
checking. This means that you don't have to call get-future-value when
using the value of a future.
You can use the following declarations to control the insertion of future
checks:
(declare (declared-futures nil)) ; tell the compiler to not insert future
; checks
(declare (declared-futures t)) ; tell the compiler to insert future
; checks
Note that even if you tell the compiler to not insert checks, your code may
run slower in fqlisp than in new-qlisp because the lisp system code has
been compiled with future checking on.
You can declare that a specific variable should be considered either
a possible future or definitely not a future.
(declare (future a)) ; check if variable a is a future, even if
; future check insertion has previously
; been proclaimed or declared to be off
(declare (not-future b c)) ; no future checks will be inserted for
; the variables b and c
You can declare whether or not the value of some form should
be checked for futures by using the following:
(the not-future (form))
(the future (form))
Note that
(the future (the not-future form)) = (the not-future form).
Comments on the use of these declarations would be appreciated, especially
on what you think should happpen when the various kinds of declarations are
used together. Right now the innermost declaration regarding a possible
future takes precedence over any outer future declarations with the
exception of nested THE forms.
Note that declarations regarding futures are like declarations for specials
in that they effect the meaning of a program and cannot be considered
optional by the compiler. Also these future declarations have not yet been
added to the interpreter.
This lisp works on my handful of examples, but no doubt there are several
bugs lurking out there. Please let me know when you encounter one.
Carol
∂17-May-89 0716 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 07:16:47 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 May 89 07:15:38 PDT
To: jmc@sail
From: "Arthur P Coladarci" <CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
John McC: The bboard matter will NOT come before the Senate
tommorrow. The Steering Committee will tackle it a final time next
week (Wednesday). My personal guess is that resolution will follow
quickly and without the necessity of Senate action. If, however,
the matter goes to the Senate on June 1, you are invited to attend.
Art.
∂17-May-89 0739 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 07:39:18 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA07773; Wed, 17 May 89 07:39:52 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 May 89 07:39:52 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905171439.AA07773@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
From: crunch@well.UUCP (John Draper)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Latest scoop from Programmers Network
Date: 17 May 89 04:36:48 GMT
Reply-To: crunch@well.UUCP (John Draper)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
It's been a while since I reported in with a status report on whats
happening with the Computing scene in the USSR, so this is a brief
report on whats going on.
First, the Programmers Network is helping to organize a programmers
exchange forum where we help to organize and coordinate programmers
in the USSR who are looking for a temporary "gig" here in the USA.
We are in daily communication with the International Computer Club
of the USSR, and we have agreed to assist in helping to organize
an exchange. If your organization or institution is interested in
inviting a Soviet programmer to work on non-sensitive projects or
programs, we can help coordinate initial contact with our Soviet
counterpart.
Just recently, we learned that the Soviet Union has a pool of
very good programmers who are very strong on Theoretical and AI
programming, dispite the primitive equipment and software development
tools. This came as a total surprise to me, and prompted me
to publish an article to "comp.misc" late last fall titled:
"A Hackers eye view of the Soviet Union". An amazing amount of
responses and querys followed, and just recently the rates for the
SF/Moscow link has reduced on the Soviet side, so we are getting a lot
more information from them. Since that time, 4 or 5 more technical
people have visited the USSR and also met the same contacts I met last
fall.
We just recieved information from our first Soviet programmer
who is looking for a short term project with a research team or
a company interested in learning about how Soviets program computers.
Sergei KOZLOV
Born in 1964. Graduated the Moscow Institute of machines
and tools and gained experience in robotics.
Scientific interest - computer graphics. He is the
author of 2,5D dialogue graphical system. Has created
software to visualize 3D objects with deletion of non-visible
lines. Is now finishing a graphical system for IBM PC range
machines which integrates the elements of 2D, 2,5D and 3D
systems and makes it possible in a very fast mode to create
graphical documentation using graphical data base.
Has a big experience in Fortran-4, C, Fortran-77
programming and also PDP-11, Intel-86, Pascal
macroassemblers. He speaks English Fluently.
If your organization is interested, you can Email me at the
following UUCP address:
uunet!hoptoad!well!crunch
Here is some information about "Macs" on the Soviet
market.
The computers of "Apple" "Macintosh Plus" and
"MacintoshSE" recently entered soviet market. They are sold
for hard currency by west-german company "Comdata" and
canadian company "Alfa Graf".
But as before there is no enough information about
"Macs" in this country. Even worse, there is an opinion that
the "Macs" have no future and can not be compared with IBM PC
range.
We are now looking for partners to create advertising
and training center of "Macs" in the Moscow. By now we are
negotiating this question with "Comdata". If you can propose
this idea also to another interested company it will be good.
BY the same token, if any Western programmers want to work on
Soviet projects to gain experience, learn Russian, or is a student
who wants to visit the USSR to work on projects, I cam propose this
to the Soviets and post their reply to this interesting idea.
John D.
Programmers Network
uunet!hoptoad!well!crunch
∂17-May-89 0800 JMC
Chereshkin 328-2800, 3-0528
∂17-May-89 0932 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Academic Council Meeting
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 09:32:01 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 17 May 89 09:27:39 PDT
From: turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sherry A. Turner)
Date: Wed 17 May 89 09:27:37-PDT
Subject: Academic Council Meeting
To: EE-FACULTY@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-ADMINLIST@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <611425657.0.TURNER@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
President Kennedy requests that as many faculty as possible attend the Academic
Council Meeting to be held tomorrow (Thursday) at 4:30 in the School of Law,
Room 290.
Joe Goodman
-------
∂17-May-89 1057 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:davies@cascade.Stanford.EDU Multiprocessor sales pitch
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 10:57:18 PDT
Received: from Cascade.Stanford.EDU by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA08296; Wed, 17 May 89 10:57:33 PDT
Received: by cascade.Stanford.EDU (5.59/inc-1.0)
id AA23784; Wed, 17 May 89 10:55:42 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 May 89 10:55:42 PDT
From: davies@cascade.Stanford.EDU (Byron Davies)
Message-Id: <8905171755.AA23784@cascade.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: Multiprocessor sales pitch
Forwarded, in case you're interested:
Subject: VENDOR DEMO: Hyperflo
Date: Wed, 17 May 89 09:14:50 PDT
>From: grossman@glacier.Stanford.EDU
This Thursday 5/18 from 10-11 in CIS-101.
I know nothing about this product except for the full page ad
that I saw in a Trade Journal. The ad made a lot of impressive
claims about HYPERFLO.
This HYPERflo system is unrelated to hypercard, hyperclass, etc.
It is a multiprocessor multitasking operating system that is
claimed to be suitable for many applications, including real-
time control of equipment. The hardware is based on SUN with
a VME chassis and multiple processors.
The ad says: Up to 100 processors, 300 MIPS, 200 MFLOPS in a
single card cage. Processor independent (simultaneous RISC,
68020, etc). Self-healing, fault tolerant. Elegant multiproc
application programming. Data flow architecture with automatic
pipelining between processors. Supports UNIX, OS-9, ADA, ...
Supports Ethernet. For complex and real-time computing problems.
Feel free to invite anyone who you think may be interested.
- Dave
∂17-May-89 1500 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU an interview for IEEE
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 15:00:33 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18527; Wed, 17 May 89 15:00:56 PDT
Date: Wed 17 May 89 15:00:55-PDT
From: Reid Hoffman <HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: an interview for IEEE
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <611445655.0.HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Professor McCarthy,
Did you get my message about this?
thanks
reid
-------
∂17-May-89 1622 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Special Faculty Meeting
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 16:22:35 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 17 May 89 16:17:47 PDT
From: turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sherry A. Turner)
Date: Wed 17 May 89 16:17:43-PDT
Subject: Special Faculty Meeting
To: EE-FACULTY@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-ADMINLIST@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <611450263.0.TURNER@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
There will be a Special Faculty Meeting on Tuesday, May 30, 1989, in McCullough
240 beginning at 3:30 pm. Agenda to follow at a later date.
Joe Goodman
-------
∂17-May-89 1648 ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU elephant
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 16:48:35 PDT
Date: Wed 17 May 89 16:48:16-PDT
From: Art Altman <ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: elephant
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12494829479.14.ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
It used to be said that "an elephant never forgets".
I don't know why.
Also,
When I was a kid (in the late 50's) there was an often repeated
cartoon on TV containing a rhyme that ended "an elephant's faithful 100%".
My memory has (perhaps mercifully) spared me the rest of passage.
Art
altman@score
-------
∂17-May-89 1651 paulf@jessica.Stanford.EDU Re: demonstrations and aggression
Received: from jessica.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 16:51:15 PDT
Received: by jessica.Stanford.EDU; Wed, 17 May 89 16:49:21 PDT
Date: Wed, 17 May 89 16:49:21 PDT
From: Paul Flaherty <paulf@jessica.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: demonstrations and aggression
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <s#d#N@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: The Three Packeteers
Cc:
In article <s#d#N@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> you write:
> It is an oversimplification to suppose that Stanford
>exists solely for undergraduate students. It also does
>graduate education. I am here, because it wanted to do
>computer science research and hired me away from M.I.T.
>by offering a full professorship and more money back in
>1962. I came, because Stanford seemed like a good place
>to be a computer scientist, and I haven't had cause to
>regret it. If the extreme partisans of emphasizing
>undergraduate education had got there way, I'd be somewhere
>else.
That makes two of us. I did my undergrad (double major in EE and Math) at
Marquette, which is primarily an undergrad school. I came out here
because of the opportunity to do a PhD based on research and experimentation.
I've found that it's often best to view Stanford as a research institution
that runs a school on the side...
--
-=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX | "UNIX could use a more user - friendly front
->paulf@shasta.Stanford.EDU | end. Anyone still have a card reader?"
∂17-May-89 1651 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Senior Faculty Meeting 5/16/89
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 16:51:16 PDT
Date: Wed 17 May 89 16:50:37-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Senior Faculty Meeting 5/16/89
To: Binford@Coyote.Stanford.EDU, Guibas@decwrl.dec.com, ZM@Sail.Stanford.EDU,
EJM@Sierra.Stanford.EDU, JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12494829909.31.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Full Professors met yesterday to consider two senior faculty appointment
matters:
1. The promotion of Associate Professor Terry Winograd to full Professor.
There were eight Professors present; the vote was 7 affirmative and 1
negative.
2. The possible appointment of Richard Karp.
It was unanimously recommended by the eight faculty present, and an advance
vote from one absent faculty member, that this appointment be made,
subject to CSD being able to obtain an additional target of opportunity
billet.
I will appreciate receiving your votes on 1. and 2. above as soon as possible.
Thanks in advance,
Betty
-------
∂17-May-89 1709 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Senior Faculty Meeting 5/16/89
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 May 89 17:09:45 PDT
Date: Wed 17 May 89 17:04:09-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Senior Faculty Meeting 5/16/89
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <Q$tih@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12494832371.31.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks, John. Will do. --Betty
-------
∂18-May-89 0729 masahiko@nuesun.ntt.jp Re: possible visit by Lifschitz
Received: from argus.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 May 89 07:28:01 PDT
Received: from ntt-sh.ntt.jp ([129.60.57.1]) by argus.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Thu, 18 May 89 07:12:19 PDT
Received: by ntt-sh.ntt.jp (3.2/ntt-sh-03e) with TCP; Thu, 18 May 89 22:55:50 JST
Received: by MECL.NTT.jp (3.2/NTTcs02) with TCP; Thu, 18 May 89 22:58:16 JST
Date: Thu, 18 May 89 22:58:16 JST
From: masahiko@nuesun.ntt.jp (Masahiko Sato)
Message-Id: <8905181358.AA09773@MECL.NTT.jp>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 01 May 89 1641 PDT <1QXtwB@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: possible visit by Lifschitz
I know only a few researchers who are interested in nonmonotonic reasoning.
I believe you have met most of them at ICOT. Japan is not active in
this field, unfortunately. However, I think that this is an important
topic, and Lifshitz' possible visit to Japan will encourage Japanese
researchers.
∂18-May-89 0800 JMC
soviet[f88
∂18-May-89 0939 MPS Meeting
Hi
The toe is not broken, but badly bruised.
Can I schedule 1/2 hour for you with Zvi either
today between 3 and 5 or tomorrow beterrn
2:30 and 4:30.Pat
∂18-May-89 1054 ARK Future of SAIL
To: JMC
CC: ARK
Has anything been decided yet? Is it still scheduled to go away at the
end of 1989? Are you taking it private? What kind of money do you want
from other users? Thanks.
Arthur
∂18-May-89 1325 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Jussi Ketonen
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 May 89 13:25:08 PDT
Date: Thu 18 May 89 13:24:46-PDT
From: Yvette Sloan <SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Jussi Ketonen
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12495054578.21.SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Professor McCarthy--
I am planning to send out to the faculty Ketonen's application for a consulting
faculty appointment. It needs to be discussed at the next faculty meeting
which is to be held on June 13. You should be at that faculty meeting to give
your support of this appointment. Do you plan to be there?
--Yvette
-------
∂18-May-89 1344 SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Jussi Ketonen
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 May 89 13:43:57 PDT
Date: Thu 18 May 89 13:43:25-PDT
From: Yvette Sloan <SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Jussi Ketonen
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <e$x3O@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12495057974.21.SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Good, thanks. --Yvette
-------
∂18-May-89 1549 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU 1989 DEPARTMENTAL AWARDS FOR OUTSTANDING SERVICE
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 May 89 15:49:24 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 18 May 89 15:44:51 PDT
Date: Thu, 18 May 89 15:44:51 PDT
From: shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Diane J. Shankle)
To: EE-Faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EEAdminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: 1989 DEPARTMENTAL AWARDS FOR OUTSTANDING SERVICE
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611534688.shankle@>
The Electrical Engineering Department annually makes three awards for
outstanding service to the Department. Each award consists of a certificate,
a citation of appreciation, and a check for $1200. The awards are presented
at the EE graduation ceremonies in June. The purpose of this memo is to
solicit your nominations for the OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARDS for 1989. All
departmental and laboratory faculty and staff are eligible, both to be
nominated and to make nominations.
Accompanying this memo is a list of past recipients and some sample citations.
Please note that past recipients cannot be renominated.
Please send your nominations, plus brief supporting information and
suggested citations, to me by I.D. mail (McC 164) or electronic mail
(shankle@sierra), or give them directly to another committee member. The
Committee will need your nominations by 5:00 P.M. Monday, May 22th. We
will be meeting soon after that date to choose the recipients.
The EE Outstanding Service Awards Committee:
Sharon Gerlach
Thomas Kailath
James Plummer
Diane Shankle
Outstanding Service Recipients
Irene Miller
Brian Reid
David F. Tuttle
Ronald Bracewell
Sally Burns
Robert G. Mathews & John A. Newkirk
Gordon S. Kino
Marilynne Elverson
Larry Manning
Chuck Williams
James Angell
David C. Bacon
Mary Cloutier
John Katsufrakis
John Shott
Harriet Smith
John Linvill
James F.Young
Louise Peterson
Gwen Adams
Malcolm M. McWhorter
Richard Reis
John L. Hennessy
Barbara McKee
Robert L. White
Jacques Beaudouin
Thomas Kailath
James D. Plummer
Sharon A. Gerlach
Sharon Gerlach
"For a tireless assistance to the Department in administering its affairs,
in a highly competent manner and a manifestly professional manner".
Thomas Kailath
"For his untiring support and younger colleagues, for his unselfish devotion
of time to the development and sustenance of ISL, for the acclaim he has
brought the Department through his research and professional activities. His
exertions as teacher, advisor and confidant in support of students and
colleagues are directed not merely to the quality of their research, but also
to the articulate oral and written expression of that research. His gracious
hosting of numerous international visitors has broadened and enriched the
quality of research within ISL while enhancing its international reputation.
In nearly thirty years of service at Stanford, he has proved himself an
invaluable resource to the lab, department, and university".
James Plummer
"For two decades of dedicated teaching of outstanding quality, for leadership
in the Integrated Circuit Laboratory, and for pioneering contribution to
microelectronics technology".
5/18/89
∂19-May-89 0825 MPS Paper
Hi
In the paper you have me proofing, you have common sense
as both one word and two. Which is it?
Pat
∂19-May-89 0850 barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 May 89 08:50:30 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA26508; Fri, 19 May 89 08:55:23 PDT
Message-Id: <8905191555.AA26508@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of 14 May 89 22:43:00 PDT.
<szcmo@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Address: CSLI, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 (415) 723-0110
Date: Fri, 19 May 89 08:55:21 PDT
From: Jon Barwise <barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU>
I suppose Phil Cohen is the local expert on speech acts, if that is
local enough.
∂19-May-89 1014 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 19-May-89 10:10-PT.]
ok
∂19-May-89 1409 VAL Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
PROOF PROCEDURES FOR NONMONOTONIC REASONING SYSTEMS
Nicolas Helft and Katsumi Inoue
ICOT Research Center
Wednesday, May 24, 1:15pm
MJH 301
Pierre Siegel has defined a framework that clearly explains the
computational aspects of a class of nonmonotonic reasoning systems,
and developed an efficient algorithm for nonmonotonic reasoning. In
this talk we will explain Siegel's framework, its connection with the
work of Przymusinski and of Ginsberg on computing circumscription,
and its relation to clause maintenance systems introduced by Reiter
and de Kleer.
∂19-May-89 1544 BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU Your Abstention on Winograd Promotion
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 May 89 15:44:28 PDT
Date: Fri 19 May 89 15:44:05-PDT
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Your Abstention on Winograd Promotion
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: BScott@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12495342083.17.BSCOTT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, Nils has just received the below quoted letter, and asked me to check
with you to see whether you might wish to change your abstention to a vote.
May 11, 1989
Dr. Nils J. Nilsson
Professor and Chairman
Department of Computer Science
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
Dear Dr. Nilsson
This is the letter you requested in support of Terry Winograd's candidacy for
full professorship.
The effect of Terry's thought and writings on my group, our work, and my life
have been profound. His book, "Understanding Computers and Cognition" (with
Fernando Flores), shook my intellectual foundations to the core - and showed me the possibility of rebuilding my own field, computer usability engineering,
afresh from the ground up. It is arguably the most influential book I have
ever read in my life. Using the concepts therein, I have, over the past
several years, completely re-directed my group's work focus, adopted a new
approach to user interface design, and launched an exciting new line of soft-
ware products.
Terry has also been helpful to me personally, reviewing my work (in particular,
my chapter on usability engineering) extremely thoroughly. He also refers
interesting students to me for possible hiring into our company.
Terry is very much the intellectual father of our group and I owe him an
immense debt. Naturally, I would very much like to see him promoted.
Sincerely yours,
(s) John Whiteside, Ph.D.
Consulting Software Engineer
Digital Equipment Corporation
110 Spit Brook Road
Nashua, NH 03062-2698
-----------
Betty
-------
∂19-May-89 1911 beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU pills
Received: from ucscd.UCSC.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 May 89 19:10:11 PDT
Received: by ucscd.UCSC.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA13185; Fri, 19 May 89 19:11:32 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 May 89 19:11:32 -0700
From: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU (20012000)
Message-Id: <8905200211.AA13185@ucscd.UCSC.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: pills
I computed p(u,k)= probability of ending up with exactly k half-pills
when starting with u whole pills, hoping that I could see the formula
and prove it by induction. But no such luck: the denominators of the
rational numbers p(u,k) get very large very quickly with no evident
(at least to me) pattern.
Shouldn't it be possible to have the computer guess at formulas
for problems like this? Seems like the computer should have been able
to do what I did for the expected value, at least if it knew that
1 + 1/2 + ... 1/n was considered "simple" and a good form for an answer.
∂19-May-89 2033 CLT Itinerary, etc
may 20-24 Iowa City
Holiday Inn 1-319-337-4058
Conference on Algebraic Methods in Software Technology
Conference Center, University of Iowa, Iowa Memorial Union
(Director 1-319-335-3231)
20 May Delta 328 lv sfo 12:55pm - arr skc 3:41pm
Delta 5578 lv slc 5:20pm - arr cr/ic 6:20pm
24 May Delta 5579 lv cr/ic 7:35pm - arr slc 8:35pm
Delta 1175 lv slc 9:06pm - arr sfo 10:00pm
ua chi-sfo arr 930pm
Estimates should be coming from
Springer construction (Neil Springer) 345-2471
and
State Construction (592-8128) Joe Caprioni
for clearing the termite report.
If either one arrives make a copy for Bob Keeley (there will probably
be two but I want to keep both) and call him to say its here.
∂20-May-89 1056 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu re: paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 May 89 10:56:01 PDT
Date: Sat, 20 May 1989 13:55:25 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: paper
In-Reply-To: Your message of 13 May 89 1249 PDT
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.611690125.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
It's about 11 AM your time. I'm in my office, and am about to
leave. I should be home in an hour. I won't be going anywhere after that,
but will probably be going to bed early again -- by 6:30 your time probably.
--Rich
∂21-May-89 0800 JMC
dennett, chess paper outline
∂21-May-89 1528 ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU Re: AI Letters
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 May 89 15:28:27 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA04318; Sun, 21 May 89 15:28:43 -0700
Date: Sun, 21 May 89 15:28:43 -0700
From: Matthew L. Ginsberg <ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905212228.AA04318@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: AI Letters
Cc: ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU
OK. My initial reaction to this is neutral. I can think of three
basic things that might appear in such a publication:
1. Pointing out an oversight or error in another paper,
2. An abstract of a paper that an author is working on or has recently
completed, but has not yet published, and
3. Short ideas of problems or approaches (random thoughts, basically).
1. My guess is that this should only be published if the sender is
the author of the original paper. Someone who finds a mistake should
contact this original author, fight it out with him, and if he's right,
said original author should indeed concede the point. If he refuses to,
and some sort of protocol has been established whereby you are supposed
to fess up after losing an argument, then *not* conceding the point is
probably more embarrassing than doing so.
2. A good idea, although I would imagine that the abstract should
be of a paper that has actually *been* submitted for publication, and
should include the intended place of appearance. In order for this
to be useful, some categorization of work in AI will be needed.
3. Of little value, I think. I just can't imagine that this will be
worth wading through.
OK; let's suppose that this is worth doing. I can't see Morgan-Kaufmann
doing it, since they will make very little money from it (the only source
of income will be library sales). But I can ask Mike Morgan if you want.
AAAI might be a better shot. I would also think that the monthly mailing
should simply be a LaTeX source file; people can deal with it as they see
fit (this avoids the C program issue you raised).
Am I willing to do it? I don't know; it will be a big investment of time,
and I've really been doing a lot of community service lately (although only
for Stanford), what with quals, the Ph.D. admissions committee and teaching
intro to AI. I'm certainly not willing to do it without other editorial
help, but am probably willing to:
1. Contact Morgan-Kaufmann to see if they are interested. (You are
certainly a better choice to contact AAAI than I am.)
2. Sit down with you (and anyone else who is interested) to try to
pick some sort of editorial board (about six folks, is my guess), and
then to get in touch with them to see if they want to do it, too. If
they all say yes, of course, the thing will be self-propelled and I won't
*have* to do it if I feel that I don't have the time.
How's that? One thing I am *not* willing to do is spend much time on
this before the end of the quarter, I'm afraid -- I have a class to teach
and a proposal to get out at the beginning of next month. So think about
it and let me know what you'd like to do ... Thanks for thinking of me!
Matt
∂21-May-89 2010 S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: Protesters and Martin Luther King Junior
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 May 89 20:10:35 PDT
Date: Sun 21 May 89 20:09:47-PDT
From: Alex Bronstein <S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Protesters and Martin Luther King Junior
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <QbpeV@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12495914741.1.S.SALUT@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
About the harsh treatment from Stanford: it is a well known fact of
hand-fighting that appearing and fighting weakly is most likely to land
a mean and strong fight from the opponent. Despite all the sophistication
of today's fight, I would figure the same holds true: the administration
today knows it's fighting a relatively small, not TOO agressive group, and
so can get away with rather strong punishment. If they were facing 1000
students with motorcycle helmets on, the administration might have reacted
differently...
I really believe that today's demonstrations are yuppie-fun for kids who
feel slightly bad about their privileged position. In contrast to 20
years ago, where they had a true mass movement for a radical world change.
Alex
ps: note, personal msg, no time for a full-fledged bboard discussion.
-------
∂22-May-89 0005 VAL Reminder: Commonsense and Nonmonotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
OPEN PROBLEMS ON THE BORDER OF LOGIC AND AI
Vladimir Lifschitz
Stanford University
Monday, May 22, 3:15pm
MJH 352
We will discuss a few outstanding problems related to the logic approach
to AI, including some of the following:
1. Describe declarative extensions of pure Prolog.
2. Develop formalisms for proving imperative sentences.
3. Formalize reasoning about finite sequences of actions.
4. Investigate limitations of the situation calculus formalism.
5. Interpret nonmonotonic reasoning in terms of probabilities.
6. Formalize counterfactual causal reasoning.
∂22-May-89 0830 JMC
labels
∂22-May-89 1434 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU last week's CSLI/SU faculty meeting
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 14:34:10 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18036; Mon, 22 May 89 14:38:49 PDT
Date: Mon 22 May 89 14:38:46-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: last week's CSLI/SU faculty meeting
To: barwise@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, herb@psych.stanford.edu, greeno.pa@xerox.com,
kay@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, nils@score.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <611876327.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
At the Stanford/CSLI faculty meeting last week, Stanley described
the progress we have made in raising non-SDF funds for CSLI but
stressed the need for the CSLI faculty to put some of their research
grants through CSLI. While we have raised 350K to date through the
IAP program, we have raised no new funds through individual
research grants, and only a few of our researchers have grants pending.
Thus we asked each researcher to think seriously about submitting
a proposal through CSLI in the near future and give us a date by
which they plan to do this.
Stanley also explained that Bob Byer is now willing to recommend CSLI
as an independent lab provided that our faculty sign a statement of
commitment to it. Everyone attending the meeting signed, and I'd
like to get each of your signatures as well. I have typed the text
of the statement below so that you can read it and presumably be
willing to sign it next time we see each other.
Thanks,
Betsy
---------------
Dear Dean Byer:
We, the undersigned, wish to assert our strong and continuing support
for CSLI. Its special interdisciplinary, interinstitutional
environment has enabled our research to flourish and to move in
directions that would otherwise have been difficult if not impossible.
We agree to share in the responsibilities of leadership, including the
responsibility of being the director, and we agree to submit funding
proposals through CSLI. Each of us supports the concept of CSLI as an
independent lab at Stanford, and we hope that this letter will assure
you of our intention to do our part in providing leadership and
funding.
Sincerely yours,
-------
∂22-May-89 1442 @Score.Stanford.EDU:betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU office at Cordura after this quarter
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 14:42:00 PDT
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Mon 22 May 89 14:41:31-PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18212; Mon, 22 May 89 14:46:39 PDT
Date: Mon 22 May 89 14:46:39-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: office at Cordura after this quarter
To: jmc@score.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <611876799.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
We are reassigning office space at Cordura in response to the proposals
for space which we received in answer to Stanley's request several
weeks ago. Could you please give me an estimate of how much you will
be using a desk in Cordura after the present quarter? I'd like
to know about how many hours per week and on which days. If that is
impossible, just give me some idea of how you plan to use the office
and how often.
Thanks,
Betsy
-------
∂22-May-89 1510 BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU new task--QLISP
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 15:08:39 PDT
Date: Mon 22 May 89 15:08:10-PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: new task--QLISP
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: clt@Sail.Stanford.EDU, bscott@Score.Stanford.EDU,
littell@Polya.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12496121976.34.BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, The new QLISP funding has arrived under Task 23 (note that this
is a new task). Here is the new account number, etc.:
Account no.: 2-DMA816
Fund no.: 187X086
Performance period: 5/10/89-2/28/90
Title: N00039-84-C-0211, Task 23
Amount of this increment: $250,000 through 11/15/89 (total
amt. of agreement is $456,244)
-Sharon
-------
∂22-May-89 1534 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Latex file for JPL Paper
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 15:34:13 PDT
Date: Mon, 22 May 1989 18:33:20 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Latex file for JPL Paper
Cc: thomason
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.611879600.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
I'm about to ship the file to you. It should produce an identical
copy of the paper when run under Latex with CM fonts, except for the
running heads. I had to hack the acticle style file to get Latex to
produce a Roman head centered without page numbers. You will get an
italic head with page numbers. But that difference probably isn't worth
getting the changed style file.
--Rich
∂22-May-89 1542 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU CSD Retreat
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 15:42:11 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA02751; Mon, 22 May 89 15:42:24 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 May 1989 15:42:23 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: CSD Retreat
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.611880143.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
Please advise how you will pay the additional charge for your room for the
CSD retreat. If I'm to charge it to your account, please advise your account
number and name. Thanks much.
∂22-May-89 1549 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Text of jmc-jpl.tex (Part 1 of 2)
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 15:48:51 PDT
Date: Mon, 22 May 1989 18:47:57 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Text of jmc-jpl.tex (Part 1 of 2)
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.611880477.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
%THIS IS LATEX TEXT FOR JPL BOOK VERSION. -RHT
\documentstyle[twoside,11pt]{article}
\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
\def\baselinestretch{.925}
\pagestyle{headings}
\markboth{JOHN MCCARTHY}{ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LOGIC}
\textwidth 10.6cm % USE THESE 2 LINES TO FOOL WITH WIDTH
\columnwidth \textwidth % BOTH LINES MUST BE USED!
\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0in} % THIS LINE WITH TWO ABOVE IMITATES
% "FULLPAGE" STYLING -- 1 IN MARGINS
% LEFT AND RIGHT.
\topmargin -1.3cm % PLAY AROUND WITH THESE 3 LINES TO GET MORE
\textheight 16.8cm % SPACE AT TOP OF PAGE --RT
\vsize =16.8cm % 643 PT = ROBERTO'S "FULLPAGE" DEFAULT HEIGHT
\headsep .6cm
\parskip = 0pt
\begin{document}
\newcommand{\first}[2]{
\vspace{1.1ex}
\noindent \hspace*{.25in}$#1$ \hfill #2\\[.5ex]}
\newcommand{\next}[1]{\hspace*{.5in}$#1$ \\[.5ex]}
\newcommand{\last}[1]{\hspace*{.5in}$#1$ \\[-1.2ex]}
%\input jmc-mac THIS REALLY MESSES THINGS UP!
%%%%%% JMC MACROS
\def\leql#1{
\global\advance\ecount 1
\expandafter\xdef\csname eqlab#1\endcsname{\number\ecount}
\leqno(\rm\the\ecount)}
\def\eqref#1{\csname eqlab#1\endcsname}
%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newcommand{\myfootnote}[2]{#1}
\centerline{\footnotesize JOHN MCCARTHY}
\vspace*{.7cm}
\begin{center}
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, LOGIC\\[.05in]
AND FORMALIZING COMMON SENSE
\end{center}
\vspace*{.05cm}
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize 1. INTRODUCTION} %\jplsection{Introduction}
\end{center}
%thomason comments in f88.in[let,jmc]/575p
\vspace*{-.05cm}
This is a position paper about the relations among
artificial intelligence (AI), mathematical logic and the
formalization of common-sense knowledge and reasoning. It also
treats other problems of concern to both AI and philosophy. I thank
the editor for inviting it. The position advocated is that
philosophy can contribute to AI if it treats some of its
traditional subject matter in more detail and that this will
advance the philosophical goals also. Actual formalisms (mostly
first order languages) for expressing common-sense facts are
described in the references.
Common-sense knowledge includes the basic facts
about\linebreak events (including actions) and their effects, facts
about knowledge and how it is obtained, facts about beliefs and
desires. It also includes the basic facts about material objects and
their properties.
%\smallskip\centerline{Copyright \copyright\ 1989 by John McCarthy}
One path to human-level AI uses mathematical logic to
formalize common-sense knowledge in such a way that common-sense
problems can be solved by logical reasoning. This methodology
requires understanding the common-sense world well \linebreak enough
to formalize facts about it and ways of achieving goals in it.
Basing AI on understanding the common-sense world is different from
basing it on understanding human psychology or neurophysiology. This
approach to AI, based on logic and computer science, is complementary
to approaches that start from the fact that humans exhibit
intelligence, and that explore human psychology or human
neurophysiology.
This article discusses the problems and difficulties, the
results so far, and some improvements in logic and logical languages
that may be required to formalize common sense. Fundamental
conceptual advances are almost certainly required. The \\
object of the
paper is to get more help for AI from philosophical logicians. Some
of the requested help will be mostly philosophical and some will be
logical. Likewise the concrete AI approach may fertilize
philosophical logic as physics has repeatedly fertilized mathematics.
There are three reasons for AI to emphasize common-sense
knowledge rather than the knowledge contained in scientific
theories.
(1) Scientific theories represent compartmentalized
knowledge. In presenting a scientific theory, as well as in
developing it, there is a common-sense pre-scientific stage. In
this stage, it is decided or just taken for granted what
phenomena are to be covered and what is the relation between
certain formal terms of the theory and the common-sense world.
Thus in classical mechanics it is decided what kinds of bodies
and forces are to be used before the differential equations are
written down. In probabilistic theories, the sample space is
determined. In theories expressed in first order logic, the
predicate and function symbols are decided upon. The axiomatic
reasoning techniques used in mathematical and logical theories
depend on this having been done. However, a robot or computer
program with human-level intelligence will have to do this for
itself. To use science, common sense is required.
Once developed, a scientific theory remains imbedded
in common sense. To apply the theory to a specific problem,
common-sense descriptions must be matched to the terms of the theory.
For example, $d = {1\over 2} gt↑2$ does not in itself identify
$d$ as the distance a body falls in time $t$ and identify $g$
as the acceleration due to gravity.
(McCarthy and Hayes 1969) uses the {\it situation
calculus} introduced in that paper to imbed the above formula
in a formula describing the common-sense situation, for example
%
%$$\eqalign{
%&dropped(x,s)\wedge height(x,s) = h\wedge d = {1\over 2}gt↑2 \wedge d < h\cr
%\supset &\exists s'(F(s,s') \wedge time(s') = time(s)+t
% \wedge height(x,s') = h - d).}$$
%
\first{dropped(x,s) \wedge height(x,s) = h \wedge d =
{1\over 2}gt↑2 \wedge d < h \supset}{}
\next{\exists s'(F(s,s') \wedge time(s') = time(s)+t \;\wedge}
\last{\wedge\; height(x,s') = h - d).}
%
\vspace{3pt}%\smallskip
Here $x$ is the falling body, and we are presuming a language
in which the functions $height$, $time$, etc. are formalized
in a way that corresponds to what the English words suggest.
$s$ and $s'$ denote {\it situations} as discussed in that paper,
and $F(s,s')$ asserts that the situation $s'$ is in the future
of the situation $s$.
(2) Common-sense reasoning is required for solving problems in
the common-sense world. From the problem solving or goal-achieving
point of view, the common-sense world is characterized by a different
{\it informatic situation} than that {\it within} any formal
scientific theory. In the typical common-sense informatic situation,
the reasoner doesn't know what facts are relevant to solving his
problem. Unanticipated obstacles may arise that involve using parts
of his knowledge not previously thought to be relevant.
(3) Finally, the informal metatheory of any scientific
theory has a common-sense informatic character. By this I mean
the thinking about the structure of the theory in general and the
research problems it presents. Mathematicians invented the
concept of a group in order to make previously vague parallels
between different domains into a precise notion. The thinking
about how to do this had a common-sense character.
It might be supposed that the common-sense world would admit a
conventional scientific theory, e.g. a probabilistic theory. But no
one has yet developed such a theory, and AI has taken a somewhat
different course that
involves nonmonotonic extensions to the kind of reasoning used in
formal scientific theories. This seems likely to work better.
Aristotle, Leibniz, Boole and Frege all included common-sense
knowledge when they discussed formal logic. However,
formalizing much of common-sense knowledge and reasoning proved
elusive, and the twentieth century emphasis has been on formalizing
mathematics. Some important philosophers, e.g. Wittgenstein, have
claimed that common-sense knowledge is unformalizable or mathematical
logic is inappropriate for doing it. Though it is possible to give a
kind of plausibility to views of this sort, it is much less easy to
make a case for them that is well supported and carefully worked out.
If a common-sense reasoning problem is well presented, one is well on
the way to formalizing it. The examples that are presented for this
negative view borrow much of their plausibility from the inadequacy of
the specific collections of predicates and functions they take into
consideration. Some of their force comes from not formalizing
nonmonotonic reasoning, and some may be due to lack of logical tools
still to be discovered. While I acknowledge this opinion, I haven't
the time or the scholarship to deal with the full range of such
arguments. Instead I will present the positive case, the problems that
have arisen, what has been done and the problems that can be foreseen.
These problems are often more interesting than the ones suggested by
philosophers trying to show the futility of formalizing common sense, and
they suggest productive research programs for both AI and philosophy.
In so far as the arguments against the formalizability of
common-sense attempt to make precise intuitions of their authors,
they can be helpful in identifying problems that have to be solved.
For example, Hubert Dreyfus (1972) said that computers couldn't have
``ambiguity tolerance'' but didn't offer much explanation of the
concept. With the development of nonmonotonic reasoning, it became
possible to define some forms of {\it ambiguity tolerance} and show
how they can and must be incorporated in computer systems. For
example, it is possible to make a system that doesn't know about
possible {\it de re}/{\it de dicto} ambiguities and has a
default assumption that amounts to saying that a reference holds
both {\it de re} and {\it de dicto}. When this assumption
leads to inconsistency, the ambiguity can be discovered and
treated, usually by splitting a concept into two or more.
If a computer is to store facts about the world and reason
with them, it needs a precise language, and the program has to embody
a precise idea of what reasoning is allowed, i.e. of how new formulas
may be derived from old. Therefore, it was natural to try to use
mathematical logical languages to express what an intelligent computer
program knows that is relevant to the problems we want it to solve and
to make the program use logical inference in order to decide what to
do. (McCarthy 1959) contains the first proposals to use logic in AI
for expressing what a program knows and how it should reason.
(Proving logical formulas as a domain for AI had already been
studied by several authors).
The 1959 paper said:
%\begingroup\narrower\narrower
% COMMON.TEX[E80,JMC] TeX version Programs with Common Sense
%
\medskip
\noindent\hspace*{.6cm}\parbox[t]{9.4cm}{ \parindent=20pt
The {\it advice taker} is a proposed program for solving problems by
manipulating sentences in formal languages. The main difference
between it and other programs or proposed programs for manipulating
formal languages (the {\it Logic Theory Machine} of Newell, Simon and
Shaw and the Geometry Program of Gelernter) is that in the previous
programs the formal system was the subject matter but the heuristics
were all embodied in the program. In this program the procedures will
be described as much as possible in the language itself and, in
particular, the heuristics are all so described.
The main advantages we expect the {\it advice taker} to have
is that its behavior will be improvable merely by making statements to
it, telling it about its symbolic environment and what is wanted from
it. To make these statements will require little if any knowledge of
the program or the previous knowledge of the {\it advice taker}. One
will be able to assume that the {\it advice taker} will have available
to it a fairly wide class of immediate logical consequences of anything
it is told and its previous knowledge. This property is expected to
have much in common with what makes us describe certain humans as
having {\it common sense}. We shall therefore say that {\it a program
has common sense if it automatically deduces for itself a sufficiently
wide class of immediate consequences of anything it is told and what
it already knows.}
%\par\endgroup
}
\medskip
The main reasons for using logical sentences extensively in AI
are better understood by researchers today than in 1959. Expressing
information in declarative sentences is far more modular than
expressing it in segments of computer program or in tables. 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 be used for many purposes, because the logical
consequences of collections of facts can be available.
The {\it advice taker} prospectus was ambitious in 1959, would
be considered ambitious today and is still far from being immediately
realizable. This is especially true of the goal of expressing the
heuristics guiding the search for a way to achieve the goal in the
language itself. The rest of this paper is largely concerned with
describing what progress has been made, what the obstacles are, and
how the prospectus has been modified in the light of what has been
discovered.
The formalisms of logic have been used to differing
extents in AI. Most of the uses are much less ambitious than
the proposals of (McCarthy 1959). We can distinguish four
levels of use of logic.
\medskip
1. A machine may use no logical sentences---all its
``beliefs'' being implicit in its state. Nevertheless, it is often
appropriate to ascribe beliefs and goals to the program, i.e. to
remove the above sanitary quotes, and to use a principle of
rationality---{\it It does what it thinks will achieve its goals}.
Such ascription is discussed from somewhat different points of view
in (Dennett 1971), (McCarthy 1979a) and
(Newell 1981). The advantage is that the intent of the machine's
designers and the way it can be expected to behave may be more readily
described {\it intentionally} than by a purely physical description.
The relation between the physical and the {\it intentional}
descriptions is most readily understood in simple systems that admit
readily understood descriptions of both kinds, e.g. thermostats. Some
finicky philosophers object to this, contending that unless a system
has a full human mind, it shouldn't be regarded as having any mental
qualities at all. This is like omitting the numbers 0 and 1 from the
number system on the grounds that numbers aren't required to count
sets with no elements or one element.
Indeed if your main interest is the null set or unit sets, numbers
{\it are} irrelevant. However, if your interest is the number system
you lose clarity and uniformity
if you omit 0 and 1. Likewise, when one studies phenomena like belief,
e.g. because one wants a machine with beliefs and which reasons about
beliefs, it works better not to exclude simple cases from the formalism.
One battle has been over whether it should be forbidden to ascribe to a simple
thermostat the belief that the room is too cold.
(McCarthy 1979a) says much more about ascribing mental qualities
to machines, but that's not where the main action is in AI.
\medskip
2. The next level of use of logic involves computer programs
that use sentences in machine memory to represent their beliefs but
use other rules than ordinary logical inference to reach conclusions.
New sentences are often obtained from the old ones by ad hoc programs.
Moreover, the sentences that appear in memory belong to a
program-dependent subset of the logical language being used. Adding
certain true sentences in the language may even spoil the functioning
of the program. The languages used are often rather unexpressive
compared to first order logic, for example they may not admit
quantified sentences, or they may use a
different notation from that used for ordinary facts to represent
``rules'', i.e. certain universally quantified implication sentences.
Most often, conditional rules are used in just one
direction, i.e. contrapositive reasoning is not used.
Usually the program cannot infer new rules; rules
must have all been put in by the ``knowledge engineer''. Sometimes
programs have this form through mere ignorance, but the usual
reason for the restriction is the practical desire to make the program
run fast and deduce just the kinds of conclusions its designer
anticipates.
We
believe the need for such specialized inference will turn out to be
temporary and will be reduced or eliminated by improved ways of
controlling general inference, e.g. by allowing the heuristic rules to
be also expressed as sentences as promised in the above extract from
the 1959 paper.
\medskip
3. The third level uses first order logic and also logical
deduction. Typically the sentences are represented as clauses, and the
deduction methods are based on J. Allen Robinson's (1965) method of
resolution. It is common to use a theorem prover as a problem solver,
i.e. to determine an $x$ such that $P(x)$ as a byproduct of a proof of
the formula $\exists xP(x)$.
This level is less used for practical
purposes than level two, because techniques for controlling the
reasoning are still insufficiently developed, and it is common for the
program to generate many useless conclusions before reaching the desired
solution. Indeed, unsuccessful experience (Green 1969) with this method
led to more restricted uses of logic, e.g. the STRIPS system of (Nilsson
and Fikes 1971).
%The promise of (McCarthy 1959) to express the
%heuristic facts that should be used to guide the search as logical
%sentences has not yet been realized by anyone.
The commercial ``expert system shells'', e.g. ART, KEE and
OPS-5, use logical representation of facts, usually ground facts only,
and separate facts from rules. They provide elaborate but not always
adequate ways of controlling inference.
In this connection it is important to mention logic programming,
first introduced in Microplanner (Sussman et al., 1971)
and from different points of view by Robert Kowalski (1979) and Alain
Colmerauer in the early 1970s.
A recent text is (Sterling and Shapiro 1986). Microplanner
was a rather unsystematic collection of tools, whereas Prolog relies
almost entirely on one kind of logic programming, but the main idea
is the same. If one uses a restricted class of sentences, the so-called
Horn clauses, then it is possible to use a restricted form of logical
deduction. The control problem is then much eased, and it is possible
for the programmer to anticipate the course the deduction will take.
The price paid is that only certain kinds of facts are conveniently
expressed as Horn clauses, and the depth first search built into
Prolog is not always appropriate for the problem.
Even when the relevant facts can be expressed as Horn
clauses supplemented by negation as failure, the reasoning
carried out by a Prolog program may not be appropriate. For
example, the fact that a sealed container is sterile if all the
bacteria in it are dead and the fact that heating a can kills a
bacterium in the can are both expressible as Prolog clauses.
However, the resulting program for sterilizing a container will
kill each bacterium individually, because it will have to index
over the bacteria. It won't reason that heating the can kills
all the bacteria at once, because it doesn't do universal
generalization.
Here's a Prolog program for testing whether a container
is sterile. The predicate symbols have obvious meanings.
\newpage
{\small\tt \obeyspaces\obeylines
not(P) :- P, !, fail.
not(P).
sterile(X) :- not(nonsterile(X)).
nonsterile(X) :-
\hspace*{5ex}bacterium(Y), in(Y,X), not(dead(Y)).
hot(Y) :- in(Y,X), hot(X).
dead(Y) :- bacterium(Y), hot(Y).
bacterium(b1).
bacterium(b2).
bacterium(b3).
bacterium(b4).
in(b1,c1).
in(b2,c1).
in(b3,c2).
in(b4,c2).
hot(c1).}
\medskip
Giving Prolog the goal $sterile(c1)$ and $sterile(c2)$ gives
the answers $yes$ and $no$ respectively. However, Prolog has
indexed over the bacteria in the containers.
The following is a Prolog program that can verify whether
a sequence of actions, actually just heating it, will sterilize
a container. It involves introducing situations analogous to
those discussed in (McCarthy and Hayes 1969).
\medskip
{\small \tt\obeyspaces\obeylines
not(P) :- P, !, fail.
not(P).
sterile(X,S) :- not(nonsterile(X,S)).
nonsterile(X,S) :-
\hspace*{5ex}bacterium(Y), in(Y,X), not(dead(Y,S)).
hot(Y,S) :- in(Y,X), hot(X,S).
dead(Y,S) :- bacterium(Y), hot(Y,S).
bacterium(b1).
bacterium(b2).
bacterium(b3).
bacterium(b4).
in(b1,c1).
in(b2,c1).
in(b3,c2).
in(b4,c2).
hot(C,result(heat(C),S)).}
\medskip
When the program is given the goals $sterile(c1,heat(c1,s0))$
\newpage\noindent
and $sterile(c2,heat(c1,s0))$ it answers $yes$ and $no$ respectively.
However, if it is given the goal $sterile(c1,s)$, it will fail because
Prolog lacks what logic programmers call ``constructive negation''.
The same facts as are used in the first Prolog program can be
expressed in in a first order language as follows.
%
$$(\forall X)(sterile(X) \equiv (\forall Y)(bacterium(Y) \wedge in(Y,X) \supset dead(Y))),$$
\vspace*{-2ex}
$$(\forall X Y)(hot(X) \wedge in(Y,X) \supset hot(Y)),$$
\vspace*{-2ex}
$$(\forall Y)(bacterium(Y) \wedge hot(Y) \supset dead(Y)),$$
%
and
%
$$hot(a).$$
%
However, from them we can prove $sterile(a)$ without having
to index over the bacteria.
Expressibility in Horn clauses, whether supplemented by
negation as failure or not, is an important property of a set of
facts and logic programming has been successfully used for many
applications. However, it seems unlikely to dominate AI
programming as some of its advocates hope.
Although third level systems express both facts and rules
as logical sentences, they are still rather specialized. The axioms
with which the programs begin are not general truths about the world
but are sentences whose meaning and truth is limited to the narrow
domain in which the program has to act. For this reason, the ``facts''
of one program usually cannot be used in a database for other programs.
\medskip
4. The fourth level is still a goal. It involves representing
general facts about the world as logical sentences. Once put in
a database, the facts can be used by any program. The facts would
have the neutrality of purpose characteristic of much human information.
The supplier of information would not have to understand
the goals of the potential user or how his mind works. The present
ways of ``teaching'' computer programs by modifying them or
directly modifying their databases amount to ``education
by brain surgery''.
A key problem for achieving the fourth level is to develop
a language for a general common-sense database. This is difficult,
because the {\it common-sense informatic situation} is complex.
Here is a preliminary list of features and
considerations.
\medskip
1. Entities of interest are known only partially, and the
information about entities and their relations that may be relevant
to achieving goals cannot be permanently separated from irrelevant
information.
%
(Contrast this with the situation in gravitational
astronomy in which it is stated in the informal introduction to
a lecture or textbook that
the chemical composition and shape of a body are irrelevant to the
theory; all that counts is the body's mass, and its initial position
and velocity.)
Even within gravitational astronomy, non-equational theories arise
and relevant information may be difficult to determine. For example, it was
recently proposed that periodic extinctions discovered in the
paleontological record are caused by showers of comets induced by a
companion star to the sun that encounters and disrupts the Oort cloud of
comets every time it comes to perihelion. This theory is qualitative
because neither the orbit of the hypothetical star nor those of the comets
is available.
\medskip
2. The formalism has to be {\it epistemologically adequate},
a notion introduced in (McCarthy and Hayes 1969). This means that
the formalism must be capable of representing the information that
is actually available, not merely capable of representing actual
complete states of affairs.
For example, it is insufficient to have a formalism that
can represent the positions and velocities of the particles in a
gas. We can't obtain that information, our largest computers don't
have the memory to store it even if it were available, and our
fastest computers couldn't use the information to make predictions even
if we could store it.
As a second example, suppose we need to be able to predict
someone's behavior. The simplest example is a clerk in a store.
The clerk is a complex individual about whom a customer may know
little. However, the clerk can usually be counted on to accept
money for articles brought to the counter, wrap them as appropriate
and not protest when the customer then takes the articles from the store.
The clerk can also be counted on to object if the customer attempts
to take the articles without paying the appropriate price. Describing
this requires a formalism capable of representing information about
human social institutions. Moreover, the formalism must be capable
of representing partial information about the institution, such as
a three year old's knowledge of store clerks. For example, a three
year old doesn't know the clerk is an employee or even what that
means. He doesn't require detailed information about the clerk's
psychology, and anyway this information is not ordinarily available.
The following sections deal mainly with the advances we see
as required to achieve the fourth level of use of logic in AI.
\smallskip
\begin{center} %\jplsection{Formalized Nonmonotonic Reasoning}
{\footnotesize 2. FORMALIZED NONMONOTONIC REASONING}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.1cm}
It seems that fourth level systems require extensions
to mathematical logic. One kind of extension is formalized {\it nonmonotonic
reasoning}, first proposed in the late 1970s (McCarthy 1977, 1980, 1986),
(Reiter 1980), (McDermott and Doyle 1980), (Lifschitz 1989a).
Mathematical logic has been monotonic
in the following sense. If we have $A \vdash p$ and $A ⊂ B$, then we also
have $B \vdash p$.
If the inference is logical deduction, then exactly the same
proof that proves $p$ from $A$ will serve as a proof from $B$. If the
inference is model-theoretic, i.e. $p$ is true in all models of $A$,
then $p$ will be true in all models of $B$, because the models of $B$
will be a subset of the models of $A$. So we see that the monotonic
character of traditional logic doesn't depend on the details of the
logical system but is quite fundamental.
While much human reasoning is monotonic,
some important human common-sense reasoning is not. We
reach conclusions from certain premisses that we would not reach if
certain other sentences were included in our premisses. For example,
if I hire you to build me a bird cage, you conclude that it is appropriate
to put a top on it, but when you learn the further
fact that my bird is a penguin you no longer draw that
conclusion. Some people think it is possible to try to save
monotonicity by saying that what was in your mind was not a general rule
about birds flying but a probabilistic rule. So
far these people have not worked out any detailed
epistemology for this approach, i.e. exactly what probabilistic
sentences should be used. Instead AI has moved to directly formalizing
nonmonotonic logical reasoning. Indeed it seems to me that
when probabilistic reasoning (and not just the axiomatic
basis of probability theory) has been fully formalized, it will
be formally nonmonotonic.
Nonmonotonic reasoning is an active field of study.
Progress is often driven by examples, e.g. the Yale shooting
problem (Hanks and McDermott 1986), in which obvious
axiomatizations used with the available reasoning formalisms
don't seem to give the answers intuition suggests. One direction
being explored (Moore 1985, Gelfond 1987, Lifschitz 1989a)
involves putting facts about belief and knowledge explicitly in
the axioms\linebreak{}---even when the axioms concern nonmental domains.
Moore's classical example (now 4 years old) is ``If I had an elder
brother I'd know it.''
Kraus and Perlis (1988) have proposed to divide much nonmonotonic
reasoning into two steps. The first step uses Perlis's (1988)
autocircumscription to get a second order formula characterizing
what is possible. The second step involves default reasoning to
choose what is normally to be expected out of the previously established
possibilities. This seems to be a promising approach.
(Ginsberg 1987) collects the main papers up to 1986. Lifschitz (1989c)
summarizes some example research problems of nonmonotonic reasoning.
\smallskip
\begin{center} %\jplsection{Some Formalizations and their Problems}
{\footnotesize 3. SOME FORMALIZATIONS AND THEIR PROBLEMS}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.1cm}
(McCarthy 1986) discusses several formalizations, proposing
those based on nonmonotonic reasoning as improvements of earlier
ones. Here are some.
\medskip
1. Inheritance with exceptions. Birds normally fly, but there
are exceptions, e.g. ostriches and birds whose feet are encased in
concrete. The first exception might be listed in advance, but the
second has to be derived or verified when mentioned on the basis of
information about the mechanism of flying and the properties of
concrete.
There are many ways of nonmonotonically axiomatizing the
facts about which birds can fly. The following axioms using
a predicate $ab$ standing for ``abnormal'' seem
to me quite straightforward.
%\leql{a4a:}
%$$(\forall x)(\neg ab(aspect1(x)) \supset \neg flies(x)).\leql{aiva}$$
%
%
\medskip
\noindent $(1)\hfil(\forall x)(\neg ab(aspect1(x)) \supset \neg flies(x))\hfil$
\medskip
%
Unless an object is abnormal in $aspect1$, it can't fly.
It wouldn't work to write $ab(x)$ instead of $ab(aspect1(x))$,
because we don't want a bird that is abnormal with respect to its ability
to fly to be automatically abnormal in other respects. Using aspects limits
the effects of proofs of abnormality.
%leql{a5:}
%$$(\forall x)(bird(x) \supset ab(aspect1(x))).\leql{av}$$
%leql{a6:}
%
\medskip
\noindent $(2)\hfil(\forall x)(bird(x) \supset ab(aspect1(x))).\hfil$
%
%
%$$(\forall x)(bird(x) \wedge\neg ab(aspect2(x)) \supset flies(x))\leql{avi}$$
%
%
\smallskip
\noindent $(3)\hfil(\forall x)(bird(x) \wedge
\neg ab(aspect2(x)) \supset flies(x)).\hfil$
\medskip
%
Unless a bird is abnormal in $aspect2$, it can fly.
When these axioms are combined with other facts about the
problem, the predicate $ab$ is then to be {\it circumscribed}, i.e.
given its minimal extent compatible with the facts being taken
into account. This has the effect that a bird will be considered
to fly unless other axioms imply that it is abnormal in
%$aspect2$. (\eqref{av}) is called a cancellation of inheritance
$aspect2$. (2) is called a cancellation of inheritance
axiom, because it explicitly cancels the general presumption that
objects don't fly. This approach works fine when the inheritance
hierarchy is given explicitly. More elaborate approaches, some
of which are introduced in (McCarthy 1986) and improved in (Haugh
1988), are required when hierarchies with indefinite numbers of
sorts are considered.
\medskip
2. (McCarthy 1986) contains a similar treatment of the
effects of actions like moving and painting blocks using the
situation calculus. Moving and painting are axiomatized entirely
separately, and there are no axioms saying that moving a block
doesn't affect the positions of other blocks or the colors of
blocks. A general ``common-sense law of inertia''
%
%$$(\forall p e s)(holds(p,s) \wedge \neg ab(aspect1(p,e,s))
%\supset holds(p,result(e,s))),$$
%
%
\first{(\forall p e s)(holds(p,s) \wedge \neg ab(aspect1(p,e,s)) \supset}{}
\next{holds(p,result(e,s))),}
%
asserts that a fact $p$ that holds in a situation $s$ is presumed
to hold in the situation $result(e,s)$ that results from an event
$e$ unless there is evidence to the contrary. Unfortunately, Lifschitz
(1985 personal communication) and Hanks and McDermott (1986)
showed that simple treatments of the common-sense law of inertia
admit unintended models. Several
authors have given more elaborate
treatments, but in my opinion, the results are not yet entirely
satisfactory. The best treatment so far seems to be that of
(Lifschitz 1987).
\smallskip
\begin{center} %\jplsection{Ability, Practical Reason and Free Will}
{\footnotesize 4. ABILITY, PRACTICAL REASON AND FREE WILL}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.18cm}
An AI system capable of achieving goals in the common-sense
world will have to reason about what it and other actors can and
cannot do. For concreteness, consider a robot that must act in the
same world as people and perform tasks that people give it. Its need
to reason about its abilities puts the traditional philosophical
problem of free will in the following form. What view shall we build
into the robot about its own abilities, i.e. how shall we make it
reason about what it can and cannot do? (Wishing to avoid begging
any questions, by {\it reason} we mean {\it compute} using axioms,
observation sentences, rules of inference and nonmonotonic rules of
conjecture.)
Let $A$ be a task we want the robot to perform, and let $B$
and $C$ be alternate intermediate goals either of which would
allow the accomplishment of $A$. We want the robot to be able
to choose between attempting $B$ and attempting $C$. It would be
silly to program it to reason: ``I'm a robot and a deterministic
device. Therefore, I have no choice between $B$ and $C$. What
I will do is determined by my construction.'' Instead it must
decide in some way which of $B$ and $C$ it can accomplish. It
should be able to conclude in some cases that it can accomplish
$B$ and not $C$, and therefore it should take $B$ as a subgoal
on the way to achieving $A$. In other cases it should conclude
that it {\it can} accomplish either $B$ or $C$ and should choose
whichever is evaluated as better according to the criteria we
provide it.
(McCarthy and Hayes 1969) proposes conditions on the
semantics of any formalism within which the robot should reason.
The essential idea is that what the robot can do is determined by
the place the robot occupies in the world---not by its internal
structure. For example, if a certain sequence of outputs from
the robot will achieve $B$, then we conclude or it concludes that
the robot can achieve $B$ without reasoning about whether the
robot will actually produce that sequence of outputs.
Our contention is that this is approximately how any
system, whether human or robot, must reason about its ability to
achieve goals. The basic formalism will be the same, regardless
of whether the system is reasoning about its own abilities
or about those of other systems including people.
The above-mentioned paper also discusses the complexities
that come up when a strategy is required to achieve the goal and
when internal inhibitions or lack of knowledge have to be taken
into account.
\begin{center} %\jplsection{Three Approaches to Knowledge and Belief}
{\footnotesize 5. THREE APPROACHES TO KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.18cm}
Our robot will also have to reason about its own knowledge
and that of other robots and people.
This section contrasts the approaches to knowledge and
belief characteristic of philosophy, philosophical logic and
artificial intelligence. Knowledge and belief have long been
studied in epistemology, philosophy of mind and in philosophical
logic. Since about 1960, knowledge and belief have also been
studied in AI. (Halpern 1986) and (Vardi 1988) contain recent
work, mostly oriented to computer science including AI.
It seems to me that philosophers have generally treated
knowledge and belief as {\it complete natural kinds}. According
to this view there is a fact to be discovered about what
beliefs are. Moreover, once it is decided what the objects of
belief are (e.g. sentences or propositions), the definitions of
belief ought to determine for each such object $p$ whether the
person believes it or not. This last is the completeness mentioned
above. Of course, only human and sometimes animal beliefs have
mainly been considered. Philosophers have differed about whether
machines can ever be said to have beliefs, but even those who admit
the possibility of machine belief consider that what beliefs are
is to be determined by examining human belief.
The formalization of knowledge and belief has been studied
as part of philosophical logic, certainly since Hintikka's book (1964),
but much of the earlier work in modal logic can be seen as applicable.
Different logics and axioms systems sometimes correspond to the
distinctions that less formal philosophers make, but sometimes the
mathematics dictates different distinctions.
AI takes a different course because of its different objectives,
but I'm inclined to recommend this course to philosophers also, partly
because we want their help but also because I think it has
philosophical advantages.
∂22-May-89 1550 Rich.Thomason@cad.cs.cmu.edu Text of jmc-jpl.tex (Part 2 of 2)
Received: from CAD.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 15:49:46 PDT
Date: Mon, 22 May 1989 18:48:04 EDT
From: Rich Thomason <thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Text of jmc-jpl.tex (Part 2 of 2)
Message-ID: <CMM.0.88.611880484.thomason@CAD.CS.CMU.EDU>
The first question AI asks is: Why study knowledge and belief
at all? Does a computer program solving problems and achieving goals
in the common-sense world require beliefs, and must it use sentences
about beliefs? The answer to both questions is approximately yes.
At least there have to be data structures whose usage corresponds
closely to human usage in some cases. For example, a robot that
could use the American air transportation system has to know that
travel agents know airline schedules, that there is a book (and now a
computer accessible database) called the OAG that contains this
information. If it is to be able to plan a trip with intermediate
stops it has to have the general information that the departure gate
from an intermediate stop is not to be discovered when the trip is
first planned but will be available on arrival at the intermediate
stop. If the robot has to keep secrets, it has to know about how
information can be obtained by inference from other information, i.e.
it has to have some kind of information model of the people from whom
it is to keep the secrets.
However, none of this tells us that the notions of
knowledge and belief to be built into our computer programs must
correspond to the goals philosophers have been trying to
achieve. For example, the difficulties involved in building a
system that knows what travel agents know about airline schedules
are not substantially connected with questions about how the
travel agents can be absolutely certain. Its notion of knowledge
doesn't have to be complete; i.e. it doesn't have to determine
in all cases whether a person is to be regarded as knowing a
given proposition. For many tasks it doesn't have to have
opinions about when true belief doesn't constitute knowledge.
The designers of AI systems can try to evade philosophical
puzzles rather than solve them.
Maybe some people would suppose that if the question of
certainty is avoided, the problems formalizing knowledge and
belief become straightforward. That has not been our experience.
As soon as we try to formalize the simplest puzzles involving
knowledge, we encounter difficulties that philosophers have rarely
if ever attacked.
Consider the following puzzle of Mr.~S and Mr.~P.
\medskip
{\it Two numbers $m$ and $n$ are chosen such that $2 \leq m \leq n \leq 99$.
Mr.~S is told their sum and Mr.~P is told their product. The following
dialogue ensues:}
\begin{quote}
{\it
Mr.~P: I don't know the numbers.\\
Mr.~S: \parbox[t]{8.5cm}{I knew you didn't know them. I don't know
them either.}\\
Mr.~P: Now I know the numbers.\\
Mr.~S: Now I know them too.
\smallskip
In view of the above dialogue, what are the numbers?}
\end{quote}
Formalizing the puzzle is discussed in (McCarthy 1989).
For the present we mention only the following aspects.
\medskip
1. We need to formalize {\it knowing what}, i.e. knowing what
the numbers are, and not just {\it knowing that}.
\medskip
2. We need to be able to express and prove non-knowledge as well as
knowledge. Specifically we need to be able to express the fact that as
far as Mr.~P knows, the numbers might be any pair of factors of the known
product.
\medskip
3. We need to express the joint knowledge of Mr.~S and Mr.~P of
the conditions of the problem.
\medskip
4. We need to express the change of knowledge with time, e.g.
how Mr.~P's knowledge changes when he hears Mr.~S say that he knew that
Mr.~P didn't know the numbers and doesn't know them himself.
This includes inferring what Mr.~S and Mr.~P still won't know.
\medskip
The first order language used to express the facts of this
problem involves an accessibility relation $A(w1,w2,p,t)$,
modeled on Kripke's semantics for modal logic. However, the
accessibility relation here is in the language itself rather than
in a metalanguage. Here $w1$ and $w2$ are possible worlds, $p$
is a person and $t$ is an integer time. The use of possible
worlds makes it convenient to express non-knowledge. Assertions
of non-knowledge are expressed as the existence of accessible
worlds satisfying appropriate conditions.
The problem was successfully expressed in the language
in the sense that an arithmetic condition determining the values
of the two numbers can be deduced from the statement. However, this
is not good enough for AI. Namely, we would like to include facts
about knowledge in a general purpose common-sense database. Instead
of an {\it ad hoc} formalization of Mr.~S and Mr.~P, the problem
should be solvable from the same general facts about knowledge that
might be used to reason about the knowledge possessed by travel agents
supplemented only by the facts about the dialogue. Moreover, the
language of the general purpose database should accommodate all
the modalities that might be wanted and not just knowledge. This
suggests using ordinary logic, e.g. first order logic, rather than
modal logic, so that the modalities can be ordinary functions or
predicates rather than modal operators.
Suppose we are successful in developing a ``knowledge formalism''
for our common-sense database that enables the program controlling
a robot to solve puzzles and plan trips and do the other tasks that
arise in the common-sense environment requiring reasoning about knowledge.
It will surely be asked whether it is really {\it knowledge} that
has been formalized. I doubt that the question has an answer.
This is perhaps the question of whether knowledge is a natural kind.
I suppose some philosophers would say that such problems are
not of philosophical interest. It would be unfortunate, however, if
philosophers were to abandon such a substantial part of epistemology
to computer science. This is because the analytic skills that
philosophers have acquired are relevant to the problems.
\newpage
\begin{center}
{ \footnotesize 6. REIFYING CONTEXT} %\jplsection{Reifying Context}
\end{center}
%contex[w89,jmc] Reifying context - for paper for Thomason
\vspace*{-.2cm}
We propose the formula $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c)$ to assert that the
proposition $p$ holds in context $c$. It expresses explicitly
how the truth of an assertion depends on context. The relation
$c1 \leq c2$ asserts that the context $c2$ is more general than
the context $c1$.
Formalizing common-sense reasoning needs contexts as objects,
in order to match human ability to consider context
explicitly. The proposed database of general common-sense knowledge
will make assertions in a general context called $C0$. However, $C0$
cannot be maximally general, because it will surely involve unstated
presuppositions. Indeed we claim that there can be no
maximally general context. Every context involves unstated presuppositions,
both linguistic and factual.
Sometimes the reasoning system will
have to transcend $C0$, and tools will have to be provided to do
this. For example, if Boyle's law of the dependence of the volume
of a sample of gas on pressure were built into $C0$, discovery of
its dependence on temperature would have to trigger a process of
generalization
that might lead to the perfect gas law.
The following ideas about how the formalization might
proceed are tentative. Moreover, they appeal to recent logical
innovations in the formalization of nonmonotonic reasoning. In
particular, there
will be nonmonotonic ``inheritance rules'' that allow default
inference from $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c)$ to $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c')$, where $c'$ is
either more general or less general than $c$.
Almost all previous discussion of context has been in
connection with natural language, and the present paper
relies heavily on examples from natural language. However, I
believe the main AI uses of formalized context will not be in
connection with communication but in connection with reasoning
about the effects of actions directed to achieving goals. It's
just that natural language examples come to mind more readily.
As an example of intended usage, consider
%
$$\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em at}(\mbox{\em he},\mbox{\em
inside}(\mbox{\em car})),c17).$$
%
Suppose that this sentence is intended to assert that a
particular person is in a particular car on a particular occasion,
i.e. the sentence is not just being used as a
linguistic example but is meant seriously. A corresponding
English sentence is ``He's in the car'' where who he is and which
car and when is determined by the context in which the sentence
is uttered. Suppose, for simplicity, that the sentence is said
by one person to another in a situation in which the car is
visible to the speaker but not to the hearer and the time at
which the the subject is asserted to be in the car is the same
time at which the sentence is uttered.
In our formal language $c17$ has to carry the information about
who he is, which car and when.
Now suppose that the same fact is to be conveyed as in
example 1, but the context is a certain Stanford Computer Science
Department 1980s context. Thus familiarity with cars is
presupposed, but no particular person, car or occasion is
presupposed. The meanings of certain names is presupposed, however.
We can call that context (say) $c5$. This more general context requires
a more explicit proposition; thus, we would have
%
%$$\mbox{\em holds}(at(``Timothy McCarthy'',inside((\iota x)(iscar(x)\wedge
%belongs(x,``John McCarthy'')))),c5).$$
%
\first{\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em at}(\mbox{\em ``Timothy
McCarthy''},\mbox{\em inside}((\iota x)(\mbox{\em iscar}(x)\;\wedge }{}
\next{\wedge\; \mbox{\em belongs}(x,\mbox{\em ``John McCarthy''})))),c5).}
%
A yet more general context might not identify a
specific John McCarthy, so that even this more explicit sentence would need
more information. What would constitute an adequate identification
might also be context dependent.
Here are some of the properties formalized contexts might have.
\medskip
1. In the above example, we will have $c17 \leq c5$, i.e. $c5$ is
more general than $c17$.
There will be nonmonotonic rules like
%
%$$(\forall c1\ c2\ p)(c1 \leq c2) \wedge \mbox{\em holds}(p,c1) \wedge
%\neg ab1(p,c1,c2) \supset \mbox{\em holds}(p,c2)$$
%
\first{(\forall c1\ c2\ p)(c1 \leq c2) \wedge
\mbox{\em holds}(p,c1) \wedge \neg ab1(p,c1,c2) \supset}{}
\next{ \mbox{\em holds}(p,c2)}
%
and
%
%$$(\forall c1\ c2\ p)(c1 \leq c2) \wedge \mbox{\em holds}(p,c2) \wedge
%\neg ab2(p,c1,c2) \supset \mbox{\em holds}(p,c1).$$
%
% VLADIMIR SUGGESTS THAT THESE ARE INSUFFIENTLY GENERAL
%
\first{(\forall c1\ c2\ p)(c1 \leq c2) \wedge \mbox{\em holds}(p,c2)
\wedge\neg ab2(p,c1,c2)\supset }{}
\next{\mbox{\em holds}(p,c1).}
%
Thus there is nonmonotonic inheritance both up and down in the generality
hierarchy.
\medskip
2. There are functions forming new contexts by specialization.
We could have something like
%
%$$c19 = specialize({he = Timothy McCarthy,belongs(car, John McCarthy)},c5).$$
\first{c19 = \mbox{\em specialize}(\mbox{\em he} = \mbox{\em Timothy
McCarthy},}{}
\next{\mbox{\em belongs}(\mbox{\em car}, \mbox{\em John McCarthy}),c5).}
We will have $c19 \leq c5$.
\medskip
3. Besides $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c)$, we may have $\mbox{\em
value}(\mbox{\em term},c)$, where $\mbox{\em term}$ is a term. The domain in
which $\mbox{\em term}$ takes values is defined in some outer context.
\medskip
4. Some presuppositions of a context are linguistic and some
are factual. In the above example, it is a linguistic matter who the
names refer to. The properties of people and cars are factual, e.g.
it is presumed that people fit into cars.
\medskip
5. We may want meanings as abstract objects. Thus we might
have
%
$$\mbox{\em meaning}(\mbox{\em he},c17) = \mbox{\em
meaning}(\mbox{\em ``Timothy McCarthy''},c5).$$
\medskip
6. Contexts are ``rich'' entities not to be fully described.
Thus the ``normal English language context'' contains factual assumptions
and linguistic conventions that a particular English speaker may not
know. Moreover, even assumptions and conventions in a context that
may be individually accessible cannot be exhaustively listed. A person
or machine may know facts about a context without ``knowing the context''.
7. Contexts should not be confused with the situations of the
situation calculus of (McCarthy and Hayes 1969). Propositions about
situations can hold in a context. For example, we may have
%
%$$\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em Holds}1(at(I,airport),
%result(drive-to(airport,result(walk-to(car),S0))),c1).$$
%
\first{\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em Holds}1(at(I,\mbox{\em airport}),
\mbox{\em result}(\mbox{\em drive-to}(\mbox{\em airport},}{}
\next{\mbox{\em result}(\mbox{\em walk-to}(car),S0))),c1).}
%
This can be interpreted as asserting that under the assumptions embodied
in context $c1$, a plan of walking to the car and then driving to the airport
would get the robot to the airport starting in situation $S0$.
\medskip
8. The context language can be made more like natural
language and more extensible if we introduce notions of entering
and leaving a context. These will be analogous to the notions
of making and discharging assumptions in natural deduction systems,
but the notion seems to be more general. Suppose we have $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c)$.
We then write
\medskip
\noindent $\mbox{\em enter c}$.
\medskip
\noindent This enables us to write $p$ instead of $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c)$.
If we subsequently infer $q$, we can replace it by $\mbox{\em holds}(q,c)$
and leave the context $c$. Then $\mbox{\em holds}(q,c)$ will itself hold in
the outer context in which $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c)$ holds. When a context
is entered, there need to be restrictions analogous to those
that apply in natural deduction when an assumption is made.
One way in which this notion of entering and leaving contexts
is more general than natural deduction is that formulas like
$\mbox{\em holds}(p,c1)$ and (say) $\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em not}
p,c2)$ behave differently from $c1 \supset p$ and $c2 \supset \neg p$
which are their natural deduction analogs. For example, if $c1$ is
associated with the time 5pm and $c2$ is associated with the time 6pm
and $p$ is $at(I, \mbox{\em office})$, then $\mbox{\em holds}(p,c1) \wedge
\mbox{\em holds}(not\ p,c2)$ might be used to infer that I left the
office between 5pm and 6pm. $(c1 \supset p) \wedge (c2 \supset \neg
p)$ cannot be used in this way; in fact it is equivalent to $\neg c1
\vee \neg c2$.
\medskip
9. The expression $\mbox{\em Holds}(p,c)$ (note the caps) represents
the proposition that $p$ holds in $c$. Since it is a proposition,
we can assert $\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em Holds}(p,c),c')$.
\medskip
10. Propositions will be combined by functional analogs of
the Boolean operators as discussed in (McCarthy 1979b).
Treating propositions involving quantification is
necessary, but it is difficult to determine the right formalization.
\medskip
11. The major goals of research into formalizing context
should be to determine the rules that relate contexts to their
generalizations and specializations. Many of these rules will
involve nonmonotonic reasoning.
\newpage %\smallskip
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize 7. REMARKS} %\jplsection{Remarks}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.1cm}
The project of formalizing common-sense knowledge and
reasoning raises many new considerations in epistemology and
also in extending logic. The role that the following ideas
might play is not clear yet.
\medskip
\noindent {\em Epistemological Adequacy often Requires Approximate Partial Theories}
(McCarthy and Hayes 1969) introduces the notion of epistemological
adequacy of a formalism. The idea is that the formalism used by
an AI system must be adequate to represent the information that
a person or program with given opportunities to observe can actually
obtain. Often an epistemologically adequate formalism for some
phenomenon cannot take the form of a classical scientific theory.
I suspect that some people's demand for a classical scientific
theory of certain phenomena leads them to despair about formalization.
Consider a theory of a dynamic phenomenon, i.e. one that changes
in time. A classical scientific theory represents the state of
the phenomenon in some way and describes how it evolves with time, most
classically by differential equations.
What can be known about common-sense phenomena usually doesn't
permit such complete theories. Only certain states permit prediction
of the future. The phenomenon arises in science and engineering
theories also, but I suspect that philosophy of science sweeps these
cases under the rug. Here are some examples.
(1) The theory of linear electrical circuits is complete
within its model of the phenomena. The theory gives the response
of the circuit to any time varying voltage. Of course, the theory
may not describe the actual physics, e.g. the current may overheat
the resistors. However, the theory of sequential digital circuits
is incomplete from the beginning. Consider a circuit built from
NAND-gates and D flipflops and timed synchronously by an appropriate
clock. The behavior of a D flipflop is defined by the theory
when one of its inputs is 0 and the other is 1 when the inputs
are appropriately clocked. However, the behavior is not defined
by the theory when both inputs are 0 or both are 1. Moreover,
one can easily make circuits in such a way that both
inputs of some flipflop get 0 at some time.
This lack of definition is not an oversight. The actual
signals in a digital circuit are not ideal square waves but have
finite rise times and often overshoot their nominal values.
However, the circuit will behave as though the signals were
ideal provided the design rules are obeyed. Making both
inputs to a flipflop nominally 0 creates a situation in
which no digital theory can describe what happens, because
the behavior then depends on the actual time-varying signals
and on manufacturing variations in the flipflops.
(2) Thermodynamics is also a partial theory. It tells
about equilibria and it tells which directions reactions go, but
it says nothing about how fast they go.
(3) The common-sense database needs a theory of the
behavior of clerks in stores. This theory should cover
what a clerk will do in response to bringing items to the
counter and in response to a certain class of inquiries.
How he will respond to other behaviors is not defined by
the theory.
(4) (McCarthy 1979a) refers to a theory of skiing that
might be used by ski instructors. This theory regards the skier
as a stick figure with movable joints. It gives the consequences
of moving the joints as it interacts with the shape of the ski
slope, but it says nothing about what causes the joints to be
moved in a particular way. Its partial character corresponds
to what experience teaches ski instructors. It often assigns
truth values to counterfactual conditional assertions like, ``If
he had bent his knees more, he wouldn't have fallen''.
\medskip
\noindent {\em Meta-epistemology}
% meta[s88,jmc] Message to AILIST on metaepistemology
% meta[e85,jmc] Meta-epistemology
% metaep[f82,jmc] A proposal for meta-epistemology
If we are to program a computer to think about its own
methods for gathering information about the world, then it needs
a language for expressing assertions about the relation between
the world, the information gathering methods available to an
information seeker and what it can learn. This leads to a subject
I like to call meta-epistemology. Besides its potential applications
to AI, I believe it has applications to philosophy considered in
the traditional sense.
Meta-epistemology is proposed as a mathematical theory
in analogy to metamathematics. Metamathematics considers the
mathematical properties of mathematical theories as objects.
In particular model theory as a branch of metamathematics deals
with the relation between theories in a language and interpretations
of the non-logical symbols of the language. These interpretations
are considered as mathematical objects, and we are only sometimes
interested in a preferred or true interpretation.
Meta-epistemology considers the relation between the world,
languages for making assertions about the world, notions of what
assertions are considered meaningful, what are accepted as rules
of evidence and what a knowledge seeker can discover about the
world. All these entities are considered as mathematical objects.
In particular the world is considered as a parameter.
Thus meta-epistemology has the following characteristics.
\medskip
1. It is a purely mathematical theory. Therefore, its
controversies, assuming there are any, will be mathematical
controversies rather than controversies about what the real world
is like. Indeed metamathematics gave many philosophical issues
in the foundations of mathematics a technical content. For
example, the theorem that intuitionist arithmetic and Peano
arithmetic are equi-consistent removed at least one area of
controversy between those whose mathematical intuitions support
one view of arithmetic or the other.
\medskip
2. While many modern philosophies of science assume some
relation between what is meaningful and what can be verified or
refuted, only special meta-epistemological systems will have the
corresponding mathematical property that all aspects of the world
relate to the experience of the knowledge seeker.
This has several important consequences for the task of
programming a knowledge seeker.
A knowledge seeker should not have a priori prejudices
(principles) about what concepts might be meaningful. Whether
and how a proposed concept about the world might ever connect
with observation may remain in suspense for a very long time
while the concept is investigated and related to other concepts.
We illustrate this by a literary example. Moli\'ere's
play {\it La Malade Imaginaire} includes a doctor who explains
sleeping powders by saying that they contain a ``dormitive
virtue''. In the play, the doctor is considered a pompous fool
for offering a concept that explains nothing. However, suppose
the doctor had some intuition that the dormitive virtue might be
extracted and concentrated, say by shaking the powder in a
mixture of ether and water. Suppose he thought that he would get
the same concentrate from all substances with soporific effect.
He would certainly have a fragment of scientific theory subject
to later verification. Now suppose less---namely, he only
believes that a common component is behind all substances whose
consumption makes one sleepy but has no idea that he should try
to invent a way of verifying the conjecture. He still has
something that, if communicated to someone more scientifically
minded, might be useful. In the play, the doctor obviously sins
intellectually by claiming a hypothesis as certain. Thus a
knowledge seeker must be able to form new concepts that have only
extremely tenuous relations with their previous linguistic
structure.
\medskip
\noindent {\em Rich and poor entities}
Consider my next trip to Japan. Considered as a plan it is
a discrete object with limited detail. I do not yet even plan to
take a specific flight or to fly on a specific day. Considered as
a future event, lots of questions may be asked about it. For example,
it may be asked whether the flight will depart on time and what precisely
I will eat on the airplane. We propose characterizing the actual trip
as a rich entity and the plan as a poor entity. Originally, I thought
that rich events referred to the past and poor ones to the future, but
this seems to be wrong. It's only that when one refers to the past
one is usually referring to a rich entity, while the future entities
one refers to are more often poor. However, there is no intrinsic
association of this kind. It seems that planning requires reasoning
about the plan (poor entity) and the event of its execution (rich
entity) and their relations.
(McCarthy and Hayes 1969) defines situations as rich entities.
However, the actual programs that have been written to reason in
situation calculus might as well regard them as taken from a
finite or countable set of discrete states.
Possible worlds are also examples of rich entities as
ordinarily used in philosophy. One never prescribes a possible
world but only describes classes of possible worlds.
Rich entities are open ended in that we can always introduce
more properties of them into our discussion. Poor entities can often
be enumerated, e.g. we can often enumerate all the events that we
consider reasonably likely in a situation. The passage from considering
rich entities in a given discussion to considering poor entities is
a step of nonmonotonic reasoning.
It seems to me that it is important to get a good formalization
of the relations between corresponding rich and poor entities.
This can be regarded as formalizing the relation between the world
and a formal model of some aspect of the world, e.g. between the
world and a scientific theory.
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS} %\jplsection{Acknowledgements}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.15cm}
I am indebted to Vladimir Lifschitz and Richmond Thomason for
useful suggestions. Some of the prose is taken from (McCarthy 1987),
but the examples are given more precisely in the present paper, since
{\it Daedalus} allows no formulas.
The research reported here was partially supported by the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Contract No.\linebreak
N00039-84-C-0211.
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize REFERENCES}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-.25cm}
\footnotesize
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Dennett, D.C. (1971)}: ``Intentional Systems'', {\it
Journal of Philosophy,} vol. 68, No. 4, Feb. 25.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Dreyfus, Hubert L. (1972):} {\it What Computers Can't
Do: the Limits of Artificial Intelligence}, revised edition 1979, New
York : Harper \&{} Row.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Fikes, R, and Nils Nilsson, (1971)}: ``STRIPS: A New
Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving'',
{\it Artificial Intelligence}, Volume 2, Numbers 3,4, January, pp.
189-208.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Gelfond, M. (1987)}: ``On Stratified Autoepistemic Theories'',
{\it AAAI-87} {\bf 1}, 207-211.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Ginsberg, M. (ed.) (1987)}: {\it Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning},
Morgan Kaufmann, 481 pp.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Green, C., (1969)}: ``Application of Theorem Proving
to Problem Solving,'' {\it First International Joint Conference on
Artificial Intelligence,} pp. 219-239.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Halpern, J. (ed.) (1986):}
{\it Reasoning about Knowledge}, Morgan Kaufmann,
Los Altos, CA.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Hanks, S. and D. McDermott (1986)}: ``Default Reasoning, Nonmonotonic
Logics, and the Frame Problem'', AAAI-86, pp. 328-333.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Haugh, Brian A. (1988)}: ``Tractable Theories of
Multiple Defeasible Inheritance in Ordinary Nonmonotonic Logics'',
{\it Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (AAAI-88)}, Morgan Kaufmann.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Hintikka, Jaakko (1964)}: {\it Knowledge and Belief; an Introduction
to the Logic of the Two Notions}, Cornell Univ. Press, 179 pp.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Kowalski, Robert (1979)}: {\it Logic for Problem Solving},
North-Holland, Amsterdam.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Kraus, Sarit and Donald Perlis (1988)}: ``Names and Non-Monotonic\-ity'',
UMIACS-TR-88-84, CS-TR-2140, Computer Science Technical Report Series,
University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Lifschitz, Vladimir (1987)}: ``Formal theories of action'',
{\it The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence,
Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop}, reprinted in (Ginsberg 1987).
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Lifschitz, Vladimir (1989a)}: {\it Between Circumscription and
Autoepistemic Logic,} to appear in the Proceedings of the First
International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation
and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Lifschitz, Vladimir (1989b)}: ``Circumscriptive Theories: A
Logic-based Framework for Knowledge Representation,'' this collection.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Lifschitz, Vladimir (1989c)}: ``Benchmark Problems for Formal
Nonmonotonic Reasoning'', {\it Non-Monotonic Reasoning}, 2nd International
Workshop, Grassau, FRG, Springer-Verlag.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1959)}: ``Programs with Common Sense'', {\it
Proceedings of the Teddington Conference on the Mechanization of
Thought Processes}, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.
% common[e80,jmc],
% common.tex[e80,jmc]
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John and P.J. Hayes (1969)}: ``Some
Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial
Intelligence'', D. Michie (ed.), {\it Machine Intelligence 4},
American Elsevier, New York, NY.
% phil.tex[ess,jmc] with slight modifications
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1977)}:
``On The Model Theory of Knowledge'' (with M. Sato, S. Igarashi, and
T. Hayashi), {\it Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference
on Artificial Intelligence}, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1977)}:
``Epistemological Problems of Artificial Intelligence'', {\it Proceedings
of the Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence}, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass.
% ijcai.c[e77,jmc]
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1979a)}:
``Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines'', {\it Philosophical Perspectives
in Artificial Intelligence}, Ringle, Martin (ed.), Harvester Press, July 1979.
% .<<aim 326, MENTAL[F76,JMC],
% mental.tex[f76,jmc]>>
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1979b)}:
``First Order Theories of Individual Concepts and Propositions'',
Michie, Donald (ed.), {\it Machine Intelligence 9}, (University of
Edinburgh Press, Edinburgh).
% .<<aim 325, concep.tex[e76,jmc]>>
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1980)}:
``Circumscription---A Form of Non-Monotonic Reasoning'', {\it Artificial
Intelligence}, Volume 13, Numbers 1,2, April.
% .<<aim 334, circum.new[s79,jmc], cirnew.tex[s79,jmc]>>
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1983)}: ``Some Expert Systems Need Common Sense'',
{\it Computer Culture: The Scientific, Intellectual and Social Impact
of the Computer}, Heinz Pagels (ed.), vol. 426, Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences.
%paper
%presented at New York Academy of Sciences Symposium.
% common[e83,jmc]
%common.tex[e83,jmc]
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1986)}:
``Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge'',
{\it Artificial Intelligence}, April 1986.
% circum.tex[f83,jmc]
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John (1987)}: ``Mathematical Logic in
Artificial Intelligence'', {\it Daedalus}, vol. 117, No. 1,
American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Winter 1988.
% logic.2[w87,jmc]
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf McCarthy, John (1989)}: ``Two Puzzles Involving Knowledge'',
{\it Formalizing Common Sense,} Ablex 1989.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf McDermott, D. and J. Doyle, (1980)}: ``Non-Monotonic
Logic I'', {\it Artificial Intelligence\/}, Vol. 13, N. 1
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Moore, R. (1985)}: ``Semantical Considerations on Nonmonotonic Logic'',
{\it Artificial Intelligence} {\bf 25} (1), pp.~75-94.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Newell, Allen (1981)}: ``The Knowledge Level''. {\it
AI Magazine\/}, Vol. 2, No. 2.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Perlis, D. (1988)}: ``Autocircumscription'', {\it
Artificial Intelligence}, {\bf 36} pp.~223-236.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Reiter, Raymond (1980)}: ``A Logic for Default
Reasoning'', {\it Artificial Intelligence}, Volume 13, Numbers 1,2,
April.
\smallskip
\noindent
{\bf Russell, Bertrand (1913)}: ``On the Notion of Cause'',
{\it Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society}, 13, pp.~1-26.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Robinson, J. Allen (1965)}: ``A Machine-oriented Logic
Based on the Resolution Principle'', {\it JACM}, 12(1), pp.~23-41.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Sterling, Leon and Ehud Shapiro (1986)}: {\it The Art
of Prolog}, MIT Press.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Sussman, Gerald J., Terry Winograd, and Eugene
Charniak (1971)}: ``Micro-planner Reference Manual'', Report
AIM-203A, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, Cambridge.
\smallskip
\noindent {\bf Vardi, Moshe (1988)}: {\it Conference on Theoretical
Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge}, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos,
CA.
\vskip .2in
{\normalsize \it
\noindent Department of Computer Science\\
\noindent Stanford University\\
\noindent Stanford, CA 94305
}
\end{document}
%\vfill\eject\end{document}
\smallskip\centerline{Copyright \copyright\ 1989 by John McCarthy}
\smallskip\noindent{This draft of thomas[f88,jmc]\ TEXed on \jmcdate\ at \theTime}
We begin with a simpler example than the rule for using
boats. Suppose that the sentence ``The library has the book''
is being used for communication, i.e. not just being considered
as a sample sentence. It is being used in a context that
has a time associated with it and which refers to a particular
book under discussion and a particular library. We propose to
formalize the assertion by
%
$$\mbox{\em holds}(has(library,book),c17),$$
%
where $has$ is conceptually a predicate, but if we are using
first order logic, $has$ is a function whose value is a term
suitable to be the first argument of $holds$. The context
constant $c17$ should give further specification of the meaning
of $has$, since the sentence could mean either that the book is
in the library at the present moment or that the book is one of
those owned by that library. This ambiguity may be resolvable in
a language with predicate functions $has1$ and $has2$, but it
isn't obvious that there won't be additional ambiguities within
$has1$ and $has2$ that have to be resolved by context.
Consider a general 1980s American academic common-sense
context. Call it $c1$. In $c1$, the phenomena of books and libraries
are ``sufficiently definite''. The context is not necessarily associated
with the English language. You could imagine a discussion in which
one person is speaking English and another is speaking Russian and
they are both communicating with a machine in a suitable first order
logical language. We won't try to define ``sufficiently definite'',
but the condition would be violated if the hearer went to the wrong
library or returned with the wrong book.
We might now have the sentence
%
$$\mbox{\em holds}(\mbox{\em time}(1988.dec.14.pst.1540,
\mbox{\em physically}(\mbox{\em has})(\mbox{\em spec}(\mbox{\em
``Stanford_Mathematics''},\mbox{\em library}),
\mbox{\em book}(\mbox{\em Author: Hintikka,Title: Knowledge and Belief}))),c1).$$
%
Context $c17$ is a specialization of $c1$, and the two
sentences are equivalent.
dec 29 Discuss what happens when a flip-flop has to be used outside
of its specified regime.
meaning(scalpel,c19) = meaning(give(scalpel),c7)
!yet to do
jan 7
discuss at some point elaboration tolerance, epistemological adequacy
and ambiguity tolerance - note ref to dreyfus
probably under remarks
discuss reification in general
analogy with resonances in physics - weak entities
\noindent Reification in general
A previous section discussed reification of context. However,
natural language uses many more reifications than that, and it seems
that many of them will be useful in AI. Here are some examples.
1. (McCarthy 1980) mentions the missionaries-and-cannibals
problem and discusses the possibility that there is something wrong
with the boat. In ordinary language, it is sometimes useful to say
that there are two things wrong with the boat, i.e. ``things wrong
with the boat'' can be identified and counted. It appears that in
ordinary language a broken motor and a leak are two different things,
while the people who fix boats do not regard the boat having a leak
and having a hole as two different things.
2.
Some entities used in common-sense thought and language seem
to be {\it weak entities}. They are used, but attempts to make them
precise fail. It is common to propose abandoning them for that reason.
I don't think AI can let itself do that. Weak entities are useful,
and we need to understand how to treat them theoretically.
!************
sterile(X) :- not[bacterium(Y,X), alive(Y)]
∂22-May-89 1553 MPS
Peter Lax was visiting 2 weeks ago and is probably back in
New York
Pat
∂22-May-89 1649 SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU sit cal and temp log
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 16:49:01 PDT
Date: Mon 22 May 89 16:48:29-PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: sit cal and temp log
To: val@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12496140240.11.SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Vladimir,
I agree with much of your thinking about the possibilities of extending sit cal
to take into account time. In fact, in my "Time for Action" paper I present
a framework that unifies time and action. You view things as "adding time
to sit cal" whereas I take a more neutral view of the framework, but
the result is not much different. How would you and John feel about
a three-person get together to discuss it? I'll be able to present my
framework in about 20 minutes.
Yoav
PS I was thinking some time next week, e.g. Tuesday pm
-------
∂22-May-89 1733 VAL re: sit cal and temp log
To: SHOHAM@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU sent Mon 22 May 89 16:48:29-PDT.]
Yoav, thank you for your message. About our meeting: When John comes back, I'll
be away at LICS, so the earliest we can meet is June 9.
--Vladimir
∂22-May-89 1744 nedzel@cive.Stanford.EDU Re: Demonstration Straw Poll
Received: from jessica.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 May 89 17:44:13 PDT
Received: from CivE.Stanford.EDU by jessica.Stanford.EDU with TCP; Mon, 22 May 89 17:42:20 PDT
Received: from localhost.ARPA by cive.STANFORD.EDU (1.2/Ultrix2.0-B)
id AA18007; Mon, 22 May 89 17:36:56 pdt
Message-Id: <8905230036.AA18007@cive.STANFORD.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: Demonstration Straw Poll
In-Reply-To: Your message of 22 May 89 12:54:00 -0700.
<15bwFO@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Mon, 22 May 89 17:36:48 PDT
From: nedzel@cive.Stanford.EDU
I agree that the survey does make the assumption that reform is
needed at Stanford. By the way, I too feel that reform is not needed --
well cancel that, I think that reform is needed, but in the opposite
direction (I don't agree with affirmative action: it's racism but
just in the other direction, IMHO).
However, I was not able, at short notice, to develop a series of questions
which would not make such a presumption (I probably should have tried
harder), and if I had, I expect it might have been very inflammatory.
Oh well. It will be intersting see what the responses say.
Thanks for your input.
∂22-May-89 1800 VAL arithmetic in logic programming
To: SHOHAM@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Yoav,
I like your idea of explaining arithmetical formulas in logic programs by
using an additional predicate that relates ground terms to their values.
Perhaps "is" from one of my examples is exactly the predicate that we need...
--Vladimir
∂23-May-89 0637 underdog@Portia.stanford.edu re: passports
Received: from Portia.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 May 89 06:37:05 PDT
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA15852; Tue, 23 May 89 06:37:44 PDT
Date: Tue, 23 May 89 06:37:44 PDT
From: Dwight Joe <underdog@Portia.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8905231337.AA15852@Portia.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: re: passports
Thanks.
∂23-May-89 0900 JMC
phone company about charge number
∂23-May-89 1001 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 22-May-89 22:25-PT.]
I talked to Hamburger yesterday. He approved the budget and asked me to send him
the 3 year version and the formal document. He said the situation was "somewhat
fluent" but he would "try to be faithful" to his commitment. Apparently he didn't
like Carolyn's 5%, but at the end he said, "I guess you guys know better what you
need."
∂23-May-89 1100 JMC
check on reservations to Canada, shipping trunks
∂23-May-89 1313 VAL
Where can I find the TeX source of Appendix A?
∂23-May-89 1340 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM Invention(s) & Technology
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 May 89 13:40:08 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 386768; Tue 23-May-89 02:28:27 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 92573; Mon 22-May-89 23:22:04 PDT
Date: Mon, 22 May 89 23:22 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Invention(s) & Technology
To: "jmc@sail.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: mlb@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890523062200.2.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
I recently saw my first copy. Imagine my disappointment when
I saw that the wonderful letter about technology museums was
from you. For a moment, I had dared to hope that there were
*two* people who could think that clearly.
∂23-May-89 1345 hellman@isl.Stanford.EDU Student Referrals
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 May 89 13:43:40 PDT
Received: from isl.Stanford.EDU by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Tue, 23 May 89 13:39:10 PDT
Received: by isl.Stanford.EDU (3.2/4.7); Tue, 23 May 89 13:40:48 PDT
Date: Tue, 23 May 89 13:40:48 PDT
From: hellman@isl.Stanford.EDU (Martin Hellman)
To: EE-Faculty@sierra
Subject: Student Referrals
Several faculty members have referred prospective graduate students
to me for information. Please refer them instead to Virginia Kurzweil,
Director of Admissions. Virginia is full-time on admissions, while
I am very part-time (with a full-time work load winter quarter!).
Virginia is very knowledgeable regarding admissions and has been
a great source of information for prospective students.
Thanks very much.
Martin Hellman
∂23-May-89 1404 Mailer re: Chinese protesters
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 May 89 14:03:41 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu
(5.61/UW-NDC Revision: 1.83 ) id AA20312; Tue, 23 May 89 14:03:05 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 May 1989 13:38:30 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Sender: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU
Subject: re: Chinese protesters
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: MRC@cac.washington.edu, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <1sbwmM@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <MailManager.611959110.4847.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
"Freedom of speech and press and free elections in the Western sense" does
little good if the societal mechanisms to establish, protect, and use those
mechanisms are not in place. The ROC government never had those mechanisms, and
"freedom of speech and press and free elections in the Western sense" are still
a new concept for the ROC, even after 38 years on the mainland and 40 years on
Taiwan.
Unlike JMC, I smell a rat -- a power struggle between two (or more) Party
factions. The Chinese students' demands are relatively minor. Unlike Tibet,
the Chinese students are not preaching sedition. The ordinary people, and the
army, are going to be sympathetic with the demands even if they aren't with the
means; and many of the demands are for things the Party has already announced
its intention to do.
What I think we're seeing is a well-coordinated coup in the ranks of the
party to get rid of some of the old farts who are holding up progress. What
better way to do it than to get the old farts to make themselves foolish (e.g.
ordering the army to do something it will refuse to do)?
I don't see a future for Wu'er Kaixi or Wang Dan as leaders of a capitalist
China. More likely, they'll either be dumped in the slammer when they're no
longer useful, or in a few years will be Party big-shots.
-------
∂23-May-89 1405 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Thesis
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 May 89 14:05:48 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA02456; Tue, 23 May 89 14:06:11 PDT
Date: Tue, 23 May 89 14:06:11 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905232106.AA02456@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: Thesis
I found the reference to lazy evaluation that you had remembered:
@inproceedings{henderson:morris,
author = "Peter Henderson and Morris, Jr., James",
title = "A Lazy Evaluator",
booktitle = "Conference Proceedings of the Third ACM Symposium
on Principles of Programming Languages",
address = "Atlanta, Georgia",
month = Jan, year = 1976, pages = "95-103"}
This is now mentioned in the thesis, along with the Friedman & Wise
paper that deals with lazy evaluation as a parallel construct.
RPG gave me numerous comments, all minor, and I've incorporated his
changes. I think he is ready to sign now. I'm meeting with Jeff
Ullman this evening (and tomorrow, if I can make changes for him by
then and he wants to see them).
∂23-May-89 1558 @Score.Stanford.EDU,@PRECARIOUS.Stanford.EDU:RDZ@SCORE.Stanford.EDU rn on go4
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 May 89 15:58:45 PDT
Received: from PRECARIOUS.Stanford.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Tue 23 May 89 15:58:19-PDT
Date: Tue, 23 May 89 15:57 PDT
From: Ramin Zabih <RDZ@SCORE.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: rn on go4
To: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <19890523225749.1.RDZ@PRECARIOUS.Stanford.EDU>
From go4, type "rn". When you get a list of
newsgroups, type "g soc.culture.china". Answer
"y" when it asks if you want to read it (there
will be a LOT of messages). You can type "h" at
any point to get help. When you are in the middle
of a message, "q" will get you back to the prompt
between messages. "q" from there will exit from
rn.
Ramin
∂24-May-89 0800 JMC
Fischer
∂24-May-89 0829 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Preliminary Time Schedules
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 May 89 08:29:47 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 24 May 89 08:25:38 PDT
From: turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sherry A. Turner)
Date: Wed 24 May 89 08:25:29-PDT
Subject: Preliminary Time Schedules
To: EE-ADMINLIST@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-FACULTY@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <612026729.0.TURNER@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
Preliminary Time Schedules for Autumn Quarter 1989-90 are available for you to
pick up in McCullough 150.
Thank you.
-Sherry-
-------
∂24-May-89 0933 shoham@time.stanford.edu mtg
Received: from time.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 May 89 09:33:01 PDT
Received: by time.stanford.edu (5.61/25-eef) id AA13866; Wed, 24 May 89 09:32:41 -0700
Date: Wed, 24 May 1989 9:32:40 PDT
From: Yoav Shoham <shoham@time.Stanford.EDU>
To: val@sail, jmc@sail
Subject: mtg
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612030760.shoham@time.Stanford.EDU>
How about a meeting Tomorrow, Thursday, at 2:30 pm, at John's office?
Yoav
∂24-May-89 1037 VAL re: mtg
To: shoham@TIME.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 24 May 1989 9:32:40 PDT.]
Fine. - Vladimir
∂24-May-89 1039 VAL Reminder: Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
PROOF PROCEDURES FOR NONMONOTONIC REASONING SYSTEMS
Nicolas Helft and Katsumi Inoue
ICOT Research Center
Wednesday, May 24, 1:15pm
MJH 301
Pierre Siegel has defined a framework that clearly explains the
computational aspects of a class of nonmonotonic reasoning systems,
and developed an efficient algorithm for nonmonotonic reasoning. In
this talk we will explain Siegel's framework, its connection with the
work of Przymusinski and of Ginsberg on computing circumscription,
and its relation to clause maintenance systems introduced by Reiter
and de Kleer.
∂24-May-89 1358 MPS Retreat
Joyce needs to know how you are planning to pay the
$161.86.
Pat
∂24-May-89 1525 @Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU:arg@lucid.com new really-new-qlisp
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 May 89 15:25:01 PDT
Received: from LUCID.COM by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA06661; Wed, 24 May 89 15:25:05 PDT
Received: from bhopal ([192.43.178.13]) by heavens-gate id AA00930g; Wed, 24 May 89 15:23:31 PDT
Received: by bhopal id AA14766g; Wed, 24 May 89 15:23:13 PDT
Date: Wed, 24 May 89 15:23:13 PDT
From: Ron Goldman <arg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8905242223.AA14766@bhopal>
To: qlisp@go4.stanford.edu
Subject: new really-new-qlisp
There's a new version of really-new-qlisp in /lucid/bin. The major change
is that now stacks are not allocated to a process until it actually starts
to run. Thus you can create more processes than there is stack for, provided
they all don't need to run simultaneously. The global variable
*maximum-number-of-processes*
determines the maximum number of processes that you can create. It is
initialized to 5000. If you want to create more than 5000 processes then at
Lisp toplevel set *maximum-number-of-processes* to whatever you need. When
you next execute QEVAL or QTIME you will be able to create more processes.
Also 'EAGER is now :EAGER.
There are a number of minor bug fixes in really-new-qlisp. In particular the
debugger function (DISPLAY-PROCESS-TREE) has been improved. Also the
excessive overhead that occurred if you set *number-of-processors* to 1 has
been eliminated.
If no one has any problems with this version, it will become new-qlisp
shortly. Please try it out.
Ron
∂24-May-89 1742 nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU Space in MJH
Received: from Tenaya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 May 89 17:42:25 PDT
Received: by Tenaya.Stanford.EDU (NeXT-0.8/25-eef) id AA00412; Wed, 24 May 89 17:42:54 PDT
Date: Wed, 24 May 89 17:42:54 PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <nilsson@tenaya.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8905250042.AA00412@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, genesereth@score.stanford.edu,
jcm@score.stanford.edu, cheriton@score.stanford.edu,
wiederhold@score.stanford.edu, golub@score.stanford.edu
Subject: Space in MJH
Cc: mcguire@polya.stanford.edu, thomas@polya.stanford.edu,
sloan@score.stanford.edu, wheaton@athena.stanford.edu,
nilsson@Tenaya.Stanford.EDU, ball@score.stanford.edu
The problem of finding and administering space in Margaret Jacks Hall is becoming
increasingly difficult as we admit more students, hire more faculty, and
invite more visitors. The problems with the current system are evident:
students either over-crowded or without offices, visitors without any space
at all, faculty/visitors/students sharing offices on a temporary basis, and an
overly complicated yet not always fully informed process for making
space decisions.
A more efficient system might be a distributed model where administration
of space falls to a number of "space czars" who lead groups in various parts of the building.
Therefore, I am asking the addressees of this note, as representatives of the various groups in
MJH, to take long term responsibility for assigning and managing space
within your areas.
A starting point is for me to divide the building into zones before turning
the management of those zones over to the occupying groups. So that I
don't begin the process by making arbitrary allocations, would you please
send George Wheaton lists of your current and expected (next year) space
requirements, including space for yourselves and associated faculty,
students and visitors (all by name if possible). He and I will assign
space and convene a meeting to discuss (ratify) the allocation. (Also, please
understand that initial assignments of space to zones does not guarantee
that these assignments will always stay that way; just as the Dean claims
to "own" all space within the SOE---in a deanly way, I'll claim to "own" all
space within mjh---in a chairmanly way.)
You may find it helpful to use maps of the building in which we have
indicated where we think people are now (as taken from the dept data base).
The maps are not on-line, but I will have Joyce put copies in your
mail boxes. You can answer, if you wish, by giving George an amended
version of what you think your space needs will be by putting the names of
occupants on the rooms you think you need.
Thanks, -Nils
∂24-May-89 1745 Mailer re: Stanford sit-in compared to Chinese situation
Received: from MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 May 89 17:45:19 PDT
Date: Wed 24 May 89 17:44:05-PDT
From: Harinder Singh <H.HARRY@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: re: Stanford sit-in compared to Chinese situation
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, singh@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <12496674650.86.H.HARRY@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Prof. McC. says:
> 2. The Chinese demonstrations are not occupying anyone's
>offices. The analogy here would be if a demonstration in White
>Plaza were forbidden.
Not quite. The distinction is just a matter of detail.
Taking over that place in Beijing and ignoring martial law orders
are rather more severe violations than the sit-in was. One can
be shot under the law of the land for violating martial law;
so far Don's Army isn't allowed to do that :-)
> 4. The rule by the Communist Party in China is not
>legitimate.
Oh yes, it is. Have you heard even the protestors
there ever contest its legitimacy? You and I and a few others
may not like the way it got power or how it uses it, but you're
not going to get far by claiming it is not legitimate. Why is
the US recognizing it then? Why is it considered the legitimate
government of the PRC in the UN, then? Has the US been voting
against treating it as a legitimate government there? To the
contrary, the present President of the US seems rather more
enamoured of it than of the slick Soviet who's been kicking
America's ass in PR gain after PR gain on weapons reductions.
Sorry, Professor. You got a problem on this point :-)
> 5. Anyone can escape the very limited jurisdiction of
>Stanford University by leaving it. Chinese people do not have
>the right or power to escape the unlimited rule of the Communist
>Party.
So then why bother trying to change anything at Stanford?
That argument could apply to anything one wanted to see done
differently. ``We're a good capitalist institution so don't
tell us what you don't like here - just leave.'' Very convenient
indeed.
'Fraid ole Don ain't gonna get away with that defense.
More interestingly, he hasn't even had the standing to tell
Jesse to keep his nose out of it! That's how much this argument
washes, Professor.
>
>Enough?
>
Nope.
Good luck,
B. I.
-------
∂24-May-89 1807 VAL Proposal
I left a copy of the DARPA proposal on your desk. Please tell me if any
changes are needed. The only missing thing is the budget, Sharon is working
on it.
∂24-May-89 1845 VAL NSF Proposal
After the new budget was sent to Hamburger by e-mail and approved by him, I
learned that NSF will cut your salary because there is a $95K annual limit
that NSF has placed on PI salaries. We can change this in the formal
document, or we can let them do it.
In any case, I prepared a new version of the NSF proposal, with Arkady
deleted. Can I ask Sharon to mail it to Hamburger?
∂24-May-89 2358 decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!uqv-mts!Ursula_M._Maydell@labrea.stanford.edu weather
Received: from labrea.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 24 May 89 23:58:25 PDT
Received: from decwrl.dec.com by labrea.stanford.edu with TCP; Wed, 24 May 89 23:58:08 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34)
id AA25882; Wed, 24 May 89 23:59:18 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34)
for labrea!sail.stanford.edu!jmc; id AA25882; Wed, 24 May 89 23:59:18 PDT
Received: from uunet.uu.net by mtxinu.COM (5.61/1.29-mls890331)
id AA18017; Wed, 24 May 89 16:45:39 -0700
Received: from watmath.UUCP by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with UUCP
id AA03579; Wed, 24 May 89 19:45:33 -0400
Received: from alberta.uucp by watmath.waterloo.edu with uucp
id <AA22046>; Wed, 24 May 89 19:17:41 EDT
Received: by pembina.alberta.UUCP (5.52/3.14)
id AA15349; Wed, 24 May 89 17:15:07 MDT
Date: Wed, 24 May 89 17:15:18 MDT
From: decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!uqv-mts!Ursula_M._Maydell@labrea.stanford.edu
To: alberta!sail.stanford.edu!jmc@uunet.uu.net
Message-Id: <1578747@UQV-MTS>
Subject: weather
John
Just in case you had not heard. We had a snowstorm here
on Friday. The snow has melted but it still has been cold
these days. We have had rain for the last few days and
it does go to 0 C at night. So bring a sweater, ha ha.
We'll wait until you come to check what the weather is
like in the mountains. If it is pouring there, it may not
be worthwhile to drive all that way, but let us see
what Alberta weather has in store for us.
I'll see you at the airport on Friday at 2:54pm
Take care
Ursula
∂25-May-89 0745 ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU AI letter idea
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 07:45:32 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA04062; Thu, 25 May 89 07:45:49 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 May 89 07:45:49 -0700
From: Matthew L. Ginsberg <ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905251445.AA04062@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: AI letter idea
What happened to it? Did you get my message?
Matt
∂25-May-89 1127 ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU re: AI letter idea
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 11:27:06 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA15762; Thu, 25 May 89 11:27:20 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 May 89 11:27:20 -0700
From: Matthew L. Ginsberg <ginsberg@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905251827.AA15762@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: re: AI letter idea
OK; does that mean that you don't want me to do it any more? Sounds like
it does ...
Matt
∂25-May-89 1151 marx@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Recommendations for Outstanding Service Award
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 11:51:49 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 25 May 89 11:47:41 PDT
From: marx@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Marianne L. Marx)
Date: Thu 25 May 89 11:47:40-PDT
Subject: Recommendations for Outstanding Service Award
To: EE-FACULTY@sierra, ee-administration@sierra
Cc: marx@SIERRA
Message-Id: <612125260.0.MARX@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
An Outstanding Service Award for a graduate student, to be presented at
commencement exercises, has been proposed. The award will be based on
nominations by faculty and staff. Please let us have any recommendations,
accompanied by a brief description of the outstanding service performed, no
later than Friday June 2nd. Thank you.
Marianne Marx
McCullough160
e-mail: marx@sierra
-------
∂25-May-89 1154 @b.nsf.gov:hhamburg@nsf.GOV proposal
Received: from note.nsf.gov by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 11:54:23 PDT
Received: from b.nsf.gov by note.nsf.gov id aa21875; 25 May 89 13:51 EDT
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, val@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: proposal
Date: Thu, 25 May 89 13:43:51 -0400
From: "Henry J. Hamburger" <hhamburg@nsf.GOV>
Message-ID: <8905251343.aa02363@b.nsf.gov>
In my original conversation with Prof. McCarthy
I recall requesting not only a revised budget but
also some words of explanation on how your various
sources of funding are allocated to various projects.
This is to deal with the question (already raised here)
of how crucial the award is to the research. Although
I have put my positive recommendation forward, I will
arrange to insert your comments on this topic,
should you send them. They may well be
unnecessary, but I recommend doing it. - HH.
∂25-May-89 1356 VAL Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
REASONING WITH DEFAULTS
Hector Geffner
UCLA
Thursday, June 1, 3:15pm
MJH 352
Defaults play a central role in commonsense reasoning, permitting the
generation of useful predictions in the absence of complete information.
These predictions are nonmonotonic, in the sense that they often need to
be revised in light of new information. A number of extensions to
classical logics have been proposed which successfully accommodate this
non-monotonic behavior. Recent work in defeasible inheritance, however,
has shown that there are additional issues, beyond non-monotonicity,
which also need to be addressed in order to capture the defaults intended
meaning.
I will present two alternative formalizations which address these issues.
In the first part I will discuss a qualitative inference system that
results from interpreting defaults as high conditional probability
statements. The system is characterized by a core of five rules of
inference which permit derivations to be constructed in the style of
natural deduction systems and which capture the context-sensitivity
of defaults. A sixth rule is then introduced which extends the core with
assumptions about conditional independence.
In the second part of the talk, I will present a model theoretic account
which provides an alternative validation of both the core rules and the
conditional independence assumptions. This account appeals to a preference
relation among models. This relation is induced from a default ordering
hinted by the probabilistic interpretation. We will then present some
examples illustrating the power of the resulting account as well as some
of its current limitations.
∂25-May-89 1408 tom@polya.Stanford.EDU your home system
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 14:05:42 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA26257; Thu, 25 May 89 14:05:41 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 May 89 14:05:41 -0700
From: Tom Dienstbier <tom@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8905252105.AA26257@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail
Cc: jsw@sail, clt@sail
Subject: your home system
John after our talk yesterday in front of the building I checked some
things out on adapting SLIP to your home environment. As it now stands
we can do a pretty good job at running multiple NCD Xwindow terminals
at your home. We can set the multiplexor ports to 9600 baud to run
these terminals. The printer port would stay where it is( I think at
1200 or 2400). The bandwith we would want to save for the terminals.
Currently we are running a 9600 baud line to your home. The MUX can
run at 19,200 baud. In order to up the speed we would need to replace
the modems that are in use to 19200 baud units. I don't suggest doing
that until we experience the loading and to see how well Gio's home
system works out. The printer port can be hooked up directly to GO of 4
or to a tip port. I don't see any real problem that we can't deal with
at this time.
thanks
tom
∂25-May-89 1424 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Re: your home system
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 14:18:15 PDT
Received: from LOCALHOST by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA00170; Thu, 25 May 89 14:18:28 PDT
Message-Id: <8905252118.AA00170@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: Tom Dienstbier <tom@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: jmc@sail, clt@sail
Subject: Re: your home system
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 25 May 89 14:05:41 -0700.
<8905252105.AA26257@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Thu, 25 May 89 14:18:26 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
I've heard that the NCD terminals don't work very well at 9600 baud
(or even at 19200) using SLIP, because of the overhead in IP/TCP and
the X protocols. What is supposed to work better is the Graphon X
terminal, which uses a special protocol over the serial line. But it
costs more and has a smaller screen.
The NCD at 9600 is probably better than what we currently have, i.e.,
an ordinary terminal at 2400 baud. But an ordinary terminal at 9600
baud will probably perform better than an X terminal. The tradeoff is
speed of screen update vs. the extra features that X offers.
Also, are we sure that whatever machine is on the other side of the
line, here in MJH, can actually sustain 9600 baud?
∂25-May-89 1708 CLT
\def\ltup{\mathopen{\hbox{\tt <}}}
\def\rtup{\mathclose{\hbox{\tt >}}}
∂25-May-89 1751 hellman@isl.Stanford.EDU Post-MS Admissions
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 25 May 89 17:51:27 PDT
Received: from isl.Stanford.EDU by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 25 May 89 17:47:57 PDT
Received: by isl.Stanford.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 25 May 89 17:49:41 PDT
Date: Thu, 25 May 89 17:49:41 PDT
From: hellman@isl.Stanford.EDU (Martin Hellman)
To: ee-faculty@sierra
Subject: Post-MS Admissions
Two recent incidents indicated that some faculty misunderstand
the commitment they make when they agree to be the "tentative
research supervisor" for a newly admitted post-MS studnet. This
is NOT just a one or two quarter commitment to supervise an EE390
project. In principle, this is a commitment to supervise the
student for his or her entire PhD program. While, in theory, you
may decline to continue supervising the student after arrival
here, that should be a rare and very unusual occurrence.
The decision to financially support the student is separate from
this advising commitment. If you have any questions, please
contact me. Thanks.
Martin Hellman
∂26-May-89 0703 sacook@neat.ai.toronto.edu
Received: from neat.ai.toronto.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 May 89 07:02:54 PDT
Received: by neat.ai.toronto.edu id 11711; Fri, 26 May 89 10:02:10 EDT
From: Stephen Cook <sacook@ai.toronto.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <89May26.100210edt.11711@neat.ai.toronto.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 May 89 10:02:03 EDT
Thanks for your rankings. And by the way, congratulations!
Steve Cook
∂26-May-89 0958 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU signatures for Bob Byer
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 May 89 09:52:48 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA16844; Fri, 26 May 89 09:57:45 PDT
Date: Fri 26 May 89 09:57:45-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: signatures for Bob Byer
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <612205065.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Would there be a convenient time today for me to catch you at Cordura
or in your CS office to get your signature on the statement of support
for Bob Byer?
Thanks.
BEtsy
-------
∂26-May-89 1153 VAL VAL's papers
``Computing circumscription'', in: {\sl Proc.~IJCAI-85}, 1985.
CC.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Closed-world data bases and circumscription'', {\sl Artificial Intelligence},
{\bf 27}, 1985.
CWA.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``On the satisfiability of circumscription'', {\sl Artificial Intelligence},
{\bf 28}, 1986.
CONSIS.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``On the declarative semantics of logic programs with negation'', in:
{\sl Workshop on Foundations of Logic Programming and Deductive Databases},
Washington, D.C., 1986.
LP.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Pointwise circumscription: preliminary report'', in: {\sl Proc.~AAAI-86}, 1986.
PTC0.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Pointwise circumscription'', in: {\sl Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning},
Morgan Kaufmann, Los Atos, California, 1987.
PTC.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``On the semantics of STRIPS'', in: {\sl Reasoning about Actions and Plans},
Morgan Kaufmann, Los Atos, California, 1987.
STRIPS.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Formal theories of action: preliminary report'', in: {\sl Proc.~IJCAI-87}, 1987.
FTA0.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Formal theories of action'', in: {\sl The Frame Problem in Artificial
Intelligence, Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop}, 1987.
FTA.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Circumscriptive theories: a logic-based framework for commonsense knowledge
(preliminary report)'', in: {\sl Proc.~AAAI-87}, 1987.
CT0.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Circumscriptive theories: a logic-based framework for commonsense knowledge)'',
{\sl Journal of Philosophical Logic}, {\bf 17}, 1988.
CT.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``The stable model semantics for logic programming'', in: {\sl Logic
Programming: Proc.~5th Int'l.~Conf.~and Symp.}, 1988 (with M. Gelfond).
STABLE.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Compiling circumscriptive theories into logic programs'', in: {\sl Non-Monotonic
Reasoning} (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, {\bf 346}), Springer-Verlag,
1989 (with M. Gelfond).
COMPIL.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Benchmark problems for formal nonmonotonic reasoning'', in: {\sl Non-Monotonic
Reasoning} (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, {\bf 346}), Springer-Verlag,
1989.
BENCH.TEX[ARC,VAL]
``Miracles in formal theories of action'', {\sl Artificial Intelligence},
{\bf 38}, 1989 (with A. Rabinov).
MIR.TEX[ARC,VAL] (LaTeX)
``Between circumscription and autoepistemic logic'', in: {\sl Proceedings
of the First International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation
and Reasoning}, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, California, 1989.
INTROS.TEX[ARC,VAL] (LaTeX)
``Things that change by themselves'', in: {\sl Proc.~IJCAI-89}, 1989 (to appear,
with A. Rabinov).
CHANGE.TEX[ARC,VAL] (LaTeX)
``Logical foundations of deductive databases'', in: {\sl Proc.~IFIP Congress'89},
1989 (to appear).
LFDD.TEX[ARC,VAL] (LaTeX)
∂26-May-89 1409 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Research Assistant
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 May 89 14:09:13 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 26 May 89 14:05:19 PDT
Date: Fri, 26 May 89 14:05:19 PDT
From: shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Diane J. Shankle)
To: EE-faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-adminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Research Assistant
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612219918.shankle@>
The new RA 1989/90 Academic Year Rates and the SEL Research Assistant
Appointment Forms are available to be picked in - McC 164.
Summer Appointment forms are due next week. Special Course Number for
100% RA is 030-501-0-01 for student's study list card.
Thanks,
Diane
Any questions please call 723-3194
∂26-May-89 1713 eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Comprehensive proposals
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 May 89 17:13:31 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA03491; Fri, 26 May 89 17:15:00 PDT
Date: Fri, 26 May 1989 17:14:58 PDT
From: Edward A. Feigenbaum <eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: genesereth@score.stanford.edu
Cc: feigenbaum@sumex-aim.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu,
nilsson@tenaya.stanford.edu
Subject: Comprehensive proposals
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612231298.eaf@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Mike,
I just read the material, which just crossed my desk. In short:
1. I agree with ALMOST everything on all of the pages. You and your committee
did an excellent job. It's careful, innovative, and worth trying.
2. I disagree specifically with just one thing:
Agreeing strongly that the Elaine Rich book is a good one to have on the list
(i.e. it covers the material that I consider to be central to the AI
science), I do not see a course on the list that is the "course surrogate" of
Rich's book. You might argue that CS221 is supposed to be that, but I don't
think that as currently taught it is that surrogate. In truth, as currently
taught, CS123 is the closest (and in fact I used to use the Rich book as the
textbook ). I can send you the course syllabus from last quarter to
demonstrate that. Alternatively, CS221 can be altered to be more "Rich-like",
which is a good idea anyway (and that's what it would have been if Rosenbloom
were still around).
Ed
∂26-May-89 1734 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: protestors
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 May 89 17:34:08 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA04802; Fri, 26 May 89 17:35:46 PDT
Date: Fri, 26 May 1989 17:35:45 PDT
From: "William A. Brown" <wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu, su-etc@sumex-aim.stanford.edu,
wab@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
Subject: re: protestors
In-Reply-To: Your message of 25 May 89 1951 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612232545.wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
John,
When the legal system completely allows no responsive outlet to the needs
of its populace, the populace is obligated to assert those needs in non-legal
fashion. The unjust law was not explicitly written. However, because the
University did not respond to the protestors' repeated past attempts at
fighting discrimination in faculty selection (among other things), the
students were left with no other options.
It should also be noted that there laws prohibiting the federal government
from contracting resources from institutions, private or public, which
discriminate racially, religiously, and/or sexually. Those laws HAVE been
violated. Unfortunately, student-led prosecution under said statutes is
prohibitively difficult. One is left with few options: devote one's entire
time to legally fighting such transgressions (which undoubtably would destroy
a student's academic life), do nothing, try using internal channels (which
was repeatedly and unsuccessfully tried), or resort to less "legally correct"
means (which seem to have worked best). Personally, I wish someone DID have
the time and resources to sue Stanford. At the very least, it is guilty of
gross breach of conrtact and misrepresentation. However, until someone DOES
sue Stanford, I fully support the protestors.
On a practical note, if the administration prosecutes the students, it has
de facto shown that its Fundamental Standard is worthless against and
inapplicable to racism, but it very effective against student protest. This
is a very ugly statement (albeit, possibly true) statement to make. If, by
its actions, Stanford prooves it will tolerate racism, yet stifle and/or
ignore student protest, I hope this fact is well publicised. Furthermore, I
hope American society is responsible enough to make sure such revelations
leads to the changing of this University. In my opnion, it would be better
not to have such institutions. There are plenty of other friendlier
universities where the money could be used to do at least as much good,
without cultivating the kind of mind that tends to separate our country and
reduce its productivity.
Bill
∂26-May-89 1820 A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU re: protestors
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 May 89 18:20:00 PDT
Date: Fri 26 May 89 18:18:42-PDT
From: ABE DEANDA <A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: protestors
To: wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
cc: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, su-etc@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <CMM.0.88.612232545.wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <12497205238.18.A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
William Brown seems to think that the university was being totally
unresponsive to the students, and that they were left with no other
option but to illegally occupy an office in order to arrange a
meeting with the President. They didn't occupy the office to increase
the number of minority faculty members - they wanted a meeting with
the president. What ever happened to picking up the phone and making
arrangement that way?
He also implies that the University is breaking federal laws against
racial discrimination by their faculty hiring policy. Prove it.
I have been working with other minority graduate students for years
to increase the number of minority graduate students in this country,
as a way of increasing the number of people qualified for faculty
positions. One thing we do is to encourage minority **high school
** students to apply to **college**. That's right - we are attacking
the problem at the origin. The protestors are doing just the opposite -
they want the university to allocate a number of faculty positions
for minorities - whether enough candidates exist or not.
Abe
-------
∂27-May-89 0923 pratt@coraki.stanford.edu MTC -> ?
Received: from coraki.stanford.edu. (Coraki.Stanford.EDU) by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 May 89 09:23:11 PDT
Received: by coraki.stanford.edu. (4.0/SMI-4.0)
id AA27698; Sat, 27 May 89 09:23:40 PDT
Date: Sat, 27 May 89 09:23:40 PDT
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@cs.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8905271623.AA27698@coraki.stanford.edu.>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: MTC -> ?
John, how attached are you to the name MTC? Everyone here knows pretty
well what it connotes. Elsewhere however the term is rarely if ever
used with our connotation, and invariably needs to be explained.
Do you have any strong objections to changing the name to something
more easily recognized by outsiders? And if not, do you have any
thoughts for alternative names? Would "Logic in CS" work, for
example?
-v
∂30-May-89 0224 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 02:24:43 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 388677; Tue 30-May-89 05:25:17 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 93813; Tue 30-May-89 02:18:58 PDT
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 02:18 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Message-ID: <19890530091851.2.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
At my MIT talk, I was going to mention the Kapteyn series
= z cos(z cos(z cos(...))) identity, and just got around
to plotting the domain of convergence of the rhs. It looks
somewhat like a Mandelblorch, except instead of a cardioid(oid)
studded with rapidly tapering trees of near circles, you get
slowly tapering trees of potatoids, with a shallow concavity
in the larger where two join. Also, there are halos of subcopies
accumulating around the boundaries of hollow places (resembling
the footprint of Mandelbrot's Plate 187), where divergence is by
oscillation instead of explosion. (It is fairly easy to show
that, despite appearances, the set is unbounded "in all
directions".)
While very interesting, this picture looks to me suspiciously
familiar. I'd appreciate references to anything that
sounds like it. (Fax on request.)
∂30-May-89 0715 kessler%cons@cs.utah.edu Parallel Lisp workshop
Received: from cs.utah.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 07:15:10 PDT
Received: from cons.utah.edu by cs.utah.edu (5.61/utah-2.1-cs)
id AA21513; Tue, 30 May 89 08:15:31 -0600
Received: by cons.utah.edu (5.61/utah-2.0-leaf)
id AA12528; Tue, 30 May 89 08:15:25 -0600
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 08:15:25 -0600
From: kessler%cons@cs.utah.edu (Robert R. Kessler)
Message-Id: <8905301415.AA12528@cons.utah.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, jsw@sail.stanford.edu, arg@lucid.com,
halstead@crl.dec.com, ran@HX.LCS.MIT.EDU, tk@ai.ai.mit.edu,
Kessler@cs.utah.edu, pierson@MULTIMAX.ENCORE.COM,
kranz@wheaties.ai.mit.edu, jmiller@cs.brandeis.edu,
katz@polya.stanford.edu, pehoushek@gang-of-four.stanford.edu,
rpg@lucid.com
Subject: Parallel Lisp workshop
As I'm sure many of you know, getting around Japan can be quite an
experience. If any of us are taking the same flight to Narita
Airport, then we could go as a group to Sendai. I am taking the
United flight 819 from San Francisco to Narita, leaving at noon on
Saturday, the 3rd and arriving at 2:45 pm on Sunday.
Are any of you on the same flight?
B.
∂30-May-89 0826 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 08:26:34 PDT
Received: from YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 388739; Tue 30-May-89 11:28:01 EDT
Received: from WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 461754; Tue 30-May-89 11:28:31 EDT
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 11:27 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890530091851.2.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890530152736.2.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Regarding RWG's all-points bulletin on the domain of convergence of
c cos(*), I have a small point to make.
Once upon a time I tried to plot the Mandelbrot analog for c exp (*),
that is, those z's for which the series does not explode.
Unfortunately, I discovered, there is no well-defined analog, despite
well-intentioned efforts like Peitgen & Richter's fig. 24 on p. 34 of
"Beauty".
The quadratic Mandelbrot set exists because all the maps z↑2+c share an
attractive fixed point at infinity. We can be sure of divergence
whenever |z| gets bigger than 2.
The exponential maps do not share a fixed point at infinity. In fact
their behavior at infinity is very complicated. There is no criterion
of guaranteed divergence as there is with the quadratic map. No matter
how large z gets, it could in the next couple of iterations be swept
back arbitrarily near the origin.
If we want Mandelbrot-analogs for exponential maps (like cos) we must
revert to the topological definition: c is in M if J[c] is connected.
The original formulation for quadratic maps established that when J[c]
is connected it has area, but when it is disconnected it is a Cantor
dust. I have no idea whether this observation is true of exponential
maps, but I can certainly imagine Julia sets that are disconnected but
not dusts. If this is the case, is the correct Mandelbrot analog the
set of c's with measurable Julia sets, or the set of c's with connected
Julia sets?
∂30-May-89 0902 wicker@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Faculty Mtg
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 09:02:36 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Tue, 30 May 89 08:55:31 PDT
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 08:55:31 PDT
From: wicker@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Beverly J. Wicker)
To: ee-faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: ee-adminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Faculty Mtg
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612546929.wicker@>
A reminder that there will be a Faculty meeting today at 3:30
in McCullough 240 to discuss Minority issues.
∂30-May-89 0957 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Tau Beta Pi
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 09:57:40 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Tue, 30 May 89 09:53:05 PDT
From: turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sherry A. Turner)
Date: Tue 30 May 89 09:53:02-PDT
Subject: Tau Beta Pi
To: EE-FACULTY@sierra
Cc: EE-ADMINLIST@SIERRA
Message-Id: <612550382.0.TURNER@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
Tau Beta Pi survey forms for instructors who are teaching Spring Quarter are
available for you to pick up in McCullough 150.
Thanks
-Sherry-
-------
∂30-May-89 1004 rpg@lucid.com Parallel Lisp workshop
Received: from lucid.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 10:04:27 PDT
Received: from challenger ([192.9.200.17]) by heavens-gate id AA00956g; Tue, 30 May 89 10:02:50 PDT
Received: by challenger id AA08882g; Tue, 30 May 89 10:02:04 PDT
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 10:02:04 PDT
From: Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>
Message-Id: <8905301702.AA08882@challenger>
To: kessler%cons@cs.utah.edu
Cc: jmc@sail.stanford.edu, jsw@sail.stanford.edu, arg@lucid.com,
halstead@crl.dec.com, ran@HX.LCS.MIT.EDU, tk@ai.ai.mit.edu,
Kessler@cs.utah.edu, pierson@MULTIMAX.ENCORE.COM,
kranz@wheaties.ai.mit.edu, jmiller@cs.brandeis.edu,
katz@polya.stanford.edu, pehoushek@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: Robert R. Kessler's message of Tue, 30 May 89 08:15:25 -0600 <8905301415.AA12528@cons.utah.edu>
Subject: Parallel Lisp workshop
As some of you know, I am not attending the workshop. (Yes, that's
right, I am co-Chairman and not attending. This is the extreme I have
to go to in order to maintain my reputation as a jerk.) Bert Halstead
will reclaim the title of co-Chairman (Yes, that's right, he used to
be co-Chairman and finked out earlier.) Have fun.
On a serious note, DARPA has been on my case about this workshop. It
seems they (and the rest of the Administration) are worried about
``innovation export.'' You might not agree with their position, but I
want to assure you that they are very serious. In order to get
permission for Goldman and Sexton (who are in the Qlisp project) to
go, I had to write a description of what they would say and what they
wouldn't say. Everything they are going to say is required to have
been already published according to the arranegment I made with DARPA.
Some of the easing of hassle for DARPA contractors was bought (I
believe) by my agreeing to not go - I was not asked to stay home, but
I was pushed clearly in that direction.
Here is an excerpt from the last message I got from Mark Pullen at DARPA:
``Your delination of what will be presented looks good to me.
Please be sure the people who go understand that they may be
pumped for information, and should give the Japanese response-
a polite smile, nothing else.''
-rpg-
∂30-May-89 1022 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 10:21:50 PDT
Received: from YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 388790; Tue 30-May-89 13:23:14 EDT
Received: from WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 461824; Tue 30-May-89 13:23:33 EDT
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 13:22 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM,
"swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890530152736.2.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890530172238.5.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
On further reflection, I realize that even the Julia set has no obvious
exponential generalization. For quadratics, the Julia set is the
complement of the basin of convergence of that attractive point at
infinity. Some kind of catalog of attractors for iterated exponentials
is needed.
∂30-May-89 1432 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU changing offices
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 May 89 14:32:32 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA05896; Tue, 30 May 89 14:37:31 PDT
Date: Tue 30 May 89 14:37:30-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: changing offices
To: zalta@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: ingrid@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, emma@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <612567450.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
A while ago Stanley sent out a message to CSLI's researchers asking them
to submit proposals for the use of space in Cordura beginning this summer
and for the following academic year. One of the requests came from Jon
Barwise for a larger lab for his hyperproof group which has tripled in
size. For various reasons which I won't bore you with, it has worked out
best to make your present office into the new hyperproof lab and move
the two of you across the hall into 227. Ed, I believe this is a much
bigger problem for you than for John because most of the books etc.
in 226 are yours, right? Jon would like to have the new lab set up as
soon as possible, and Emma needs to see to some additional wiring and
so needs access to it too. I know that moving is never convenient, but
how soon would it not be terrible for you to move? We can talk in
person about this if you want to, but I couldn't find you just now and
wanted to get this word to you right away. Let me know what you think.
Thanks,
BEtsy
-------
∂30-May-89 1434 VAL Geffner's seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I'd like to move Geffner's seminar on reasoning with defaults
(Thursday, June 1) to 2:15 instead of 3:15. If anyone objects
to that, please let me know.
--Vladimir
∂30-May-89 1529 MPS phone
Mike Fallon, friend of Armin Miller called
5-30
941-7573
∂31-May-89 0201 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 02:00:38 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 389080; Wed 31-May-89 04:56:57 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 93932; Wed 31-May-89 01:50:35 PDT
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 01:50 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890530172238.5.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890531085026.5.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 13:22 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
On further reflection, I realize that even the Julia set has no obvious
exponential generalization. For quadratics, the Julia set is the
complement of the basin of convergence of that attractive point at
infinity. Some kind of catalog of attractors for iterated exponentials
is needed.
Yikes! I am confused. Looking at the code, the thing I computed was
merely the attractor for f(z) = z cos z. Thanks for unwedging me,
Allan. But it would have made a darn nice slide.
I want to know where the "continued cosine" converges. I.e.,
those z for which |z sin x| < 1 for x some root of x = z cos x, i.e.
some fixed point of z cos(). Presumably, this will look a lot less
attractive than the attractor I just wasted 2 days computing.
∂31-May-89 0722 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 07:22:38 PDT
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 389112; Wed 31-May-89 09:34:20 EDT
Received: from TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM by RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 93940; Wed 31-May-89 06:28:06 PDT
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 06:27 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: "DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890530172238.5.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890531132758.8.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Maybe this will be obvious after a "night's" sleep, but is
it clear to anyone why both
y e↑sqrt(1+y↑2)/(1+sqrt(1+y↑2)) = 1
and
y sinh(sqrt(1+y↑2)) = 1
have the same root around y = .662743 ?
∂31-May-89 0755 ACW@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 07:55:34 PDT
Received: from YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 389164; Wed 31-May-89 10:56:58 EDT
Received: from WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 462247; Wed 31-May-89 10:57:24 EDT
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 10:56 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890531085026.5.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890531145615.7.ACW@WHIMBREL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 01:50 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Tue, 30 May 89 13:22 EDT
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
On further reflection, I realize that even the Julia set has no obvious
exponential generalization. For quadratics, the Julia set is the
complement of the basin of convergence of that attractive point at
infinity. Some kind of catalog of attractors for iterated exponentials
is needed.
Yikes! I am confused. Looking at the code, the thing I computed was
merely the attractor for f(z) = z cos z. Thanks for unwedging me,
Allan. But it would have made a darn nice slide.
This can't be right: "attractor" means something that a sequence
converges to. Do you mean "basin of attraction" or "domain of
convergence" for f(f(f(f(...)))).
I want to know where the "continued cosine" converges. I.e.,
those z for which |z sin x| < 1 for x some root of x = z cos x, i.e.
some fixed point of z cos(). Presumably, this will look a lot less
attractive than the attractor I just wasted 2 days computing.
∂31-May-89 0845 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:wilf@CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Re: fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 08:44:55 PDT
Received: from CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via INTERNET with SMTP id 389192; 31 May 89 11:45:22 EDT
Received: from CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU by central.cis.upenn.edu
id AA13865; Wed, 31 May 89 11:43:35 -0400
Posted-Date: Wed, 31 May 89 11:43:33 -0400
Message-Id: <8905311543.AA13865@central.cis.upenn.edu>
To: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM,
"swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
Subject: Re: fractal freaquest
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 31 May 89 06:27:00 -0700.
<19890531132758.8.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 11:43:33 -0400
From: wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu
The two equations have the same root for the following reason. Let's call
z the exponential of sqrt(1+y↑2). Solve the first equation for z in terms
of y and the sqrt. Then substitute (z-1/z)/2 for sinh(sqrt) in the second
equation, and it reduces to 0=0, which I believe.-Herb Wilf
∂31-May-89 0912 @ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM:MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM fractal freaquest
Received: from ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 09:12:47 PDT
Received: from WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM by ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via INTERNET with SMTP id 389203; 31 May 89 12:13:03 EDT
Received: from METAL-FLAKE.SWW.Symbolics.COM by WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 262612; Wed 31-May-89 09:07:08 PDT
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 09:07 PDT
From: Marc Le Brun <MLB@WHITE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: fractal freaquest
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM
cc: math-fun@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM, "swolf@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"DEK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"ilan@score.stanford.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "wilf@central.cis.upenn.edu"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"igor@wri.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, "rcs@la.tis.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM,
"jdl%pruxe%att@research.att.com"@ELEPHANT-BUTTE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: <19890531132758.8.RWG@TSUNAMI.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Message-ID: <19890531160706.8.MLB@METAL-FLAKE.SWW.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Wed, 31 May 89 06:27 PDT
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Maybe this will be obvious after a "night's" sleep, but is
it clear to anyone why both
y e↑sqrt(1+y↑2)/(1+sqrt(1+y↑2)) = 1
and
y sinh(sqrt(1+y↑2)) = 1
have the same root around y = .662743 ?
I think if you solve the first equation for e↑sqrt(1+y↑2) you get algebraic in y, which you
can then substitute for the exponentials in the second equation, resulting in an easily
manipulated tautology.
∂31-May-89 1027 jezuk@sierra.STANFORD.EDU EERA Personnel Changes
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 10:27:23 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 31 May 89 10:21:00 PDT
From: jezuk@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Joseph A. Jezukewicz)
Date: Wed 31 May 89 10:20:57-PDT
Subject: EERA Personnel Changes
To: EE-FACULTY@SIERRA, EE-ADMINLIST@SIERRA
Cc: na.kmd@forsythe, down@SIERRA, ab.jpd@forsythe, wanda@SIERRA,
carilli@SIERRA, rachel@SIERRA, na.khw@forsythe, na.dam@forsythe
Message-Id: <612638457.0.JEZUK@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
Dear Folks,
With the pending yearend retirement of Chile Brennan, we have made some changes
to begin a transition. Effective immediately, Lajauna Frank has been promoted
to head the Procurement section of the EERA Accounting Office. This is the
same position which has been ably managed by Chile Brennan for the past many
years. Chile will continue to assist Lajauna plus devote additional time to
updating and reorganizing the open commitment and closed transaction file
systems and also document his knowledge of procurement policies and procedures.
The position vacated by Lajauna Frank is currently under recruitment. An
announcement of the position vacacy appears in the May 31 Campus Report.
Best regards,
Joe Jezukewicz
Director, EERA
-------
∂31-May-89 1034 @Score.Stanford.EDU:gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu ELIS Machines
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 31 May 89 10:34:52 PDT
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Wed 31 May 89 10:34:14-PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA05536; Wed, 31 May 89 10:36:25 PDT
Date: Wed, 31 May 1989 10:36:21 PDT
From: Grace Smith <gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@score.stanford.edu
Cc: gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: ELIS Machines
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612639381.gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Professor McCarthy,
I've learned in a round-about manner that you're interested in having our
NTT owned ELIS machines. We have documentation authorizing the extension
of importation of the two machines until 3/7/90. Please let me know if
you really are interesting in assuming responsibility for these machines
so that I can pass the information on to Mr. Hibino.
Thanks very much,
Grace Smith
∂31-May-89 1233 VAL Reminder: Special Seminar on Nonmonotonic Reasoning
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
*** Note: We meet at 3:15, as originally announced -- no change ***
REASONING WITH DEFAULTS
Hector Geffner
UCLA
Thursday, June 1, 3:15pm
MJH 352
Defaults play a central role in commonsense reasoning, permitting the
generation of useful predictions in the absence of complete information.
These predictions are nonmonotonic, in the sense that they often need to
be revised in light of new information. A number of extensions to
classical logics have been proposed which successfully accommodate this
non-monotonic behavior. Recent work in defeasible inheritance, however,
has shown that there are additional issues, beyond non-monotonicity,
which also need to be addressed in order to capture the defaults intended
meaning.
I will present two alternative formalizations which address these issues.
In the first part I will discuss a qualitative inference system that
results from interpreting defaults as high conditional probability
statements. The system is characterized by a core of five rules of
inference which permit derivations to be constructed in the style of
natural deduction systems and which capture the context-sensitivity
of defaults. A sixth rule is then introduced which extends the core with
assumptions about conditional independence.
In the second part of the talk, I will present a model theoretic account
which provides an alternative validation of both the core rules and the
conditional independence assumptions. This account appeals to a preference
relation among models. This relation is induced from a default ordering
hinted by the probabilistic interpretation. We will then present some
examples illustrating the power of the resulting account as well as some
of its current limitations.
∂01-Jun-89 1403 drb@cscfac.ncsu.edu your visit to NC
Received: from cscosl.ncsu.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 89 14:03:27 PDT
Received: by cscosl.ncsu.edu (5.57/Ultrix2.4-C)
id AA24012; Thu, 1 Jun 89 17:04:14 EDT
Received: by cscfac.ncsu.edu (1.2/Ultrix2.0-B)
id AA05167; Thu, 1 Jun 89 17:02:36 edt
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 89 17:02:36 edt
From: drb@cscfac.ncsu.edu (Dennis R. Bahler)
Message-Id: <8906012102.AA05167@cscfac.ncsu.edu>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: your visit to NC
Prof. McCarthy:
We have scheduled your talk entitled Programs with Common Sense for
the early evening of Tues., Sept. 26. There will most probably be a
reception before.
In addition, I have reserved the CS video seminar series slot for 3 pm Monday,
Sept. 25. The technical level for this series is effectively unlimited and
the audience is typically CS faculty and students.
We hope you will want to give a talk in this forum too.
This hookup goes live and interactively to Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill,
UNC-Charlotte, and several other sites.
Dennis Bahler
drb@cscadm.ncsu.edu
∂01-Jun-89 1630 ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU contentions
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 Jun 89 16:30:02 PDT
Date: Thu 1 Jun 89 16:29:22-PDT
From: Art Altman <ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: contentions
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12498758200.43.ALTMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Newsletter sounds interesting.
I've never seen it.
Do you know where I can get a copy?
or out of what city is it published?
thanks very much,
Art Altman
Rockwell Science Center
-------
∂02-Jun-89 0000 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 in Edmonton, Alberta till June 2.
∂02-Jun-89 1052 CLT travel
Franklin will try to contact you, but in case he fails
he is going to charge the apex flight to Israel today.
If you have changed your mind you can call him first
thing Monday morning and cancel before it officially goes
through the books.
∂02-Jun-89 1614 shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU E.E. Outstanding Service Awards for 1989
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 Jun 89 16:14:33 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 2 Jun 89 16:07:32 PDT
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 89 16:07:32 PDT
From: shankle@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Diane J. Shankle)
To: EE-faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-adminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: E.E. Outstanding Service Awards for 1989
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612832047.shankle@>
The Outstanding Service Awards Committee would like to thank everyone for
their nominations.
To: Electrical Engineering Faculty and Staff
From: J.W. Goodman
Subject: E.E. Outstanding Service Awards for 1989
I am pleased to announce that the E.E. Outstanding Service Awards Committee
has chosen the following recipients for the 1989 awards:
Charles "Chile" Brennan
Carmen Miraflor
Calvin F. Quate
The awards each consist of a check for $1200, and will be given to the
recipients at the E.E. Graduation Ceremony to be held June 18 at Governor's
Corner. Be sure to attend.
Congratulations to the winners!
∂02-Jun-89 1951 CLT israel
Zohar says to look him up if you are interested in
going to a great place for dinner.
∂03-Jun-89 0243 RFC Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 3 June 1989
Previous Balance 17.77
Monthly Interest at 1.0% 0.18
Current Charges 4.00 (bicycle lockers)
0.60 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 22.55
PAYMENT DELIVERY LOCATION: CSD Receptionist.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
Please deliver payments to the Computer Science Dept receptionist, Jacks Hall.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your PONY ACCOUNT NAME on your check.
Note: The recording of a payment takes up to three weeks after the payment is
made, but never beyond the next billing date. Please allow for this delay.
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.0% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
An account with a credit balance earns interest of .33% per month,
based on the average daily balance.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 1/10/89.
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.
∂03-Jun-89 0816 CLT foundation
I am meeting a contractor at the old house
today at 1:30 to see about getting a bid for
the foundation work.
∂03-Jun-89 1521 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: changing offices
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 Jun 89 15:21:35 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA01508; Sat, 3 Jun 89 15:26:42 PDT
Date: Sat 3 Jun 89 15:26:41-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: changing offices
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <612916001.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <5hP4Q@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Thanks for being so cooperative. We haven't moved anything. Are you back
for a while now?
Betsy
-------
∂03-Jun-89 1546 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: signatures for Bob Byer
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 3 Jun 89 15:44:13 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA01553; Sat, 3 Jun 89 15:49:19 PDT
Date: Sat 3 Jun 89 15:49:18-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: signatures for Bob Byer
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <612917358.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <5hE4b@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
At the faculty CSLI SU faculty meeting a few weeks ago, Stanley asked
folks to sign the following letter. It is the last of the requests
we've had from Byer in response to our request to be an independent
lab. You could still sign it if you would like to. Will you
be around on Monday? Here is the letter so that you can be
thinking about it:
Dear Dean Byer:
We, the undersigned, wish to assert our strong and continuing support
for CSLI. It's unique interdisciplinary, inter-institutional
environment has enabled our research to flourish in directions that
would otherwise have been difficult if not impossible. We agree to
share in the responsibilities of leadership, including the
responsibility of being the director, and we agree to submit funding
proposals through CSLI. We support the concept of CSLI as an
independent lab at Stanford, and hope that this letter sufficiently
reassures you of our intention to do our part in providing leadership
and funding.
Sincerely,
-------
∂04-Jun-89 1507 CLT misc
I left an envelope on the washer with check and some instructions for Zella
We'll be staying at the Sunset motel in Pacific Grove
(408-375-3936)
Timothy has been invited to Tommy's birthday party Sunday 11 Jun 3-5.
∂04-Jun-89 1614 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: changing offices
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 89 16:14:04 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA03532; Sun, 4 Jun 89 16:19:05 PDT
Date: Sun 4 Jun 89 16:19:05-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: changing offices
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <613005545.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <yh#In@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
OK. One question I've been asked is whether the signing the letter
means that ALL proposals must come through CSLI. It doesn't. It only
means that you'll submit some once in a while. By any chance was that
your worry?
Betsy
-------
∂04-Jun-89 1649 betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU re: changing offices
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 4 Jun 89 16:49:47 PDT
Received: by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA03591; Sun, 4 Jun 89 16:54:54 PDT
Date: Sun 4 Jun 89 16:54:53-PDT
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: changing offices
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <613007693.0.BETSY@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <aityG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
We don't have a tax but we do ask that you write in computer and personnel
support when it's appropriate.
Betsy
-------
∂05-Jun-89 0944 gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu ELIS Machines
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 89 09:44:21 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA06059; Mon, 5 Jun 89 09:46:04 PDT
Resent-Message-Id: <8906051646.AA06059@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Return-Path: <gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0) id AA05536; Wed, 31 May 89
10:36:25 PDT
Date: Wed, 31 May 1989 10:36:21 PDT
From: Grace Smith <gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@score.stanford.edu
Cc: gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: ELIS Machines
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.612639381.gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Resent-To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1989 9:46:03 PDT
Resent-From: Grace Smith <gsmith@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Professor McCarthy,
I've learned in a round-about manner that you're interested in having our
NTT owned ELIS machines. We have documentation authorizing the extension
of importation of the two machines until 3/7/90. Please let me know if
you really are interesting in assuming responsibility for these machines
so that I can pass the information on to Mr. Hibino.
Thanks very much,
Grace Smith
∂05-Jun-89 1000 JMC
∂30-May-89 1529 MPS phone
Mike Fallon, friend of Armin Miller called
5-30
941-7573
∂05-Jun-89 1501 cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU re: Rumor reposted from soc.culture.china (was A must !)
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 89 15:01:52 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA15570; Mon, 5 Jun 89 15:02:24 PDT
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 89 15:02:24 PDT
From: cphoenix@csli.Stanford.EDU (Chris Phoenix)
Message-Id: <8906052202.AA15570@csli.Stanford.EDU>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: re: Rumor reposted from soc.culture.china (was A must !)
Sorry... I'll dig it up and post the relevant parts of the header.
∂05-Jun-89 1534 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 89 15:34:28 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu
(5.61/UW-NDC Revision: 1.85 ) id AA03003; Mon, 5 Jun 89 15:33:30 -0700
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1989 15:30:04 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Sender: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU
Subject: re: Nicaragua and China events
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <5iPlr@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <MailManager.613089004.821.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
The Soviets are simply reporting what happened; otherwise, they're treating
it as a purely domestic Chinese matter. They just mended fences after 30 years
and don't want to start a new period of Soviet/Chinese hostility.
The Cubans have always been rather cool to the Chinese, particularly since
the Chinese have badgered them repeatedly about Angola. Thanks to US government
stupidity, you can't get Cuban publications in the US, but you still can listen
to Radio Habana on short-wave.
I don't know what the Nicaraguans are saying, but given the strong Roman
Catholic Church I expect them to take the same line as the Soviets.
-------
∂05-Jun-89 1610 JMC
co2 geology 321
∂05-Jun-89 1830 grossman@polya.Stanford.EDU GO4 root password
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Jun 89 18:30:28 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA21847; Mon, 5 Jun 89 18:30:42 -0700
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 89 18:30:42 -0700
From: Stu Grossman <grossman@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906060130.AA21847@polya.Stanford.EDU>
To: weening@polya.Stanford.EDU, jmc@sail
Subject: GO4 root password
Since I couldn't figure out the root password for GO4, and a ce needed to get
root on the system, I have changed it. It is now 'alion'.
Stu
P.S. Eat this message after reading it, as it contains sensitive information.
∂06-Jun-89 0043 PAF China
Looks pretty grave. We've been out at the ham radio club, listening
to Radio Bejing, and looking for pirate stations in the ham bands.
-=PAF
∂06-Jun-89 0915 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Jun 89 09:15:38 PDT
Date: Tue 6 Jun 89 09:13:25-PDT
From: ABE DEANDA <A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Nicaragua and China events
To: MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU
cc: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <MailManager.613089004.821.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
Message-ID: <12499989558.20.A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Mark Crispin states:
> I don't know what the Nicaraguans are saying, but given the strong
> Roman Catholic Church I expect them to take the same line as the
> Soviets.
I'm not sure what this is implying, but I would like to point out that
that Roman Catholic Church is not that strong in Sandinista Nicaragua.
What is in place right now are a few 'liberation theologists' who are
trying to speak for the Church in Nicaragua, but the more mainstream
Catholics are anti-Sandinista. If you will recall, a few years back
when Pope John Paul II visited Nicaragua, the government organized
demonstrations against him, and he publicly reprimanded one of the
priests who was involved in the government (i.e. held an appointed
positiion).
Abe
-------
∂06-Jun-89 0930 JMC
Gillespie
∂06-Jun-89 1055 MPS phone call
Jessie Schilling, 5-4271
re: Stewardship, Pigott chair. Wants a report
letter from you.
Pat
∂06-Jun-89 1139 PAF Beijing
We are currently monitoring the CW portion of the 20m amateur band. No
luck yet.
-=paulf
∂06-Jun-89 1751 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Jun 89 17:51:34 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA14592; Tue, 6 Jun 89 17:51:58 PDT
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1989 17:51:57 PDT
From: David Wallace <gumby@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: Mark Crispin <MRC@cac.washington.edu>
Cc: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: re: Nicaragua and China events
In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 5 Jun 1989 15:30:04 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613183917.gumby@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1989 15:30:04 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@cac.washington.edu>
I don't know what the Nicaraguans are saying, but given the
strong Roman Catholic Church I expect them to take the same line
as the Soviets.
Huh? I can't think of a communist regime supported by the Church (the
"liberation theologians" tend to be out of the Catholic mainstream,
even in Nicaragua); the church has often been outspoken in the support
of right-wing regimes (Franco, Hitler, and Petain, for instance).
∂06-Jun-89 1900 JMC
493-6315
∂06-Jun-89 1907 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Jun 89 19:07:07 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu
(5.61/UW-NDC Revision: 1.95 ) id AA06310; Tue, 6 Jun 89 19:06:49 -0700
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1989 18:58:08 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Sender: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU
Subject: re: Nicaragua and China events
To: David Wallace <gumby@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Cc: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>, su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <CMM.0.88.613183917.gumby@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <MailManager.613187888.7590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
I am surprised that the Nicaraguans have come out in favor of the Chinese
massacre. Perhaps it's because those massacred were not good Catholics; they
were merely Buddhists or Confucionists or atheists and thus their lives are not
of much concern to the Roman church. I imagine that the pope (a.k.a. the
world's biggest transvestite) would have had something to say if it was Chinese
Catholics who were being mowed down.
It should be noted that the Sandanista leadership is Catholic, and, unlike Fidel
Castro, have not formally broken with the church. The Ortegas go to Mass like
the rest of the mindless flock.
I never meant to imply that the Catholic Church supported Marxist governments
(Nicaragua is not a "communist regime"...yet). Rather, I was commenting that
many world governments do not openly defy the Catholic Church. This is sad.
-------
∂06-Jun-89 2222 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: Avoiding Blacks...
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Jun 89 22:21:51 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA17451; Tue, 6 Jun 89 22:23:36 PDT
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1989 22:23:35 PDT
From: "William A. Brown" <wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: re: Avoiding Blacks...
In-Reply-To: Your message of 06 Jun 89 2153 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613200215.wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
In reply to John McCarthy
There are de facto "White functions", but not by your definition. I
consider White functions functions that are historically non-minority, such
as a Grateful Dead concert. That does not mean that non-Whites CAN'T attend,
it simply means they DON'T attend. The same is true for Black, Jewish, and
Lithuanian functions. I go to a Black church, but we certainly have non-Black
members. The traditions of the church are still firmly rooted in Black
American culture.
Re: Chill outs. No, there are no "Get out White People" signs. Personally, I
think non-minorities are intimidated by the crowd of Blacks. In fact, that is
painfully obvious. However, it is NOT upon us to change our wa; the only
impediments to "outside" participation is in the minds of these "outsiders."
When I first came here, I went to my first non-Black fraternity party. I was
not invited, but I wasn't UNIVITED either. It was something I won't repeat,
as I don't drink and I REALLY don't like people who DO drink spilling beer on
me. But I didn't expect the PARTY to change for me.
Minorities learn early how to deal with new situations. We're forced to. I
really don't think non-minorities, in GENERAL, share that same degree of
adaptability. In addition, I think it decreases in everyone with age.
Regarding the Chill Outs, they are held on White Plaza every Friday, without
fail. You can't get much more open than that.
If one really wished to lessen their personal ignorance about another
culture, he/she can simply go see it; don't expect it to come to you. And
don't expect it to try to accomodate you any more than it would accomodate
nayone else. Just as you don't order hamburger in a Chinese restaurant, you
don't play Rolling Stones records at a Chill Out. There are plenty of other
places you can here that. If you are really interested, GO. But understand,
it is not there just for YOUR entertainment. Accept it for what it is.
I sincerely apologize for my numerous typos (here = hear, etc.) I am a
PISS-POOR typist, but luckily, I am not aspiring to be a secretary.
Re: To those who are wondering what a Black fraternity party is like, they
are announced, like all other parties, by fliers posted all over campus.
There is usually a small cover charge, and alcohol is often absent. The Black
fraternal and sororal organizations on campus are Kappa Alpha Psi (by far the
best :), Delta Sigma Theta, Omega Psi Phi, Alpha Kappa Alpha, and Alpha Phi
Alpha. Sometimes they sponsor a Chill Out, which is free.
∂06-Jun-89 2312 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: Avoiding Blacks...
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Jun 89 23:12:43 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18035; Tue, 6 Jun 89 23:14:27 PDT
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1989 23:14:27 PDT
From: "William A. Brown" <wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: re: Avoiding Blacks...
In-Reply-To: Your message of 06 Jun 89 2241 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613203267.wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
I sent it separately to su-etc. No, chill-out means to kick up your heels;
relax. Your interpretaion really was quite funny! Yes, there were SOME
Blacks, just as there are SOME Whites in my church. Still, the proportions
are way off. Like I said, it's not that they CAN'T come; they simply DON'T
come in significant numbers out of preference. As I believe I said in my
transmission, chill-outs are on White plaza.
∂07-Jun-89 0153 MAILER-DAEMON@uunet.uu.net Returned mail: Host unknown
Received: from uunet.uu.net by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 01:53:45 PDT
Received: from forsythe.Stanford.EDU by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with SMTP
id AA26609; Wed, 7 Jun 89 04:53:56 -0400
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 89 04:53:56 -0400
From: MAILER-DAEMON@uunet.uu.net (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown
Message-Id: <8906070853.AA26609@uunet.uu.net>
To: <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
----- Transcript of session follows -----
bad system name: isl
uux failed. code 68
550 <norman%isl.UUCP@UUNET.UU.NET>... Host unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from forsythe.Stanford.EDU by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with SMTP
id AA26594; Wed, 7 Jun 89 04:53:56 -0400
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Wed, 7 Jun 89 01:08:58 PDT
Message-Id: <MjQ1T@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 07 Jun 89 0109 PDT
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: China
To: isl!norman
I did not have the Nation in mind, and the Nation wasn't on that
rack, which is for publications in a newspaper format. I would
have expected the Nation to oppose the crackdown. Its articles
and editorials have generally opposed Soviet actions against
human rights for some years now. Let me assure you that my
motive was curiosity about the Communist Party
attitude. The American communists generally follow the Soviet
line when they can figure out what it is. However, Soviet
publications in the past could get away with ignoring
unsuitable news, and Western communists could not. For this
reason, when I was in the Soviet Union at a time when
non-communist Western newspapers were unavailable, the Western
communist newspapers were enormously more informative than
Pravda.
Today the Soviet media report most of the important news, but
have the luxury of waiting to comment until the Party decides
what the comment should be. Western communist newspapers
don't have that luxury. That's why I found Gus Hall's article
interesting.
Looking at the other leftist papers was an afterthought, and
also I had to leave before I was done, because the store was
closing.
I reported all I remembered. I would be pleased if you would
visit Kepler's and give a more thorough summary.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂07-Jun-89 0800 JMC
209 575-3445, James Bussey
∂07-Jun-89 0841 Mailer Re: A triumph of stupidity
Received: from KL.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 08:41:15 PDT
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 89 08:41:22 PDT
From: Richard Steinberger <STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Re: A triumph of stupidity
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <5jQXk@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12500245867.19.STEINBERGER@KL.SRI.COM>
FROM JMC:
> 1. No sooner does one stupidity (communism) show signs of
> dying out, than another gains strength - environmental extremism.
> 2. Another triumph by the people who gave you the
>Cambodian massacres - Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda.
> 3. The scientific and engineering community failed to
>do anything at all to inform the public. We'll eventually
>suffer for this.
> 4. Probably the fact that Rancho Seco was run by a
>public agency contributed to the disaster. Private utilities
>put up a fight.
You may consider a public vote to close Rancho Seco extremism. However,
it is a democratic action. Voters, informed or not, have made their voices
heard and will, presumably have some of their wishes respected. Whether
this represents extremism or not is a separate issue which I will not
get into.
To credit Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden for this vote is probably an exageration.
Though they may be against nuclear power on general principles, there were
certainly many local citizen activists who played a more important role.
Furthermore to blame Fonda and Hayden for Pol Pot's massacres seems rather
illogical. Some of their (political) positions during the late 60s were
perhaps not well thought-out, and Jane, at least has expressed regret
at visiting Hanoi during the Vietnam era. But to conclude that somehow
they deserve full condemnation for events in Cambodia is hard to follow.
Perhaps the "scientific and engineering community" did not take public
positions on the Rancho Seco issue. Clearly there are scientists and
engineers on both sides of the issue. If both sides of this community
entered the debate, results may or may not have been any different, although
it's possible the public may have become better informed.
Yes, private companies may be able to put up more of a fight: More
advertising, higher-paid lawyers, court battles, appeals. Is this
relevant? I haven't seen any pro-nuclear activists complain about France's
government-funded and managed nuclear program.
-ric s.
-------
∂07-Jun-89 1230 MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU re: Nicaragua and China events
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 12:30:17 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu
(5.61/UW-NDC Revision: 1.95 ) id AA25591; Wed, 7 Jun 89 12:30:06 -0700
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1989 12:24:49 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Sender: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU
Subject: re: Nicaragua and China events
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <ajCao@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <MailManager.613250689.1575.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
I agree that they categorize people based on whether or not they are Marxist
(or whether or not their oppressors are Marxist). I am, however, stating that
they also categorize people based on whether or not they are Catholic (or
whether or not their oppressors are Catholic).
In other words, being Marxist may be more important than being Catholic in
being rated as "good", but being Catholic *is* a factor.
-------
∂07-Jun-89 1359 Mailer re: Nicaragua and China events
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 13:59:52 PDT
Date: Wed 7 Jun 89 13:57:25-PDT
From: ABE DEANDA <A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Nicaragua and China events
To: MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU
cc: gumby@sumex-aim.stanford.edu, JMC@sail.stanford.edu,
su-etc@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: <MailManager.613187888.7590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
Message-ID: <12500303401.11.A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Mark Crispin writes:
> I am surprised that the Nicaraguans have come out in favor of the Chinese
> massacre. Perhaps it's because those massacred were not good Catholics; they
> were merelt Buddhists or Confucionists or atheists and thus their lives are not
> much of a concern to the Roman church ..... [The Pope] would have had
> something to say if it were good Catholics who were being mowed down.
> It should be noted that the Sandanista leadership is Catholic, and, unlike
> Fidel Castrom have not formally broken with the church,
This is one reason that the Catholic Church does not allow Priests to
hold political office. Mark's comments mistakenly imply that the
government of Nicaragua is Catholic, even though the Church is openly
at odds with the Nicaraguan government. Furthermore, the Pope has come
out against the massacre in China.
The Nicaraguans have come out in favor of the massacre for perhaps the
reason that JMC alluded to ... they may see the writing on the wall for
Communist Regimes.
Abe
-------
∂07-Jun-89 1408 NA.KXB@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU EERA PERSONNEL SERVICES
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 14:08:16 PDT
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 7 Jun 89 14:02:22 PDT
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 89 14:02:43 PDT
To: ee-faculty@sierra
From: "Karen Bennett" <NA.KXB@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: EERA PERSONNEL SERVICES
To: Principal Investigators and Staff
Electrical Engineering Research Administration
From: Kathy Davis, Assistant Dean for Human Resources
Joe Jezukewicz, Director, EERA
Date: June 7, 1989
Subj: EERA PERSONNEL SERVICES
Beverly Kelvie's retirement has prompted a review of the division of
responsibilities between Electrical Engineering Research
Administration (EERA) personnel administration and the School of
Engineering Human Resources Office. The purpose of this memo is to
define the respective roles of these offices with regard to
personnel activity in the EE labs, and to outline specific areas
about which you may have questions.
Since Bev will not be replaced for the short-term, many of her
responsibilities will be handled by Kathy Davis and Karen Bennett in
the Human Resources Office of the School of Engineering, and Joe
Jezukewicz and Anid Banuelos in EERA.
Joe Jezukewicz, EERA Director, will assume primary responsibility
for the EERA employee relations activities and its coordination with
the Assistant Dean, Kathy Davis, and campus Employee Relations.
Underlying this responsibility is the assumption that line
supervisors are still the first point of contact in matters such as
dealing with issues of performance management, staff
dissatisfaction, job enrichment, etc.
Both personnel and payroll administration report to Joanne Russell
in the EERA Accounting Office, assuring effective coordination of
these related areas. Anid Banuelos is responsible for the following
personnel administrative activities:
- Issuing payroll checks and troubleshooting payroll problems.
- Maintaining on-line leave accrual records/reporting system.
- Administering disability and Worker's Compensation claims and
preparing accident reports.
- Processing salary distribution offsets and summer salary
supplements for research faculty.
- Coordinating nonexempt hiring process, as noted.
- Arranging for temporary staffing needs.
- Updating EERA and faculty/staff directories.
- Preparing personnel forms, such as:
+ Salary and appointment changes for staff,
postdoctoral fellows, and students.
+ Personnel requisitions.
+ Nonexempt step increases.
Other areas of EERA Human Resources and Personnel Administration
will be managed in the following manner:
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
As noted above, EERA employee relations will be managed and
coordinated by Joe Jezukewicz in conjunction with Kathy Davis.
*
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
Line supervisors have the primary responsibility for staff
development. Information regarding staff development opportunities
can be obtained from Joe Jezukewicz, Kathy Davis, or the campus
Training and Development Office.
CLASSIFICATION/COMPENSATION
Requests for review of job classifications and compensation for
existing positions should be referred to Kathy Davis. Anid Banuelos
will process associated salary or appointment changes and prepare
requisitions for new positions.
NONEXEMPT EMPLOYMENT
Anid Banuelos will be responsible for preparing requisitions for
processing from a job description prepared by the hiring officer
(supervisor having the vacancy). She will receive the
resumes/applications, log them in, and forward them to the hiring
supervisor. When a hiring decision has been made, all applications
must be returned to Anid for reference in preparing a search
summary, and for retention in EERA for a period of three years as
required by federal law. Anid also will prepare the in-house
paperwork, offer, and rejection letters.
ALL HIRING DECISIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE DEAN'S HUMAN
RESOURCES OFFICE which will provide assistance and guidance on all
staffing-related issues.
EXEMPT EMPLOYMENT
Anid Banuelos will prepare the requisitions for submission to the
Assistant Dean of Human Resources, with whom the hiring supervisor
will coordinate the search, develop a search plan, and coordinate
the hiring process. Other procedures will be the same as for
nonexempt employment described above.
WAIVERS [TO] HIRE
The requesting supervisor should complete the necessary
documentation for submission to Kathy Davis. All questions should
be directed to her office.
RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Questions regarding research associate appointments and salaries
should be referred directly to Rose Ewing, Faculty Administrator.
All other matters concerning research associates may be directed to
Kathy Davis. Anid Banuelos will prepare associated salary and
appointment changes.
SALARY SETTING/PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS
The performance appraisal process will be managed by Kathy Davis'
office in coordination with Joe Jezukewicz. Performance appraisals
should be sent directly to Kathy Davis' office when completed. The
staff salary setting process will be managed by Kathy Davis' office
in close coordination with EERA and its Laboratory Directors and
supervisors. Anid Banuelos will coordinate scheduled nonexempt step
increases with the employee's supervisor and process associated
paperwork, as noted above.
LAYOFFS
All layoffs must be coordinated with and approved by the School
Human Resources Office. The EERA pre-award and accounting offices
monitor the programmatic and financial status of EE research
projects and will direct concerns to principal investigators, and EE
Department or lab administration, as appropriate. Accordingly, they
will apprise the School Human Resources Office with which EERA will
coordinate the processing of any staffing-related changes. However,
we urge the research labs to also alert Human Resources and EERA
when any potential layoff situations are recognized.
VISA INFORMATION
Questions regarding visas should be referred to Anid Banuelos.
RESOURCE PERSONNEL
Electrical Engineering
School of Engineering Research Administration
Kathy Davis Joe Jezukewicz
Assistant Dean for Human Resources Director, EERA
222 Terman Center AEL 118
3-3872, na.kmd@forsythe 3-1803, jezuk@sierra
Rose Ewing Anid Banuelos
Faculty Administrator Personnel Assistant, EERA
201 Terman Center AEL 117
3-4852, na.rxe@forsyhte 3-3665, anid@sierra
Karen Bennett Joanne Russell
Personnel Administrator Accounting Office, EERA
222 Terman Center AEL 115
3-8145, na.kxb@forsythe 3-1225, russell@sierra
Jan Simpson
Personnel Assistant
222 Terman Center
5-8245, na.jan@forsythe
To: EE-FACULTY@SIERRA, EE-ADMINLIST@SIERRA, NA.KMD, DOWN@SIERRA,
NA.RXE@FORSYTHE
∂07-Jun-89 1409 MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU final pre-massacre issue of Beijing Review
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 14:09:05 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu
(5.61/UW-NDC Revision: 1.95 ) id AA26821; Wed, 7 Jun 89 14:08:37 -0700
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1989 13:50:24 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Sender: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU
Subject: final pre-massacre issue of Beijing Review
To: su-etc@LaBrea.Stanford.EDU
Cc: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <MailManager.613255824.2781.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
I just received the most recent issue of Beijing Review (China's official
foreign-language news/political weekly magazine), almost certainly the last
issue before the massacre.
Many of the staff members of Beijing Review, China Reconstructs (a monthly
feature magazine), and Radio Beijing (the international radio service) were
participants in the demonstrations before the massacre. These journalists were
all pro-China, pro-Party. They were also pro-Democracy and pro- telling the
truth. They were a credit to their profession.
Many of them are now dead. Like the brief announcement on Radio Beijing
condemning the massacre, this final issue of Beijing Review is their swan song.
It is fascinating reading. Deng Xiaoping is referred to as "doddering".
The students are quoted extensively, including very harsh criticism of Li Peng.
The declaration of martial law is openly mocked. In some cases, this is
presented as quotations or with comments about how "a few bad elements are
trying to overthrow the socialist system"...but there is no doubt where the
hearts and minds of the Chinese journalists lay. There is extensive coverage
of the demonstrations and several photographs.
I've only skimmed through it as yet, otherwise I'd quote in greater detail.
If China Books & Periodicials in San Francisco still has any copies left,
I recommend getting a copy, and one of next week's issue (assuming there is one
next week) to compare. This is history.
-------
∂07-Jun-89 1726 gerlach@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Re: change electronic mail address
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 17:26:09 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 7 Jun 89 17:24:15 PDT
From: gerlach@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sharon Gerlach)
Date: Wed 7 Jun 89 17:24:14-PDT
Subject: Re: change electronic mail address
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Cc: gerlach@SIERRA
Message-Id: <613268654.0.GERLACH@SIERRA>
In-Reply-To: <ejxVP@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
Will do!
-------
∂07-Jun-89 2012 R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU Environmental Science
Received: from Macbeth.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Jun 89 20:12:26 PDT
Date: Wed 7 Jun 89 20:10:25-PDT
From: Dennis Ward <R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Environmental Science
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12500371305.80.R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
Saw your posting on SU-ETC and wonder if you have a source for the mentioned
article on the misuse of environmental science?
Thanks,
Dennis
-------
∂08-Jun-89 0422 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu Re: A triumph of stupidity
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 04:22:36 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA09252; Thu, 8 Jun 89 04:24:21 PDT
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1989 4:24:20 PDT
From: "William A. Brown" <wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu, su-etc@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: A triumph of stupidity
In-Reply-To: Your message of 07 Jun 89 0151 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613308260.wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
John,
The opponents of nuclear energy are not stupid - they just have a
different opinion than yours.
Bill
∂08-Jun-89 0902 R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU re: Environmental Science
Received: from Macbeth.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 09:02:41 PDT
Date: Thu 8 Jun 89 09:00:41-PDT
From: Dennis Ward <R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Environmental Science
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <MjdSp@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12500511526.83.R.RAMJET@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
I'd appreciate a copy, if it's not too much trouble. I teach at
the Air Force Academy and am organizing our March student
conference, which this year is on global environmental issues.
I'm in the process of setting the agenda and lining up speakers,
round table leaders, panelists, etc, and some diverse views would
be helpful.
My address:
Captain Dennis Ward
USAFA/DFPS
USAF ACademy
Colorado Springs, CO 80840
also: ward@usafa.af.mil
Thanks very much.
Dennis
-------
∂08-Jun-89 0908 MPS
Yes, it was mailed (Velikhov)
∂08-Jun-89 1023 davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU Re: Avoiding Blacks...
Received: from psych.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 10:23:44 PDT
Received: by psych.Stanford.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 8 Jun 89 10:24:41 PDT
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 89 10:24:41 PDT
From: davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU (Martin Davidson)
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: Avoiding Blacks...
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <MjCuI@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Stanford University
Cc:
In article <MjCuI@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> you write:
>[In reply to message from wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu sent Tue, 6 Jun 1989 21:27:44 PDT.]
>
>There aren't any ``white functions'', i.e. functions to which non-whites
>are not admitted or require more of an invitation than white outsiders
>to the particular group. That there should be is contrary to the
>policy of Stanford and often contrary to law.
>
>On the other hand, there are specifically black functions.
Please name a specifically black function to which whites are not
admitted or require more of an invitation than black outsiders.
Please cite your sources.
>I'm not familiar with the particular function you mentioned. Is it
>somehow obvious that non-blacks are welcome?
Does it need to be? If so, why?
Martin
∂08-Jun-89 1201 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU Autumn Quarter Textbooks
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 12:01:17 PDT
Date: Thu 8 Jun 89 12:00:52-PDT
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Autumn Quarter Textbooks
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12500544328.16.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Instructor:
It's time to order Autumn Quarter textbooks. Since many of you will soon
be leaving for the summer, please take a moment now to review the following.
I'd appreciate a response by **JUNE 30** at the latest as the Bookstore
requires a long lead time on text orders, and I'll be gone from mid-July
to mid-August.
Where available, past textbook orders and enrollments will be forwarded.
Please make any necessary corrections, and add in complete ordering
information for new texts.
Necessary ordering information includes:
Author:
Title:
Publisher:
Required or Optional:
Please include an estimated enrollment (an educated quess will do).
***No text order on file for CS306***
Thanks again.
Claire
-------
∂08-Jun-89 1916 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU possible IEEE interview
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 19:16:43 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA08069; Thu, 8 Jun 89 19:17:18 PDT
Date: Thu 8 Jun 89 19:17:18-PDT
From: Reid Hoffman <HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: possible IEEE interview
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <613361838.0.HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Professor McCarthy,
(In presumption that you got my mail), did I say something to offend you
when I asked if you would be interested in doing an interview for a
magazine? I still haven't heard from you, and I was hoping that I hadn't
offended you.
thanks
reid
-------
∂08-Jun-89 2048 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU re: possible IEEE interview
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 20:48:40 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA10427; Thu, 8 Jun 89 20:49:16 PDT
Date: Thu 8 Jun 89 20:49:15-PDT
From: Reid Hoffman <HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: possible IEEE interview
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <613367355.0.HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <AkATE@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Well, it actually doesn't need to be done anymore as the deadline is
almost here (and if you will be travelling soon, extending the deadline
doesn't make sense.) However, it might be possible for a later issue,
for which we could have the interview over the summer, so what it
involves is:
the IEEE is starting a new student journal
the editors are interested in having interviews with various leading
figures in C.S. about the state of the field and future direction (e.g. people
like Knuth, you, Nilsson)
if we were to do this, we should meet to discuss what good questions
would be (so you could suggest some and also have a couple of days to think
about others) and then meet again for an interview. I would then prepare a
transcript, edit it, and go over it with you till we reach a final copy and
then send it in to the student editor at Stanford.
Would you be interested in doing it later this summer?
thanks
reid
-------
∂08-Jun-89 2114 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu comments on Lisp book
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 8 Jun 89 21:14:07 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 9 Jun 89 00:14:18 EDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: comments on Lisp book
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 89 00:14:10 EDT
Message-ID: <7299.613368850@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Hi, John. A few years ago you said some nice things about my introductory
Lisp book. I'm now completing the second edition. Besides rewriting it
for Common Lisp, I've added several interesting new teaching devices. The
most interesting one is called an evaltrace diagram. (I'm currently
preparing a journal article on evaltrace notation.)
Anyway, the reason I'm writing to you is this: I'd like to get some quotes
from distinguished Lisp personalities to use either on the back cover of
the book, or the four-color brochure.
Would you be willing to take a look at the draft? If you decide you like
it, and you're willing to let your name be used, then all you'd have to do
is write down your impressions (a couple of paragraphs is fine), and the
publisher will extract whatever they think will make a good quote. They
will clear the exact quote with you before using it anywhere.
We're on a tight schedule, so if you agree, I'll ship you the draft
immediately via FedEx to your office at Stanford.
Thanks, -- Dave
∂09-Jun-89 0755 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 07:55:42 PDT
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 07:54:29 PDT
To: jmc@sail
From: "Arthur P Coladarci" <CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
John: As you already may have heard, Bob Street has decided
to reconnect rec.humor.funnry to the Stanford computer systems.
This action will be reported to the Senate next Thursday.
Art Coladarci
∂09-Jun-89 0838 MPS
∂08-Jun-89 1800 JMC Please mail
To: MPS
the three Soviet campaign platforms to Petr Beckmann.
I'm sorry, but I do not know what file this is. Please
Pat
∂09-Jun-89 0902 looking!brad@watmath.waterloo.edu Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
Received: from watmath.waterloo.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 09:02:02 PDT
Received: from looking.uucp by watmath.waterloo.edu with uucp
id <AA06352>; Fri, 9 Jun 89 12:01:37 EDT
Received: by looking.on.ca (smail2.5)
id AA20541; 9 Jun 89 11:58:43 EDT (Fri)
To: watmath!SAIL.Stanford.EDU!JMC@watmath.waterloo.edu (John McCarthy)
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 11:58:41 EDT
Subject: Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy" of Jun 09, 89 at 0821
X-Mailer: Elm [version 1.5]
Message-Id: <8906091158.AA20541@looking.on.ca>
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
Excellent. And thanks for all your efforts. The only disappointing thing
is that the decision to ban can be made so quickly, but the decision to
un-ban takes 5 months. Bureaucracy....
∂09-Jun-89 0916 CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 09:16:44 PDT
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 09:15:31 PDT
To: jmc@sail
From: "Arthur P Coladarci" <CR.APC@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
John: Regrading your su.etc message on Streets decision. Some
people are assuming that all after your first sentence is my message
to you. Will you get out a clarification? Thanks. Art.
∂09-Jun-89 0917 winograd@loire.stanford.edu Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
Received: from loire.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 09:17:12 PDT
Received: by loire.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA19764; Fri, 9 Jun 89 09:16:51 PDT
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 09:16:51 PDT
Message-Id: <8906091616.AA19764@loire.stanford.edu>
From: Terry Winograd <Winograd@csli.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
Do I detect a note of irony in "...and it took less than six months."?
--t
∂09-Jun-89 1135 TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU A favor, please?
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 11:35:19 PDT
Date: Fri 9 Jun 89 11:34:54-PDT
From: Taleen Nazarian <TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: A favor, please?
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12500801745.26.TALEEN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Prof. McCarthy,
I would like to ask your permission to list you as a reference. While
I've enjoyed being publications coordinator for the past two years,
I think it is time to move on and better exercise my potential. I took
this job mainly because it was the most appropriate thing to do
at the time (Betty had said it was perfectly okay to take several weeks
off for a honeymoon, etc.....), I now am really ready to move on.
I am hoping to find something which can better utilize my economics
background (maybe SRI? maybe somewhere else...). I appreciate that
you once set up an interview for me. I am assuming that you really
think I do have some potential for the outside world. :)
While I only worked one summer for you, I hope that you have gotten
to know me well enough to be able to serve as a reference.
Please let me know if this is okay. I know dozens of your students
probably already use you as a reference, but do you have room for
one more little staff member?
Thanks,
Taleen
(I could either list your name and number, and/or include a letter of
"recommendation" from you with future applications. Please let me know
how you want to do this, if at all.)
-------
∂09-Jun-89 1136 MPS
Call Joel Shurkin, News Service, 5-1944
Pat
∂09-Jun-89 1336 heit@meme.Stanford.EDU Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
Received: from meme.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 13:36:01 PDT
Received: by meme.Stanford.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 9 Jun 89 13:38:16 PDT
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 13:38:16 PDT
From: heit@meme.Stanford.EDU (Evan Heit)
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, cphoenix@csli
Subject: Re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
In-Reply-To: <ekWFA@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Stanford University
Cc:
Yay team!
Well, the book-burning would have been fun, but I prefer less flagrant
political methods. Maybe next time....
∂09-Jun-89 1356 boyer@CLI.COM congrats
Received: from CLI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 13:55:55 PDT
Received: by CLI.COM (4.0/1); Fri, 9 Jun 89 15:57:01 CDT
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 15:57:01 CDT
From: Robert S. Boyer <boyer@CLI.COM>
Message-Id: <8906092057.AA06410@CLI.COM>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: bledsoe@cs.utexas.edu
Subject: congrats
Reply-To: boyer@cli.com
I just learned via Richard Waldinger that you've been recently elected
to the National Academy of Science. That's a great award but one that
was very, very, long over due.
∂09-Jun-89 1407 hayes@kanga.parc.xerox.com Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
Received: from arisia.Xerox.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 14:07:41 PDT
Received: from kanga.parc.Xerox.COM by arisia.Xerox.COM with SMTP
(5.61+/IDA-1.2.8/gandalf) id AA02935; Fri, 9 Jun 89 14:05:45 -0700
Received: by kanga.parc.xerox.com
(5.61+/IDA-1.2.8/gandalf) id AA00972; Fri, 9 Jun 89 14:07:50 PDT
Message-Id: <8906092107.AA00972@kanga.parc.xerox.com>
Reply-To: Pat Hayes <hayes@arisia.Xerox.COM>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 14:07:50 PDT
From: Pat Hayes <hayes@arisia.Xerox.COM>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored
Congratulations. My view of Stanford has considerably improved, I
must say.
Pat
PS I suppose that this means that there wont be any mudwrestling after
all. Ah well.
∂09-Jun-89 1516 MPS U of Md trip
You will need to confirm these times and dates with
Yvonne Clark, 301 770-2310
Lv 6-25 United 620 8:40 am
Ar Natl 7:13 pm
Lv 6-28 United 623 5:00 pm
Ar Chicago 6:14 pm
Lv Chicago United 135 7:05 pm
Ar SFO 9:37 pm
∂09-Jun-89 1520 taleen@polya.Stanford.EDU re: A favor, please?
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 15:20:06 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA19136; Fri, 9 Jun 89 15:20:25 -0700
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1989 15:20:22 PDT
From: "Taleen M. Nazarian" <taleen@polya.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: A favor, please?
In-Reply-To: Your message of 09 Jun 89 1516 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613434022.taleen@polya.stanford.edu>
That would be just fine. Thank you very much. I'll ask Pat to
put it in letter form as well. Also, thank you for replying right
away. The sooner I get started on this, the better!
Taleen
∂09-Jun-89 1523 MPS
∂09-Jun-89 1516 MPS U of Md trip
To: JMC
You will need to confirm these times and dates with
Yvonne Clark, 301 770-2310
Lv 6-25 United 620 8:40 am
Ar Natl 7:13 pm
Lv 6-28 United 623 5:00 pm
Ar Chicago 6:14 pm
Lv Chicago United 135 7:05 pm
Ar SFO 9:37 pm
∂09-Jun-89 1522 looking!brad@watmath.waterloo.edu Statement on the restoration of rec.humor.funny
Received: from watmath.waterloo.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 15:22:04 PDT
Received: from looking.uucp by watmath.waterloo.edu with uucp
id <AA20532>; Fri, 9 Jun 89 18:21:19 EDT
Received: by looking.on.ca (smail2.5)
id AA22446; 9 Jun 89 17:51:37 EDT (Fri)
To: G.GORIN%macbeth.stanford.edu GQ.VVN@forsythe.stanford.edu
Subject: Statement on the restoration of rec.humor.funny
Cc: jmc%sail.stanford.edu weening@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
Date: Fri Jun 9 17:51:29 1989
Message-Id: <8906091751.AA22434@looking.on.ca>
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
While I feel you have made the right move in this, I feel I must
insist that you add something to your statement. Namely that you
found no evidence that the newsgroup rec.humor.funny did perpetuate
racism, sexism or intolerance.
Inaccurate reports at the beginning of this affair led the Bay area
newspapers to report RHF as a "file filled with thousands of racist
jokes." As you are no doubt aware, only a tiny fraction of the material
in the group was ever in question, and complaints only came from people
with judgement found questionable by the vast majority of the readers.
I can send you well over 100 testimonials (gathered in only 1 day)
stating that RHF is not in any way withing the categories you state
you abhor.
Your prepared statement implies something nasty has been banned, and
that it is being restored under protest. I wish this concept
removed or corrected.
There is no need for you or Stanford to make any judgemental statement,
implicit or explicit, within your prepared statement. I would like it
made clear that what you are really saying is that the various committees
have agreed it is not Stanford's place to judge or ban material from
libraries or computer systems. If you would like to make an independent
statement of judgement in another statement, go ahead. Just don't
associate the two.
Brad Templeton
∂09-Jun-89 1548 TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored - clarification
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 15:48:43 PDT
Date: Fri 9 Jun 89 15:48:21-PDT
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: Academic freedom wins and rhf restored - clarification
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <akyWV@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12500847886.22.TAJNAI@Score.Stanford.EDU>
John, your message was perfectly clear, and I congratulate you on
fighting and winning!
Carolyn
-------
∂09-Jun-89 1656 portia@Portia.stanford.edu well, there is a rec.humor.funny
Received: from Portia.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 9 Jun 89 16:56:53 PDT
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA15826; Fri, 9 Jun 89 16:57:49 PDT
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 89 16:57:49 PDT
From: Reid Hoffman <portia@Portia.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8906092357.AA15826@Portia.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: well, there is a rec.humor.funny
It doesn't have any new jokes yet, but it seems to exist.
reid
∂10-Jun-89 0757 wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu re: Protestors
Received: from sumex-aim.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 10 Jun 89 07:57:45 PDT
Received: by sumex-aim.stanford.edu (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA01372; Sat, 10 Jun 89 07:59:30 PDT
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 1989 7:59:30 PDT
From: "William A. Brown" <wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Cc: wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu
Subject: re: Protestors
In-Reply-To: Your message of 09 Jun 89 1743 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613493970.wab@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Thank you.
∂10-Jun-89 0900 JMC
zohar
∂10-Jun-89 0900 JMC
menlo medical
∂10-Jun-89 2348 LES Printing trasparencies
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Jun-89 19:16-PT.]
> Can the Imagen safely be used to print on transparencies?
Yes, as far as the machine goes, but the toner usually doesn't bind
as well as on paper (it can be rubbed off) and there are more misfeeds
and double feeds because of the slickness of the transparencies.
∂10-Jun-89 2355 LES re: Printing trasparencies
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Jun-89 23:52-PT.]
They seem to all be about the same with respect to transparencies.
I find that it is generally easier to make paper masters on the printer
then struggle with getting a copier to make adequate transparencies.
Another option is to use the thermofax machine, assuming that there
is thermofax paper in stock.
∂11-Jun-89 0026 LES re: Printing trasparencies
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Jun-89 00:23-PT.]
You should be able to. You will probably do better using the manual feed
rather than the paper cassette, though. With the manual feed you don't get
misfeeds.
∂11-Jun-89 0032 LES re: Printing trasparencies
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Jun-89 00:28-PT.]
I think so. It is at end opposite where the cassette plugs in.
It conceivably might work to just remove the cassette and then feed
the transparencies, but you may have to tell the controller to do
that. I think that there may be a switch in the spooler to specify
manual feed -- I don't remember offhand.
∂11-Jun-89 0037 LES re: Printing trasparencies
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Jun-89 00:33-PT.]
You can try removing the cassette and see if it accepts manual feed. If
not, then it has to be told and there should be a description of how in
the spooler manual.
∂11-Jun-89 1003 BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU Summary of April computer charges.
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 Jun 89 10:03:20 PDT
Date: Sun 11 Jun 89 09:56:57-PDT
From: Billing Editor <BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Summary of April computer charges.
To: MCCARTHY@Score.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12501308202.10.BEDIT@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Dear Mr. McCarthy,
Following is a summary of your computer charges for April.
Account System Billed Pct Cpu Job Disk Print Adj Total
JMC SAIL 2-DMA804 100 183.02 11.49 ***.** 6.20 5.00 2405.97
MCCARTHY SCORE 2-DMA804 100 .00 .00 31.48 .00 5.00 36.48
jmc LABREA 2-DMA804 100 .00 .00 102.37 .00 5.00 107.37
Total: 183.02 11.49 ***.** 6.20 15.00 2549.82
University budget accounts billed above include the following.
Account Princip Inv Title Comment
2-DMA804 McCarthy N00039-84-C-0211 Task 16, AI
The preceding statement is a condensed version of the detailed summary sheet
sent monthly to your department.
Please verify each month that the proper university budget accounts are paying
for your computer usage. Please also check the list of account numbers below
the numeric totals. If the organizations/people associated with that account
number should NOT be paying for your computer time, send mail to BEDIT@SCORE.
Please direct questions/comments to BEDIT@SCORE.
-------
∂11-Jun-89 1021 ARK Contined Operation of SAIL
To: ball@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, ME@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, tom@POLYA.Stanford.EDU,
wheaton@ATHENA.Stanford.EDU
Jim and Marty,
I'd like to meet with you some time this week to discuss the future of
SAIL, and to develop a budget for its continued operation. This budget
will be divided in fixed fractions among the user communities based
approximately on usage ratios, but without direct usage charges. I will
contact both of you during the week to set up a time. If you think someone
else should be in the meeting (e.g., Tom or George), please let me know
and I'll invite them. This is being done at the request of John McCarthy.
Arthur
∂11-Jun-89 1118 ME directory protection
∂10-Jun-89 2102 JMC
How do I unprotect a directory?
ME - Use the UFD command and type a new value for the directory protection.
Type just return to the other questions except for the final Y/N question.
(You also have to know the password for the directory.)
∂11-Jun-89 1454 ME re: manual feed on Imagen
To: JMC
CC: LES
∂11-Jun-89 0053 JMC manual feed on Imagen
To: ME
CC: LES
Les tells me that it is best to use manual feed if one wants
to make transparencies on the Imagen. Is there, or can there be,
some way to tell the Imagen to take its paper from the manual
feed? Les thought there might be a spooler switch, but MONCOM
mentions no such thing. It's LATHROP that I have in mind using.
ME - Looking back at my notes from a couple of years ago, I think that I
never figured out how to tell the Imagen printer to use the manual feed.
I don't have any Imagen manuals here for your printer, so if you have
a manual and can find details on how to tell it to use the manual feed,
let me know (look under paper or feed or manual feed). Otherwise, I
assume we need to contact Imagen.
(There is a spooler switch for manual feed on the Apple LaserWriter,
but it won't work with the Imagen until I find out the control details.)
∂11-Jun-89 2338 LES re: manual feed on Imagen
To: ME
CC: JMC
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Jun-89 14:54-PT.]
I believe that the way to tell Imagen printers to use manual mode is
included in the preamble control language definition that is included in
the manual that I got you several years ago. As I recall, another copy
went to Art Samuel. There ought to be at least one copy surviving.
If not, we can no doubt extort another copy.
∂12-Jun-89 0825 ball@hudson.Stanford.EDU Contined Operation of SAIL
Received: from hudson.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 89 08:25:16 PDT
Received: by hudson.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA06167; Mon, 12 Jun 89 08:25:22 -0700
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 89 08:25:22 -0700
From: Jim Ball <ball@hudson.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906121525.AA06167@hudson.Stanford.EDU>
To: ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Cc: ME@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
tom@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, wheaton@ATHENA.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Arthur Keller's message of 11 Jun 89 1021 PDT
Subject: Contined Operation of SAIL
Arthur,
It would probably be better to schedule the meeting with Goerge rather
than myself. I am not really up to date on current plans and
schedules.
-Jim
∂12-Jun-89 0900 JMC
ups 408 734-4000
∂12-Jun-89 0901 MPS
Tom Philp, San Jose Merc would like you to caal him
408 920-5024
∂12-Jun-89 1014 JMC
Caligaris re cash card
∂12-Jun-89 1014 JMC
call Doris re shares and address change
∂12-Jun-89 1024 wheaton@Athena.Stanford.EDU Contined Operation of SAIL
Received: from Athena.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 89 10:21:45 PDT
Received: by Athena.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA21128; Mon, 12 Jun 89 09:29:57 -0700
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 89 09:29:57 -0700
From: George S Wheaton <wheaton@Athena.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906121629.AA21128@Athena.Stanford.EDU>
To: ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Cc: ball@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, ME@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, tom@POLYA.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Arthur Keller's message of 11 Jun 89 1021 PDT <9lY6I@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Contined Operation of SAIL
I would like to attend.
gw
∂12-Jun-89 1134 VAL reply to message
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Jun-89 21:00-PT.]
The list of my papers is files[arc,val]. I just added a few unpublished
items at the end.
∂12-Jun-89 1528 LES Manual feed on Imagen
To: JMC, ME
Imagen (now QMS) customer service says that there are two ways to
make the printer use the manual feed:
(a) include the command "inputbin manual" in the document control language
preamble that gets shipped to the printer;
(b) type "set manual" on the printers console terminal.
John is going to try (b), since it is the simpler solution. If it doesn't
work for some reason, perhaps Marty could add a spooler switch to do (a).
∂12-Jun-89 1729 ME re: Manual feed on Imagen
To: JMC
CC: LES
OK, you can now use the /MANUAL switch on Lathrop. Let me know if it
works, since I have no way of testing it here.
∂12-Jun-89 1756 90.EJOHNSON@GSB-How.Stanford.EDU Learning Lisp
Received: from GSB-How.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 89 17:56:24 PDT
Date: Mon 12 Jun 89 17:55:30-PDT
From: Eric N. Johnson <90.EJOHNSON@GSB-How.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Learning Lisp
To: jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12501657464.13.90.EJOHNSON@GSB-How.Stanford.EDU>
John,
I'm looking for a way to "get up to speed" in Lisp. I have a computer science
degree, but I've gotten a little rusty after four years of no "serious"
programming efforts. I'd like to take the Artificial Intelligence course
next year. To do so, I think I need to spend some time attempting some minor
programs with Lisp this summer.
As for access to hardware, I currently own an IBM-PC compatible and a
very odd machine from HP called an Integral (basically a 68000 running
AT&T Unix V.2).
I'll be in the area over the summer so if there are university machines that
would be best suited to the task (that I can use without being registered
over the summer?), I would be in physical proximity to them.
Do you have any suggestions for how I might do this? Hardware, software,
books, etc? I'd appreciate any suggestions you have.
Eric Johnson
P.S. Since my finances aren't great, solutions with higher benefit/$cost
ratios are preferred! (That's not an indication of commitment, but
a reflection of the fact that purchasing a $2000 Lisp interpreter
wouldn't be an acceptable expense to the financial aid office.)
-------
∂12-Jun-89 2139 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Qlisp meeting(s) next week
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Jun 89 21:39:18 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA04386; Mon, 12 Jun 89 21:37:27 PDT
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 89 21:37:27 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906130437.AA04386@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Qlisp meeting(s) next week
I'd like to meet next week for the following purposes:
(1) to discuss our impressions of the US/Japan parallel Lisp workshop;
(2) to get a presentation of some new products from Alliant.
These should probably be two separate meetings, but I think we should
have them both between June 19 and 21 since Carol and Ron won't return
until late this week, and I am leaving on the 22nd.
Meeting (2) will require signing non-disclosure agreements, and also
depends on the schedule of the Alliant people.
Please let me know as soon as possible what dates/times are good or
bad for you.
∂13-Jun-89 0353 ariel%bimacs.bitnet@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU travel plans
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 Jun 89 03:53:49 PDT
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Tue, 13 Jun 89 03:52:31 PDT
Received: from bimacs.bitnet (ARIEL) by VM1.BIU.AC.IL (Mailer R2.03B) with
BSMTP id 4886; Tue, 13 Jun 89 13:20:51 P
From: Ariel J. Frank <ariel%bimacs.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 89 13:19:23 +0200
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: travel plans
Hello Prof. McCarthy. I was wondering if we can be of any help or be
advised of your travel plans. You have reservations at Kfar Hamacabia
for June 18-21 (all booked and arranged). The symposium location at
Bar-Ilan is at Weissfeld Auditorium, old physics building, room 301.
Follow car/foot signs when arriving at Bar-Ilan main enterance. A
social evening in Jaffa (sea and fish) is planned for Wed the 21th. I
will have a $1000 check and a $500 (in Israeli currency) local expenses
check for you. I will be all Sunday at Bar-Ilan (Tel: 03-5318407/8).
Ariel.
Ariel J. Frank
Deputy Chairperson
Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan, Israel 52100
Tel: (972-3) 5318407/8
BITNET: ariel@bimacs (also F68388@barilan)
ARPA: ariel%bimacs.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
CSNET: ariel%bimacs.bitnet%cunyvm.cuny.edu@csnet-relay
UUCP: uunet!mcvax!humus!bimacs!ariel
∂13-Jun-89 1126 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Summer Time Schedules
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 Jun 89 11:26:15 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Tue, 13 Jun 89 11:20:50 PDT
From: turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sherry A. Turner)
Date: Tue 13 Jun 89 11:20:48-PDT
Subject: Summer Time Schedules
To: EE-ADMINLIST@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: EE-FACULTY@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <613765248.0.TURNER@SIERRA>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
Time Schedules for Summer Quarter 1988-89 are available for you to pick up in
McCullough 150. You may also pick up the academic Calendars for 1989-90.
Thank you,
-Sherry-
-------
∂13-Jun-89 2003 JMC
susie
∂13-Jun-89 2009 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Lisp book
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 Jun 89 20:09:05 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 13 Jun 89 23:09:13 EDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Lisp book
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 89 23:09:08 EDT
Message-ID: <991.613796948@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Hi, John.
My publisher is holding open some space on the back of the book for a
suitable reviewer's quotation. My first choice would be to use a quotation
from you, but the publisher says they have to have it by this Friday in
order to meet the production schedule. (We're hoping to debut the book at
IJCAI.)
If you could possibly email me *something* by Thursday evening, I'll
take care of transmitting it to the publisher. Again, thanks for your time.
-- Dave
∂13-Jun-89 2036 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Re: Lisp book
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 Jun 89 20:36:23 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 13 Jun 89 23:36:09 EDT
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: Lisp book
In-reply-to: Your message of 13 Jun 89 20:26:00 -0700.
<AmamQ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 89 23:36:06 EDT
Message-ID: <1015.613798566@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Okay, I'll attempt to clear up the errors you indicated in the history
section.
-- Dave
∂14-Jun-89 0002 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu Re: Lisp book
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 00:02:51 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 14 Jun 89 03:02:49 EDT
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: Lisp book
In-reply-to: Your message of 13 Jun 89 23:31:00 -0700.
<AmdwJ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 03:02:29 EDT
Message-ID: <1225.613810949@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
> Another error: On page 77 you have a footnote about usage of the word
> "variable". It's wrong. Your usage of variable here does correspond to
> the mathematical usage. The "unknowns" of high school algebra are
> represented by letters but are not called variables in high school
> algebra. They're called unknowns. Ask a mathematician.
I don't quite see why the footnote is incorrect. The footnote is attached
to the sentence "A variable is a place where data is stored." We're
identifying variables with storage locations; the implication (unstated
because this is an early chapter) is that they can undergo assignment.
When one defines a mathematical function F(x), one is using x to name the
unknown input; one doesn't expect the value of x to change in the midst of
evaluating the function.
I do appreciate your comments. And I apologize again for the short notice
regarding the cover copy. Dick Gabriel and Guy Steele are also reading the
manuscript right now, but the publisher says there's only room for one
quote on the back cover, and if possible I'd like it to be from you.
-- Dave
∂14-Jun-89 0721 CLT mess
I am tired of cleaning up your mess in the kitchen.
There was olive oil all over the counter, the pantry door
dripping down the bottle and on the pantry shelf.
Not to mention other crumbs on the counter.
Couldn't you be more considerate?
∂14-Jun-89 1042 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Alliant presentation
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 10:41:57 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA01936; Wed, 14 Jun 89 10:40:07 PDT
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 10:40:07 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906141740.AA01936@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Alliant presentation
Alliant can't make the presentation next week, so I've tentatively
rescheduled it for Thursday, July 27 at 10:00 a.m. (I'll be back at
Stanford for a short visit then.) Please mark your calendars.
∂14-Jun-89 1052 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Summer schedule
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 10:52:00 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA01974; Wed, 14 Jun 89 10:50:32 PDT
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 10:50:32 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906141750.AA01974@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail, clt@sail, mps@sail
Subject: Summer schedule
I will be leaving on June 22. From June 26 to September 1 (except for
short trips), I will be at IDA/CRD in Princeton, phone (609) 924-4600.
I will be staying at the Residence Inn in Princeton, but I don't know
the phone number there yet. I'll be returning on September 5.
I've scheduled a trip back to Stanford for July 26-30.
From IDA, I should be able to dial in to Gang-of-Four and read my mail
here. If that doesn't work, I'll try to get an account on the
Princeton University machines and have mail forwarded. I hope to read
my mail every 2 or 3 days, at least.
∂14-Jun-89 1054 MPS
Jennifer NcComb, SJose Business Journal wuld
like to talk to you about video text
408 295-3800
∂14-Jun-89 1244 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Parallel Lisp mailing list
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 12:44:47 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA02201; Wed, 14 Jun 89 12:42:29 PDT
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 12:42:29 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906141942.AA02201@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: parallel-lisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Parallel Lisp mailing list
Welcome to the Parallel Lisp mailing list. I've created this list as
a result of a request at the US/Japan Parallel Lisp Workshop for a
place to discuss benchmarks, but I think it will be useful for other
discussions related to parallel Lisp as well.
To send a message to the list, mail to the address
parallel-lisp@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
Gang-of-Four is Stanford's Alliant FX/8 on which we do Qlisp research.
The above address should work from any Internet host; I'm not sure of
the syntax from CSNET or JUNET. For administrative requests, such as
additions to or removals from the list, please mail to
parallel-lisp-request@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
This will avoid having such messages received by the entire list.
Here is the current membership of the list. I've already added a few
Stanford and Lucid people who were not at the workshop. If you would
like anyone else added, or need to correct an email address, please
send mail to the parallel-lisp-request address given above.
Zahira Ammarguellat ammargue@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu
Ron Goldman arg@lucid.com
Carol Sexton carol@lucid.com
Carolyn Talcott clt@sail.stanford.edu
Etsuya Shibayama etsuya%is.titech.junet@relay.cs.net
Robert Halstead halstead@crl.dec.com
Luddy Harrison harrison@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu
Ryuzo Hasegawa hasegawa@icot.jp
Motokazu Hozumi hozumi%trla.ibmtrl.junet@relay.cs.net
Norio Irie irie%ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cs.net
Takayasu Ito ito%ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cs.net
Hideya Iwasaki iwasaki%wadalab.t.u-tokyo.junet@relay.cs.net
John McCarthy jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Jim Miller jmiller@cs.brandeis.edu
Morry Katz katz@polya.stanford.edu
Robert Kessler kessler@cs.utah.edu
David Kranz kranz@hx.lcs.mit.edu
Mario Tokoro mario@keio.ac.jp
Masahiko Sato masahiko%sato.riec.tohoku.junet@relay.cs.net
Ken-ichiro Murakami murakami@ntt-20.ntt.jp
Norihisa Suziki nsuzuki%tokvmsi1.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
Ikuo Takeuchi nue@ntt-20.ntt.jp
Hiroshi Okuno okuno@ntt-20.ntt.jp
Dan Pehoushek pehoushek@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
Dan Pierson pierson@encore.com
Randy Osborne ran@hx.lcs.mit.edu
Dick Gabriel rpg@lucid.com
Akikazu Takeuchi takeuchi@sys.crl.melco.co.jp
Takuo Watanabe takuo%is.titech.junet@relay.cs.net
Tomoyuki Tanaka tanakat%jpntscvm.bitnet@forsythe.stanford.edu
Kazunori Ueda ueda@icot.jp
Akihori Umemura umemura%ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@relay.cs.net
Shigeru Uzahara uzuhara%trla.ibmtrl.junet@relay.cs.net
Joe Weening weening@gang-of-four.stanford.edu
Aki Yonezawa yonezawa%is.titech.junet@relay.cs.net
Taiichi Yuasa yuasa%tutics.tut.junet@relay.cs.net
∂14-Jun-89 1338 wicker@sierra.STANFORD.EDU EE Faculty Mtg
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 13:38:22 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 14 Jun 89 13:32:16 PDT
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 13:32:16 PDT
From: wicker@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Beverly J. Wicker)
To: ee-faculty@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: ee-adminlist@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: EE Faculty Mtg
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.613859535.wicker@>
Reminder: The EE Faculty meeting will be on Friday, June 16 at 9:00 AM
in AEL 109.
∂14-Jun-89 1353 turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU Re: EE junk electronic mail
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 13:53:28 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 14 Jun 89 13:51:09 PDT
From: turner@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Sherry A. Turner)
Date: Wed 14 Jun 89 13:51:08-PDT
Subject: Re: EE junk electronic mail
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-Id: <613860668.0.TURNER@SIERRA>
In-Reply-To: <1ymZR1@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(219)+TOPSLIB(128)@SIERRA>
You will need to talk with Sharon Geralch. I believe Sharon is the person
handling the distribution list.
Sorry for any inconveniences.
-------
∂14-Jun-89 1454 zalta@csli.Stanford.EDU office space at Cordura
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 14:54:19 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA05791; Wed, 14 Jun 89 14:54:58 PDT
Date: Wed 14 Jun 89 14:54:57-PDT
From: Ed Zalta <ZALTA@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: office space at Cordura
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <613864497.0.ZALTA@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
I've arranged it that instead of us moving across the hall to 227, you and
I will stay put, and Bill Uzgalis will move across into our office.
That seems to be a better solution, and one to which Bill has no objections.
Ed
-------
∂14-Jun-89 1551 ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU Hyperproof lab
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 15:51:38 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA28226; Wed, 14 Jun 89 15:56:52 PDT
Message-Id: <8906142256.AA28226@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU, etch@russell.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@sail.stanford.edu, whp4@russell.Stanford.EDU,
emma@russell.Stanford.EDU, cymru@russell.Stanford.EDU,
betsy@russell.Stanford.EDU, uzgalis@russell.Stanford.EDU
Cc: ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU, hyde@russell.Stanford.EDU,
tran@russell.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Hyperproof lab
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 15:56:50 PDT
From: ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU
For various reasons, it seems to work out better if we move the
Hyperproof lab into 227 instead of 226. I gather Ed has talked to all
of you, except Julius who is out of town and whom I will send a
separate message, and everyone is agreeable and there are no wiring
problems.
Jon: What about the students? Will you talk to them or should I?
Bill U has already moved into 226, and I will pack up Julius' stuff
tomorrow, so they can move in after that.
Ingrid
∂14-Jun-89 1552 ZM
John,
I am waiting to hear from Nils about CT's promotion.
Zohar
∂14-Jun-89 1613 VAL
To: JMC
CC: MPS
I'd like to take a vacation, June 19-22.
∂14-Jun-89 1614 Mailer Re: Avoiding Blacks
Received: from psych.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 16:10:18 PDT
Received: by psych.Stanford.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 14 Jun 89 16:10:45 PDT
From: davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU (Martin Davidson)
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: davidson@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Avoiding Blacks
In-Reply-To: Your message of 14 Jun 89 15:09:00 PDT.
<ansDL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 16:10:43 PDT
In response to my posting, jmc asks:
>> create an institutional environment in which it is
>> explicitly stated that we, as persons of color, are
>> different in significant ways from the white Anglo
>> population and that those differences are as important
>> as the similarities we share.
>
>What are the significant differences you see?
The differences are numerous and have been written about by several
scholars more informed than I (depending upon what ethnic group one
focuses on and what issues one explores). I can refer you to
books which will offer more thorough treatments than I
will present here on su-etc.
Let me respond by introducing an important difference from my
experience--the role of
interdependence and communality in the black community. In contrast
to the ideas of individual achievement and independence so prevalent
in US "mainstream" culture, the early experiences of many black
students (as well as students from other ethnic groups)
were shaped by extended families and communities.
The reasons for these extended social groups were numerous including
economic conditions (joint child rearing was necessary because many
black families did not have the luxury of a single full-time
care-giver) and cultural heritage (many of the West African tribes
from which Africans were captured and enslaved were
structured in similar communal systems).
Black students in the college dining rooms have been and
continue to be harrassed by white students (some well meaning, some
not) wondering why they always
sit together. Rather than jumping to the simplistic conclusion that blacks are
unfriendly, hostile, or insecure, a more powerful explanation
might be that a myriad of factors influence the choices of table
segregation, not the least of which are preferences that are
consistent with cultural traditions of communality.
This is one simple example of how a cultural tradition may manifest
here at Stanford or in any multicultural environment. One solution
to resolving tension around dining room table segregation is to
demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of the dynamics leading to
the behavior. This can be an arduous task for non-black students who are
ignorant of important cultural premises.
Martin
∂14-Jun-89 1723 VAL lunch
Can we move our Friday lunch to Thursday (tomorrow)? I'll be repeating my LICS
talk at Xerox Friday morning, and they want to take me to lunch after that. If
you are busy tomorrow, then we'll have to skip this week.
∂14-Jun-89 1729 AR.RXM@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU Joke File
Received: from Forsythe.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 17:29:33 PDT
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 17:28:19 PDT
To: jmc@sail
From: "ROBIN L. McCLISH" <AR.RXM@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Joke File
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I am very interested in the "joke" file. I heard about it a
quite a while ago, just after it was taken off, of course, and am
very happy to see that it has come back. Would you please tell me
how to access it. Thank you very much.
Robin McClish
To: JMC@SAIL
∂14-Jun-89 1822 MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM AIJ Board Meeting at IJCAI
Received: from Xerox.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 18:22:46 PDT
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 14 JUN 89 18:11:46 PDT
Date: 14 Jun 89 18:11 PDT
From: Mimi MGardner <MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM>
Subject: AIJ Board Meeting at IJCAI
To: Amarel@rutgers.edu, harryb%cvaxa.sussex.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk,
Berliner@K.GP.CS.CMU.EDU, bledsoe@cs.utexas.edu, boyer@cs.utexas.edu,
rjb@research.att.com, buchanan@vax.cs.pittsburgh.edu,
bundy@edinburgh.ac.uk, Carbonell@RI.CMU.EDU, davis@wheaties.ai.mit.edu,
deKleer.pa@Xerox.COM, duda@Polya.Stanford.edu,
LErman@TEKNOWLEDGE-VAXC.ARPA, Generserth@sumex-aim.stanford.EDU,
grosz@harvard.HARVARD.EDU, Hayes.pa@Xerox.COM,
Hinton%ai.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net, Lehnert@CS.UMass.edu,
VAL@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, dwl@cs.duke.edu, JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
McDermott@yale.edu, Tom.Mitchell@RI.CMU.EDU,
mcvax!di.unipi.it!ugo@uunet.UU.NET, BMoore@ai.sri.com,
nagao%kuee.kyoto-u.junet%utokyo-relay.csnet@Xerox.COM, Newell@RI.CMU.EDU,
NILSSON@Score.Stanford.EDU, Judea@CS.UCLA.edu, rperrault@SRI.com,
zenon%uwo.cdn%ubc.CSNet@relay.cs.net, reiter%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
SRIDHARAN@unixb.ctc.fmc.com,
Wahlster%sbsvax.uucp%germany.CSNet@relay.cs.net,
walker@mouton.bellcore.com, Yorick%nmsu.CSNet@relay.cs.net,
Winograd@CSLI.Stanford.edu, wwoods@harvard.harvard.edu
cc: MGardner.pa@Xerox.COM, ADFD%ICNUCEVM.bitnet@cnuce-ym.arpa,
Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM, jmb%sevax.prg.oxford.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Message-ID: <890614-181146-4367@Xerox>
Dear Board Members:
Once again it is time for our annual editorial board meeting. It will take
place during IJCAI, on Wednesday, August 23 at 7:15 AM. The meeting will
be in the Windsor Room of the Westin Hotel (Rennaissance Center). As
usual, breakfast will be served. Please arrive a little early so we can
start our meeting promptly. We hope to end by 8:45 so that people can go
to the first morning session.
Topics for discussion include:
1) Whether it is time to consider publication in the AAAI and IJCAI
Proceedings (and other?) as archival, and what this should mean for our
publication policy.
2) Perceived coverage of the field as reflected in the AI Journal. Is it
appropriate? Should we do anything about it.
3) Is it worthwhile to have regular theme issues on special topics of broad
interest e.g. Knowledge Representation.
4) Should the AI Journal sponsor some activities in the AI Exhibit of the
Boston Computer Museum?
5) Current status, both of subscriptions, and of the backlog.
Please let us know if you plan to come to the breakfast, and if there are
any other topics that you think we should discuss.
Electronic responses can be sent to MGardner.pa@Xerox.com, fax to Mimi
Gardner, (415) 494-4334, or by ordinary mail.
Thank you all for your support of the Artificial Intelligence Journal. It
is your work and support that have made the AI Journal the standard
reference journal in the field. Mike Brady and I are looking forward to
seeing you at the meeting if you can attend.
Daniel G. Bobrow
Editor-in-Chief
----- mmg
∂14-Jun-89 2117 VAL Hi
∂14-Jun-89 1826 boyer@rascal.ics.utexas.edu Hi
Received: from cs.utexas.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Jun 89 18:25:53 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 20:25:49 CDT
Received: from rascal.ics.utexas.edu by cs.utexas.edu (5.59/36.2)
id AA12898; Wed, 14 Jun 89 20:26:13 CDT
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 89 20:25:49 CDT
From: boyer@rascal.ics.UTEXAS.EDU (Bob Boyer)
Message-Id: <8906150125.AA18555@rascal.ics.utexas.edu>
Received: by rascal.ics.utexas.edu (3.2/4.22)
id AA18555; Wed, 14 Jun 89 20:25:49 CDT
To: val@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Hi
Reply-To: boyer@cs.utexas.edu
Just thought I'd mention that I had a dozen great conversations with
Mints at a conference in Bastad, Sweden a couple of weeks ago. A
really wonderful fellow. Apparently this was the first time that he'd
been let outside of the Soviet Union. A remark of his I'll always
remember, as we moved down the buffet table at the last lunch was
``Last fresh vegetables for two months.''
∂15-Jun-89 0747 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu revised history section
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 89 07:47:12 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 15 Jun 89 10:46:45 EDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: revised history section
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 89 10:46:42 EDT
Message-ID: <1149.613925202@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
Here is the revised "History of Lisp" section. I added references to
Newell, Shaw, and Simon, and to Gelerntner and Gerberich. I also flushed
the misleading explanation of how "Lisp program = Lisp data" came about.
To do justice to this would require more sophistication than one has a
right to expect from people reading Chapter 1 of an intro book. Better to
let them read your History of Lisp paper, which I cite in the historical
section of the bibliography.
================================================================
@Section(The History of Lisp)
@noindent[]The origins of Lisp date back to 1956, when a summer research
meeting on artificial intelligence was held at Dartmouth College. At the
meeting, John McCarthy learned about a technique called ``list processing''
that Allen Newell, J. C. Shaw, and Herbert Simon had developed. Most
programming in the 1950s was done in assembly language, a primitive
language defined directly by the circuitry of the computer. Newell, Shaw,
and Simon had created something more abstract, called IPL (for Information
Processing Language), that manipulated symbols and lists, two important
datatypes in artificial intelligence programming. But IPL's syntax was
similar to (and as akward as) assembly language.
Elsewhere in the 1950s a new language called FORTRAN was being developed.
FORTRAN was designed for the sort of numerical calculations that are common
in scientific computing. It allowed the programmer to think in terms of
algebraic @i[expressions] such as A=(X+Y)*Z instead of writing assembly
language instructions. The idea that programmers should expresss their
ideas in familiar mathematical notation, and the computer should be the one
to translate these expressions into assembly language, was a radical
innovation. It made FORTRAN a powerful numerical computing language.
McCarthy wanted to build an equally powerful language for symbolic
computing.
One approach he suggested was to build on top of FORTRAN, by creating a set
of special subroutines for list manipulation. This idea was pursued by
Herbert Gelerntner and Carl Gerberich at IBM, and was called FLPL, for
FORTRAN List Processing Language. But McCarthy himself, working first at
Dartmouth and later at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, designed
a new language, LISP (for LISt Processor), that drew on ideas from IPL,
FORTRAN, and FLPL. The first version, Lisp 1, was developed for the IBM
704 computer.
Lisp 1.5 was the first Lisp dialect to be widely used. The @i[Lisp 1.5
Programmer's Manual] by McCarthy et al. appeared in 1962. By 1964 Lisp was
running on several types of computers, including an IBM 7094 under MIT's
Compatible Timesharing System; it was thus one of the first interactive
programming languages. Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) also played a
prominent role in Lisp's history. One of the early Lisp implementations
ran on its first computer, the PDP-1. The PDP-6 and PDP-10 (later
DECSystem-20) computers were specifically designed to implement Lisp
efficiently.
After the mid-1960s, Lisp implementations began to diverge. MIT developed
MacLisp, while Bolt, Beranek and Newman and the Xerox Corporation jointly
developed Interlisp. Stanford Lisp 1.6 was an offshoot of an early version
of MacLisp; it eventually gave rise to UCI Lisp. Each of these dialects
substantially extended the original Lisp 1.5, but they did so in
incompatible ways.
In the 1970s Guy Steele and Gerald Sussman defined a new kind of Lisp,
called Scheme, that combined some of the elegant ideas from the Algol
family of programming languages with the power of Lisp's syntax and data
structures. Extended dialects of Scheme began evolving, paralleling the
development of Lisp.
By the early 1980s there were dozens of incompatible Lisp implementations
in existence, with about half a dozen major dialects. A project was begun,
led by Scott Fahlman, Daniel Weinreb, David Moon, Guy Steele, and Richard
Gabriel, to define a Common Lisp that would merge the best features of
existing dialects into a coherent whole. The first edition of the Common
Lisp standard appeared in 1984; a revised standard will appear some time in
1989. Common Lisp rapidly became the Lisp of choice in both academic and
industrial settings. The other dialects have mostly died out, except for
Scheme, which continues to enjoy a modest popularity for educational
applications.
Many of the more important ideas in programming systems first arose in
connection with Lisp. These include mixing of interpreted and compiled
functions, garbage collection, recursive function calls, source-level
tracing and debugging, and syntax-directed editors. Today Lisp is a
leading language for sophisticated research on functional, object-oriented,
and parallel programming styles.
For additional information on the history of Lisp, see the Further
Readings section at the back of the book.
∂15-Jun-89 0800 JMC
visit Dina Bolla
∂15-Jun-89 1052 dliu@sierra.STANFORD.EDU re: Stanford graduate expelled from China
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 89 10:51:52 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 15 Jun 89 10:49:32 PDT
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 89 10:49:32 PDT
From: dliu@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (David Liu)
To: JMC@SAIL, MRC@CAC.Washington, su-etc@sierra.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: re: Stanford graduate expelled from China
[In response to mesage :MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU Wed Jun 14 19:01:59 1989]
The chinese journalists are forced to say what CCP wanted.
If they do not do so, they can be replaced by CCP.
Just as the TV reporter in Beijing who reported
the massacre and was replaced at the second day.
His fate is unknow but not had to guess.
Even many chinese people know how to read between lines
over the years. The recent event has forced the CCP to
shoot chinese people and then lie on our TV screen in our
living rooms. It is not surprising CCP asked Dan Rather to
chut down.
The CCP news control system has nothing for
any sensible man to admire about.
∂15-Jun-89 1134 Mailer re:Stanford graduate expelled from China
Received: from hanna.cac.washington.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 89 11:34:48 PDT
Received: from tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu by hanna.cac.washington.edu
(5.61/UW-NDC Revision: 1.99 ) id AA20211; Thu, 15 Jun 89 11:34:50 -0700
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1989 11:24:07 PDT
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Sender: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU
Subject: re:Stanford graduate expelled from China
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: dliu@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU, rick@HANAUMA.STANFORD.EDU,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <AnB2q@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <MailManager.613938247.7590.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
I fully intend to keep the issues of Beijing Review from the last two weeks
and see which BR staff members have disappeared. Some names are already rather
obvious -- they openly criticized Deng and Li and praised the acts of students
such as Wu'er.
Considering that anything in the post-massacre BR will have to be taken
with a rock of salt, it isn't clear that by-lines can be trusted either. One
will also have to do even more reading between the lines than usual.
It was reported in the *western media* that several BR and Radio Beijing
staff members were in the square when the shooting started. They didn't escape.
-------
∂15-Jun-89 1300 JMC
Washington reservations
∂15-Jun-89 1516 davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU Re: Avoiding Blacks
Received: from psych.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 89 15:16:23 PDT
Received: by psych.Stanford.EDU (3.2/4.7); Thu, 15 Jun 89 15:16:42 PDT
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 89 15:16:42 PDT
From: davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU (Martin Davidson)
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@psych.Stanford.EDU,
davidson@psych.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Avoiding Blacks
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <sntQo@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Stanford University
Cc:
In article <sntQo@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> you write:
>1. In your opinion do almost all blacks share the communal
>cultural tradition? I had imagined that many blacks, confirmed
>by the few I know personally, shared the culture of ``individual
>achievement and independence''. What is the responsibility of
>institutions, e.g. Stanford, to both kinds of blacks? I assume
>it is a question of adjusting the rules, since many, perhaps
>most, would resist classification? Do you or other blacks
>regard such blacks as abnormal?
Good questions. I don't know if anyone has assessed, or knows how to
assess the prevalence and effects of the communal tradition among
blacks. But clearly, to paraphrase my wife, blackness is
resplendently multifarious! Certainly many blacks, myself included,
value independence and personal achievement, and being a Stanford
student probably pulls for such an attitude. But the communal value
is nevertheless present for many of these same blacks as well.
Classifications of normality around this don't make much sense to me.
I'm not completely sure what you mean by institutional responsiblity
to individuals holding these differing worldviews, but I think that one
potentially effective model for an educational institution to
address these perspectives is to offer courses, for example, whose
intellectual content focuses on communality and its historical
tradition, as well as courses that are
structured around co-operative learning, constructing contingencies
that teach and encourage students to actively work together (perhaps
the SWOPSI program with its action projects addresses this aspect).
>2. Do you think the orientation to ``communality'' as opposed to
>``individual achievement'' reduces individual achievement? If
>so, what if any adjustment do you propose in the institutions of
>society that allocate rewards and social roles on the basis of
>individual achievement?
First, I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. Indeed, I spend
much of my waking and sleeping time trying to integrate the two. So
at this point in my thinking, individual acheivement is only reduced
if ones acheivement goals (or prerequisites for them) are isolation.
I will have to think more about the reward allocation issue.
One interesting example of such a reward adjustment I have
always liked is psychologist Micheal Cole's policy of
publishing some research articles under the authorship of
the Laboratory of Human Development. Thus, Micheal, his students
and his colleagues get credit for publishing work as a community and as
individuals (each member of the lab includes the article on his or
her vita). Also, this policy in
no way prevents individuals from publishing under their own name if
they do the work themselves.
-MD
∂16-Jun-89 0800 JMC
fischer ny
∂16-Jun-89 1008 tkeenan@note.nsf.gov Proposal 8915663
Received: from note.nsf.gov by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 10:07:56 PDT
To: jmc@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: tkeenan@note.nsf.gov
bcc:
Subject: Proposal 8915663
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 12:46:51 -0400
From: "Thomas A. Keenan" <tkeenan@note.nsf.gov>
Message-ID: <8906161247.aa01838@note.nsf.gov>
John:
You submitted a proposal with Mason and Talcott entitled
"Axiomitizing Program Equivalence in Typed Functional Languages
with Imperative Features" to the Computer & Computation Theory
program. It has been redirected to my program, Software Systems,
where such material is normally handled. I notice that the
proposal at $157,380 is for a period of one year. This is a
little unusual, most people seek a longer period of support. Is
this what you intended?
Tom
∂16-Jun-89 1016 S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: AIDS
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 10:16:53 PDT
Date: Fri 16 Jun 89 10:13:56-PDT
From: William Brown, Jr. <S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: AIDS
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <so1eQ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12502622014.12.S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
[In response to JMC]
Physicians cannot legally test anyonee for ANYTHING against his
or her will. Even release forms are not legally binding ON THE
PATIENT. The PATIENT can revoke his/her permission for an
operation at any time. The only exceptions occur when the patient
is deemed mentally unable to make the decision (young children,
Alzheimer's patient's, etc.) Non-approved invasive procedures are
grounds not only for malpractice but also for assault. Most
patients don't realize this, and assume, for instance, that they
must wait for a physician's "release" to actually leave a
hospital. On the flip side, most people also assume a hospital
MUSt accept a patient. This is also not true, except in
life-threatening situatio. It should be noted that giving birth
is not considered a life-threatening situation legally. I will be
glad to provide you with the court case numbers. Therefore, you
cannot mandate AIDS testing.
(Note - the other exception to these rules occurs in
vaccinations. They can be legally mandated because the public
good is considered greater than the private insult, even with
vacciness with rare but serious side effects. I sincerely doubt
this reasoning will be legally applied to AIDS testing.)
Finally,I strongly support, more AIDS testing. For a disease that
is really quite difficult to catch (compare with plaque, leprosy,
etc.) it can only exist in a state of ignorance. However, we
cannot abridge civil liberties in the process.
--Bill
-------
∂16-Jun-89 1031 CLT Proposal 8915663
To: tkeenan@NOTE.NSF.GOV
CC: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Regarding the proposal of McCarthy with Mason and Talcott entitled
"Axiomitizing Program Equivalence in Typed Functional Languages
with Imperative Features" to the Computer & Computation Theory program.
It was intended as a three year proposal with an annual budget of $157,380.
Do we need to take any formal action to fix this bug?
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Carolyn Talcott
∂16-Jun-89 1034 S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU AIDS
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 10:34:20 PDT
Date: Fri 16 Jun 89 10:31:23-PDT
From: William Brown, Jr. <S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: AIDS
To: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: su-etc@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12502625189.12.S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
In my response to jmc on AIDS, I did not and do not mean to imply
that he was suggesting violating the civil liberties of AIDS
patients. The only part of my reply that dealt with his statement
was the legal argument.
--Bill
(I hope I nipped THAT in the bud!)
-------
∂16-Jun-89 1041 ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU invitation to banquet
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 10:41:07 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA08186; Fri, 16 Jun 89 10:46:25 PDT
Message-Id: <8906161746.AA08186@russell.Stanford.EDU>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: debra@russell.Stanford.EDU
Subject: invitation to banquet
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 10:46:22 PDT
From: ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU
John,
As you might know, CSLI's first Industrial Affiliates Advisory Board
Meeting is to take place Wednesday through Friday of next week, 21-23
June 1989, and Stanley would like to invite you to attend the banquet
that will be held at the Buck House on Thursday, 22 June. We will
start with cocktails at 6:30 and dinner will be served at 7:30.
Please RSVP to Debra (debra@csli).
Ingrid
∂16-Jun-89 1147 CLT keeley
Did he call last night?
∂16-Jun-89 1315 tkeenan@note.nsf.gov Re: Proposal 8915663
Received: from note.nsf.gov by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 13:15:18 PDT
To: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
cc: tkeenan@note.nsf.gov, JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: Proposal 8915663
In-reply-to: Your message of 16 Jun 89 10:31:00 -0700.
<11o9uW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 16:08:46 -0400
From: "Thomas A. Keenan" <tkeenan@note.nsf.gov>
Message-ID: <8906161608.aa17195@note.nsf.gov>
Yes, I think this proposal should go through your Sponsored
Projects Office again since their records will show this as a one
year proposal for $157,380. I suppose they should send us an
ammended cover sheet. Is each year supposed to be exactly the
same amount of money? Don't you want to consider proposed second
and third year budgets? We always negotiate the real amounts
later but you may as well have budgets reviewers can look at and
relate to. I think this will be confusing to reviewers until you
fix it up so I will put your proposal on "hold" until I receive
"patches" from you.
∂16-Jun-89 1316 A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU Re: AIDS
Received: from Hamlet.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 13:16:31 PDT
Date: Fri 16 Jun 89 13:13:23-PDT
From: ABE DEANDA <A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: AIDS
To: William.Brown@labrea.stanford.edu, S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU
cc: JMC@sail.stanford.edu, su-etc@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <12502622014.12.S.SUMMER-RAIN@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12502654681.17.A.ABIE@Hamlet.Stanford.EDU>
I would agree with most of what W. Brown wrote re: testing of patients.
It should be pointed out, though, that there is also such a thing as
implied consent. This principle allows us to perform an invasive diagnostic
test without asking permission secondary to the patient signing a release
on admission (a routine procedure at Stanford).
What does this include? The usual case is daily blood work - i.e.
blood cultures, electrolytes, etc. The other case which may serve as
a prototype for AIDS testing is toxicology screens, routinely performed
in the Emergency room and Labor & Delivery. The philosophy is that
the knowledge that the person may have narcotics (for example) in their
bloodstream would be important in the management of that patient. However,
I know we don't ask patients if we can check their blood for drugs.
Abe
-------
∂16-Jun-89 1327 ME failed mail
This message failed only for the recipient at LaBrea.
Received: from labrea.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 11:27:04 PDT
Received: from Sail.Stanford.EDU by labrea.stanford.edu with TCP; Fri, 16 Jun 89 11:26:34 PDT
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 11:26:34 PDT
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@labrea.stanford.edu>
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown
Message-Id: <8906161826.AA10264@labrea.stanford.edu>
To: <Mailer@sail.stanford.edu>
----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 <William.Brown@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU>... Host unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Message-Id: <Eop2C@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 16 Jun 89 1125 PDT
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: AIDS
To: William.Brown@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from William.Brown@labrea.stanford.edu sent Fri 16 Jun 89 10:31:23-PDT.]
I'm not sure what the New York doctors' resolution was referring to,
since it referred to customary practice involving other infectious
diseases. However, it may involve two things. (1) Extending
compulsory reporting requirements to include AIDS. (2) Adding
an HIV test to the list of things a blood sample is to be
tested for without special formalities.
∂16-Jun-89 1330 MPS Inference
There are some forms here that have to be signed by
you and returned today. I can fax some of them, but
the one that requires your signature will have to go
fed ex before 3:00 today. It will arrive at their
office tomorrow.
Pat
∂16-Jun-89 1400 JMC
reply to Hoover invitation
∂16-Jun-89 1405 Mailer Re: Hong Kong and the Falklands
Received: from thrush.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 14:05:06 PDT
Received: by thrush.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Fri, 16 Jun 89 14:04:35 PDT
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Hong Kong and the Falklands
In-Reply-To: Your message of 16 Jun 89 13:47:00 PDT.
<1yor7n@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 14:04:32 PDT
From: Jim Helman <jim@thrush.STANFORD.EDU>
I was referring to the Falklands' four-legged population, which before
the disagreement between Britain and Argentina substantially
outnumbered the two-leggers.
And I'm certainly not prejudiced against sheep, I eat them and wear
them quite regularly.
-jim
∂16-Jun-89 1508 ME failed mail
This message also failed, only for the recipient at LaBrea.
I don't know where the LaBrea address is coming from, but
it's wrong.
Received: from labrea.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 13:58:50 PDT
Received: from Sail.Stanford.EDU by labrea.stanford.edu with TCP; Fri, 16 Jun 89 13:58:16 PDT
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 89 13:58:16 PDT
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@labrea.stanford.edu>
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown
Message-Id: <8906162058.AA12316@labrea.stanford.edu>
To: <Mailer@sail.stanford.edu>
----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 <William.Brown@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU>... Host unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Message-Id: <EorAZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 16 Jun 89 1358 PDT
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: AIDS
To: William.Brown@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU, A.ABIE@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU
Cc: S.SUMMER-RAIN@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from William.Brown@labrea.stanford.edu sent Fri 16 Jun 89 13:19:24-PDT.]
I suspect that the New York doctors are asking for something
beyond what the current generation of civil libertarians
considers acceptable, namely making information obtained from
routine blood tests available for vigorous contact tracing. This
is how I thought venereal diseases, cholera, smallpox, staph
infections, etc. were traditionally handled. Could one of the
medical people inform us more precisely, e.g. by looking at a
text published before 1981, what might be in question. Aside
from the "gay discrimination" question, isn't this what has been
effective in the past in limiting the spread of many contagious
diseases and what is likely to be effective with AIDS. I realize
that some medical arguments against this have been given in
connection with AIDS, but I think they are more and more regarded
as specious, i.e. just excuses for deferring to the "gay community",
which was expanding its political assertiveness just when the AIDS
epidemic started.
∂16-Jun-89 1612 cohen@venera.isi.edu Sharing Tech Reports
Received: from venera.isi.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jun 89 16:12:04 PDT
Posted-Date: Fri 16 Jun 89 16:08:35-PDT
Received: by venera.isi.edu (5.61/5.51)
id <AA22392>; Fri, 16 Jun 89 16:08:37 -0700
Date: Fri 16 Jun 89 16:08:35-PDT
From: Danny Cohen <COHEN@VENERA.ISI.EDU>
Subject: Sharing Tech Reports
To: List2:;
Message-Id: <614041716.0.COHEN@VENERA.ISI.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VENERA.ISI.EDU>
!
Online Retrieval of Technical Reports
The computer science research community could use E-mail to improve the
dissemination and distribution of technical reports and other
publications.
The suggestion is that each research organization will have a similar
E-address (e.g., cs-publications@XXX.edu), and a mechanism (manual or
automated) to respond to standard E-mail sent to this E-address, such
as requests for publication lists, for exact citation, for retrieval
of abstracts, or for getting copies of publications that are available
online (or FTP-paths for them).
In addition, mailing lists will be maintained at each site for
announcements of new publications. Most libraries would probably prefer
to be notified about all publications, but individuals may prefer to be
notified through a keyword filter.
Simple means will be provided to use E-mail to request a list of recent
reports and publications, to request online abstracts, to locate reports
from complete or incomplete information (e.g., partial title or only the
name of one of many authors), to request a paper copy to be mailed, to
request that an online version of the entire paper (if available) be
E-mailed, or an FTP path to the file be provided, and so on.
Similarly, simple means will be provided to use E-mail for individuals
to add (or delete) their names (and modify their E-addresses) from the
mailing lists, to change their keyword profile, and so on.
ISI will be delighted to maintain a mailing list of all these services
in all interested organizations (universities and other research
organizations).
The suggestion is that each participating organization should offer such
a service for its own publications, using its judgment to decide what to
include (such as technical reports, conference papers, and books). It
is not suggested to create one master database for all the publications
by the entire community. Such a "global" service could also be done as
a part of a large nationwide project -- not proposed here.
If we indeed adapt such a system it would be nice to include in it as
much past information as is available. But even if most of us do not
have online lists for the past, it is important to start collecting this
information online soon.
In anticipation of future automation of the service we will propose soon
a format for the various requests to be E-mailed. It most likely will
follow the "MOSIS syntax".
!
Your comments about this idea and about your participation would be
highly appreciated. If enough organizations would like to join, we will
send more specific proposal.
If you already have a similar system (manual or automatic) - please let
me know. We may adapt it, or steal/borrow some good ideas from it.
Feel free to forward this message to anyone who may be interested in it.
Danny
P.S., I am looking for a name for this activity. TERROR (for TEchnical
RepoRts Online Retrieval) and ROTOR (for Retrieval Of Technical
Online Reports) do not have the right ring. How about Marian,
after the favorite librarian? Other suggestions are welcome.
-------
∂17-Jun-89 0418 Dave.Touretzky@dst.boltz.cs.cmu.edu reminder
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 17 Jun 89 04:18:20 PDT
Received: from DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU by DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU; 17 Jun 89 07:18:25 EDT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Reply-To: Dave.Touretzky@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: reminder
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 89 07:18:19 EDT
Message-ID: <1620.614085499@DST.BOLTZ.CS.CMU.EDU>
From: Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
John:
Just a quick reminder that I have to settle the back cover copy with the
publisher by Monday. If you can't give me a quote by then, we can still
use your comments in the brochure, which has a later deadline. In that
case it would be best to send a 2-3 paragraph micro-review and let the
publisher pick what they decide is the most appropriate quote.
-- Dave
∂17-Jun-89 0700 JMC
call miro and fran
∂17-Jun-89 0700 JMC
letter to Natasha
∂17-Jun-89 1040 RWF re: rec.humor.funny
[In reply to message rcvd 16-Jun-89 20:30-PT.]
Great posting.
∂19-Jun-89 1027 CLT for timothy
The Fischer-Tech mini motor will be shipped
by the distributor the end of the week.
Cost is about $45.
∂20-Jun-89 0605 decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!goebel@labrea.stanford.edu Elephants never forget.
Received: from labrea.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Jun 89 06:04:52 PDT
Received: from decwrl.dec.com by labrea.stanford.edu with TCP; Tue, 20 Jun 89 06:03:57 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34)
id AA26052; Tue, 20 Jun 89 06:05:49 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34)
for labrea!SAIL.Stanford.Edu!JMC; id AA26052; Tue, 20 Jun 89 06:05:49 PDT
Received: from uunet.uu.net by mtxinu.COM (5.61/1.29-mls890331)
id AA27969; Mon, 12 Jun 89 10:44:02 -0700
Received: from watmath.UUCP by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with UUCP
id AA20560; Mon, 12 Jun 89 13:45:03 -0400
From: decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.uu.net!watmath!alberta!goebel@labrea.stanford.edu
Received: from alberta.uucp by watmath.waterloo.edu with uucp
id <AA24988>; Mon, 12 Jun 89 13:16:36 EDT
Received: by pembina.alberta.UUCP (5.52/3.14)
id AA15797; Mon, 12 Jun 89 10:23:53 MDT
Received: by salient.alberta.UUCP (3.2/3.14)
id AA20681; Mon, 12 Jun 89 10:23:50 MDT
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 89 10:23:50 MDT
Message-Id: <8906121623.AA20681@salient.alberta.UUCP>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Elephants never forget.
I was watching and listening as someone else listened to directions taken
over the phone today, and was struck by the similarity with the Elephant idea.
The listener was writing down a description of how to find a house in the
country...the description had the property that Elephant programs have: if
you execute the instructions, they are validated if you actually end up at
the right place. Just like the airline reservations example with Elephant,
execution against the real world validates the program.
It struck me how interesting it would be to have a program accept directions
like that, and try to validate them, e.g., against a map.
I'm off to Germany and the Soviet Union on Monday...I plan to seek out a
catologue of Fischer-Teknik construction toys; I'll let you know what I find.
Randy
∂20-Jun-89 1050 weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU Qlisp meeting tomorrow
Received: from Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Jun 89 10:50:09 PDT
Received: by Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (5.59/25-eef) id AA00655; Tue, 20 Jun 89 10:48:17 PDT
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 89 10:48:17 PDT
From: Joe Weening <weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906201748.AA00655@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
To: qlisp@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Qlisp meeting tomorrow
Let's meet tomorrow, June 21, at 1:30 in MJH 352 to go over the papers
at the Japan workshop and anything else that people want to discuss.
Sorry for the short notice.
∂20-Jun-89 1156 hoffman@csli.Stanford.EDU interview
Received: from csli.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Jun 89 11:55:58 PDT
Received: by csli.Stanford.EDU (4.0/inc-1.0)
id AA18713; Tue, 20 Jun 89 11:56:39 PDT
Date: Tue 20 Jun 89 11:56:38-PDT
From: Reid Hoffman <HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: interview
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <614372198.0.HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(242)+TOPSLIB(128)@CSLI.Stanford.EDU>
Professor McCarthy,
I tried to call you this morning, but I guess that you weren't in. What would
be a good time to call you about this interview?
thanks
reid
-------
∂20-Jun-89 1307 decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!piotr@labrea.stanford.edu EKL
Received: from labrea.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Jun 89 13:07:25 PDT
Received: from decwrl.dec.com by labrea.stanford.edu with TCP; Tue, 20 Jun 89 13:06:49 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34)
id AA06473; Tue, 20 Jun 89 13:08:34 PDT
Received: by decwrl.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34)
for labrea!sail.stanford.edu!jmc; id AA06473; Tue, 20 Jun 89 13:08:34 PDT
Received: from uunet.uu.net by mtxinu.COM (5.61/1.29-mls890331)
id AA16362; Tue, 20 Jun 89 10:40:01 -0700
Received: from watmath.UUCP by uunet.uu.net (5.61/1.14) with UUCP
id AA02717; Tue, 20 Jun 89 13:41:04 -0400
Received: from alberta.uucp by watmath.waterloo.edu with uucp
id <AA17919>; Tue, 20 Jun 89 13:17:08 EDT
Received: by pembina.alberta.UUCP (5.52/3.14)
id AA08999; Tue, 20 Jun 89 10:59:12 MDT
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 89 10:59:12 MDT
From: decwrl!mtxinu!uunet.UU.NET!watmath!alberta!piotr@labrea.stanford.edu (Piotr Rudnicki)
Message-Id: <8906201659.AA08999@pembina.alberta.UUCP>
To: jk@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: EKL
Cc: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Dear Dr. Ketonen:
Is it possible to obtain a decription of EKL?
I would be grateful for any description.
PR
*-----------------------------------------------------------*
| Piotr Rudnicki | |
| Department of Computing Science | piotr@alberta.UUCP |
| The University of Alberta | |
| Edmonton, Alberta, Canada | tel. 403-492-2983 (o) |
| T6G 2H1 | 403-437-0008 (h) |
*-----------------------------------------------------------*
∂21-Jun-89 1320 siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU rec.humor.funny
Received: from sierra.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Jun 89 13:20:08 PDT
Received: by sierra.STANFORD.EDU (3.2/4.7); Wed, 21 Jun 89 13:17:29 PDT
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 89 13:17:29 PDT
From: siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman)
To: jmc@sail
Cc: CR.APC@Forsythe
Subject: rec.humor.funny
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.614463446.siegman@>
TO: ARTHUR COLADARCI
PROF. VAN HARVEY
JOHN MCCARTHY
PROF. GILLESPIE
I PROPOSE TO SEND THE FOLLOWING COMMUNICATION TO CAMPUS
REPORT, AND WOULD LIKE TO AVOID ANY EXPLICIT ERRORS OR
MISREPRESENTATIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS YOU'D
CARE TO OFFER ME BEFORE IT'S SUBMITTED, I'D BE GRATEFUL TO RECEIVE
THEM, EITHER BY ELECTRONIC MAIL (SIEGMAN@SIERRA) OR CAMPUS MAIL
(GINZTON LABORATORY, MC #4085).
As a member of the Faculty Senate Steering Committee which
requested and transmitted to the administration (with our approval)
the advice from the Academic Council's Committee on Libraries
concerning the restoration of rec.humor.funny, I want to make a
critical reply to President Donald Kennedy's and Professor Van Horne's
remarks on this issue in the Faculty Senate on June 15, as reported in
Campus Report on June 21.
The Committee on Libraries seemed to us an obvious place
to seek advice on this issue for at least two cogent reasons:
1. Whether or not this was a "free speech" issue, it
certainly appeared to many of us (on the StC and outside) to have
many, if not all, the elements of a censorship incident. Libraries
have historically been at the focus of censorship cases; and one
expects librarians, and members of library committees, to be concerned
and informed, not just on the mechanics of checking out books, but on
all the concerns that surround attempts to censor books and other
published means of expression.
2. To anyone who has had any experience with these new
"electronic news groups", it should be obvious that they represent
marvelous as well as challenging new ways of publishing, distributing,
storing, archiving, and making available written information. If
that's not part of the charter and the active concern of libraries,
librarians, and library committees, it seems to me they have a
disturbingly narrow view of their mission.
[As an aside, rec.humor.funny is not simply an "electronic
bulletin board" on which anyone can post a joke. It is a "moderated"
news group, which means there is a moderator Q an articulate,
concerned and sensitive individual named Brad Templeton Q who performs
precisely the classical function of a journal editor, or an
anthologist, in determining what is "published" on this news group. A
sizable fraction of the submissions to the group I believe are in fact
rejected.]
In defense of the Steering Committee, I think it should be
noted that the StC had repeated contacts with C-LIB on this issue; and
I do not believe the concerns raised by Prof. Van Harvey in the
Senate, undercutting the C-LIB's formal written communication to us,
were transmitted or made known to us earlier.
In respond to President Kennedy's statement that "the
Committee on Libraries (did not make) an argument that is worth
anything", I think it might be noted that no "arguments worth
anything" Q indeed no public arguments or substantive discussion or
specific complaints or indictments at all Q were raised by the
administration itself before rec.humor.funny was cut off.
It's my personal belief that this was not only a
censorship issue, but in fact an active act of censorship. I'm
dismayed that Stanford did it, and that the President defends it.
Anthony E. Siegman
Professor of Electrical Engineering
∂23-Jun-89 1142 S.SUMMER-RAIN@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU re: AIDS
Received: from Macbeth.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 Jun 89 11:41:59 PDT
Date: Fri 23 Jun 89 11:38:25-PDT
From: William Brown, Jr. <S.SUMMER-RAIN@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: AIDS
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: S.SUMMER-RAIN@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU,
wab@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <EorAZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12504472402.87.S.SUMMER-RAIN@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
Sorry about the delay.
Yes, syphilis, etc. were, as they say, reportable diseases. There are NO
ABSOLUTE rights in the Constitution, not even the right to life. There
have been legally backed medical reasons for the designation of certain
diseases as reportable. I believe AIDS would fall within that category.
However, AIDSdiscrimination is a MAJOR problem. It may be the only solid
reason AIDS is not reportable, but unfortunately, due to the magnitude
of the discrimination, it is reason enough. No one was stoned and chased
from his community for having syphilis. Yet we have schools refusing to
let AIDS children attend classes. I wish AIDS WAS reportable. First,
however, we must be able to reasonably assure its victims that their
rights will not be attacked.
I once wrote a Daily essay asking for the availability of non-
reproduceable, dated, unique AIDS test results. Coupled with a publicity
campaign, this would, for the first time, give the sexual consumer a
valid method of ascertaining the probability of his/her prospective
partner's having AIDS. The test should be voluntary, and notate records
should be kept. In this way a lover could ask his/her partner if he/she
had a recent negative AIDS test result, and could he/she please produce
it? The ELISA test is relatively cheap, and would be cheaper if it was
mass-processed by Uncle Sam. In addition, the indigent could be partially
subsidized for their tets up to a limited number of tests/year. I
would also only recommend the more accurate and expensive test to those
people who tested positive to TWO ELISA tests. As these tests will only be used by the sexually active, multiple partner public, and because only the
indigent will need to be partially subsidized for their expense, the
program should be cost effective.
When I recommended this, several medical colleagues tried to bite my head
off. Most completely ignored the volunteer nature of the proposal, and
attacked me for stances I never took. The program would be an
IMMENSE aid to the sexual consumer. From experience (one of my friends
was SAVED from AIDS when mandatory, periodic military testing picked it
up in her boyfriend) I know the SEXUAL CONSUMER needs a better tool
than "Just say no."
Please send replies to wab@ksl.stanford.edu - I rarely check this address.
---Bill
-------
∂23-Jun-89 1655 Mailer re: AIDS
Received: from Macbeth.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 23 Jun 89 16:55:43 PDT
Date: Fri 23 Jun 89 16:52:10-PDT
From: ABE DEANDA <A.ABIE@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: AIDS
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
cc: William.Brown@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU, S.SUMMER-RAIN@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <EorAZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-ID: <12504529518.81.A.ABIE@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU>
My understanding of the reporting of venereal diseases is that the
information is given to the county for chiefly epidemiological
reasons, and that the onus for prevention lies on the physician
treating the patient.
Abe
-------
∂26-Jun-89 0621 beckmann@boulder.Colorado.EDU Stanford prof
Received: from boulder.Colorado.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Jun 89 06:20:54 PDT
Return-Path: <beckmann@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Received: by boulder.Colorado.EDU (cu-hub.022489)
Received: by schof.colorado.edu (cu.generic.021288)
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 89 07:21:06 MDT
From: Beckman <beckmann@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Message-Id: <8906261321.AA03266@schof>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Stanford prof
Hello John:
The name of the Stanford prof who replied to my refusal to do business
with Stanford was Alexander Dallin, professor of international history & pol
political science. I only just found his letter, and am sending a copy
to you this morning. Would greatly appreciate a reply about him, as I plan
to put the case in AtE.
Cordially,
Petr
∂27-Jun-89 0934 chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU 7/11 Faculty Meeting
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Jun 89 09:34:15 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA21546; Tue, 27 Jun 89 09:34:31 -0700
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1989 9:34:29 PDT
From: "Joyce R. Chandler" <chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
To: dill@amadeus, rwf@sail, guibas@dec.com, jlh@amadeus, dek@sail, lam@mojave,
zm@sail, jmc@sail, pratt@polya.Stanford.EDU, ullman@score
Cc: chandler@polya.Stanford.EDU
Subject: 7/11 Faculty Meeting
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.614968469.chandler@polya.stanford.edu>
Please be advised that there will be an URGENT faculty meeting on July 11 at
2:30 in MJH-220 to consider the Oussama Khatib case. Will you be able to
attend? Please respond ASAP.
∂27-Jun-89 1959 CLT miro
called, he will try to get you in Md. They are coming to
CA arriving thurs pm. Will be staying with their son
in Cupertino (408 252 6210).
∂28-Jun-89 0905 MPS telephone message
∂27-Jun-89 0917 bergman@polya.Stanford.EDU telephone message
Received: from polya.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Jun 89 09:17:21 PDT
Received: by polya.Stanford.EDU (5.61/25-eef) id AA20709; Tue, 27 Jun 89 09:17:42 -0700
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1989 9:17:41 PDT
From: Sharon Bergman <bergman@polya.stanford.edu>
To: mps@sail
Subject: telephone message
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.614967461.bergman@polya.stanford.edu>
Pat, I just listened to Thea's voice mail. There was a message
on it that was difficult to understand. I could pick up bits of it,
and it looks as though it is something you can respond to. Someone
from the Tokyo conference (AI Symposium) called. The telephone number
is 03 508 0820. They need an account number of John McCarthy's
Union Bank. It sounds as though they want to reimburse John for airfare
to the conference. Maybe for one of the people who went to Tokyo?
Anyhow, call the number for more information. Thanks.
It came in sometime last week. I don't know the exact date.
Sharon
Good evening;
After much research, I was able to decipher just what the above message
was all about. If I had received it on time, I could have told you
about it when you called Monday.
I called Imanishi Yutaka yesterday to see if he could unravel the mystery.
It appears that he heard from the HARP people and they are going to mail
a check to you on July 1.
It was Carolyn's suggestion that I Fax the people in Japan and have them
wire the money to your bank. I did that this morning. Your banker,
Matt, gave me instructions on how to handle it properly so you get the
money without any problems.
I told Imanishi I would call him on Thursday, after I talked to you, to
let him know how you wanted to handle this transfer of funds. His number
is 212 682-2190 if you want to call him before coming to work on Thursday.
∂28-Jun-89 1153 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU No texts?
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Jun 89 11:52:33 PDT
Date: Wed 28 Jun 89 11:52:21-PDT
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: No texts?
To: rwf@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, pratt@jeeves.Stanford.EDU
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12505785658.12.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I have your Fall Quarter course listed as "no texts needed". Please let me
know by June 30 if I'm mistaken and you do in fact need texts ordered.
Thanks again.
Claire
-------
∂28-Jun-89 1546 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil ANNUAL REPORTING
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 28 Jun 89 15:46:36 PDT
Received: from sun45.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA07819; Wed, 28 Jun 89 18:33:11 EDT
Posted-Date: Wed 28 Jun 89 18:20:12-EDT
Received: by sun45.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA04575; Wed, 28 Jun 89 18:20:15 EDT
Date: Wed 28 Jun 89 18:20:12-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: ANNUAL REPORTING
To: SW-PI@vax.darpa.mil
Cc: njacobs@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <615075612.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
TO: DARPA/ISTO Algorithms and Software PIs:
SUBJECT: 1. Annual email technical reports.
2. Financial reporting by email (to follow).
The message below is a DRAFT of a message that will be sent to the
community in the next few days. I am sending it now in order to
elicit comments and suggestions.
Comments are specifically sought along the following lines: (1) Is
there information you feel we should have from you that is not
specifically solicited? (2) Are there portions of the request that
are unclear? (3) Is redundant information solicited? My hope is to
converge on a technical report format that will stick for a while.
You will receive a separate message containing your DARPA/ISTO Project
Code and our current mailing addresses for your effort. The Project
Code (a.k.a. "task code") is a two letter unique id. Guidance for the
mailing address is at the end of the message draft below.
PLEASE DO THIS NOW:
(0) If you do not receive your project code in a message in the
next 24 hours, call Nicole Jacobs (address below).
(1) Acknowledge receipt of the two msgs to Nicole Jacobs.
(2) Respond concerning the mailing addresses (see end of message).
(3) (Optional) Comment on the message draft.
Thanks,
Bill
================================================================
To all DARPA/ISTO Algorithms and Software PIs:
ANNUAL TECHNICAL REPORTS
1. This is the time of year when we require information from
contractors concerning accomplishments for the current fiscal year
(FY) and objectives for the next FY. This information is used to
assist us in planning incremental funding for those efforts that are
expected to continue into the next FY (which begins 1 Oct 89).
2. WHAT IS REQUIRED. In the past, we have requested by email
quarterly reports, annual reports, and project summaries, each with
certain financial information. This year, we expect that only two
email reports will be solicited:
(1) A single annual technical summary.
(2) Financial summaries.
NOTE: These email reports are in addition to the reports required as
contractual deliverables, and this request does not waive that
requirement.
3. FINANCIAL SUMMARIES. The format for the financial summaries will
be uniform throughout the ISTO community, in order that we can use
automatic means to insert the data you provide into our financial
database. Details of the format and deadlines will be provided in a
separate message. PLEASE SEND FINANCIAL SUMMARIES SEPARATELY.
4. TECHNICAL SUMMARIES. The technical summaries provide us with an
up-to-date view of the state of activity in our community. The
challenge is to be concise yet substantive. An example is given
below. Here is what is required:
(1) Basic data.
[a] DARPA/ISTO project code (a.k.a. "task code").
[b] Institution.
[c] Project title. [one line]
[d] Project mailbox. [Internet address]
[e] PIs. [for each: name, phone numbers, email address]
(2) PROJECT SUMMARY description.
[A short paragraph (approximately four sentences) outlining the
specific need for your effort, the opportunity it represents, the
specific major characteristics of the approach, and the results to be
delivered. Your summary should indicate the expected impact of the
project, i.e., how future technologies will be different because of
this investment by DARPA.]
(3) ACCOMPLISHMENTS for fy89.
[Two to four concrete accomplishments. Emphasize technical results
with externally recognizable impact. If you achieved a major
milestone of broad community impact, describe it. (There should be
such an event every year or two.)]
(4) OBJECTIVES for fy90.
[Two to four. Emphasize both technical results and impact.]
(5) TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER progress and plans.
[a] Expected IMPACT of the technology you are producing and what
steps are being taken to enhance and accelerate the impact.]
[b] CUSTOMERS for your results, whether the results be theorems or
software components or software interface definitions. (Include
potential users with whom you have had discussions as well as actual
current users. Include both research groups and development groups.)
[c] Opportunities pursued for accelerating community CONSENSUS, where
needed and where possible, for systems interface definitions that your
work creates, contributes to, and/or depends on. (Any producer of a
large system prototype should address this issue. At the research
prototype stage, efforts involving collaboration among research groups
to agree on component interfaces should be described.)
[d] Major PRODUCERS of technology that you rely upon, including
technical results, interface definitions, and systems components. (Do
not mention common commercial components.)
(6) Other information.
[a] Major PERSONNEL changes.
[b] Major recent PUBLICATIONS, HONORS, etc. [Send us copies of
important publications once in a while.]
[c] Important new technical OPPORTUNITIES.
5. EXAMPLE TECHNICAL SUMMARY. The following (frivolous) example is
intended to illustrate the actual format to use for submitted
technical summaries.
PLEASE ADHERE TO THIS FORMAT. Specifically, (1) do not include markup
commands from a text processor (except in formulas that are especially
complex), and (2) do not use leading indentation or any other extra
embedded whitespace.
================ Begin Example ================
(1) Basic data.
[a] ZZ
[b] OSI (Olfactory Sciences Institute)
[c] Olfactory Affector Technology
[d] oat-pi@olfactory.com
[e]
J. Random
jrandom@olfactory.com
(111)111-1111 office
(111)111-1112 direct line
K. Random
krandom@olfactory.com
(111)111-1111
(2) Project Summary.
Produce scalable olfactory affector technology with broad applications
based on underlying chemical microaffectors recently prototyped by
SMELATECH. Effort will be focused on descriptive olfactory control
language and interfaces, with the goal of a consensus for formal
olfactory descriptions among users and producers. Initial efforts
will focus in the culinary and enological domains, with military
applications to follow. Designs for prototype affectors with high
dispersal capacity will be delivered.
(3) Accomplishments.
Scalable affectors were developed with dispersal capacities
approaching 47ou/m. Initial results indicate that residual diffusion
effects can be reduced by 8Db.
The basic culinary interface suite was developed and submitted for
community reaction through the Olfactory Interfaces working group.
Prototype indoor affectors for the initial range of affects were
prototyped and distributed to beta-sites for evaluation.
(4) Objectives.
Create an initial oenological suite.
Increase dispersal capacity to 120ou/m. Develop improved
instrumentation for measuring residual diffusion effects to -43Db.
(5) Technology Transfer.
[a] Impact. None.
[b] Customers. Agreement reached with Cineplex-Odious for prototype
indoor deployment. Efficacy relative to the current distributed
manual affector technology will be assessed.
[c] Consensus. Established an Oenological Group to seek consensus on
abstract interface descriptions for the emerging oenological suite,
with a particular goal of relating existing oenological nomenclature
and abstractions with affector control parameters. A subgroup will
advise concerning the faithfulness of the affectors as they emerge.
[d] Producers. Essential microaffector technology developed by
SMELATECH is in use. The scalability of this technology is the source
of our ability to scale up dispersal capacity.
(6) Other information.
None.
=============== End Example ================
6. WHAT TO DO.
(0) One report should be sent for each independently funded effort.
If you receive multiple copies of this message, it is probably because
you are involved with multiple funded efforts. If there is any
question about what constitutes an "independently funded effort,"
please call Nicole or me.
(1) Send reports by email directly to Nicole Jacobs at DARPA:
njacobs@vax.darpa.mil (202)694-5800
(2) If you do not receive an acknowledgement within a week,
call Nicole to ensure she has received your message.
(3) Follow the format guidance for your responses.
(4) MAILING ADDRESSES. Help us keep our mailing list current. We
often send official correspondence by email. The best way to do this
is for you to have a virtual project mailbox at your site that will
forward to PIs and other responsible people. Again, if there is a
question, call Nicole and check to see what address we have on file.
(5) Deadline: Please respond by the morning of 17 July. Early
responses are requested.
Thanks,
Bill
================================================================
-------
∂29-Jun-89 0816 STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU re: No texts?
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 89 08:16:19 PDT
Date: Thu 29 Jun 89 08:15:59-PDT
From: Claire Stager <STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: No texts?
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
cc: stager@Score.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: <b5C3F@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Office: CS-TAC 29, 723-6094
Message-ID: <12506008414.19.STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Yes--I have you down for CS306--Recursive Programming and Proving. Not right??
Please let me know.
Claire
-------
∂29-Jun-89 1025 cohen@venera.isi.edu Re: cbcl
Received: from venera.isi.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 89 10:25:32 PDT
Posted-Date: Thu 29 Jun 89 10:25:23-PDT
Received: by venera.isi.edu (5.61/5.51)
id <AA24141>; Thu, 29 Jun 89 10:25:25 -0700
Date: Thu 29 Jun 89 10:25:23-PDT
From: Danny Cohen <COHEN@VENERA.ISI.EDU>
Subject: Re: cbcl
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-Id: <615144323.0.COHEN@VENERA.ISI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <65Xlc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VENERA.ISI.EDU>
John,
No progress. I paln to approach them again by the end of July.
I'll get a new guy to start putting together a pitch for Craig
about the entire subject of computerized commerce. The protocol
should be a key element in it.
Danny
-------
∂29-Jun-89 1029 MPS
Good morning
I already sent the Fax for the money, but I don't think
their going to send you another check. At least I hope
not. Even if they do, we can always send it back.
Yes, I sent Velikhov a letter on May 24. It is called
veliko.1 on your directory.
Pat
∂29-Jun-89 1249 underdog@Portia.stanford.edu re: question for the profs.
Received: from Portia.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 89 12:49:28 PDT
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA00729; Thu, 29 Jun 89 12:46:59 PDT
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 89 12:46:59 PDT
From: Dwight Joe <underdog@Portia.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8906291946.AA00729@Portia.stanford.edu>
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: re: question for the profs.
In what area of computer science/mathematics would you specialize?
Still AI?
--Dwight
∂29-Jun-89 1534 @VM1.NoDak.EDU:avg@saturn.ucsc.edu re: Reducing the number of literals in equations
Received: from VM1.NoDak.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 89 15:34:08 PDT
Received: from saturn.ucsc.edu by VM1.NoDak.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.1MX) with TCP; Thu, 29 Jun 89 17:34:58 CDT
Received: by saturn.ucsc.edu (5.58/25-eef)
id AA01715; Thu, 29 Jun 89 15:32:03 PDT
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 89 15:32:03 PDT
From: Allen Van Gelder <avg@saturn.ucsc.edu>
Message-Id: <8906292232.AA01715@saturn.ucsc.edu>
To: JMC%SAIL.STANFORD.EDU@vm1.nodak.edu
Subject: re: Reducing the number of literals in equations
I didn't think the problem was about logical literals. I didn't see
any -'s. I think ``variable occurrence'' would have been a better
description than ``literal'' for what is to be minimized.
Of course, finding the minimum form is not a decision problem, so
is not NP-complete, technically.
-- Allen
∂29-Jun-89 1651 harnad@Princeton.EDU Brain Evolution
Received: from Princeton.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 29 Jun 89 16:50:51 PDT
Received: from clarity.Princeton.EDU by Princeton.EDU (5.58+++/2.19)
id AA06702; Thu, 29 Jun 89 19:29:21 EDT
Received: by clarity.Princeton.EDU (4.0/1.81)
id AA07598; Thu, 29 Jun 89 10:27:38 EDT
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 89 10:27:38 EDT
From: harnad@Princeton.EDU (Stevan Harnad)
Message-Id: <8906291427.AA07598@clarity.Princeton.EDU>
To: srh@flash.bellcore.com
Subject: Brain Evolution
TO: BBS Associates.
The following paper has been accepted as a target article for open
peer commentary in Behavioral & Brain Sciences and is about to be
circulated to potential commentators. Commentators must be current BBS
Associates or nominated by a current BBS Associate. To be considered as
a commentator on this article or to suggest other appropriate
commentators, please send email to:
harnad@confidence.princeton.edu or write to:
BBS, 20 Nassau Street, #240, Princeton NJ 08542 [tel: 609-921-7771]
____________________________________________________________________
BRAIN EVOLUTION IN HOMO: THE "RADIATOR" THEORY
By Dean Falk, Dept. of Anthropology, SUNY, Albany NY 12222
ABSTRACT: The "radiator" theory of brain evolution is proposed to
account for "mosaic evolution" whereby brain size began to increase
rapidly in the genus Homo well over a million years after bipedalism
had been selected for in early hominids. Because hydrostatic
pressures differ across columns of fluid depending on orientation
(posture), vascular systems of early bipeds became reoriented so that
cranial blood flowed preferentially to the vertebral plexus instead of
the internal jugular vein in response to gravity. The Hadar early
hominids and robust australopithecines partly achieved this
reorientation with a dramatically enlarged occipital/marginal sinus
system. On the other hand, hominids in the gracile australopithecine
through Homo lineage delivered blood to the vertebral plexus via a
widespread network of veins that became more elaborate through time.
Mastoid and parietal emissary veins are representatives of this
network, and increases in their frequencies during hominid evolution
are indicative of its development. Brain size increased with
increased frequencies of mastoid and parietal emissary veins in the
lineage leading to and including Homo, but remained conservative in
the robust australopithecine lineage that lacked the network of veins.
The brain is an extremely heat-sensitive organ and emissary veins in
humans have been shown to cool the brain under conditions of
hyperthermia. Thus, the network of veins in the lineage leading to
Homo acted as a radiator that released a thermal constraint on brain
size. The radiator theory is in keeping with the belief that basal
gracile and basal robust australopithecines occupied distinct niches,
with the former living in savanna mosaic habitats that were subject to
hot temperatures and intense solar radiation during the day.
∂30-Jun-89 1100 jeff%venus@rand.org Re: ANNUAL REPORTING
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 Jun 89 11:00:41 PDT
Posted-Date: Fri, 30 Jun 89 10:33:36 PDT
Received: from rand.org by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA13548; Fri, 30 Jun 89 13:42:38 EDT
Received: from venus.rand.org by rand.org; Fri, 30 Jun 89 10:34:39 PDT
Received: from localhost by venus.rand.org; Fri, 30 Jun 89 10:33:39 PDT
Message-Id: <8906301733.AA12886@venus.rand.org>
To: "William L. Scherlis" <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Cc: SW-PI@vax.darpa.mil, jeff%venus@rand.org
Reply-To: jeff@rand.org
Subject: Re: ANNUAL REPORTING
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 28 Jun 89 18:20:12 EDT.
<615075612.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 89 10:33:36 PDT
From: Jeff Rothenberg <jeff%venus@rand.org>
Bill,
Your message is quite clear, and the report you ask for seems appropriate.
There is only one minor point that I think could use some clarification:
(6) [c] Important new technical OPPORTUNITIES.
Exactly what do you have in mind here? Opportunities that have already been
taken advantage of by the project? Opportunities that we expect to take
advantage of next year? Opportunities revealed by the project that might
suggest new work or other projects? Something else? All of the above?
Since your example is silent on this point, could you add a sentence or two
of explanation?
thanks,
Jeff Rothenberg
(jeff@rand.org)
∂30-Jun-89 1224 hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM An Interview
Received: from Xerox.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 Jun 89 12:24:26 PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 30 JUN 89 11:36:15 PDT
Date: 30 Jun 89 11:35 PDT
From: hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: An Interview
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
cc: hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <890630-113615-1365@Xerox>
Professor McCarthy,
Are you back yet? Should I call you to discuss the IEEE interview?
thanks
reid
∂30-Jun-89 1330 hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM re: An Interview
Received: from Xerox.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 Jun 89 13:29:56 PDT
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 30 JUN 89 13:17:12 PDT
Date: 30 Jun 89 13:16 PDT
From: hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: re: An Interview
In-reply-to: your message of 30 Jun 89 12:32 PDT
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
cc: hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <890630-131712-1593@Xerox>
Professor McCarthy,
I can't interview you today because I haven't prepared. I wasn't sure if
you had agreed, and would like to spend a bit of time out-lining what sorts
of questions you would like to discuss. (I thought interesting subjects
might range from: connectionism, non-monotonic logic, expert systems,
current state/directions of AI, relation of AI to computer science, AI's
science aspects vs. engineering aspects, knowledge representation
hypothesis, physical symbol systems hypothesis, and others.) Would Monday
be possible, perhaps meeting ahead of then to discuss the sorts of
questions I should prepare (and perhaps send to you ahead of time)? I
would be most interesting in using the interview as a forum for you to talk
about what interests you most as well.
Given that I have work scheduled till 5PM, I would prefer not to meet you
at Cordura today, but I could reschedule my work with some difficulty.
Also, the deadline isn't until the end of the month, so if you wish to put
it off till the end of your next trip, that's also possible.
thanks
reid
∂30-Jun-89 1350 VAL proposals
I understand that your directory [pro,jmc] contains a collection of our
proposals. It occurred to me that the final versions of our last 3 proposals
are probably not there, and you may wish to add them to your collection.
They are arpa87.tex[arc,val], nsf88.tex[arc,val] and arpa89.tex[val].
∂30-Jun-89 1412 hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM sorry about the grammar/coherency mistakes in the last message
Received: from Xerox.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 Jun 89 14:12:07 PDT
Received: from Semillon.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 30 JUN 89 14:11:18 PDT
Date: 30 Jun 89 14:07 PDT
From: hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: sorry about the grammar/coherency mistakes in the last message
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
cc: hoffman.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <890630-141118-1774@Xerox>
Today is incredibly frantic as I am trying to get some projects done on
time. My writing is much better than that mail message!
thanks
reid
∂30-Jun-89 1445 MPS
Hi,
I have your invoice and expense report to sign. Your
tickets to Japan are in my office. Are you going
to be in to pick them up, or should I give them to
Carolyn?
Also, how about Monday? May I have it off? Thanks
Pat
∂30-Jun-89 1607 VAL re: proposals
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Jun-89 16:04-PT.]
Done.
∂30-Jun-89 1931 underdog@Portia.stanford.edu CS stuff
Received: from Portia.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 30 Jun 89 19:31:05 PDT
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA25252; Fri, 30 Jun 89 19:28:41 PDT
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 89 19:28:41 PDT
From: Dwight Joe <underdog@Portia.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <8907010228.AA25252@Portia.stanford.edu>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: CS stuff
From underdog Fri Jun 30 19:25:16 1989
Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON>
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA25146; Fri, 30 Jun 89 19:25:00 PDT
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 89 19:25:00 PDT
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON>
Full-Name: Mail Delivery Subsystem
Message-Id: <8907010225.AA25146@Portia.stanford.edu>
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
To: underdog
Status: R
----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 jmc... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: by Portia.stanford.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA25127; Fri, 30 Jun 89 19:25:00 PDT
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 89 19:25:00 PDT
From: Dwight Joe <underdog>
Full-Name: Dwight Joe
Message-Id: <8907010225.AA25127@Portia.stanford.edu>
To: jmc
Subject: CS stuff
Professor McCarthy,
Do you know where I can get access to the following:
"Intel Multibus Specification, Intel Corporation, 1982"
?
----Dwight
P.S.
I need to take a look at it in a hurry.