perm filename W86.IN[LET,JMC] blob
sn#814413 filedate 1986-04-02 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00921 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00098 00002 ∂01-Jan-86 0000 JMC Duda
C00100 00003 ∂01-Jan-86 1000 JMC
C00101 00004 ∂01-Jan-86 1656 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: Kripke
C00103 00005 ∂01-Jan-86 1819 @SCRC-YUKON.ARPA:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM test1, test2
C00104 00006 ∂01-Jan-86 2214 YM My thesis
C00106 00007 ∂02-Jan-86 0931 RA Sergei Batrovin article in NYT
C00107 00008 ∂02-Jan-86 1029 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Proposed Agenda
C00110 00009 ∂02-Jan-86 1138 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth Papers
C00112 00010 ∂02-Jan-86 1152 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: agenda item
C00114 00011 ∂02-Jan-86 1212 RA Industrial mailing list
C00115 00012 ∂02-Jan-86 1235 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: agenda item
C00117 00013 ∂02-Jan-86 1244 RA Sarah
C00118 00014 ∂02-Jan-86 1332 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Excess Reports
C00119 00015 ∂02-Jan-86 1357 NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Party for Ed
C00120 00016 ∂02-Jan-86 1516 LES IBM Workstation
C00122 00017 ∂02-Jan-86 1520 ME Prancing Pony Bill
C00124 00018 ∂02-Jan-86 1703 LLW@S1-A.ARPA SDI Software ISsues
C00128 00019 ∂03-Jan-86 0911 mcdermott-drew@yale-venus Mike Genesereth
C00133 00020 ∂03-Jan-86 1032 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Phone Message
C00134 00021 ∂03-Jan-86 1047 spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM genesereth
C00136 00022 ∂03-Jan-86 1126 RA
C00139 00023 ∂03-Jan-86 1146 gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM Re: industrial lectureship
C00141 00024 ∂03-Jan-86 1249 RA abstract
C00142 00025 ∂03-Jan-86 1442 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: department plans and basic research in computer science
C00144 00026 ∂03-Jan-86 1446 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Retreat Agenda, II
C00150 00027 ∂03-Jan-86 1452 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Retreat Agenda, another try
C00154 00028 ∂03-Jan-86 1542 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: department plans and basic research in computer science
C00155 00029 ∂03-Jan-86 1545 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Planning Workshop
C00164 00030 ∂03-Jan-86 1554 KAELBLING@SRI-AI.ARPA Workshop on the Foundations of AI
C00165 00031 ∂03-Jan-86 1754 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA your VTS course
C00171 00032 ∂03-Jan-86 2136 sun!plaid!chuq@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Re: Does INFO-IBMPC@<somewhere> exist? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00176 00033 ∂04-Jan-86 0956 CLT calendar item
C00177 00034 ∂04-Jan-86 1002 CLT invite
C00178 00035 ∂04-Jan-86 1657 SJG re: Always make lots of S-turns.
C00180 00036 ∂04-Jan-86 2109 CLT calendar item
C00181 00037 ∂04-Jan-86 2129 PSZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Genesereth evaluation letter
C00183 00038 ∂06-Jan-86 0114 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:MRC@PANDA re: your VTS course
C00187 00039 ∂06-Jan-86 0803 PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU 1986-Jan-Mailing
C00191 00040 ∂06-Jan-86 0900 JMC
C00192 00041 ∂06-Jan-86 1015 JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA contractors
C00193 00042 ∂06-Jan-86 1017 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft):]
C00197 00043 ∂06-Jan-86 1017 RA NSF proposal
C00198 00044 ∂06-Jan-86 1058 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gordon Bell Dinner
C00199 00045 ∂06-Jan-86 1103 Q.QUEENIE@[36.48.0.1] Re: Systems concepts machine
C00201 00046 ∂06-Jan-86 1301 LES IBM Workstation
C00203 00047 ∂06-Jan-86 1344 VAL definition of circumscription
C00204 00048 ∂06-Jan-86 1512 LES Editor-based Operating System discussion
C00205 00049 ∂06-Jan-86 1657 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
C00206 00050 ∂06-Jan-86 1731 LES Facilities Committee Meeting
C00207 00051 ∂06-Jan-86 1735 LES Oops
C00208 00052 ∂06-Jan-86 2150 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA Request regarding Symbolic Systems
C00210 00053 ∂06-Jan-86 2243 MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA [crash!victoro@sdcsvax.ARPA: A Bit of 'News']
C00221 00054 ∂07-Jan-86 0000 JMC references from Hintikka
C00222 00055 ∂07-Jan-86 0924 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Request regarding Symbolic Systems
C00223 00056 ∂07-Jan-86 0928 VAL news on circumscription
C00224 00057 ∂07-Jan-86 1007 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft):]
C00227 00058 ∂07-Jan-86 1019 RA Robert Jastrow
C00228 00059 ∂07-Jan-86 1035 RA Jack Cate
C00229 00060 ∂07-Jan-86 1155 RA Re: Please print the following files:
C00230 00061 ∂07-Jan-86 1435 RA he would like now
C00231 00062 ∂07-Jan-86 1537 RA name
C00232 00063 ∂07-Jan-86 1552 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Technical Reports
C00233 00064 ∂07-Jan-86 2158 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Planning workshop
C00234 00065 ∂07-Jan-86 2248 hitson@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Facilities Committee Meeting
C00236 00066 ∂08-Jan-86 0944 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Leon Sterling
C00237 00067 ∂08-Jan-86 1000 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA re: Planning workshop
C00238 00068 ∂08-Jan-86 1104 G.GORIN@[36.48.0.5] Re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
C00239 00069 ∂08-Jan-86 1435 LES Qlisp Shuffle
C00241 00070 ∂08-Jan-86 1505 VAL Common Sense Seminar - Correction
C00242 00071 ∂08-Jan-86 1526 LES re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
C00243 00072 ∂08-Jan-86 1530 greep@camelot re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
C00244 00073 ∂08-Jan-86 1624 RA Franklin, Dina Bolla
C00245 00074 ∂08-Jan-86 1900 JMC
C00246 00075 ∂08-Jan-86 2052 VAL pointwise circumscription
C00247 00076 ∂08-Jan-86 2203 CLT Encore
C00248 00077 ∂08-Jan-86 2206 RPG Uniforum
C00249 00078 ∂09-Jan-86 1146 RA lunch
C00250 00079 ∂09-Jan-86 1333 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Leon Sterling
C00251 00080 ∂09-Jan-86 1059 VAL lexicographic minimization
C00255 00081 ∂09-Jan-86 1354 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C00256 00082 ∂09-Jan-86 1433 LES Encore reprise
C00257 00083 ∂09-Jan-86 1454 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Hopcroft
C00258 00084 ∂09-Jan-86 1543 CLT
C00260 00085 ∂09-Jan-86 1639 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next Ph.D. committee meeting
C00261 00086 ∂09-Jan-86 1652 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
C00278 00087 ∂09-Jan-86 1710 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Coffee, tea, etc. is now FREE
C00280 00088 ∂09-Jan-86 1717 LES Computer Buyers' Network
C00286 00089 ∂09-Jan-86 2250 FY Takeuchi function
C00287 00090 ∂10-Jan-86 0746 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA visit
C00289 00091 ∂10-Jan-86 1143 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Saul Amarel
C00290 00092 ∂10-Jan-86 1254 VAL Shoham's reply to my message
C00291 00093 ∂10-Jan-86 1318 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA modems
C00292 00094 ∂10-Jan-86 1435 VAL visit to MCC
C00293 00095 ∂10-Jan-86 1457 ALS Modified XGP fonts for the IMAGEN
C00295 00096 ∂10-Jan-86 1540 RA Jack Cate
C00296 00097 ∂10-Jan-86 1726 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Computer Buyers' Network
C00298 00098 ∂10-Jan-86 2207 lamport@decwrl.DEC.COM
C00301 00099 ∂11-Jan-86 1634 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
C00305 00100 ∂12-Jan-86 1104 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: smoking and selt belts (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00307 00101 ∂12-Jan-86 1241 YM Re: My thesis
C00308 00102 ∂12-Jan-86 1410 LES Amarel visit
C00309 00103 ∂12-Jan-86 1841 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.ARPA Course on Technology, Values, and Society
C00310 00104 ∂12-Jan-86 2109 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Hi, John!
C00311 00105 ∂12-Jan-86 2129 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Hi, John!
C00313 00106 ∂13-Jan-86 0600 JMC
C00314 00107 ∂13-Jan-86 0900 JMC
C00315 00108 ∂13-Jan-86 0915 RA meeting Hopcroft
C00316 00109 ∂13-Jan-86 1117 RA John Cocks
C00317 00110 ∂13-Jan-86 1138 RA Jack Cate
C00318 00111 ∂13-Jan-86 1154 JJW Machines for Qlisp
C00319 00112 ∂13-Jan-86 1203 RPG Machines
C00320 00113 ∂13-Jan-86 1512 CLT ucla logic conf
C00322 00114 ∂13-Jan-86 1532 RA trip to LA Jan. 24
C00323 00115 ∂13-Jan-86 1625 LES Minutes of '86 Jan. 8 Meeting of CSD Facilities Committee
C00330 00116 ∂13-Jan-86 1629 VAL re: circumscription names
C00332 00117 ∂13-Jan-86 1652 RA David Chudnovsky
C00333 00118 ∂13-Jan-86 1643 CLT reservations
C00334 00119 ∂13-Jan-86 1659 VAL Non-monotonic seminar
C00337 00120 ∂13-Jan-86 1741 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Draft of proposals
C00338 00121 ∂13-Jan-86 1806 JMC
C00339 00122 ∂14-Jan-86 0943 RA Hopcroft
C00340 00123 ∂14-Jan-86 1013 CLT oh well
C00342 00124 ∂14-Jan-86 1049 RPG Alliant
C00346 00125 ∂14-Jan-86 1319 CLT alliant
C00347 00126 ∂14-Jan-86 1329 RPG So
C00348 00127 ∂14-Jan-86 1502 RA David Chudnovsky
C00349 00128 ∂14-Jan-86 1606 STEINBERG@RED.RUTGERS.EDU smoking
C00351 00129 ∂14-Jan-86 2207 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
C00352 00130 ∂15-Jan-86 0903 RA your NSF grant
C00353 00131 ∂15-Jan-86 1017 RA I got a call from Inference they want to know whether
C00354 00132 ∂15-Jan-86 1057 OR.MURRAY@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Re: smoking
C00356 00133 ∂15-Jan-86 1521 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Last call for updates on research interests
C00358 00134 ∂15-Jan-86 1521 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA research interests
C00362 00135 ∂15-Jan-86 1631 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Current CV
C00363 00136 ∂15-Jan-86 1804 POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Bicycle Racks (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00365 00137 ∂15-Jan-86 2039 CLT wics
C00366 00138 ∂16-Jan-86 0900 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Stan Rosenschein
C00369 00139 ∂16-Jan-86 0954 VAL correction to your 1980 circ'n paper
C00370 00140 ∂16-Jan-86 1046 ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA recommendation for Industrial CS course instructor
C00372 00141 ∂16-Jan-86 1049 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee
C00374 00142 ∂16-Jan-86 1053 ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA recommendation for Industrial CS Lectureship
C00377 00143 ∂16-Jan-86 1456 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Geneserth Recommendations
C00378 00144 ∂16-Jan-86 1502 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Planning workshop
C00379 00145 ∂16-Jan-86 1513 RA leave early
C00380 00146 ∂16-Jan-86 1532 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA re: Planning workshop
C00381 00147 ∂16-Jan-86 1553 RA Re: Geneserth Recommendations
C00382 00148 ∂16-Jan-86 1559 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Keith Lantz
C00383 00149 ∂17-Jan-86 0732 JJW High-speed home lines
C00384 00150 ∂17-Jan-86 0927 RA David Chudnovsky
C00385 00151 ∂17-Jan-86 0952 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: High-speed home lines
C00387 00152 ∂17-Jan-86 0951 RA long lunch
C00388 00153 ∂17-Jan-86 1249 CLT
C00389 00154 ∂17-Jan-86 1355 CLT
C00390 00155 ∂17-Jan-86 1410 VAL Reiter's visit
C00391 00156 ∂17-Jan-86 1520 ME home terminals
C00392 00157 ∂17-Jan-86 1524 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: home terminals
C00394 00158 ∂17-Jan-86 1639 VAL Non-monotonic seminar
C00398 00159 ∂18-Jan-86 0900 JMC
C00399 00160 ∂18-Jan-86 1114 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Talks on Feb 6
C00402 00161 ∂18-Jan-86 1836 VAL giving preference to the past
C00405 00162 ∂19-Jan-86 1638 VAL reply to today's three messages
C00409 00163 ∂20-Jan-86 0001 spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM genesereth
C00416 00164 ∂20-Jan-86 0739 shoham%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA Chronological skepticism (a long message sorry)
C00428 00165 ∂20-Jan-86 1445 VAL Re: Chronological scepticism
C00432 00166 ∂20-Jan-86 2045 RPG SHARE Lisp
C00433 00167 ∂21-Jan-86 0000 JMC
C00434 00168 ∂21-Jan-86 0122 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS assignment
C00439 00169 ∂21-Jan-86 0942 RPG
C00440 00170 ∂21-Jan-86 0947 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Research Interests
C00444 00171 ∂21-Jan-86 1044 RPG Hm
C00445 00172 ∂21-Jan-86 1057 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA thanks
C00446 00173 ∂21-Jan-86 1143 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Workshop on Planning and Reasoning about Action
C00454 00174 ∂21-Jan-86 1251 RA Robert Morse
C00455 00175 ∂21-Jan-86 1342 RA Meeting with Mike Buckley
C00456 00176 ∂21-Jan-86 1524 RA Robert Morse
C00457 00177 ∂21-Jan-86 1511 GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA mrs
C00458 00178 ∂21-Jan-86 1518 VAL seminar
C00459 00179 ∂21-Jan-86 1523 RA David Chudnovsky
C00460 00180 ∂21-Jan-86 1552 VAL Chronological scepticism
C00462 00181 ∂21-Jan-86 1643 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA you can mail to me on Turing now
C00463 00182 ∂21-Jan-86 1751 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Falwell vs. Computer
C00469 00183 ∂21-Jan-86 1944 LERNER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Event of the Month
C00472 00184 ∂22-Jan-86 0001 JMC
C00473 00185 ∂22-Jan-86 0800 JMC
C00474 00186 ∂22-Jan-86 0906 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee Meeting
C00476 00187 ∂22-Jan-86 1149 RA lunch
C00477 00188 ∂22-Jan-86 1325 ME mail
C00479 00189 ∂22-Jan-86 1631 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Re: doing it with ordinary circumscription
C00481 00190 ∂22-Jan-86 2025 gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM Re: course description
C00483 00191 ∂22-Jan-86 2253 JJW Byron Davies' CAREL
C00485 00192 ∂22-Jan-86 2255 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS
C00489 00193 ∂23-Jan-86 0930 AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA visit to MCC
C00490 00194 ∂23-Jan-86 0935 RA meeting
C00491 00195 ∂23-Jan-86 1137 RA Jennifer Ballantine
C00492 00196 ∂23-Jan-86 1152 RA lunch
C00493 00197 ∂23-Jan-86 1206 VAL Minker's workshop
C00495 00198 ∂23-Jan-86 1523 Samuel←C.←Yang.osbunorth@Xerox.COM Ready to take CS306 Final
C00497 00199 ∂23-Jan-86 1533 G.GRACE@LOTS-B fld
C00498 00200 ∂23-Jan-86 1606 RA US-Japan
C00499 00201 ∂23-Jan-86 1607 G.GRACE@LOTS-B Previous Message.
C00500 00202 ∂23-Jan-86 1614 RA Mr. Calo
C00501 00203 ∂23-Jan-86 1631 RA leaving
C00502 00204 ∂23-Jan-86 1639 OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Rebirth of the energy mailing list
C00505 00205 ∂23-Jan-86 1926 LES IBM workstation briefings
C00507 00206 ∂24-Jan-86 0739 hanks%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA Re: checking on email
C00509 00207 ∂24-Jan-86 0900 JMC
C00510 00208 ∂24-Jan-86 0936 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA MESSAGE
C00511 00209 ∂24-Jan-86 1123 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA New phones
C00512 00210 ∂24-Jan-86 1519 RA
C00513 00211 ∂24-Jan-86 1620 RA James Flanegan, AT&T
C00514 00212 ∂25-Jan-86 1033 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting
C00516 00213 ∂26-Jan-86 0952 SJG NASA form
C00517 00214 ∂26-Jan-86 1016 Energy Digest V86 #1.1
C00529 00215 ∂26-Jan-86 1038 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA Kripke
C00530 00216 ∂26-Jan-86 1535 @MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:FONER%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Energy Digest V86 #1.1
C00532 00217 ∂26-Jan-86 1802 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Liskov dinner Wednesday
C00534 00218 ∂26-Jan-86 2013 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Liskov dinner Wednesday
C00536 00219 ∂26-Jan-86 2319 FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00538 00220 ∂27-Jan-86 0817 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee Meeting
C00539 00221 ∂27-Jan-86 0850 @MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:ota@s1-b.arpa Rebirth of the energy mailing list
C00541 00222 ∂27-Jan-86 0900 JMC
C00542 00223 ∂27-Jan-86 0950 VAL re: Two more ideas:
C00543 00224 ∂27-Jan-86 1117 RA
C00547 00225 ∂27-Jan-86 1141 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search
C00549 00226 ∂27-Jan-86 1307 OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
C00550 00227 ∂27-Jan-86 1316 RA Dr. Calo, IBM
C00551 00228 ∂27-Jan-86 1434 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA new modems
C00552 00229 ∂27-Jan-86 1515 NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA Exxon proposal
C00573 00230 ∂27-Jan-86 1656 RA Bob Waddell
C00574 00231 ∂27-Jan-86 1714 FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00576 00232 ∂27-Jan-86 1752 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
C00581 00233 ∂27-Jan-86 1757 JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Letters
C00582 00234 ∂27-Jan-86 1926 VAL
C00583 00235 ∂27-Jan-86 2130 BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA CS 306 grade from Fall 85
C00586 00236 ∂28-Jan-86 0248 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS assignment
C00597 00237 ∂28-Jan-86 1025 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth
C00599 00238 ∂28-Jan-86 1047 VAL Non-monotonic seminar
C00601 00239 ∂28-Jan-86 1051 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Genesereth
C00602 00240 ∂28-Jan-86 1113 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planning, reasoning seminar
C00603 00241 ∂28-Jan-86 1129 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Stan
C00605 00242 ∂28-Jan-86 1140 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA your math fiction story
C00607 00243 ∂28-Jan-86 1141 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA more on your story
C00609 00244 ∂28-Jan-86 1240 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Questions on the proposal:
C00613 00245 ∂28-Jan-86 1455 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: your math fiction story
C00614 00246 ∂28-Jan-86 1524 LES IBMer's phone #
C00615 00247 ∂28-Jan-86 1610 RA Michael McCarthy
C00616 00248 ∂28-Jan-86 1611 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [Bruce Delagi <DELAGI@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: [<ram%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>: Of growing code and diminishing hacks...]]
C00623 00249 ∂28-Jan-86 1734 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
C00627 00250 ∂28-Jan-86 1825 LES DARPA Equipment Funds
C00630 00251 ∂28-Jan-86 1914 LES Re: Qlisp progress
C00633 00252 ∂28-Jan-86 1951 SCHULZ@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Specail characters on LOTS
C00635 00253 ∂28-Jan-86 2328 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
C00638 00254 ∂29-Jan-86 0850 SJG challenger
C00639 00255 ∂29-Jan-86 1009 RA Genesereth Committee meeting
C00640 00256 ∂29-Jan-86 1029 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth Committee
C00642 00257 ∂29-Jan-86 1050 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: Alex Bronstein's quals
C00644 00258 ∂29-Jan-86 1146 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA Equipment Funds
C00646 00259 ∂29-Jan-86 1159 KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Ambiguities in PhD requirements
C00648 00260 ∂29-Jan-86 1212 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA McCarthy and Lifschitz
C00650 00261 ∂29-Jan-86 1226 CPE a time to see you
C00651 00262 ∂29-Jan-86 1252 berglund@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Questions on the proposal:
C00653 00263 ∂29-Jan-86 1312 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Ambiguities in PhD requirements
C00654 00264 ∂29-Jan-86 1336 PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Collection Program / Archives
C00657 00265 ∂29-Jan-86 1346 RA Bronstein's quals
C00658 00266 ∂29-Jan-86 1446 AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA visit to MCC
C00659 00267 ∂29-Jan-86 1519 LES DARPA Equipment Funds
C00660 00268 ∂29-Jan-86 1541 cheeseman@ames-pluto.ARPA Workshop funding request
C00667 00269 ∂29-Jan-86 1719 VAL Non-monotonic seminar: Reminder
C00669 00270 ∂29-Jan-86 1803 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Alex Bronstein's quals
C00671 00271 ∂29-Jan-86 1803 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Alex Bronstein's quals
C00673 00272 ∂29-Jan-86 1809 berglund@su-pescadero.arpa Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
C00675 00273 ∂29-Jan-86 2050 KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Teaching minor
C00676 00274 ∂29-Jan-86 2252 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
C00679 00275 ∂30-Jan-86 0654 ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Silico Sapiens
C00682 00276 ∂30-Jan-86 0937 RA Louise Fariello
C00683 00277 ∂30-Jan-86 1058 KWT VTSS160 assignment and comments
C00684 00278 ∂30-Jan-86 1251 RA Cuthbert Hurd
C00685 00279 ∂30-Jan-86 1257 RA Bronstein quals
C00686 00280 ∂30-Jan-86 1344 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth
C00688 00281 ∂30-Jan-86 1453 rapaport%buffalo.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Meinongian semantics
C00693 00282 ∂30-Jan-86 1524 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA mrs sales
C00695 00283 ∂30-Jan-86 1604 HX.HAL@Lindy
C00696 00284 ∂30-Jan-86 1620 RA leaving early
C00697 00285 ∂30-Jan-86 1716 LES
C00698 00286 ∂30-Jan-86 1930 DATJN%NEUVM1.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Info about your course Values, Technology, and Society
C00700 00287 ∂31-Jan-86 0823 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Will you be attending the Forum next week?
C00702 00288 ∂31-Jan-86 1057 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Meeting
C00704 00289 ∂31-Jan-86 1127 CLT sarah
C00705 00290 ∂31-Jan-86 1138 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA TA track
C00708 00291 ∂31-Jan-86 1207 RPG Account
C00709 00292 ∂31-Jan-86 1301 CLT
C00710 00293 ∂31-Jan-86 1335 RPG Account
C00711 00294 ∂31-Jan-86 1344 RA be back
C00712 00295 ∂31-Jan-86 1459 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa disks
C00713 00296 ∂31-Jan-86 1522 RA question
C00714 00297 ∂31-Jan-86 1620 RA Katie, Computer Forum
C00715 00298 ∂31-Jan-86 2009 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA maps
C00717 00299 ∂31-Jan-86 2137 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa complete servers
C00719 00300 ∂31-Jan-86 2228 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Formal Reasoning???
C00721 00301 ∂31-Jan-86 2347 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Formal Reasoning???
C00724 00302 ∂01-Feb-86 1359 JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Genesereth tenure
C00725 00303 ∂01-Feb-86 1600 ME Prancing Pony Bill
C00727 00304 ∂01-Feb-86 1948 LES Pub macros
C00741 00305 ∂02-Feb-86 1313 SJG re: quiz question
C00742 00306 ∂02-Feb-86 1501 ALI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Here is more than you probably want to know.
C00743 00307 ∂02-Feb-86 1730 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA map coloring
C00755 00308 ∂02-Feb-86 2356 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA more kempe
C00765 00309 ∂03-Feb-86 0756 DE2SMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re:request for letters
C00772 00310 ∂03-Feb-86 0800 JMC
C00773 00311 ∂03-Feb-86 0900 JMC
C00774 00312 ∂03-Feb-86 1000 JMC
C00775 00313 ∂03-Feb-86 1010 SJG circumscription (?) question
C00777 00314 ∂03-Feb-86 1135 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Umbrella Contract
C00779 00315 ∂03-Feb-86 1138 RA Bronstein quals
C00780 00316 ∂03-Feb-86 1143 RA lunch
C00781 00317 ∂03-Feb-86 1209 SJG re: circumscription (?) question
C00784 00318 ∂03-Feb-86 1310 VAL re: circumscription (?) question
C00787 00319 ∂03-Feb-86 1320 VAL MCC visit
C00789 00320 ∂03-Feb-86 1329 VAL the art of replying
C00790 00321 ∂03-Feb-86 1327 VAL re: circumscription (?) question
C00791 00322 ∂03-Feb-86 1336 VAL non-monotonic seminar
C00792 00323 ∂03-Feb-86 1406 SJG circumscription
C00794 00324 ∂03-Feb-86 1727 RA Darmouth AI conference
C00795 00325 ∂03-Feb-86 1746 LES Message to Squires
C00798 00326 ∂03-Feb-86 1823 CLT
C00799 00327 ∂03-Feb-86 2305 @SCRC-YUKON.ARPA:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM do you still have
C00801 00328 ∂04-Feb-86 0951 RA flight to El Paso
C00803 00329 ∂04-Feb-86 1410 Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM Correction to McCarthy's paper
C00805 00330 ∂04-Feb-86 1545 RA El Paso trip
C00806 00331 ∂04-Feb-86 1640 RA Are you going to use the Imagen printer at home or here?
C00807 00332 ∂04-Feb-86 2227 S.SOOD@LOTS-A Vtss class
C00808 00333 ∂05-Feb-86 0104 LES Facilities Committee minutes of 1/31/86
C00817 00334 ∂05-Feb-86 0115 LES Lost Subcommittee
C00818 00335 ∂05-Feb-86 0951 RA airline tickets
C00819 00336 ∂05-Feb-86 1123 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: AFWAL]
C00823 00337 ∂05-Feb-86 1118 CLT ian
C00824 00338 ∂05-Feb-86 1155 CLT ian
C00825 00339 ∂05-Feb-86 1245 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Facilities Committee minutes of 1/31/86
C00828 00340 ∂05-Feb-86 1411 LES "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
C00831 00341 ∂05-Feb-86 1510 WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA TELEPHONE MESSAGE
C00832 00342 ∂05-Feb-86 1943 ASHOK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA [John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>: re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)]
C00835 00343 ∂05-Feb-86 2051 roy@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Why Jews (at least, that's where we started!)
C00842 00344 ∂06-Feb-86 0913 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
C00845 00345 ∂06-Feb-86 0930 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
C00847 00346 ∂06-Feb-86 1010 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C00848 00347 ∂06-Feb-86 1025 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C00849 00348 ∂06-Feb-86 1147 RA 1099-Misc Form
C00850 00349 ∂06-Feb-86 1238 RA dead files
C00851 00350 ∂06-Feb-86 1445 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C00852 00351 ∂06-Feb-86 1743 CLT
C00853 00352 ∂06-Feb-86 2048 STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
C00873 00353 ∂07-Feb-86 0008 YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Draft of thesis
C00876 00354 ∂07-Feb-86 1334 LES "General use" wins
C00879 00355 ∂07-Feb-86 1529 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
C00883 00356 ∂07-Feb-86 1735 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: "General use" wins
C00888 00357 ∂07-Feb-86 1855 binford@su-whitney.arpa "General use" wins
C00890 00358 ∂08-Feb-86 1352 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: "General use" wins
C00895 00359 ∂08-Feb-86 1409 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa On my serving on the facilities committee
C00900 00360 ∂09-Feb-86 1258 JK
C00904 00361 ∂09-Feb-86 2059 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Sequent Balance
C00907 00362 ∂09-Feb-86 2250 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Sequent Balance
C00909 00363 ∂10-Feb-86 0729 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA
C00911 00364 ∂10-Feb-86 0735 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa re: Sequent Balance
C00914 00365 ∂10-Feb-86 1004 CLT calendar item
C00915 00366 ∂10-Feb-86 1026 CLT
C00916 00367 ∂10-Feb-86 1127 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: "General use" wins
C00918 00368 ∂10-Feb-86 1203 RICH@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
C00920 00369 ∂10-Feb-86 1215 RA telex for you
C00922 00370 ∂10-Feb-86 1243 VAL Samizdat Bulletin
C00924 00371 ∂10-Feb-86 1439 RA trip to Austin
C00925 00372 ∂10-Feb-86 1501 RA David chudnovsky
C00926 00373 ∂10-Feb-86 1511 HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Susans birthdate
C00927 00374 ∂10-Feb-86 1620 RA Chris Garcia,TIME
C00928 00375 ∂10-Feb-86 1658 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA re: Improving History (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00929 00376 ∂10-Feb-86 1743 RICH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Timesharing
C00930 00377 ∂10-Feb-86 1917 RPG Uniforum
C00932 00378 ∂10-Feb-86 1929 LES PC RT
C00933 00379 ∂10-Feb-86 1942 LES re: Uniforum
C00934 00380 ∂10-Feb-86 1953 JJW Re: Uniforum
C00935 00381 ∂10-Feb-86 2106 LES
C00936 00382 ∂10-Feb-86 2320 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS assignment
C00942 00383 ∂11-Feb-86 0411 HST lisp standardization
C00943 00384 ∂11-Feb-86 0931 dreyfus%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU
C00944 00385 ∂11-Feb-86 1016 CLT Uniforum
C00945 00386 ∂11-Feb-86 1057 RA trip to Austin
C00946 00387 ∂11-Feb-86 1158 RA Re: trip to Austin
C00947 00388 ∂11-Feb-86 1233 RA Bob Simons
C00948 00389 ∂11-Feb-86 1238 RA Ralph Preiss, IEEE
C00949 00390 ∂11-Feb-86 1240 GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA AI Qual
C00951 00391 ∂11-Feb-86 1302 RA Gerard Piel
C00952 00392 ∂11-Feb-86 1323 TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU A quick question
C00954 00393 ∂11-Feb-86 1425 LES Lisp
C00955 00394 ∂11-Feb-86 1946 LES RT priming
C00956 00395 ∂11-Feb-86 2237 ME (on TTY63, at TV-120 2237)
C00957 00396 ∂11-Feb-86 2346 ME name
C00958 00397 ∂12-Feb-86 0003 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa use of arpa funds, etc.
C00964 00398 ∂12-Feb-86 0032 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa comments on jan. 2 draft
C00969 00399 ∂12-Feb-86 0112 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa CSD qual and thesis proposal presentation proposal
C00975 00400 ∂12-Feb-86 0149 ME JMC printer
C00977 00401 ∂12-Feb-86 1046 RA meeting with Genesereth
C00978 00402 ∂12-Feb-86 1136 LES telephone call
C00979 00403 ∂12-Feb-86 1150 LES Meeting
C00980 00404 ∂12-Feb-86 1153 LES RT Unix
C00981 00405 ∂12-Feb-86 1230 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA PLANLUNCH seminar
C00982 00406 ∂12-Feb-86 1336 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee
C00983 00407 ∂12-Feb-86 1353 SB New data lines
C00984 00408 ∂12-Feb-86 1541 LES Re: 4.2 documentation
C00987 00409 ∂12-Feb-86 1603 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA re: PLANLUNCH seminar
C00988 00410 ∂12-Feb-86 1629 RPG Alliant Visit
C00989 00411 ∂12-Feb-86 1814 ME Lathrop spooler
C00990 00412 ∂13-Feb-86 0601 TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Thanks
C00992 00413 ∂13-Feb-86 1006 STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
C00994 00414 ∂13-Feb-86 1214 AI.JMC@MCC.ARPA contex
C00995 00415 ∂13-Feb-86 1242 RA trip to LA
C00996 00416 ∂13-Feb-86 1316 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Susan
C00998 00417 ∂13-Feb-86 1405 RA trip to LA
C00999 00418 ∂13-Feb-86 1441 GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA answers to questions
C01015 00419 ∂13-Feb-86 1501 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
C01017 00420 ∂13-Feb-86 1533 RA Prof. Rowe
C01018 00421 ∂13-Feb-86 1536 CLT
C01019 00422 ∂13-Feb-86 1615 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Meeting
C01020 00423 ∂13-Feb-86 1621 RA trip to Washington DC
C01021 00424 ∂14-Feb-86 0719 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa DARPA reequipment money: the department section
C01023 00425 ∂14-Feb-86 1206 LES
C01025 00426 ∂14-Feb-86 1416 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA next visit
C01026 00427 ∂14-Feb-86 1824 LES RT compatibility
C01027 00428 ∂14-Feb-86 1906 RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA MRG's tenure
C01034 00429 ∂14-Feb-86 2304 CLT calendar item
C01036 00430 ∂15-Feb-86 1145 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA DARPA equipment money
C01040 00431 ∂15-Feb-86 1316 AI.WOODY@MCC.ARPA Re: next visit
C01042 00432 ∂15-Feb-86 1559 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA equipment money
C01043 00433 ∂16-Feb-86 1213 CLT
C01044 00434 ∂16-Feb-86 1256 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: DARPA equipment money
C01046 00435 ∂16-Feb-86 1407 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA equipment money
C01047 00436 ∂17-Feb-86 0242 greiner%utai%toronto.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Evaluation for Prof Genesereth
C01055 00437 ∂17-Feb-86 0900 JMC
C01056 00438 ∂17-Feb-86 1158 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA equipment money
C01058 00439 ∂17-Feb-86 1630 RA paper to Piel
C01059 00440 ∂17-Feb-86 1732 LES Facilities Committee Minutes of 2/12/86
C01067 00441 ∂17-Feb-86 1737 LES Facilities Minutes Oops
C01068 00442 ∂17-Feb-86 2120 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: DARPA equipment money
C01070 00443 ∂17-Feb-86 2324 HST lisp standardization
C01072 00444 ∂18-Feb-86 0846 RA robotics committee meeting
C01073 00445 ∂18-Feb-86 0849 RA AI courses and degrees meeting
C01074 00446 ∂18-Feb-86 0900 JMC
C01075 00447 ∂18-Feb-86 1034 CLT lisp standardization
C01076 00448 ∂18-Feb-86 1044 SJM Kiremidjian
C01077 00449 ∂18-Feb-86 1157 LES
C01078 00450 ∂18-Feb-86 1157 LES Re: Parallel Computers
C01080 00451 ∂18-Feb-86 1318 LES
C01081 00452 ∂18-Feb-86 1319 LES Computer Facilities on DARPA funds.
C01083 00453 ∂18-Feb-86 1332 LES QLisp
C01086 00454 ∂18-Feb-86 1333 RA Dr. Paris
C01087 00455 ∂18-Feb-86 1358 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA talk?
C01089 00456 ∂18-Feb-86 1412 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: talk?
C01090 00457 ∂18-Feb-86 1624 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C01091 00458 ∂18-Feb-86 1811 RA Judith Lemon SU TV network
C01092 00459 ∂18-Feb-86 2105 ZM
C01093 00460 ∂19-Feb-86 0257 HST lisp standardisation
C01097 00461 ∂19-Feb-86 0917 VAL non-monotonic reasoning seminar
C01098 00462 ∂19-Feb-86 0942 RA
C01099 00463 ∂19-Feb-86 1011 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee
C01101 00464 ∂19-Feb-86 1101 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Courses and Degrees
C01102 00465 ∂19-Feb-86 1102 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Courses and Degrees
C01103 00466 ∂19-Feb-86 1355 ME Lathrop
C01106 00467 ∂19-Feb-86 1417 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Industrial Vistors
C01107 00468 ∂19-Feb-86 1443 LES
C01109 00469 ∂19-Feb-86 1610 COWER@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: ANE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LANRE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LAUBSCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LEBEN@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
C01111 00470 ∂19-Feb-86 2151 CLT lisp standardization
C01114 00471 ∂20-Feb-86 0855 RA
C01115 00472 ∂20-Feb-86 0856 ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU re: Silico Sapiens
C01117 00473 ∂20-Feb-86 1108 RA industrial lectureship for next year
C01118 00474 ∂20-Feb-86 1104 LES Facilities Committee Meeting
C01119 00475 ∂20-Feb-86 1157 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Credit for VTSS160?
C01120 00476 ∂20-Feb-86 1319 RA Greg Nelsson
C01121 00477 ∂20-Feb-86 1348 VAL next MCC visit
C01122 00478 ∂20-Feb-86 1404 RA
C01123 00479 ∂20-Feb-86 1433 RA Keeble Schuchart Phtography
C01124 00480 ∂20-Feb-86 1434 VAL Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
C01126 00481 ∂20-Feb-86 1536 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Message from Ed Feigenbaum
C01128 00482 ∂20-Feb-86 1631 RA leaving
C01129 00483 ∂20-Feb-86 1842 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Re: Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
C01131 00484 ∂20-Feb-86 2327 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
C01132 00485 ∂20-Feb-86 2347 GHG
C01133 00486 ∂21-Feb-86 0800 JMC
C01134 00487 ∂21-Feb-86 0838 RA trip to Washington
C01135 00488 ∂21-Feb-86 1026 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rutie
C01136 00489 ∂21-Feb-86 1026 RA Re: trip to Washington
C01137 00490 ∂21-Feb-86 1101 RA John Pucci
C01138 00491 ∂21-Feb-86 1118 RA Washington trip
C01139 00492 ∂21-Feb-86 1153 RA lunch
C01140 00493 ∂21-Feb-86 1157 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C01141 00494 ∂21-Feb-86 1243 CLT
C01142 00495 ∂21-Feb-86 1358 VAL David Etherington
C01143 00496 ∂21-Feb-86 1414 RA Re: Washington trip
C01144 00497 ∂21-Feb-86 1504 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA More/Trustees' Dinner
C01146 00498 ∂21-Feb-86 1527 RA Meeting: Nilsson, Reid, and you
C01147 00499 ∂21-Feb-86 1532 LES let.pub file
C01148 00500 ∂21-Feb-86 1615 RA Dr. Alan Rowe
C01149 00501 ∂21-Feb-86 1737 RA trip to Washington
C01150 00502 ∂21-Feb-86 1757 ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: photo
C01152 00503 ∂21-Feb-86 1759 ME not printing XGP files
C01154 00504 ∂22-Feb-86 1444 LES Alliant versus Sequent
C01158 00505 ∂22-Feb-86 2315 KWT Where does PARRY reside?
C01159 00506 ∂23-Feb-86 0900 JMC
C01160 00507 ∂23-Feb-86 1111 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS223A, CS323
C01162 00508 ∂23-Feb-86 1247 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tues
C01163 00509 ∂23-Feb-86 1705 SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: CS223A, CS323
C01165 00510 ∂24-Feb-86 0933 RA Judith Lemmon
C01166 00511 ∂24-Feb-86 1052 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Yuri Gastev
C01167 00512 ∂24-Feb-86 1505 VAL Nakagawa's visit
C01168 00513 ∂24-Feb-86 1532 LES RT account
C01169 00514 ∂24-Feb-86 1636 VAL paper on pointwise circ'n
C01170 00515 ∂24-Feb-86 1700 RA John Pucci
C01171 00516 ∂24-Feb-86 1716 ME printing XGP files via Lathrop spooler
C01172 00517 ∂24-Feb-86 2117 norvig@usc-cse.usc.edu Number of `facts' per brain.
C01174 00518 ∂24-Feb-86 2300 ME Lathrop
C01176 00519 ∂24-Feb-86 2321 S.SOOD@LOTS-B VTSS HOMEWORK
C01177 00520 ∂24-Feb-86 2326 WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: sail jingles.
C01178 00521 ∂24-Feb-86 2330 HST proposal for the 30-years lisp conference
C01181 00522 ∂25-Feb-86 0718 GHOSH@SU-SIERRA.ARPA re: HAM radios
C01182 00523 ∂25-Feb-86 0826 RA John Pucci
C01183 00524 ∂25-Feb-86 0835 RA Judith Lemmon
C01184 00525 ∂25-Feb-86 0944 hitson@su-pescadero.arpa Tomorrow's meeting...
C01186 00526 ∂25-Feb-86 1127 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa more input / request for output
C01190 00527 ∂25-Feb-86 1131 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Dinner/Monday, 3/10
C01191 00528 ∂25-Feb-86 1149 RA Dr. Appointment
C01192 00529 ∂25-Feb-86 1208 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Horn
C01194 00530 ∂25-Feb-86 1209 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: Yuri Gastev
C01195 00531 ∂25-Feb-86 1216 AI.PETRIE@MCC.ARPA MRS
C01198 00532 ∂25-Feb-86 1257 norvig@usc-cse.usc.edu re: Number of `facts' per brain.
C01201 00533 ∂25-Feb-86 1514 NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA Symbolic Systems Program
C01204 00534 ∂25-Feb-86 1801 jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
C01205 00535 ∂25-Feb-86 1813 LES Facilities Committee Meeting
C01216 00536 ∂25-Feb-86 1815 ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ["Derek Partridge <derek@nmsu>" <derek@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>:]
C01231 00537 ∂25-Feb-86 1845 jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
C01233 00538 ∂25-Feb-86 2111 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa color graphics
C01236 00539 ∂25-Feb-86 2327 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Revised rates
C01239 00540 ∂25-Feb-86 2336 JMC re: Revised rates
C01240 00541 ∂26-Feb-86 0120 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Worstations & 'Glue' for the Darpa discussion
C01247 00542 ∂26-Feb-86 0932 VAL
C01248 00543 ∂26-Feb-86 1000 CLT calendar item
C01249 00544 ∂26-Feb-86 1100 JMC
C01250 00545 ∂26-Feb-86 1127 RA check and letters
C01251 00546 ∂26-Feb-86 1356 RA leaving early for course
C01252 00547 ∂26-Feb-86 1426 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA updated Workstation/Glue text
C01257 00548 ∂26-Feb-86 1510 RA leaving
C01258 00549 ∂26-Feb-86 1542 HQM%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
C01310 00550 ∂26-Feb-86 1832 KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Ambiguous requirements
C01312 00551 ∂26-Feb-86 2045 JMC
C01313 00552 ∂27-Feb-86 0055 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA How about a non-mon workshop at AAAI this year? (Deadline 3/1)
C01315 00553 ∂27-Feb-86 0412 YEARWOOD@SRI-AI.ARPA Files archived from directory <PS:<COMMONSENSE>>
C01316 00554 ∂27-Feb-86 0619 kddlab!nttlab!kddlab!nttlab!α@seismo.CSS.GOV
C01318 00555 ∂27-Feb-86 0835 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Meeting
C01319 00556 ∂27-Feb-86 0845 SJM productivity essay
C01320 00557 ∂27-Feb-86 0904 RA meeting reminder
C01321 00558 ∂27-Feb-86 0914 BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Shankar
C01323 00559 ∂27-Feb-86 0915 RA Loretta Britten, Time-Life
C01324 00560 ∂27-Feb-86 1001 JMC
C01325 00561 ∂27-Feb-86 1008 RA Re: leaving early for course
C01326 00562 ∂27-Feb-86 1035 CLT Axioms for arrays - need a reference
C01329 00563 ∂27-Feb-86 1116 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Epsilon
C01330 00564 ∂27-Feb-86 1213 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa a data point on servers
C01340 00565 ∂27-Feb-86 1214 LES memo.pub
C01341 00566 ∂27-Feb-86 1235 gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM Re: Industrial lecturer
C01343 00567 ∂27-Feb-86 1504 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA paper
C01345 00568 ∂27-Feb-86 1726 SJG circumscription reference(s) sought
C01346 00569 ∂27-Feb-86 1840 LES Alliant vs. Sequent
C01348 00570 ∂27-Feb-86 2048 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:jlh@su-sonoma.arpa MacQueen
C01350 00571 ∂27-Feb-86 2114 BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
C01354 00572 ∂28-Feb-86 0132 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa MacQueen
C01357 00573 ∂28-Feb-86 0900 JMC
C01358 00574 ∂28-Feb-86 0911 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: paper
C01359 00575 ∂28-Feb-86 0958 SJM personal flying machines
C01360 00576 ∂28-Feb-86 1045 SJM helicopter data
C01361 00577 ∂28-Feb-86 1130 RA Eliot Blum, SLAC
C01362 00578 ∂28-Feb-86 1209 RA going home
C01363 00579 ∂28-Feb-86 1345 MDIXON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA re: dump?
C01365 00580 ∂28-Feb-86 1352 SJG oops ...
C01366 00581 ∂28-Feb-86 1341 SJG potential AI roundtable
C01368 00582 ∂28-Feb-86 1509 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: potential AI roundtable
C01369 00583 ∂28-Feb-86 1554 ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: photo
C01372 00584 ∂28-Feb-86 1645 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
C01375 00585 ∂28-Feb-86 1725 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
C01377 00586 ∂28-Feb-86 1732 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Personnel Survey of AI Salaries
C01390 00587 ∂28-Feb-86 2029 RA
C01391 00588 ∂28-Feb-86 2031 YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Visit
C01393 00589 ∂01-Mar-86 0050 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa re: a data point on servers
C01397 00590 ∂01-Mar-86 1315 worley@su-navajo.arpa re: a data point on servers
C01399 00591 ∂01-Mar-86 1325 SJG re: message to Dreyfus
C01400 00592 ∂01-Mar-86 1400 JMC
C01401 00593 ∂01-Mar-86 1802 binford@su-whitney.arpa workshop
C01403 00594 ∂01-Mar-86 2309 T.TALM@LOTS-B VTSS 160 writing assignment #5 from Todd Gates
C01409 00595 ∂01-Mar-86 2349 worley@su-navajo.arpa re: a data point on servers
C01410 00596 ∂02-Mar-86 1147 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA BAD NEWS!
C01412 00597 ∂02-Mar-86 1152 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA congratulations
C01413 00598 ∂02-Mar-86 1240 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA MRG
C01415 00599 ∂02-Mar-86 1332 GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: bells of rhymneypartridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C01417 00600 ∂02-Mar-86 1334 GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: bells of rhymneypartridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C01418 00601 ∂02-Mar-86 1409 GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: bells of rhymneypartridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C01420 00602 ∂02-Mar-86 1432 binford@su-whitney.arpa workshop
C01421 00603 ∂02-Mar-86 1449 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: workshop
C01422 00604 ∂02-Mar-86 1810 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA ONR Proposal
C01424 00605 ∂02-Mar-86 2138 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Congratulations!
C01425 00606 ∂02-Mar-86 2241 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planlunch
C01426 00607 ∂02-Mar-86 2250 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Congratulations!
C01427 00608 ∂02-Mar-86 2355 LES re: ONR Proposal
C01428 00609 ∂03-Mar-86 0109 LES Facility Committee Minutes of 2/27/86
C01438 00610 ∂03-Mar-86 0849 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:HART@SRI-AI.ARPA VIPship
C01440 00611 ∂03-Mar-86 0900 JMC
C01441 00612 ∂03-Mar-86 0921 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: VIPship
C01443 00613 ∂03-Mar-86 1000 JMC
C01444 00614 ∂03-Mar-86 1027 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa CS PhD proposal
C01446 00615 ∂03-Mar-86 1030 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA MAD tools
C01450 00616 ∂03-Mar-86 1042 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
C01453 00617 ∂03-Mar-86 1112 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Round table
C01457 00618 ∂03-Mar-86 1112 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Review of CS PhD program
C01460 00619 ∂03-Mar-86 1125 RA John Nafeh, MAD
C01461 00620 ∂03-Mar-86 1216 VAL The wise men problem
C01462 00621 ∂03-Mar-86 1217 RA Invitation to Milan, Italy
C01463 00622 ∂03-Mar-86 1239 SJG AI roundtable
C01464 00623 ∂03-Mar-86 1326 RA Casey Farrell
C01465 00624 ∂03-Mar-86 1352 VAL re: Etherington
C01467 00625 ∂03-Mar-86 1443 SJG re: why I think Minsky will come
C01468 00626 ∂03-Mar-86 1443 SJG
C01469 00627 ∂03-Mar-86 1441 VAL re: AI roundtable
C01470 00628 ∂03-Mar-86 1530 RA Judith Lemon
C01471 00629 ∂03-Mar-86 1630 LES re: ONR Proposal
C01472 00630 ∂03-Mar-86 1642 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Curriculum changes
C01475 00631 ∂03-Mar-86 1646 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Curriculum changes
C01477 00632 ∂03-Mar-86 1714 LES re: ONR Proposal
C01478 00633 ∂03-Mar-86 1720 LES
C01479 00634 ∂03-Mar-86 1735 LES
C01480 00635 ∂03-Mar-86 1758 SJG topic for AI roundtable
C01481 00636 ∂03-Mar-86 2026 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Meeting
C01482 00637 ∂03-Mar-86 2038 LES Facility Committee update
C01486 00638 ∂03-Mar-86 2209 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: ONR Proposal
C01489 00639 ∂04-Mar-86 0005 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Facility Committee update
C01491 00640 ∂04-Mar-86 0851 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: topic for AI roundtable
C01493 00641 ∂04-Mar-86 1106 ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Cognitive AI course
C01496 00642 ∂04-Mar-86 1108 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS 309C
C01498 00643 ∂04-Mar-86 1136 RA Lunch tomorrow
C01499 00644 ∂04-Mar-86 1204 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA Industrial Lectureship 86/87
C01500 00645 ∂04-Mar-86 1210 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: CS 309C
C01501 00646 ∂04-Mar-86 1210 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: New Cognitive AI course
C01503 00647 ∂04-Mar-86 1331 LES ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
C01504 00648 ∂04-Mar-86 1340 GROSZ@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA AAAI workshop funds
C01506 00649 ∂04-Mar-86 1416 RA call from Sarah
C01507 00650 ∂04-Mar-86 1434 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Faculty lunch discussion
C01512 00651 ∂04-Mar-86 1443 LES Encore visit
C01513 00652 ∂04-Mar-86 1535 LES ONR discussion, final
C01514 00653 ∂04-Mar-86 1653 CLT calendar non item
C01515 00654 ∂04-Mar-86 2020 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
C01516 00655 ∂04-Mar-86 2024 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
C01517 00656 ∂04-Mar-86 2049 berglund@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Faculty lunch discussion
C01519 00657 ∂05-Mar-86 0030 LES Squires views
C01526 00658 ∂05-Mar-86 0049 LES re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
C01528 00659 ∂05-Mar-86 0904 MACMILK@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: JMC's letter to Stanford Daily (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C01529 00660 ∂05-Mar-86 0916 RA industrial lecturer
C01530 00661 ∂05-Mar-86 1101 VAL MCC visit
C01531 00662 ∂05-Mar-86 1347 RA Msg. from Zohar
C01532 00663 ∂05-Mar-86 1400 RA leaving
C01533 00664 ∂05-Mar-86 1533 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planlunch abstract?
C01534 00665 ∂05-Mar-86 1538 VAL Reminder: Non-Monotonic Seminar
C01537 00666 ∂05-Mar-86 1658 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: MAD tools
C01540 00667 ∂05-Mar-86 1807 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA response
C01544 00668 ∂05-Mar-86 1904 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
C01568 00669 ∂05-Mar-86 1921 LES Facility Committee Minutes of 3/5/86
C01575 00670 ∂05-Mar-86 1931 LES Facilities 3/5/86 Minutes Correction
C01576 00671 ∂05-Mar-86 2244 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS class
C01577 00672 ∂06-Mar-86 1330 RA Roxie France, Time Life Books
C01578 00673 ∂06-Mar-86 1611 RA Cuthbert Hurd
C01579 00674 ∂06-Mar-86 1730 CLT
C01580 00675 ∂06-Mar-86 1815 ME Prancing Pony Bill
C01582 00676 ∂06-Mar-86 2334 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA Symbolic Systems
C01586 00677 ∂07-Mar-86 0908 RA be late
C01587 00678 ∂07-Mar-86 0931 SJG meeting this AM at 10.30?
C01589 00679 ∂07-Mar-86 1126 pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: colo(u)r graphics
C01591 00680 Here's a slightly tighter version.
C01594 00681 ∂07-Mar-86 1312 Carnese@SRI-KL.ARPA positive responsibility of computer professionals
C01596 00682 ∂07-Mar-86 1405 VAL Negation in NAIL!
C01601 00683 ∂07-Mar-86 1421 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa Systems PhD Program
C01625 00684 ∂07-Mar-86 1451 RA post office
C01626 00685 ∂07-Mar-86 1452 LES
C01627 00686 ∂07-Mar-86 1639 hpm@rover.ri.cmu.edu Re: computer controlled vehicles
C01629 00687 ∂07-Mar-86 1914 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Negation in NAIL!
C01631 00688 ∂08-Mar-86 1122 SJG transportation to/from Reasoning About Knowledge workshop
C01633 00689 ∂09-Mar-86 1203 BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA cs 306 grade from Fall 85
C01635 00690 ∂09-Mar-86 1304 EVAN@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: cartoon
C01637 00691 ∂09-Mar-86 1520 VAL cooperating experts
C01639 00692 ∂09-Mar-86 1533 VAL Edward Zelenin
C01640 00693 ∂09-Mar-86 1739 @SRI-BISHOP.ARPA:Kaelbling@SRI-AI.ARPA Penguin cartoon
C01642 00694 ∂09-Mar-86 2249 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Reminder re Trustee's Dinner
C01643 00695 ∂10-Mar-86 0601 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: phone call
C01644 00696 ∂10-Mar-86 0912 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA next visit
C01645 00697 ∂10-Mar-86 1409 RA reminder
C01646 00698 ∂10-Mar-86 1359 VAL re: Negation in NAIL!
C01648 00699 ∂10-Mar-86 1549 RA Roger Wainwright, University of Talsa
C01649 00700 ∂10-Mar-86 1549 RA John Nafeh
C01650 00701 ∂10-Mar-86 1738 LES Parallel computer buy
C01651 00702 ∂10-Mar-86 2205 LLW@S1-A.ARPA Late CSD Application
C01658 00703 ∂10-Mar-86 2243 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: meeting
C01659 00704 ∂11-Mar-86 0633 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
C01660 00705 ∂11-Mar-86 0643 rjk@mitre-bedford.ARPA Situational Calculus
C01662 00706 ∂11-Mar-86 1049 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Reminder - meeting today 2:15
C01663 00707 ∂11-Mar-86 1135 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.ARPA Photo
C01665 00708 ∂11-Mar-86 1315 rjk@mitre-bedford.ARPA Situation Calculus
C01666 00709 ∂11-Mar-86 1537 CLT phon call
C01667 00710 ∂11-Mar-86 1717 LES re: meeting
C01668 00711 ∂11-Mar-86 1736 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: uucp through the ethertips
C01671 00712 ∂11-Mar-86 1929 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
C01679 00713 ∂11-Mar-86 1929 LES re: meeting
C01680 00714 ∂11-Mar-86 1931 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA [B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra@OSU-20>: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop]
C01688 00715 ∂11-Mar-86 2251 HX.RLS@Lindy
C01689 00716 ∂11-Mar-86 2359 avg@su-aimvax.arpa re: Negation in NAIL!
C01693 00717 ∂12-Mar-86 0923 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Yesterday's committee meeting
C01698 00718 ∂12-Mar-86 0941 VAL re: Negation in NAIL!
C01701 00719 ∂12-Mar-86 0942 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
C01702 00720 ∂12-Mar-86 0950 RA lunch today cancelled
C01703 00721 ∂12-Mar-86 1002 RA reminder to call Franklin Hersch
C01704 00722 ∂12-Mar-86 1003 RA Larry Lesser, Inference
C01705 00723 ∂12-Mar-86 1056 VAL Pointwise circ'n paper
C01706 00724 ∂12-Mar-86 1113 CLT
C01707 00725 ∂12-Mar-86 1140 SJM sjm
C01708 00726 ∂12-Mar-86 1238 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK re: Photo
C01710 00727 ∂12-Mar-86 1247 RA Talk at Fermilab
C01711 00728 ∂12-Mar-86 1316 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
C01713 00729 ∂12-Mar-86 1317 RA Igor Maximovich Bobko
C01714 00730 ∂12-Mar-86 1332 RA Ed Fredkin
C01715 00731 ∂12-Mar-86 1334 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth
C01716 00732 ∂12-Mar-86 1449 rar@kestrel.ARPA tense logic < first order theory of time ?
C01723 00733 ∂12-Mar-86 1528 RA leaving now
C01724 00734 ∂12-Mar-86 1639 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA more time comments
C01733 00735 2-Mar-86 1721 ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA re: Can you recommend a body shop? (Or warn me off a bad one?)
C01734 00736 ∂12-Mar-86 1727 RPG ISO steering committee
C01735 00737 ∂12-Mar-86 1909 CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Speaker on Leibniz's logic
C01737 00738 ∂12-Mar-86 1926 LES re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
C01740 00739 ∂12-Mar-86 2053 CLT
C01741 00740 ∂13-Mar-86 0825 CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU re: Speaker on Leibniz's logic
C01742 00741 ∂13-Mar-86 0900 JMC
C01743 00742 ∂13-Mar-86 0927 BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
C01745 00743 ∂13-Mar-86 1103 BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
C01746 00744 ∂13-Mar-86 1212 rar@kestrel.ARPA You first conjecture
C01748 00745 ∂13-Mar-86 1419 RA Stuart Craine
C01749 00746 ∂13-Mar-86 1420 RA letter signing
C01750 00747 ∂13-Mar-86 1428 LES re: meeting
C01751 00748 ∂13-Mar-86 1941 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
C01763 00749 ∂13-Mar-86 2057 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA a partial answer
C01767 00750 ∂13-Mar-86 2233 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA uucp, my paper and the other class essays
C01770 00751 ∂13-Mar-86 2359 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS
C01773 00752 ∂14-Mar-86 0144 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK re: Photo
C01774 00753 ∂14-Mar-86 0516 PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Letter of reference
C01776 00754 ∂14-Mar-86 0737 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: reports
C01782 00755 ∂14-Mar-86 0740 CLT
C01783 00756 ∂14-Mar-86 0802 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK Re: visit to Edinburgh
C01786 00757 ∂14-Mar-86 0957 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C01787 00758 ∂14-Mar-86 1134 RA letter to Zenon Pylyshyn
C01788 00759 ∂14-Mar-86 1245 PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA re: You first conjecture
C01790 00760 ∂14-Mar-86 1357 PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA re: a partial answer
C01792 00761 ∂14-Mar-86 1512 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
C01794 00762 ∂14-Mar-86 1544 RA
C01795 00763 ∂14-Mar-86 1552 RA telefax to Italy
C01796 00764 ∂14-Mar-86 1644 rar@kestrel.ARPA An example, and an assessment of the discussion so far
C01805 00765 ∂14-Mar-86 1857 LES RT ethernet card
C01806 00766 ∂15-Mar-86 1036 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Ramin Zabih
C01808 00767 ∂15-Mar-86 1238 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search
C01810 00768 ∂15-Mar-86 1332 DEK sabbatical work
C01811 00769 ∂16-Mar-86 0100 JMC
C01812 00770 ∂16-Mar-86 0218 ME xgpsyn
C01813 00771 ∂16-Mar-86 1456 RPG Alliant versus Encore
C01814 00772 ∂16-Mar-86 1529 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Szolovitz Letter Missing
C01815 00773 ∂16-Mar-86 2224 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa some interesting info on MIT...
C01818 00774 ∂17-Mar-86 0617 nttlab!NTT-20!Goto@su-shasta.arpa A message from Prof.Nagao at Kyoto University
C01822 00775 ∂17-Mar-86 1000 RA Roxie France, Time-Life Books
C01823 00776 ∂17-Mar-86 1005 RA msg. from Zohar
C01824 00777 ∂17-Mar-86 1013 RA John Nafeh, MAD
C01825 00778 ∂17-Mar-86 1014 RA Talk at Fermi Lab
C01826 00779 ∂17-Mar-86 1101 VAL Dynamic logic and situation calculus
C01827 00780 ∂17-Mar-86 1110 VAL
C01828 00781 ∂17-Mar-86 1129 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Info
C01831 00782 ∂17-Mar-86 1140 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Info
C01834 00783 ∂17-Mar-86 1300 LES Ebos review
C01835 00784 ∂17-Mar-86 1316 LES Moses' Thesis
C01836 00785 ∂17-Mar-86 1518 CLT call
C01837 00786 ∂17-Mar-86 1622 VAL
C01838 00787 ∂17-Mar-86 1702 rar@kestrel.ARPA Responses to earlier comments and queries
C01852 00788 ∂17-Mar-86 1731 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rutie
C01853 00789 ∂17-Mar-86 1917 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA example
C01856 00790 ∂17-Mar-86 2023 veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Request for lit.
C01858 00791 ∂17-Mar-86 2120 RPG Welcome
C01860 00792 ∂18-Mar-86 0318 UMA@IBM-SJ.ARPA connection
C01864 00793 ∂18-Mar-86 0329 UMA@IBM-SJ.ARPA trying connection still
C01869 00794 ∂18-Mar-86 0720 HST bibel's phone
C01871 00795 ∂18-Mar-86 0900 JMC
C01872 00796 ∂18-Mar-86 0900 JMC
C01873 00797 ∂18-Mar-86 0946 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa PC/RT
C01874 00798 ∂18-Mar-86 0957 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: PC/RT
C01875 00799 ∂18-Mar-86 1019 RA Re: Talk at Fermi Lab
C01876 00800 ∂18-Mar-86 1040 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: PC/RT
C01877 00801 ∂18-Mar-86 1045 VAL tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
C01880 00802 ∂18-Mar-86 1112 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: PC/RT
C01881 00803 ∂18-Mar-86 1113 RA [Reply to message recvd: 17 Mar 86 15:20 Pacific Time]
C01882 00804 ∂18-Mar-86 1229 SJM essays
C01883 00805 ∂18-Mar-86 1329 RA Airfare prices
C01884 00806 ∂18-Mar-86 1429 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa yet another revision ...
C01886 00807 ∂18-Mar-86 1501 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA Re: tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
C01888 00808 ∂18-Mar-86 1539 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C01889 00809 ∂18-Mar-86 1553 greep@camelot Re: need part of the book
C01891 00810 ∂18-Mar-86 1546 VAL Trip to Monterey
C01892 00811 ∂18-Mar-86 1600 PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA re: Responses to earlier comments and queries
C01894 00812 ∂18-Mar-86 1603 RA Msg. from Frank at Dina Bolla
C01895 00813 ∂18-Mar-86 1623 VAL re: tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
C01898 00814 ∂18-Mar-86 1659 CLT package
C01899 00815 ∂18-Mar-86 1727 CLT shopping
C01900 00816 ∂18-Mar-86 1735 CLT
C01901 00817 ∂18-Mar-86 1755 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA time and expressibility
C01905 00818 ∂19-Mar-86 0303 kddlab!nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet
C01908 00819 ∂19-Mar-86 0627 somewhere!nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet
C01910 00820 ∂19-Mar-86 0923 RA Roxie France, Time-Life
C01911 00821 ∂19-Mar-86 1054 CLT mat
C01913 00822 ∂19-Mar-86 1103 SJG trip to Monterey
C01914 00823 ∂19-Mar-86 1301 VAL re: time and expressibility
C01917 00824 ∂19-Mar-86 1311 LES let.pub fixup
C01918 00825 ∂19-Mar-86 1659 rar@kestrel.ARPA The subject of the discussion
C01922 00826 ∂19-Mar-86 1721 RPG Grey Thursday
C01923 00827 ∂19-Mar-86 1955 greep@camelot Talk: A Data-Flow Environment for an Interactive Graphics
C01926 00828 ∂20-Mar-86 0000 JMC
C01927 00829 ∂20-Mar-86 0613 nttlab!masahiko@su-shasta.arpa our visit to Stanford
C01930 00830 ∂20-Mar-86 0614 nttlab!masahiko@su-shasta.arpa change of address
C01932 00831 ∂20-Mar-86 0821 UMA@IBM-SJ.ARPA stay at IBM
C01934 00832 ∂20-Mar-86 0846 CLT calendar item
C01935 00833 ∂20-Mar-86 1058 RTC Old course notes
C01936 00834 ∂20-Mar-86 1433 S.SOOD@LOTS-A vtss class
C01937 00835 ∂20-Mar-86 1635 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS 309 schedule
C01938 00836 ∂21-Mar-86 0908 SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM Distributed AI Workshop
C01941 00837 ∂21-Mar-86 1022 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search
C01943 00838 ∂21-Mar-86 1158 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA uucp
C01946 00839 ∂21-Mar-86 1215 RA air fare Edinburgh-Milan
C01947 00840 ∂21-Mar-86 1300 SJM essays
C01948 00841 ∂21-Mar-86 1702 RTC Desk space
C01950 00842 ∂21-Mar-86 1842 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Getting things rolling
C01958 00843 ∂21-Mar-86 1907 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA expressibility
C01963 00844 ∂21-Mar-86 2038 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
C01972 00845 ∂25-Mar-86 0302 JMC Expired plan
C01973 00846 ∂25-Mar-86 0313 gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA Documenting our decisions
C01980 00847 ∂25-Mar-86 0319 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA AI comp
C01983 00848 ∂25-Mar-86 0320 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
C01985 00849 ∂25-Mar-86 0321 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU [yuasa: forwarded]
C01993 00850 ∂25-Mar-86 0330 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA [Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>: AI comp]
C02001 00851 ∂25-Mar-86 0333 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
C02005 00852 ∂25-Mar-86 0336 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa meet to discuss sequent, encore, etc.
C02006 00853 ∂25-Mar-86 0338 OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA Re: Documenting our decisions
C02008 00854 ∂25-Mar-86 0648 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search Committee
C02009 00855 ∂25-Mar-86 0905 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA 1986 Publisher's Prize
C02011 00856 ∂25-Mar-86 0926 CLT japan
C02012 00857 ∂25-Mar-86 0936 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
C02013 00858 ∂25-Mar-86 0939 CLT okner
C02014 00859 ∂25-Mar-86 0953 VAL re: expressibility
C02015 00860 ∂25-Mar-86 1005 gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA Documenting our decisions
C02018 00861 ∂25-Mar-86 1122 VAL meeting with Rabinov
C02019 00862 ∂25-Mar-86 1134 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
C02021 00863 ∂25-Mar-86 1154 VAL question
C02022 00864 ∂25-Mar-86 1654 RA Dave Rodgers, Squent
C02023 00865 ∂25-Mar-86 1936 LES Parallel Computer
C02028 00866 ∂25-Mar-86 2119 CLT nafey
C02029 00867 ∂25-Mar-86 2149 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
C02033 00868 ∂26-Mar-86 0615 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
C02036 00869 ∂26-Mar-86 0739 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search Committee
C02037 00870 ∂26-Mar-86 0833 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU FYI
C02044 00871 ∂26-Mar-86 0911 roy@su-aimvax.arpa Prospective PhD student.
C02046 00872 ∂26-Mar-86 0939 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: Parallel Computer
C02049 00873 ∂26-Mar-86 1009 RPG Document
C02051 00874 ∂26-Mar-86 1052 RA Nafeh
C02052 00875 ∂26-Mar-86 1124 JJW PC-RT is in the host table
C02053 00876 ∂26-Mar-86 1258 greep@camelot
C02055 00877 ∂26-Mar-86 1357 RA leaving
C02056 00878 ∂26-Mar-86 1405 greep@camelot Re: terminal type
C02057 00879 ∂26-Mar-86 1502 CLT
C02058 00880 ∂26-Mar-86 1812 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Symbolics Maintenance
C02069 00881 ∂26-Mar-86 1819 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
C02071 00882 ∂26-Mar-86 1841 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA Additional sponsor for the Workshop on High Level Tools
C02074 00883 ∂26-Mar-86 1903 LES Revised Alliant Proposal
C02076 00884 ∂26-Mar-86 2000 JMC
C02077 00885 ∂26-Mar-86 2006 LES DARPA Equipment Update
C02085 00886 ∂26-Mar-86 2021 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU AI Workshop
C02091 00887 ∂26-Mar-86 2116 binford@su-whitney.arpa Symbolics Maintenance
C02093 00888 ∂26-Mar-86 2127 RPG Squires
C02094 00889 ∂26-Mar-86 2231 jmc@
C02095 00890 ∂26-Mar-86 2240 greep@camelot Re: terminal type
C02098 00891 ∂26-Mar-86 2342 LES re: Symbolics Maintenance
C02099 00892 ∂26-Mar-86 2348 greep@camelot Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
C02102 00893 ∂27-Mar-86 0017 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
C02104 00894 ∂27-Mar-86 0541 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU re: JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
C02105 00895 ∂27-Mar-86 0905 SJG
C02106 00896 ∂27-Mar-86 1104 RPG Squires letter
C02107 00897 ∂27-Mar-86 1108 CLT Alliant rationalization
C02108 00898 ∂27-Mar-86 1121 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: advocating postdoctoral fellowships
C02109 00899 ∂27-Mar-86 1120 RPG Lisp Conference
C02110 00900 ∂27-Mar-86 1122 CLT Revised Alliant Proposal
C02111 00901 ∂27-Mar-86 1148 RPG
C02112 00902 ∂27-Mar-86 1351 RA Dave Rodgers, Sequent
C02113 00903 ∂27-Mar-86 1354 ME forwarded inquiry about AI
C02115 00904 ∂27-Mar-86 1411 SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM DAI'86
C02119 00905 ∂27-Mar-86 1421 RA Re: Dave Rodgers, Sequent
C02120 00906 ∂27-Mar-86 1426 greep@camelot IBM proposal
C02128 00907 ∂27-Mar-86 1607 RA Rich McAndrew, Alliant
C02129 00908 ∂27-Mar-86 1956 LLW@S1-A.ARPA Ramin Zabih
C02132 00909 ∂28-Mar-86 0940 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Visiting prospective student
C02134 00910 ∂28-Mar-86 0943 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Whoops
C02136 00911 ∂28-Mar-86 1007 RA Zabih, Ramin David
C02137 00912 ∂28-Mar-86 1206 SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM re: DAI'86
C02138 00913 ∂28-Mar-86 1236 RA leave early
C02139 00914 ∂28-Mar-86 1319 VAL seminar
C02140 00915 ∂28-Mar-86 1323 VAL Rabinov
C02141 00916 ∂28-Mar-86 1324 VAL Reiter
C02142 00917 ∂28-Mar-86 2036 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA example
C02144 00918 ∂28-Mar-86 2211 greep@camelot
C02145 00919 ∂29-Mar-86 0806 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Japanese representative
C02147 00920 ∂29-Mar-86 1255 yossi@su-shasta.arpa Prospective Applicant Visit
C02149 00921 ∂29-Mar-86 1528 yossi@su-shasta.arpa re: Prospective Applicant Visit
C02151 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Jan-86 0000 JMC Duda
∂28-May-85 0905 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Duda
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 May 85 09:05:11 PDT
Date: Tue 28 May 85 09:05:25-PDT
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Duda
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
John, I mentioned the possibility of being a "VIP" to Dick Duda
recently. In my opinion he would do an absolutely outstanding job
of giving a course on expert systems. Dick is pretty busy through
next academic year but might be interested in teaching a course
in '86-'87. He works at Syntelligence (408) 745-6666. -Nils
-------
∂01-Jan-86 1000 JMC
Greg Nelson,gnelson@decwrl should be asked about applying for industrial lec.
∂01-Jan-86 1656 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: Kripke
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Jan 86 16:56:39 PST
Date: Wed 1 Jan 86 16:53:27-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: Kripke
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 1 Jan 86 13:22:00-PST
Message-ID: <12171879938.17.RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
[cwr]
Professor McCarthy:
Thank you. I was able to determine the demographic specifics, solo.
Perhaps I would have been clearer in my query if I had also said that
Kripke's address at the Philosophy Department in Princeton, N.J., and
his departmental telephone at the Princeton Philosophy Department
have not been successful channels for contacting him. In fact, that
people in his department seem to have a difficult time knowing anything
specific about his being that would assist in contacting him. And, that
if anybody had a method, or a friend that travels to Princeton to deliver
communication to him, or knew the dude to consider allowing a one page
communication from me to pass through to him.
Thanks again, and Happy New Year to you and your family.
-- Chuck
-------
∂01-Jan-86 1819 @SCRC-YUKON.ARPA:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM test1, test2
Received: from SCRC-YUKON.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Jan 86 18:19:37 PST
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by SCRC-YUKON.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 183767; Wed 1-Jan-86 21:15:11-EST
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 86 18:17 PST
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: test1, test2
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <860101181728.8.RWG@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
to scrc and scrc-yukon both got through.
hope there were no test0 and test3.
∂01-Jan-86 2214 YM My thesis
I have just put in your mail bin a somewhat revised version of my thesis.
Most of the changes are in Chapter 9 or later in the thesis so you do not
have to reread the parts you read.
Now virtually all of Zohar and Richard proposed changes are in this version.
When you have comments please send me a message.
Zohar will be here in 10 days or so and I'd like him to see the final
version with corrections corresponding to your comments, if possible.
Also, Richard recommended removing the first introduction chapter from the
thesis and leaving what is now chapter 2 as the introduction. Zohar
on the other hand does not object to this introduction but left it me to
decide. If you have an opinion on this point I would like to know.
If you do not have any comments and are ready to sign please let me know
and I'll get you the signature pages.
Thanks, and happy new year,
-Yoni
∂02-Jan-86 0931 RA Sergei Batrovin article in NYT
The tel. no. of the translator Catherine A. Fitzpatrick is (212) 840 9460.
Her address is: 36 West 44 Street, Helsinky Watch, New York, NY 10036.
∂02-Jan-86 1029 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Proposed Agenda
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 10:29:35 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 10:24:42-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Proposed Agenda
To: "Retreat List": ;
Message-ID: <12172071314.24.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Here is a suggestion for Saturday's agenda. In writing this up, it
seemed clear that we need more than one day for this! Let me know
if you have additional/alternative/more specific items that need to
be considered. I trust everyone got the online map I sent around.
-Nils
Proposed Agenda for CSD Retreat
January 4, 1986
Hidden Villa Ranch
Frank and Josephine Duveneck House
9:30-10:00: Coffee and Rolls
10:00-10:30: Consideration of Agenda and Overview
10:30-11:00: Remarks from Dean Jim Gibbons
11:00-12:00: Discussion of CSD Long Range Plan--Nils Nilsson
12:00-12:30: Impacts of the plan on CSD organization--Nils Nilsson
12:30-1:30: Lunch
1:30-2:30: Discussion of the Proposed Undergraduate Major--Jeff Ullman
2:30-3:30: Short discussions about the work of those committees that
might have big future impacts; PhD Committee--Terry Winograd
Facilities Committee--Les Earnest
3:30-4:00: Summary of LOTS future plans--Ralph Gorin
4:00-4:30: Student Perspectives--Ramsay Haddad
4:30-5:00: Wrap-up
5:00-6:00: Refreshments
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1138 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth Papers
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 11:38:29 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 11:35:09-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth Papers
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172084139.25.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, the Genesereth papers are due in the Dean's Office by the end of the
month. This is a reminder about what has to be done before 1/31:
1. Check to see which evaluation letters have not been received, and make
reminder phone calls to these persons.
2. Call a meeting of the promotion committee.
3. Present the committee's recommendation to the senior faculty.
4. Then the formal papers have to be prepared. This will take a little time,
but we can help with them.
Let me know if I can help in any way.
Betty
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1152 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: agenda item
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 11:52:41 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 11:49:13-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: agenda item
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 2 Jan 86 11:08:00-PST
Message-ID: <12172086697.39.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I think Jim Gibbons would welcome remarks that argued for maximizing our
flexibility to exploit new areas of CS that are now unimagined. So, in
sending remarks to the faculty and in commenting on "Gibbons' pitch" at
the retreat, we only have to be careful not to imagine confrontations that
aren't really there. (There may be confrontations, but I don't think they
have to do with flexibility; they have to do with Gibbons' caricaturized
view of the dep bing overly theoretical in the past. He's being
slowly re-informed on that point.)
Since we are unlikely to get billets committed to "Presently unimagined Areas,"
we will have to temporatily project their use in presently known subdivisions,and
then agree amongst ourselves to be flexible and opportunistic when we
actually hire people. -Nils
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1212 RA Industrial mailing list
Betty Scott says she does not have a list, but she suggested using the
Forsythe mailing list which Ann Richardson is preparing.
Ann says thatForsythe mailing list is not ready yet she will probably have
it by the end of next week.
She gave me the Forum mailing list which she had gotten from Carolyn Tajnai. I
put the list on your desk. Do you want to use this list? If yes, are there
names you want added to it? If not, what would you like me to do.
∂02-Jan-86 1235 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: agenda item
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 12:35:18 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 12:32:04-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: agenda item
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 2 Jan 86 11:56:00-PST
Message-ID: <12172094498.11.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I don't think you will find Gibbons arguing against basic research.
I believe he is willing to accept the argument that increased applications
of computer science ought to be the responsibility of that area
(civil engrg, medicine, etc.) interested in the application. Anyway, it
will be useful for him to hear directly from our faculty how important
we regard basic research.
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1244 RA Sarah
Sarah called. She will try again later. If you want to call her she
is at the barn 322 5713. She rented a car and charged it to your American
Express card. Hertz might call and ask for your approval. She had to rent
a car because taking a bus would mean missing her flight back; besides,
renting a car was cheaper.
∂02-Jan-86 1332 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Excess Reports
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 13:31:55 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 13:28:40-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Excess Reports
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172104802.20.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Yes I would appreciate that very much. You can place them in the library
box a Margaret Jacks. Also, if you could identify them as coming from
you that would be helpful for us when we are sorting out mail. Thanks
Harry
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1357 NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Party for Ed
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 13:57:46 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 13:55:00-PST
From: Penny Nii <NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Party for Ed
To: GROUP-L: ;
Message-ID: <12172109595.43.NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
It was pointed out to me that I did not say who all were invited to this
SURPRISE party. The invitees are all KSL members and old friends
and students of the Project. Hope you all can come.
penny
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1516 LES IBM Workstation
To: Eustis@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
I trust that the IBM workstation we discussed earlier is still forthcoming
and will arrive soon. Is there any specific information available on its
hardware and software characteristics (e.g. main memory size, secondary
storage, screen resolution, which version of Unix it runs)? If any
documentation exists, we would like to get a copy as soon as possible.
Also, is it correct to assume that the machine and its documentation will
not be subject to proprietary information agreements?
Thanks for your help.
Les Earnest
∂02-Jan-86 1520 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 2 January 1986
Previous Balance 25.56
Monthly Interest at 1.5% 0.38
Current Charges 6.00 (bicycle lockers)
2.95 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 34.89
Please deliver payments to Debbie Woodward, room 040, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: Payment recordation takes up to three weeks after delivery of a payment
(but not beyond the next billing date).
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.5% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 11/1/85.
Accounts with balances remaining unpaid for more than 55 days are
considered delinquent and are subject to reduction of credit limit.
Please pay your bill and keep your account current.
∂02-Jan-86 1703 LLW@S1-A.ARPA SDI Software ISsues
Received: from S1-A.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 17:03:44 PST
Date: 02 Jan 86 1703 PST
From: Lowell Wood <LLW@S1-A.ARPA>
Subject: SDI Software ISsues
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: LLW@S1-A.ARPA
[John: Your points below appear to be very cogent ones. I'll forward
them for consideration to Pete Worden and his Merry Band. Thanks, Lowell]
∂22-Dec-85 1239 JMC@SU-AI.ARPA sdi software
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by S1-A.ARPA with TCP; 22 Dec 85 12:39:34 PST
Date: 22 Dec 85 1242 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: sdi software
To: llw@S1-A.ARPA
Do the following considerations seem relevant to you?
Whether the software problems of SDI would make it impracticable cannot
fully be estimated until a definite system is proposed. However, some
relevant information can be obtained by answering the following questions
about previous large systems involving both software and hardware.
1. What fraction of system failures have been due to program bugs?
2. What fraction of delays in system availability have been due
to program bugs?
3. What fraction of cost over-runs have been due to underestimation
of the cost of software?
4. What fraction of total cost has been software?
Answers to these questions can be obtained for NASA, DoD and
commercial systems and should help clear the air. Lacking such answers,
let me mention some impressions based merely on having read the
newspapers.
1. While some examples of software failure have been publicized, they
are very small in number compared to hardware failure. Moreover,
computer hardware failure is a small part of total hardware failure.
Certainly this is true of the Shuttle program.
2 and 3. The cited sources of delays and cost over-runs are almost
always hardware.
4. Software is relatively small fraction of the cost of most military
programs.
In so far as past experience is relevant to SDI, this means that
there are likely to be resources for putting extra effort into software
if this is critical. In previous programs, it would seem that the
competition for resources has prevented putting more money into software
than was required to keep software failures to the small fraction of
total failures that was actually experienced.
These considerations bode well for SDI.
∂03-Jan-86 0911 mcdermott-drew@yale-venus Mike Genesereth
Received: from YALE-VENUS.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 09:11:07 PST
Date: 3 JAN 1986 12:11:51 EST
From: <MCDERMOTT-DREW@YALE.ARPA>
To: mccarthy@sail.arpa
Subject: Mike Genesereth
Reply-To: <MCDERMOTT-DREW@YALE.ARPA>
I am sending this by US mail, but here is a preview:
John McCarthy,
Stanford
Dear John,
Mike Genesereth is doing some excellent work in AI. He has carved out
a special niche for himself, namely the exploration of deductive models
of reasoning and control, and has mined results from this area with
astonishing energy and dedication. It is difficult to think of anyone
who has set up shop and gotten results so quickly.
There are two areas that I am familiar with where his work is particularly
good. First, his MRS system, in which one theorem prover is controlled
by another (the so-called "meta level"). One may think of this as a sort
of "advice taker," in that what the system does is influenced by axioms
given to it by a human programmer. As you know, getting this idea to
actually work is very difficult, and Genesereth's architecture, embodied
in the MRS system, is one of the most promising around. It is perhaps
the only true predicate-calculus system that has actually been used to
build reasoning programs. Genesereth and his students have used this
system to explore many issues in automated reasoning. I especially liked
their work on planning conjunctive deductive goals.
The other work of his that I like a lot is the work on DART, a digital-
circuit fault diagnoser that operates by using a predicate-calculus
description of a digital circuit, and applying resolution-theorem-
proving techniques "abductively" to infer hypotheses about what is
wrong. The same elegant technique is then used to infer tests to
discriminate among competing hypotheses. The whole thing is brilliantly
simple.
You asked me to compare Genesereth with Allen, deKleer, Levesque, Mitchell,
Raulefs, Wilensky, and Davis. This is a good selection of the best
people working on automated reasoning, as opposed to a more specialized
subfield, like vision. I would put Genesereth in the middle of the pack.
I rank deKleer and Mitchell better, Allen and Levesque about the same,
Wilensky and Davis worse. (I don't know Raulefs very well.) Some other
names come to mind, like Doug Lenat and Jaime Carbonell. Genesereth is
about as good as Carbonell. Lenat is more creative, but a lot less clear.
The one flaw Genesereth has is that he doesn't always keep all of AI in
perspective, and may have an exaggerated sense of the importance of
deductive techniques. However, since most people in AI tend to
underestimate the value of deduction, this is probably not serious.
Sincerely,
Drew McDermott
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1032 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Phone Message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 10:32:25 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 10:18:52-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Phone Message
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172332394.34.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Nancy Staggs of Wm. Ober returned your call. 326-7177
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1047 spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM genesereth
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 10:47:15 PST
Received: by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA15803; Fri, 3 Jan 86 10:49:07 pst
Received: By max.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM (from krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM (krazykat.ARPA))
id AA01360; Fri, 3 Jan 86 10:43:07 pst
Return-Path: <hayes@krazykat>
Received: By krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM
id AA22375; Fri, 3 Jan 86 10:43:02 gmt
Message-Id: <8601031843.AA22375@krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM>
Date: 3 Jan 1986 10:40-PST
From: Patrick Hayes <spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Subject: genesereth
To: Mccarthy@sail.ARPA
John, could you please send me another copy of Genesereths vita asap? I
cant
find the other one, and I need it in order to write a sensible letter
about him. If its online , electronics is faster...
Sorry about the delay, use excuse #23.
Pat
∂03-Jan-86 1126 RA
John,
Before I send out the announcements will you please make sure that the
text is o.k.?
Here's the final version. I have added deadline, application details
and full address.
ANNOUNCEMENT
INDUSTRIAL LECTURESHIP IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
The Computer Science Department of Stanford University
is pleased to announce the Industrial Lectureship in Computer
Science and Engineering for the academic year 1986-87.
The purpose of the lectureship is to increase interaction between
Computer Science Department faculty and students and computer scientists in local
industry.
Each quarter the Computer Science Department invites one
outstanding computer scientist from the local industry to give a course in
his specialty. Office space, computer use and salary appropriate to the
teaching of one course will be provided. It is expected that the balance
of the lecturer's salary will be paid by his permanent employer.
Applications should include a curriculum vita and a course description
suitable for inclusion in the 1986-87 Stanford catalog. The deadline is
Febrary 1, 1986.
Recommendations and applications should be addressed to Professor
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305,
(415)497-4430, electronic mail: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂03-Jan-86 1146 gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM Re: industrial lectureship
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 11:45:41 PST
Received: from magic.ARPA (magic) by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA16492; Fri, 3 Jan 86 11:47:45 pst
Received: by magic.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA29711; Fri, 3 Jan 86 11:46:22 pst
From: gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM (Greg Nelson)
Message-Id: <8601031946.AA29711@magic.ARPA>
Date: 3 Jan 1986 1146-PST (Friday)
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: industrial lectureship
In-Reply-To: Your message of 03 Jan 86 1138 PST.
<8601031941.AA16398@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Thank you for sending me the announcement. I will send you an
application next week.
Greg
∂03-Jan-86 1249 RA abstract
Mailed the abstract to Jennifer Ballantine.
∂03-Jan-86 1442 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: department plans and basic research in computer science
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 14:42:06 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 3 Jan 86 14:42:21 pst
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 86 14:42:21 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Re: department plans and basic research in computer science
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
John, is what's worrying you the Gibbons idea that the AI person
should be one interested in "Engineering Design"?
If so, I second your concern, and I think we have to fight
against it tooth and nail. I've spoken to Nils about this
general concern, and I think Nils' strategy is to work around
the constraints rather than knock them over. Maybe he's
got the right idea, but I intend to make things hot for JG
on this issue tomorrow.
---jeff
∂03-Jan-86 1446 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Retreat Agenda, II
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 14:46:40 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 14:41:45-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Retreat Agenda, II
To: "Retreat List": ;
Message-ID: <12172380250.40.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Here's a slightly revised retreat agenda. Note some time changes in
topics.
"Retreat List":-
!Forest Baskett! baskett@DECWRL.DEC.COM,-
!Tom Binford! TOB@SAIL,-
!Len Bosack! BOSACK,-
!Harold Brown! BROWN@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Bruce Buchanan! BUCHANAN@SUMEX-AIM,-
!David Cheriton! cheriton@Pescadero,-
!William Clancey! CLANCEY@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Germund G. Dahlquist! DAHLQUIST,-
!George Dantzig! or.dantzig@Sierra,-
!Les Earnest! Les@SAIL,-
!Bob Engelmore! ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM,-
!LaDonna L. Eppley! EPPLEY,-
!Edward Feigenbaum! FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Bob Floyd! RWF@SAIL,-
!Mike J. Flynn! M@Sierra,-
!Alain Fournier! Fournier@Navajo,-
!Peter Friedland! FRIEDLAND@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Dick Gabriel! RPG@SAIL,-
!Michael Genesereth! GENESERETH,-
!Jim Gibbons! GIBBONS@Sierra,-
!John Gill! GILL,-
!Gene Golub! GOLUB,-
!Ralph Gorin! G.GORIN@LOTS-A,-
!Barbara J. Grosz! grosz@SRI-AI.ARPA,-
!Leonidas Guibas! guibas@DECWRL.DEC.COM,-
!Joe Halpern! halpern@IBM-SJ.ARPA,-
!Pat Hayes! PHAYES@SRI-KL,-
!Barbara Hayes-Roth! BHAYES-ROTH@SUMEX-AIM,-
!John Hennessy! JLH@Sonoma,-
!John Herriot! HERRIOT,-
!Mark Horowitz! Horowitz@Sierra,-
!Cuthbert Hurd! CHURD,-
!Tom Kailath! TK@ISL,-
!Ken Kennedy! KENNEDY,-
!Jussi Ketonen! JK@Sail,-
!Donald E. Knuth! DEK@SAIL,-
!Keith Lantz! LANTZ,-
!Vladimir Lifschitz! VAL@SAIL,-
!Mark Linton! LINTON@Shasta,-
!Zohar Manna! ZM@SAIL,-
!Ernst W. Mayr! MAYR,-
!John McCarthy! JMC@SAIL,-
!Edward J. McCluskey! ejm@Shasta,-
!William F. Miller! MILLER@SRI-KL.ARPA,-
!Penny Nii! NII@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Nils Nilsson! NILSSON,-
!Joseph Oliger! OLIGER,-
!Susan Owicki! SSO.OWICKI@Sierra,-
!Christos H. Papadimitriou! PAPA,-
!Fernando C.N. Pereira! pereira@SRI-AI.ARPA,-
!Vaughan Pratt! pratt@Navajo,-
!Stuart T. Reges! REGES,-
!Brian Reid! reid@Glacier,-
!Thomas C. Rindfleisch! RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Paul Rosenbloom! Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Stanley Rosenschein! stan@SRI-AI.ARPA,-
!Betty Scott! BSCOTT,-
!Ted Shortliffe! SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM,-
! Tenenbaum! Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.ARPA,-
!Jeff Ullman! ULLMAN@diablo,-
!Richard Waldinger! WALDINGER@SRI-KL.ARPA,-
!Gio Wiederhold! Wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM,-
!Terry Winograd! WINOGRAD@CSLI,-
!Andrew Yao! YAO,-
!Student Bureaucrats! BUREAUCRATS@Sushi
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1452 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Retreat Agenda, another try
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 14:52:18 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 14:44:31-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Retreat Agenda, another try
To: "Retreat List": ;
Message-ID: <12172380756.40.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Sorry for sending the wrong file. Let's try this one:
Proposed Agenda for CSD Retreat
January 4, 1986
Hidden Villa Ranch
Frank and Josephine Duveneck House
(The names associated with discussion topics below indicate discussion
leaders NOT speakers! The purpose of our retreat is to give everyone a
chance to voice their opinions, ask questions of others, and jointly
think about our future. It will be particularly appreciated if a few
people who think that their positions on these matters are among those
that "span the space" of the prominent points of view are prepared to
describe their positions during the discussion.)
9:30-10:00: Coffee
10:00-10:15: Consideration of Agenda and Overview--Nils Nilsson
10:15-10:45: Discussion with Dean Jim Gibbons
10:45-11:45: Discussion of the Proposed Undergraduate Major--Jeff Ullman
11:45-12:30: Discussion of "whither CSD" and the Long Range Plan
--Nils Nilsson
12:30-1:30: Lunch
1:30-2:00: Impacts of "The Plan" on CSD organization--Nils Nilsson
2:00-3:00: Short discussions about the work of those committees that
might have big future impacts; PhD Committee--Terry Winograd,
Facilities Committee--Les Earnest
3:00-3:30: Summary of LOTS future plans and their impact on CSD
academic computing--Ralph Gorin
3:30-4:00: Student Perspectives--Ramsay Haddad
4:00-5:00: Wrap-up (There will probably be a lot of subjects we haven't
covered yet.)
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1542 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: department plans and basic research in computer science
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 15:42:53 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 3 Jan 86 15:43:07 pst
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 86 15:43:07 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: re: department plans and basic research in computer science
To: JMC@Sail
Right, I agree the problem is a general one; I just felt that
the AI situation was the most blatant example of the problem.
∂03-Jan-86 1545 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Planning Workshop
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 15:45:41 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 15:44:52-PST
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Planning Workshop
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Dear John,
Here is an approximate costing for the workshop, together with our
draft announcement.
APPROXIMATE COSTING:
(assuming we will be inviting a few more people and about an equal
number will not be able to attend)
Accomodation: 40 people at $70 night (full board) for 3 nights $8400
Air fares: 27 local at $200 $5400
10 East Coast at $600 $6000
3 overseas at $1500 $4500
Shuttle bus/car rental: $500
Printing/Secretarial/etc.: $2000
Projectors/Room rental/Refreshments/etc.: $1000
TOTAL $27800
-----
We are asking for $10000 to cover basic conference costs (printing,
secretarial, projector hire, room rental, etc.) and to help offset
travel and accomodation costs for those invitees who would otherwise
be unable to attend (primarily east coast and overseas invitees). The
idea is to have ALL the best researchers in planning attend the
conference so that we can establish some real foundations in the
subject --- to do this we will need to partially subsidize costs for
some of the attendees. We don't expect to get funding from any other
sources.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Announcement and Call for Papers
INVITED WORKSHOP ON
PLANNING AND REASONING ABOUT ACTION
Timberline Lodge, Portland, Oregon, July 1-3, 1986
This invited workshop will focus on work in planning, rational agency,
and representations and techniques for reasoning about action.
Emphasis will be placed on theoretical and foundational issues, rather
than on particular system implementations. To foster thorough
investigation of these topics, a primary goal of the workshop will be
to have long (45 - 60 minute) presentations as well as ample
discussion time. Invited participants are encouraged to submit a
paper in one of the following areas:
* Representation (including representations of action, time,
causality, and process).
* Planning systems (including algorithms and systems for planning,
reacting, and reasoning about behaviors).
* Multiagent worlds (including reasoning about mutual beliefs,
concurrency, and interagent communication).
* Rational agents (including formalisms for describing the beliefs,
desires, and intentions of rational agents).
Because we expect to have approximately 40 attendees and wish to limit
the workshop to approximately 15-18 papers of high quality, all
submissions will be refereed. It is intended that accepted papers be
published in book form.
Papers should be approximately 20 pages double-spaced. Two copies
should be mailed, by April 15, 1986, to: Planning/Action Workshop,
attn: Georgeff,Lansky , Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI
International, 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025. Authors
will be notified of acceptance or otherwise by May 15; final versions
must reach SRI by June 15.
The workshop is being sponsored by the American Association for
Artificial Intelligence. This will be used in part to help subsidize
workshop attendance for those who could not otherwise attend. An
accommodations package will be offered that covers room and board (3
meals). Rooms have been reserved for the evenings of June 30 -- July
2, and a limited number of rooms have also been reserved for those who
might like to stay on, July 3--5. An initial list of invitees is
attached below.
Timberline Lodge is a year-round ski resort near Portland (approx. 1 hour
drive). The lodge is a huge stone castle built by hand from native
materials and is a national historic landmark. Summertime at Timberline
offers intermediate/advanced skiing, a swimming pool, hiking, and
nearby tennis, golf, and horseback riding.
We hope that you will attend!
Sincerely,
-Michael Georgeff
-Amy Lansky
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
List of invitees:
James Allen
Doug Appelt
Michael Arbib
Michael Bratman
David Chapman
Phil Cohen
Tom Dean
Tom Dietterich
Mark Drummond
Jeff Finger
Michael Genesereth
Michael Georgeff
Matt Ginsberg
Joe Halpern
Pat Hayes
David Israel
Leslie Kaelbling
Henry Kautz
Kurt Konolige
Amy Lansky
Vladimir Lifschitz
John McCarthy
Drew McDermott
Bob Moore
Leora Morgenstern
Yoram Moses
Nils Nilsson
Ed Pednault
Fernando Pereira
Martha Pollack
Jeff Rosenschein
Stan Rosenschein
Yoav Shoham
Reid Simmons
Dave Smith
Mark Stefik
Lucy Suchman
Austin Tate
Richard Waldinger
David Wilkins
Terry Winograd
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1554 KAELBLING@SRI-AI.ARPA Workshop on the Foundations of AI
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 15:54:50 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 15:54:00-PST
From: Leslie Kaelbling <KAELBLING@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Workshop on the Foundations of AI
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
I read an announcement of a workshop on the foundations of AI in New
Mexico on the AILIST. It looks interesting, but there was no
information on registration. Is it by invitation only?
- Leslie
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1754 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA your VTS course
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 17:54:09 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 17:54:22-PST
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: your VTS course
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12172415317.24.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I am interesting in seeing what's going on in the course, but I'm not
at all sure I'll have the time to staff-audit, much less participate.
Is it being videotaped?
A few things about cellular telephones you might want to investigate
are problems that exist today:
. why is roamer service only available if the customer or the customer's
company makes prior billing arrangements with the company whose area
the roamer is in? [That is, why isn't billing consolidated nationally?]
. why are roamer charges so terribly high?
. why are charges in single-company areas so high?
. why are so many cellular systems set up like San Francisco's, with a few
large cells instead of many small cells, leading to noisy connections,
dropped calls, service brownouts/blackouts, and all channel busy conditions?
[A good leftist such as myself would say "this is due to insufficient gov't
regulation; they are trying to recover their initial costs too quickly and
have no motivation to be consumer-responsive. This is especially true in
single-company areas such as San Francisco, but even in two (the maximum)
company areas there still is insufficient competition to trust capitalist
market forces without government regulation. Then again, I think it was a
terrible idea to break up and deregulate AT&T."]
. why is a cellular phone number limited to a single unit? If you have more
than one phone, you have to have separate numbers for each phone (and pay
$45/month for each!). It shouldn't be that difficult to extend the serial
number as password for the phone number to be a list of authorized serial
numbers.
. why has such inadequate provision been made for security on cellular phones?
In spite of legislation, there already are receivers on the market for
picking up cellular calls. When roaming, there is no validation of the
serial number so anybody can claim to be you in a roaming city.
. why is there no standard way for accessing customer service in the area you
are in, a way that *always* works even if your phone isn't authorized?
. why isn't there equal access for long-distance dialing? You're stuck with
whatever long distance company the cellular company gives you. Fortunately
it's usually AT&T, but to use another company you have to dial the local
node (paying air time immediately instead of when your long-distance call
is completed).
[I would answer "because the cellular companies are large and greedy and are
feeding on the pent-up demand for cellular service. With little or no
competition, and the certainly of never having more than one other company
to compete with, they have little motivation to change. With the deregulation
frenzy of the present government, nothing exists to force them to change
either, since the customer base is a captive audience.]
-------
∂03-Jan-86 2136 sun!plaid!chuq@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Re: Does INFO-IBMPC@<somewhere> exist? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 21:35:57 PST
Received: by ucbvax.berkeley.edu (5.38/1.7)
id AA04507; Fri, 3 Jan 86 21:35:34 PST
Received: from snail.sun.uucp by sun.uucp (3.0-/SMI-2.0)
id AA26101; Fri, 3 Jan 86 20:56:02 PST
Received: from plaid.sun.uucp by snail.sun.uucp (3.0-/SMI-3.0DEV4)
id AA13943; Fri, 3 Jan 86 20:55:23 PST
Return-Path: <chuq@plaid>
Received: by plaid.sun.uucp (2.2/SMI-2.0)
id AA05741; Fri, 3 Jan 86 20:55:36 pst
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 86 20:55:36 pst
From: sun!plaid!chuq@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Chuq Von Rospach)
Message-Id: <8601040455.AA05741@plaid.sun.uucp>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Re: Does INFO-IBMPC@<somewhere> exist? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Newsgroups: su.bboard
In-Reply-To: <2788@glacier.ARPA>
Organization: The Hackers Line
Cc:
In article <2788@glacier.ARPA> you write:
>From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
>
>The REQUEST convention is observed by all but the ignorant. Unfortunately,
>there will always be lots of those. It would be better if the short name
>would mail to the REQUEST and the long one labelled <topic>-TO-ALL would
>go to all recipients. Perhaps it should be <topic>-BROADCAST to suggest
>to even the meanest intelligence that something so directed would be broadcast.
The whole problem of topic naming has been discussed a number of times by
people involved in USENET. The thought of changing the name to
something-BROADCAST would help to some degree, but it doesn't really help the
truly ignorant -- most sites tend to have forwarding aliases set up anyway,
and these people would mail to the group regardless of what they are called.
Add on top of that the inconvenience factor to the rest of the list (hackers
HATE typing long names when they don't have to -- they invented ITS, C, UNIX
and the csh alias and history mechanisms...).
In general, you can't hide from the ignorant. My thought would be to put a
real simple intercept prog at the end of the alias that looks for specific
keywords in the subject (most administrivia requests seem to say something
like 'add me' or 'delete me') and have it hold for verification any message
under 10 lines or so (they tend to be quite short). That way the good
people aren't mucked about more than neccessary and yet the list can be
protected from the 'normal' problems.
chuq
--
:From catacombs of Castle Tarot: Chuq Von Rospach
sun!chuq@decwrl.DEC.COM {hplabs,ihnp4,nsc,pyramid}!sun!chuq
It's not looking, it's heat seeking.
∂04-Jan-86 0956 CLT calendar item
fri 24-jan -- sun 26-jan logic meeting ucla
11:00-12:15 tuth CLT MTC(rum) course
( I notice you have made a 9:30 am appointment at Obers on
Thursday. Unless you plan to be done at 10 you probably
should change it.)
∂04-Jan-86 1002 CLT invite
did to reply to penny that 0 of you would come to eds party?
∂04-Jan-86 1657 SJG re: Always make lots of S-turns.
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Dec-85 21:33-PT.]
Dear John:
It's not clear S-turns would have helped. Pitts' generally have a very
steep approach on finals (because biplanes with 200HP engines behave
more like rocks than gliders when you cut the power), so I suspect that
the Pitts hit the Cessna from above; both planes have blind spots that
make this possible. I think the trick is to use your radio a lot.
Could we chat sometime? I'd like to solicit your opinion about the
fact that Dreyfuss is giving a SIGlunch, which seems to have upset a lot
of people in the KSL, and also perhaps you could tell me how I can get
MAD to pay me the money they owe me ...
Happy New Year! Talk to you soon --
Matt
∂04-Jan-86 2109 CLT calendar item
wed 26-feb 15:30 Timothy to Dr. Ginter (3rd floor 1150 veterans blvd)
∂04-Jan-86 2129 PSZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Genesereth evaluation letter
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Jan 86 21:29:39 PST
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 86 00:28:30 EST
From: Peter Szolovits <PSZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Genesereth evaluation letter
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: PSZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, ROSIE@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].773173.860105.PSZ>
I just want to let you know that I am still working on the evaluation
letter you requested for Mike Genesereth's tenure case. My model of
Stanford is that it's very tough to get tenure, so I am trying to be
quite careful and thorough to understand Mike's work and to give it a
critical and full review. Alas, other commitments have kept coming in
the way, and I have just been unable to get it done yet. Tomorrow
morning I leave for a trip to Japan and it's hopeless to try to finish
before then, so I will work on the letter while I'm traveling and mail
it to you from Japan ASAP. I believe Dr. Kaihara from U. Tokyo has some
way of getting to SUMEX, so I may try sending it electronically to cut
some time.
My impression of Mike is quite positive and I will write a strong
letter. I'm just terribly sorry I haven't been able to complete it.
--Pete Szolovits
∂06-Jan-86 0114 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:MRC@PANDA re: your VTS course
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 01:14:27 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 01:06:42-PST
From: Mark Crispin <MRC%PANDA@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: your VTS course
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 3 Jan 86 18:18:00-PST
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12173018307.10.MRC@PANDA>
I don't know of any cellular areas in which the non-wireline company has
started operations before the wireline company has. In San Francisco, the
company is GTE Mobilnet (not a small company). Many of us are eagerly
awaiting Cellular One (the non-wireline company) coming online; there is
talk of a mass desertion.
There is an amazing pent-up demand for cellular service. They are still
installing phones in cars as fast as they can. There is no motivation for
change, especially when it comes to roamer policies. Pacific Bell is one
of the worst offenders; they charge $6-$8/day for roamer privileges plus
call charges (that is, $180-$240/month). Considering that GTE Mobilnet's
monthly service charge is $45/month (which is just about the highest in the
nation) such roamer charges are unconscionable. The problem is, roamers
really have no choice. They are at the mercy of the company whose area they
are in, especially when their phone lacks the "A/B switch" which gives them
the opportunity to select the (generally more economical) non-wireline
company to roam to instead of the default wireline company.
The frauds you referred to have little to do with the mainstream of cellular.
The fraud is that most of the goofy outfits you refer to never have a chance
of getting a franchise. The non-wireline companies are mostly large
organizations such as Cellular One which base their prices on the wireline
company's minus a tad (as opposed to setting their own prices independently).
-------
∂06-Jan-86 0803 PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU 1986-Jan-Mailing
Received: from RED.RUTGERS.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 08:03:14 PST
Date: 6 Jan 86 10:58:03 EST
From: PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Subject: 1986-Jan-Mailing
To: arpanet.mail: ;
cc: petty@RED.RUTGERS.EDU
Message-ID: <12173093193.34.PETTY@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Below is a list of our newest technical reports.
The abstracts for these are available for access via FTP with user account
<anonymous> with any password. The file name is:
<library>tecrpts-online.doc
If you wish to order copies of any of these reports please send mail via the
ARPANET to PETTY@RUTGERS. Thank you!!
[ ] DCS-TR-160 - "KNOWLEDGE PROCESSING vs PROGRAMMING: CK-LOG vs
PROLOG"), C.V. Srinivasan.
[ ] DCS-TR-161 - "A NOTE ON UNMERGING"), B. Reed, J.S. Salowe,
and W.L. Steiger.
[ ] DCS-TR-162 - "STABLE UNMERGING IN LINEAR TIME AND CONSTANT
SPACE"), J.S. Salowe and W.L. Steiger.
[ ] DCS-TR-163 - "SUBSET SIZE IN PARALLEL"), L. Rudolph and
W.L. Steiger.
[ ] DCS-TR-164 - "THE CONSISTENT LABELING PROBLEM, PART 1:
BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM FORMULATION"), @#@#B.A. Nadel.
[ ] DCS-TR-165 - "THE CONSISTENT LABELING PROBLEM, PART 2:
SUBPROBLEMS, ENUMERATIONS AND CONSTRAINT SATISFIABILITY"),
B.A. Nadel.
[ ] DCS-TR-166 - "THE CONSISTENT LABELING PROBLEM, PART 3: THE
GENERALIZED BACKTRACKING ALGORITHM"), B.A. Nadel.
[ ] DCS-TR-167 - "THE CONSISTENT LABELING PROBLEM, PART 4: THE
GENERALIZED FORWARD CHECKING AND WORD-WISE FORWARD CHECKING
ALGORITHMS"), B.A. Nadel.
[ ] ML-TR-2 - "EXPLANATION-BASED GENERALIZATION: A UNIFYING VIEW"),
T.M. Mitchell, R.M. Keller and S.T. Kedar-Cabelli.
[ ] ML-TR-3 - "ANALOGY - FROM A UNIFIED PERSPECTIVE"),
S.T. Kedar-Cabelli.
[ ] ML-TR-4 - "MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH AT RUTGERS UNIVERSITY"),
R.M. Keller and S.T. Kedar-Cabelli.
-------
∂06-Jan-86 0900 JMC
Call Staggs to postpone Thursday.
∂06-Jan-86 1015 JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA contractors
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 10:15:17 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 10:14:27-PST
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: contractors
To: "@ps:<jamie>casita.dis"@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: jamie@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Contractors will be touring Casita today with plans for our
remodeling. They may need to check inside your offices, and
I hope it will not cause too much interuption.
Jamie
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1017 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft):]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 10:17:38 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 10:02:18-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft):]
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, tob@SU-AI.ARPA,
reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173115811.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
For those of you who don't know him, John Hopcroft is a fine
computer scientist at Cornell who has been interested in various
aspects of robotics during the last couple of years or so. -Nils
---------------
1) 6-Jan jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.
2) 6-Jan To: jeh@GVAX.CS.CORN
Message 1 -- ************************
Return-Path: <jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: from cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jan 86 07:10:42-PST
Received: by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.31/4.30)
id AA13206; Mon, 6 Jan 86 10:11:40 EST
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 86 09:28:58 est
From: jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft)
Message-Id: <8601061428.AA01978@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (4.30/4.30)
id AA01978; Mon, 6 Jan 86 09:28:58 est
To: nilsson@su-score.arpa
Nils Nilsson
I will be in Palo Alto Jan 16-17. I would like to come a day early
and take an informal look at Stanford. Would it be possible to visit you
on Jan 15.
John Hopcroft
Message 2 -- ************************
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 6-Jan-86 09:57:08
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 09:57:08-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
To: jeh@GVAX.CS.CORNELL.EDU
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <8601061428.AA01978@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Message-ID: <12173114871.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, Yes, Welcome! I'll have some time in the morning of the Jan 15.
Should I send a note around to a few people saying you will be around, or
would you prefer to make your own appointments with people you might like
to see? (I'd love to introduce you to our "Robotics Search Committee." !!)
In the meantime I'll hold the am of the 15th for you until you let me
know what you'd like regarding schedule. -Nils
-------
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1017 RA NSF proposal
I typed the budget and cover sheet for the continuation of your NSF
grant. I need a progress report from you so we can mail it.
Thanks,
Rutie
-----
∂06-Jan-86 1058 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gordon Bell Dinner
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 10:58:02 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 10:54:49-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gordon Bell Dinner
To: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
Gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173125372.44.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to confirm that there will be a dinner on Jan. 7 with Gordon and
Gwen Bell at Chantilly, 540 Ramona in Palo Alto. There will be cocktails
at 7:00 p.m. and dinner at 7:45 p.m.
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1103 Q.QUEENIE@[36.48.0.1] Re: Systems concepts machine
Received: from LOTS-A by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 11:03:45 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 11:02:58-PST
From: Queenette Baur <Q.QUEENIE@[36.48.0.1]>
Subject: Re: Systems concepts machine
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 5 Jan 86 00:30:00-PST
Message-ID: <12173126855.201.Q.QUEENIE@LOTS-A>
The Systems Concepts machine is called EPIC. It is down, however, until
further notice. We have to take away the disk drive and it won't be back
up until the massbus interface is completed. I've asked Sean to be sure
your account was activated.
Best Wishes for the New Year,
Queenie`
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1301 LES IBM Workstation
∂06-Jan-86 1214 EUSTIS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA IBM Workstation
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 12:14:00 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 12:13:03-PST
From: Robert Eustis <EUSTIS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: IBM Workstation
To: Les@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: Eustis@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Dear Les,
I called Bob Semans of IBM on January 3, 1986 and Bob said that the
release of the IBM workstations has been slipped twice already and that
he is not allowed to say when the next date is. Bob said that no
information is available on hardware and software characteristics
and that there will be no proprietary problems once we receive the
information. He does want Stanford CSD to have a workstation as soon
as they are released.
I am sorry that I can't be helpful, Les. Please feel free to contact
Bob Semans directly if you wish at (415) 855-3415.
Best,
Bob
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1344 VAL definition of circumscription
I have some new ideas about what generalizations of circumscription may be needed,
and I'd like to discuss them with you when you have a few minutes.
∂06-Jan-86 1512 LES Editor-based Operating System discussion
To: g.gorin@LOTS-A, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, greep@CAMELOT
I propose that we have a discussion of EBOS on Wednesday, January 15
at 2:00pm in JMC's office for the purpose of clarifying objectives
and, possibly, deciding what will be done first and who will do it.
In case of conflict, make a counter-proposal.
∂06-Jan-86 1657 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
This quarter we will meet in MJH352, on Thursdays, at 4pm (not Tuesdays, as was
announced before). Ben Grosof will speak next week, and this week we have a
visitor.
Speaker: James Allen, University of Rochester
Title: A Plan Recognition Model Using Circumscription on a Theory of Planning
Time: Thursday, January 9, 4pm
Place: MJH352
Vladimir Lifschitz
∂06-Jan-86 1731 LES Facilities Committee Meeting
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Noon Wednesday, December 8 in MJH 301.
Known topics:
Network file exchange capability needs,
Need for equipment inheritance rules and accountability,
Possibility of coordinating large quantity purchases of computer
equipment to secure better discounts,
2 or 3 AT&T Unix workstations are looking for a good home,
Possibility of amending cost center model to reduce connect-time
charges.
∂06-Jan-86 1735 LES Oops
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Make that January 8 at noon.
∂06-Jan-86 2150 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA Request regarding Symbolic Systems
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 21:50:21 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 21:49:12-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Request regarding Symbolic Systems
To: Herb@SU-PSYCH.ARPA, Reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
Barwise@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Etchemendy@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Sag@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
Nissenbaum@SU-CSLI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Stanley@SU-CSLI.ARPA, tw@SU-AI.ARPA, John@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Helen Nissenbaum and I are in the process of applying to the Exxon
Foundation for seed money to help get the Symbolic Systems Program
off the ground. The foundation asks that applications include "Name,
title, and qualifications of each person participating in the project."
Since you expressed some interest in the possibility of being part of
the program, I would like your permission to list you in the application.
If you are willing to be listed, could you send me a copy of your CV
to be enclosed with the application?
Thanks.
Tom
-------
∂06-Jan-86 2243 MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA [crash!victoro@sdcsvax.ARPA: A Bit of 'News']
Received: from SIMTEL20.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 22:43:23 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 23:38:12-MST
From: Mark Crispin <MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA>
Subject: [crash!victoro@sdcsvax.ARPA: A Bit of 'News']
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Telephone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12173253419.7.MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA>
Have you seen this?? Do you have any idea who Miles Costick is? Is
he anybody real or is he just a crank? What about the California
Computer News? Sounds like some of the goofy right-wing publications
that have been floating around this area lately. I particularly enjoyed
the bit about breaking into the CIA in 15 minutes (using those mathmatical
code those yellow slant-eyes know so well) and Cap Weinberger's reading
his secret reports via ARPANET netmail...
---------------
Return-Path: <msggroup-request@BRL.ARPA>
Received: from BRL-AOS.ARPA by SIMTEL20.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jan 86 22:14:13-MST
Received: from sdcsvax.arpa by AOS.BRL.ARPA id a000508; 6 Jan 86 23:48 EST
Received: by sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (5.31/4.41)
id AA06997; Mon, 6 Jan 86 20:14:52 PST hops=0
From: crash!victoro@sdcsvax.ARPA
Message-Id: <8601070414.AA06997@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 86 14:22:21 PST
To: risks@SRI-CSL.ARPA
Subject: A Bit of 'News'
Cc: human-nets@rutgers.ARPA, info-nets%mit-oz@MIT-MC.ARPA, MsgGroup@BRL.ARPA,
security@rutgers.ARPA
[Munch, Munch - Now it comes suger free!]
The following text is printed in its entirity and covers many
areas of interest to the readers of these digest. Please excuse
the possible multiple copies of this text as I give total
permission to resend this to any group that may have an interest
in the subjects herein. (Including net.jokes)
====================
Exchange Students Spying?
Trade Expert Warns They Could Crack DoD Computers
-California Computer News
-January 1986, Volume IV, No 1
By Lona White - CCN Contributing Writer
LOS ANGELES - Approximately 11,000 Communist Chinese
foregin exchange students enrolled in the most technically-
orientated U.S. universities may possibly have cracked the top-
secret Defense Department computers.
According to Dr. Miles Costick, Washington, D.C.-based
private trade expert, many of these alleged "students" hold
high-level degrees and have acquired considerable practical
experence in advanced science.
"Obviously the majority are students and experts and to a
lesser degree graduate and post-graduate students," he said.
They are studying at such heavyweight institutions as Los
Alamos, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cal
Tech, Stanford, Lawrence Livermore and the University of
California, Berkley.
At the California Institute of Technology, they are studying
composite materials, which are compounds for making heat
resistant nuclear missile nose cones.
At MIT they are involved in physics, propulsion and
navigation studies, but computer technology, especially hybrid
technology, appears to be the primary goal. These hybrids are
the product of digital and analog computers and are most suitable
for military intelligence operations.
They are also interested in microelectronics, production
technology for advanced microchips, nuclear weapons technology,
advanced fiber optics, astronomics, areonautics, and advanced
telecommunications systems, including satellites and satellite
ground stations.
"The Chinese students have free access to everything," said
Costick, "even at our nuclear weapons defense facilities where
lasers and particle beam weapons research is conducted for the
President's Strategic Defense Initative (SDI). Our own people
are required to have top security clearance in these areas," he
said.
At Los Alamos or California's Lawrence Livermore they have
access to terminals where much of the U.S. military intelligence
research work is done. "For a good mathematician it takes less
then 15 minutes to break into the codes," Costick said.
"Our entire data bank is extremely vulnerable," he
continued. "A very skillful person with access to the terminals
which lead into the data bank could conceivably penetrate CIA's
data bank."
In addition, they are working in the areas where the Defense
Departments' electronic mail network terminals are located, the
ARPA network (Advanced Research Projects Agency). Costick
suspects they have broken into that network and have been "spying
for two or three years."
The ARPA system, connects to the entire military complex,
including the daily electronic mail sent to the secretary of
defense. It describes the latest developments in military
research and the extent of our research in the newest weapons and
intelligence systems.
This open-arms policy exists for the sake of good Chinese-
Americans relations. By contrast, however, the under-400
American students studying in the People's Republic of China are
denied any activities that remotely approach the freedom allowed
visiting Chinese here.
They are restricted to one particular area or to the
university and can be arrested or expelled if they are found
driving in forbidden areas. The secret police even prevent them
from mingling with Chinese students at the schools.
The Chinese, however, are not the only communists interested
in gaining access to our universities' computers. A Defense
Department report revealed scores of American universities,
including six in California, which are prime targets for the
Russian KGB and Eastern bloc nations.
USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal Tech, and the Universities of
California at San Diego and Berkley are listed as among the top
American educational institutions possessing technology desires
by the Soviets to enhance their industrial and military power.
In addition, four supercomputer centers at Princeton,
Cornell, and the the Universities of Illinois and California at
San Diego are available to members of the academic community
involved in highly technical research.
=====
I do hope I haven't triggered anyones strange editing program...
And I hope that this send is of interest to those interested in
the media coverage of your little world.....
Victor O'Rear-- {ihnp4, cbosgd, sdcsvax, noscvax}!crash!victoro
San Diego, California or bix!victoro
-------
∂07-Jan-86 0000 JMC references from Hintikka
Veiko Rantala - Aspects of Definability (Acta Philosophica Fennica)
Academic Boodstore Keskuskaatu
SF-00100 Helsinki 10
Finland
Hintikka
in Lucia Vanna, Editor
Matters of of Intelligence
Dreidel, 1985(?)
∂07-Jan-86 0924 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Request regarding Symbolic Systems
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 09:24:50 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 09:24:05-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Request regarding Symbolic Systems
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 6 Jan 86 22:10:00-PST
I'll get a copy of the application to you as soon as it is in semi-final
shape--within a couple of weeks, I hope.
Tom
-------
∂07-Jan-86 0928 VAL news on circumscription
FACT 1. If all occurences of P in A are positive then Circum(A;P) collapses.
FACT 2. If all occurences of P1, P2 in A are positive then
Circum(A;P1,P2) ≡ Circum(A,P1) ∧ Circum(A,P2).
The main news is that I have an alternative definition of circumscription, which
is not equivalent to the old one, but seems to work as well or better.
∂07-Jan-86 1007 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft):]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 10:06:54 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 10:03:27-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft):]
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, tob@SU-AI.ARPA, cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173378164.24.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John Hopcroft appears interested to talk to us. I'll ask Anne
Richardson to get in touch with you, Bob, about scheduling a meeting.
-Nils
---------------
Return-Path: <jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: from cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jan 86 19:03:55-PST
Received: by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.31/4.30)
id AA17866; Mon, 6 Jan 86 22:06:20 EST
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 86 22:06:08 est
From: jeh@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (John E. Hopcroft)
Message-Id: <8601070306.AA15638@gvax.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by gvax.cs.cornell.edu (4.30/4.30)
id AA15638; Mon, 6 Jan 86 22:06:08 est
To: nilsson@su-score.arpa
Nils Nilsson
Yes, please send a note around and set up any appointments you
think appropriate. I wll plan on arriving about 9:30 and can spend
the entire day of Jan 15. I definitely would like to talk to your
robotics search committee.
John Hopcroft
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1019 RA Robert Jastrow
Please call Robert Jastrow in New York (212)) 580 7042.
Thanks.
∂07-Jan-86 1035 RA Jack Cate
Cate called 321 1225.
∂07-Jan-86 1155 RA Re: Please print the following files:
[Reply to message recvd: 07 Jan 86 10:30 Pacific Time]
Do you want them scribed? or shall I simply dover them?
∂07-Jan-86 1435 RA he would like now
From Delfin System; talked to you a while ago re your participation
in a panel discussion re AI technology, particularly expesert systems.
He said that at the time you agreed in principle; he would like to
further discuss it with you. His tel.:(56) 295 1818.
∂07-Jan-86 1537 RA name
The guy's name is Garo Kiremidjian
∂07-Jan-86 1552 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Technical Reports
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 15:51:13 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 15:48:02-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Technical Reports
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173440893.18.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Received the reports from Sweden you sent. Thanks we can definitely use
them. We will be looking into an exchange agreement with them
Harry
-------
∂07-Jan-86 2158 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Planning workshop
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 21:58:11 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 21:58:14-PST
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Planning workshop
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Just a reminder about funding for the planning workshop....
Did we give you enough info in our last message?
Mike.
-------
∂07-Jan-86 2248 hitson@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Facilities Committee Meeting
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 22:48:00 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 7 Jan 86 22:44:50 pst
Date: 7 Jan 1986 2244-PST (Tuesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson@su-pescadero.arpa>
To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: hitson@su-pescadero.arpa, facil@sail
Subject: Re: Facilities Committee Meeting
In-Reply-To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA> / 06 Jan 86 1731 PST.
Some additional agenda items:
- inquiry/request w.r.t. the possibility of having one (or more?) of the
CSD-CF purchased Suns reside at Welch road for use by CS PhD students
over there.
- request for summary information on the status of efforts to acquire
parallel computation facilities for CSD. To be forwarded to students
for their information and/or comments as appropriate.
- status of faculty survey/long-range plan for the department. (I
volunteered to help with this, but never did find out how I could best
contribute and didn't pursue this very aggressively I'm afraid
as finals/holidays arrived. I am still interested in helping construct,
critique, and/or review early drafts of the long-range plan).
--- Bruce
∂08-Jan-86 0944 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Leon Sterling
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 09:44:06 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 09:41:15-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Leon Sterling
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173636267.15.PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Leon Sterling, a Logic Programming person from Case Western Reseerve,
will be visiting tomorrow. Tell me if you would like to meet with him.
---Christos.
PS That's tomorrow morning. ---C
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1000 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA re: Planning workshop
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 10:00:50 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 10:00:28-PST
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Planning workshop
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 7 Jan 86 22:22:00-PST
Thanks very much. We greatly appreciate your help.
Mike.
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1104 G.GORIN@[36.48.0.5] Re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
Received: from LOTS-C by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 11:04:26 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 11:03:04-PST
From: Ralph Gorin <G.GORIN@[36.48.0.5]>
Subject: Re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, greep%Camelot@[36.48.0.5], G.GORIN@[36.48.0.5]
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 6 Jan 86 15:12:00-PST
Message-ID: <12173651161.7.G.GORIN@LOTS-C>
I go to a class at 2:15 on MWF. How about 3:15 on Wednesday 1/15?
Ralph
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1435 LES Qlisp Shuffle
To: JMC, CLT, RPG
Steve Squires says that the Qlisp proposal has just been signed-off by
Saul Amarel and is going through the DARPA Headquarters mill. They chose
to cover the people money on this round and will fund the machine buy as
soon as we tell them what we want.
He estimates a couple of weeks until it clears DARPA. When I asked about
the potential impact of Gramm-Rudman (sp?) he remarked that it has
accounted for much of the delay so far -- the various DARPA offices are
spending most of their time trying to assess the impact of that bill and
figuring out ways around it. He also asserted that we are high on their
priority list and is confident that they will get full funding for us.
∂08-Jan-86 1505 VAL Common Sense Seminar - Correction
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Allen's talk tomorrow at 4 will be in MJH301, not MJH352 as announced before.
--Vladimir
∂08-Jan-86 1526 LES re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
To: G.GORIN@LOTS-C
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, greep@CAMELOT
[In reply to message sent Wed 8 Jan 86 11:03:04-PST.]
3:15 on 1/15 is fine for JMC and me.
∂08-Jan-86 1530 greep@camelot re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 15:30:11 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 8 Jan 86 15:28:34 pst
Date: 8 Jan 1986 1528-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, greep@CAMELOT, G.GORIN@LOTS-C
Subject: re: Editor-based Operating System discussion
In-Reply-To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA> / 08 Jan 86 1526 PST.
3:15 on 1/15 is fine with me.
∂08-Jan-86 1624 RA Franklin, Dina Bolla
Frank returned your call. He will try again in about 1/2 hour.
∂08-Jan-86 1900 JMC
Call vicki
∂08-Jan-86 2052 VAL pointwise circumscription
It seems to give a simple solution to the problem given to us by Yoav Shoham a
few months ago about reducing "P happens as early as possible" to
circumscription. If we minimize P at each point x with the values of P at
points earlier than x fixed and the other values varied then we say exactly
that the negation of P happens as early as possible.
∂08-Jan-86 2203 CLT Encore
To: LES, JMC, RPG, JJW, CLT
Greg Holman - the Encore sales rep called
He claims there are now running machines in Boston and at Argon
available for trying out. There will be 3 in the LA/SanDiego area
the end of February.
They will have a booth at UNIFORM (a UNIX show) in LA (around Feb 4th).
There will be a machine there which would be available nights for
benchmarking.
Perhaps we should send someone to UNIFORM to poke tires?
∂08-Jan-86 2206 RPG Uniforum
To: CLT, JMC, LES, JJW
Some people from Lucid will be going to that show, so probably
I can have it checked out.
-rpg-
∂09-Jan-86 1146 RA lunch
Going out for lunch will be back around 1:15.
∂09-Jan-86 1333 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Leon Sterling
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 10:34:24 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 9 Jan 86 10:34:44 pst
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 86 10:34:44 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Re: Leon Sterling
To: PAPA@SU-Score, jmc@Sail, pratt@Navajo
I've got Dave Maier visiting today and tomorrow.
We'd like say hello to him, but we don't have all that much time.
∂09-Jan-86 1059 VAL lexicographic minimization
To: shoham@YALE.ARPA
CC: hanks@YALE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Dear Yoav,
I haven't replied to your message on this subject because I didn't know what to
say. Now I do.
These last days I've been working on a modification of circumscription which I
call "pointwise" circumscription. Let me tell you what it is. In the simplest
form, the pointwise circ'n of P in A(P) is
A(P) and not (exists x)(Px and A(lambda y (Py and not x=y))).
It says that you can't make P stronger by changing its value in any single point.
Notice that this is a first-order formula. Generally, it is weaker than usual
"global" circ'n, but they are equivalent when all occurences of P in A(P) are
positive (which is usually the case in applications).
The main advantage of the new definition is that it is more convenient when we
try to generalize it and allow various things to vary in the process of
minimization. For instance, we may allow the values of P itself at some ponts
y to be varied when P is minimized at x. And our selection of these points y
may depend on x. Formally, we assume that a formula Fxy is given (not containing
P), which means: "The value of P at y must remain fixed when its value at x is
minimized", and the second term of circumscription becomes
not (exists x,P')((all y)(Fxy -> Py<->P'y) and Px and A(lambda y(P'y and not x=y))).
(This reduces to the previous case when Fxy is identically false).
The most general definition allows other predicate and function symbols to be
or fixed (again on some parts of their domains, defined by formulas with parameter
x), but for your problem the form given above suffices. Take Fxy to be y<x, i.e.,
require that P be minimal at x given the values of P at points "earlier" than x,
and you get exactly lexicographical minimization for the negation of P.
This solution can be viewed as an implementation of your idea of establishing
infinitely many priorities, because minimizing P1 and P2 with P1 allowed to vary
when P2 is minimized is equivalent to assigning a higher priority to P2 (see
Theorem 2 in my IJCAI paper). We can say that the pointwise minimization of Px
is done here with the earlier values of x given a higher priority.
Hoping to hear from you,
Vladimir
∂09-Jan-86 1354 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 11:35:40 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 10:30:21-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173907350.15.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Elizabeth Barth phoned, regarding reservations for th Logic Conference. Please
call. 213 825-1148.
Tina
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1433 LES Encore reprise
To: CLT, JMC, RPG
I too put off the Encore sales folks. Incidentally, the latest reliable
rumor is that Gordon Bell is leaving Encore and joining a startup here
that will also include George Michel and some other guy from LLL.
This says something about Encore's situation, I believe.
This may be slightly confidential, so be discreet.
∂09-Jan-86 1454 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Hopcroft
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 14:52:42 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 14:49:47-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Hopcroft
To: reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, TOB@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173954577.50.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Hopcroft will be visiting Stanford on Jan. 15 and would like to meet
with the Robotics Committee. Is there a time when each of you could
meet (separately or as a group) with him on that day?
-Anne
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1543 CLT
∂09-Jan-86 1318 JMC
Exactly when is the logic meeting in L.A.?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday noon (24 jan) to Sunday noon (26 jan).
Here is an excerpt from the announcement. We have reservations
at the UCLA guest house for friday and saturday nights. Shall I
ask Rutie to make plane reservations and arrange a rental car?
Logic Meeting at UCLA
January 24, 25, 26 1986
There will be a very informal gathering of logicians at UCLA, starting
with lunch at 12:00 noon on Friday, January 24 and ending at noon on Sunday
January 26. As usual, there will be two talks on Friday afternoon, three
talks and a session on problems and short announcements on Saturdy, and two
more talks on Sunday morning. The entertainment will include a get together
on Friday afternoon and a party on Saturday night.
∂09-Jan-86 1639 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Next Ph.D. committee meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 16:39:43 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 16:35:30-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Next Ph.D. committee meeting
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12173973823.35.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Ph.D. Committee will next meet on Tuesday, January 14,
at 2:15 pm, in Jacks 252. Terry has put together a preliminary
draft of committee proposals, which will be discussed.
Victoria
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1652 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 16:50:51 PST
Date: 9 Jan 86 14:28:50 PST
From: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: lamport@decwrl, mcdermott@yale., doyle@cmu-cs-a,
mlf%cunyvm.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa, dolev%.hujics.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa,
rivest@mit-mc, ladner@washington, jmc@su-ai, lynch@mit-xx,
john@su-csli, barwise@su-csli, stan@sri-ai, reiter%utai.toronto@csnet-relay
kozen%crnlcs.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa
A while ago you should have received information regarding
the Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About
Knowledge. If you are interested in attending the conference,
I would appreciate it if you could register right away.
You can fill in the appended on-line registration form if you have
mislaid the original, and then send in your check by mail.
If you already sent in your registration, of course, please
ignore this note (I am sorry this sounds so much like
a billing notice!). Even if you are not planning to come,
perhaps you could return the enclosed form to let me know.
Space at Asilomar is quite limited, and there is a lengthy
waiting list of people who would like to attend.
I would like to finalize the attendance details as soon
as I can.
I have appended my previous letter with conference information in
case you mislaid or did not receive my previous mailing.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
- Joe Halpern
Registration for Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
Name:
I will ←←←←←←←←← will not ←←←←←←←←← attend
If you plan to attend, please fill in the rest of this form.
Affiliation:
Address:
Telephone:
Net address (if available):
Vegetarian meals desired?:
Preferred roommate:
Please enclose a check for $50 ($25 for full-time students, $0 for
invited speakers and program committee members), made payable
to "Conference on Reasoning About Knowledge % IBM". Do not
forget to add the "% IBM", as otherwise the check is much harder
to cash!
This form, together with your check, should be mailed to:
Joe Halpern
IBM Almaden Research Center
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
---------------
This is the letter you should have received a while ago:
Nov. 6, 1985
Dear Colleague:
The Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
will be held Mar. 19-22 at the Asilomar Conference Center in Monterey.
As you can see from the enclosed program, it promises to be a very
exciting conference. I hope you will be able to attend.
Due to space limitations at Asilomar, we only have room for 90
invitees. Thus I must ask you to register before January 10, 1986
if you do plan to attend. The registration fee of $50 ($25 for
full-time students, $0 for invited speakers and program committee
members) covers food and lodging at Asilomar and a copy of the
conference proceedings. IF WE DO NOT RECEIVE YOUR REGISTRATION
BY JANUARY 10, 1986, WE WILL ASSUME YOU ARE NOT COMING, AND YOUR
SLOT WILL BE ASSIGNED TO SOMEONE ELSE.
If you should discover that you cannot come after you have
registered, please let us know right away so that we can give
someone else an opportunity to come. Similarly, we would
appreciate knowing if for any reason you cannot stay for the
full length of the conference.
Here is some further information on the conference:
Location: Monterey is on the coast of California, south of San
Francisco. An interesting historical city in its own right, it is also
close to such attractions as Carmel and Big Sur. Monterey has an
airport which is served by United Airlines as well as commuter
carriers. Limousines are available from the airport to Asilomar
at a cost of approximately $8. In many cases it may be more
convenient to fly into San Jose or San Francisco rather than
Monterey. San Francisco is about a two-and-a-half hour drive
from Monterey, while San Jose is about one hour and a half.
Climate: The March daytime temperature in Monterey usually gets up
to the low 60's or high 50's, but evenings are cool, and the temperature
may dip below freezing. Rain is also a strong possibility.
Directions to Asilomar:
Asilomar conference center is located on the Pacific Ocean at
the end of Highway 68 in Pacific Grove, California. When
arriving from the north or south on State Route 101, turn west
at Salinas onto Highway 68 and proceed to the Asilomar
gatepost at the end of the highway. When using State Route
1, either north or southbound, turn west onto Highway 68 in
Carmel, and proceed as above.
Accomodations: we have booked 45 rooms at Asilomar from March 19-22.
Each of these rooms
has two double beds; invitees that stay at Asilomar will be required
to share a room. If you have a preference for a roommate, please
indicate this on the enclosed registration form.
Otherwise I will be the matchmaker.
Check-in time on March 19 is 3 P.M. Rooms may not be available for
occupancy before that time. Check-out time on Mar. 22 is 1 P.M.
Asilomar is quite heavily booked, but it may be possible to
extend your stay there. If you are interested in doing this, you should
contact Asilomar directly at: Asilomar
Conference Center, 800 Asilomar Blvd., P.O. Box 537, Pacific Grove,
CA 93950; telephone (408) 372-8016.
Meals: all meals will be served at Asilomar. Conference
registration includes dinner on Mar. 19 and lunch on Mar. 22.
If you prefer vegetarian meals, please indicate this preference
on the registration form and pick up vegetarian meal tickets
at check-in time.
Expenses: As mentioned above, the registration fee covers accommodation
and meals at Asilomar. We also expect to be able to cover roughly
25-30% of invitees' airfares, but this cannot be guaranteed.
We encourage invitees to find
other sources of funding, so we can help those who most need it.
Schedule: A tentative schedule is enclosed. If I have made a mistake
regarding your affiliation and/or the title of your talk, please let
me know. As you can see, other than a few invited talks, all
talks are 25 minutes in length. If you are a speaker, please plan for
a 20 minute talk, allowing 5 minutes for questions. If there is interest,
we may also schedule one or two informal "rump sessions", where exciting
new results can be presented.
.sk
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
I can be reached by computer at Halpern@IBM-SJ on ARPANET or CSNET,
and at HALPERN@SJRLVM1 on BITNET. The IBM Research Lab will be moving
at the end of November. On November 25, my telephone number will change
to (408) 927-1787, my BITNET address will become HALPERN@ALMVMA, while
my postal address will be:
IBM Almaden Research Center
Dept. K53/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
I am looking forward to seeing you at Asilomar!
Yours truly,
Joe Halpern
-----------
PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE
Wednesday afternoon - Session Chairman: J. Halpern
4:00 - Welcome and Announcements
4:15 - Reasoning About Knowledge: An Overview (invited talk)
- J. Halpern, IBM Almaden
4:55 - Varieties of Self-Reference
- B. Smith, Xerox PARC
5:20 - Pegs and Alecs
- F. Landman, Amsterdam
Wednesday evening - Session Chairman: R. Thomason
8:00 - Reasoning About Knowledge in Philosophy (invited talk)
- J. Hintikka, Florida State U.
8:40 - 11:00 - reception
Thursday morning - Session Chairman: H. Levesque
9:00 - Reasoning About Knowledge in AI (invited talk)
- R. Moore, SRI
9:40 - The Synthesis of Digital Machines With Provable Epistemic Properties
- S. Rosenschein and L. Kaelbling, SRI
10:05 - A First-Order Theory of Planning, Knowledge, and Action
- L. Morgenstern, NYU
10:30 - break
11:00 - The Consistency of Syntactical Treatments of Knowledge
- J. des Rivieres and H. Levesque, U. of Toronto
11:25 - The Knower's Paradox and Representational Theories of Attitudes
- N. Asher and H. Kamp, U. of Texas, Austin
Thursday afternoon - Session Chairman: M. Vardi
3:40 - Knowledge and Common Knowledge in a Byzantine Environment I: Crash Failures
- C. Dwork, IBM Almaden, and Y. Moses, MIT
4:05 - Foundations of Knowledge for Distributed Systems
- M. Fischer and N. Immerman, Yale
4:30 - break
5:00 - Knowledge and Implicit Knowledge in a Distributed Environment
- R. Fagin and M. Vardi, IBM Almaden
5:25 - The Logic of Distributed Protocols
- R. Ladner, U. of Washington, and J. Reif, Harvard
Thursday evening - Session Chairman: R. Stalnaker
8:30 - Panel: Objects of knowledge and belief: sentences vs. propositions?
- Panelists: H. Levesque, R. Thomason, K. Konolige, H. Kamp
.pa
Friday morning - Session Chairman: M. Fischer
9:00 - Reasoning About Knowledge in Economics (invited talk)
- R. Aumann, Hebrew University
9:40 - On Aumann's Notion Common Knowledge -- An Alternative Approach
- T. Tan, Chicago, and S. Werlang, Princeton/IMPA/EPGE-FGV
10:05 - On Play By Means Of Computing Machines
- N. Megiddo, IBM Almaden, and A. Wigderson, MSRI/Berkeley
10:30 - break
11:00 - A Theory of Higher Order Probabilities
- H. Gaifman, Hebrew University
11:25 - On Epistemic Knowledge and Logical Omniscience
- M. Vardi, IBM Almaden
Friday afternoon - Session Chairman: R. Moore
4:20 - Mental Situation Calculus (invited talk)
- J. McCarthy, Stanford
5:00 - A Resolution Method for Quantified Modal Logics of Knowledge and Belief
- C. Geissler, ENST, Paris, and K. Konolige, SRI
5:25 - Steps Towards a First-Order Logic of Explicit and Implicit Belief
- G. Lakemeyer, U. of Toronto
Friday evening
6:00 - banquet
8:30 - Logicians Who Reason About Themselves (invited talk)
- R. Smullyan, Indiana University
Saturday morning - Session Chairman: R. Parikh
9:00 - Reasoning About Knowledge in Cryptography (invited talk)
- S. Micali, MIT
9:40 - break
10:10 - Realizability Semantics for Reasoning in the Presence of Errors
- J. Mitchell, AT&T Bell Labs, and M. O'Donnell, U. of Chicago
10:35 - Theoretical Foundations for Belief Revision
- J. Martins, IST, Lisbon, and S. Shapiro, SUNY Buffalo
11:00 - A Framework for Intuitionistic Modal Logic
- G. Plotkin and C. Stirling, Edinburgh
∂09-Jan-86 1710 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Coffee, tea, etc. is now FREE
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 17:10:27 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 17:05:12-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Coffee, tea, etc. is now FREE
To: coffee-drinkers: ;
Message-ID: <12173979228.25.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
I am pleased to announce that coffee, tea, hot chocolate, cups, and milk
will now be provided FREE for department members and guests -- half of the
tab is being picked up by the pony and the other half by the department.
I have refunded money to several people who paid in advance for one or
more months starting January. If you think that you paid in advance for
one of those months but didn't get the money back, let me know.
I am leaving in about 2-1/2 weeks for a long job-interview trip. After
that, I'll be finishing up and leaving permanently. So someone else will
have to take over the coffee pool (the job will be much easier now that
it doesn't involve collecting and doling out money). Basically, all you
have to do is recruit and remind people to get the various items. How
about it?
Joan
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1717 LES Computer Buyers' Network
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jlh@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
ar.rtb@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, hk.pld@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
Here is a draft prospectus for a Computer Buyers' Network. This idea came
out of a discussion at our last CSD Computer Facilities Committee meeting.
I have reviewed this scheme with Jim Gallaher and Rich Baldwin of the
Procurement Department, who seem to like it. I solicit any ideas or
criticism that you might have in response to this draft.
I invite suggestions on how to get the prospectus to interested parties.
I plan to send it to the CSD Faculty list but hesitate to post it on
SU-BBoards. Perhaps we should go through department heads to reach other
prospective participants.
Regards,
Les Earnest
-----------------------------------------
This is an invitation to join in an experimental information exchange
intended to get more out of our purchasing power for computer systems.
If you wish to participate, please respond as indicated at the end of this
message.
Stanford's decentralized administrative structure has a number of
important advantages, but the lack of central control can cause some
opportunities for cooperation to be missed. In particular, it appears
feasible to greatly increase our leverage with vendors of computer
equipment and software by combining needs from multiple activities so as
to secure lower prices on the basis of higher-volume purchases.
The Procurement Department attempts to combine orders where feasible but,
except for rare coincidences, there are few opportunities to do so. Once
a purchase request has been issued by a department, they are usually in a
great hurry to get delivery and do not wish go through another negotiation
with prospective vendors. The best time to coordinate or integrate
prospective purchases is at the stage where requirements are being
specified or a request for proposals is being written.
I propose that we set up an electronic mail "hotline" among people at
Stanford who are directly involved in procuring computer equipment or
software, to act as a forum for exchanging information on current needs,
plans and opportunities. Since most of these people are rather busy,
we must take precautions to ensure that the message volume does not become
burdensome. I propose the following guidelines.
1. This forum is intended for announcements of computer needs, plans
or opportunities, with the primary goal of getting better prices
by combining orders.
2. Only people who are directly involved in specifying and buying
computer equipment or software should participate and we should
not take on the job of selling for various vendors.
3. Any participant with a financial conflict-of-interest on an issue
under discussion should make that fact clear in conjunction with
any remarks that he or she may make.
3. Negative remarks are welcome and often helpful, but any extended
debates of the issues should be spun off as separate discussion
groups.
To have your name added to, or deleted from, the list of participants,
send a message to Combuyn-Request@Sail. Messages sent to Combuyn@Sail
will be automatically redistributed to everyone on the list. An archive
of messages will be kept for at least a few months.
I propose to run this on an experimental basis for six months or so, then
review how well it is working and give careful consideration to
refinements or restructuring. Suggestions on how to improve the
usefulness of this service are welcome at any time.
Les Earnest
Self-appointed Coordinator
Computer Buyers Network
∂09-Jan-86 2250 FY Takeuchi function
Recently, I was looking at RPG's book on various implementations of LISP,
and he mentioned the Takeuchi function.
After staring at it for a while, I realized that I had no idea why
it terminated. I was able to show some facts about it, but I still had
no feeling for termination.
Could you give me a reference to this function and/or some idea of why
it teminates?
Thanks.
-- Frank
∂10-Jan-86 0746 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA visit
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 07:44:33 PST
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1986 09:44 CST
Message-ID: <AI.BOYER.12174139226.BABYL@MCC.ARPA>
From: AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA
To: JMC@SU-AI, VAL@SU-AI
Subject: visit
John,
Vladimir has agreed to consult at MCC.
John and Vladimir,
So we now just need to agree on the time for the next
visit. Various types of writing and planning duties here
make it much better for me, Woody, and Doug if you two can
come for a couple of days the week of February 10 instead of
at the end of January as previously discussed. How does
that sound?
Thanks,
Bob
∂10-Jan-86 1143 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Saul Amarel
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 11:42:19 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 11:39:18-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Saul Amarel
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174182045.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to reconfirm that Saul Amarel will be visiting the department on
Jan. 13 from 8:15 am to 11:00 and would like to meet with you during that
time in MJH 220.
-Anne
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1254 VAL Shoham's reply to my message
Dear Vladimir,
Good to hear from you. Your new formulation looks very promising, but let me do
it more justice by thinking about it for a while. I haven't thought about the
stuff in some time, although it's beginning to be directly relevant to what
I'm working on now. I'll be in touch. Please give my regards to JMC.
Regards,
Yoav.
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1318 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA modems
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 13:18:17 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 13:15:23-PST
From: Thomas Dienstbier <TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: modems
To: clt@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174199535.9.TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The modems are now here. We would like to install the new modems and mux's
this tuesday. Is that ok with you?
thanks
tom
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1435 VAL visit to MCC
If you want to go there during the week of Feb. 10, I would prefer the beginning
of the week.
∂10-Jan-86 1457 ALS Modified XGP fonts for the IMAGEN
The following fonts are now available in the correct resolution for use on
the IMAGEN printer. These are preliminary versions only, without any hand
editing, which would be desirable in some cases and which I will do as soon
as uses for them develop. I have the necessary programs in being and can
also make .GF and .TFM files if and when anyone wants them.
Filnam Ext Blks Written Time
[300,SYS]
QUUX25 FNT 3.9 08-Jan-86 1614
BASL30 FNT 4.2 10-Jan-86 1312
BASL35 FNT 5.3 10-Jan-86 1308
BAXM30 FNT 4.1 10-Jan-86 1318
MATH30 FNT 3.1 10-Jan-86 1418
SUB FNT 2.4 10-Jan-86 1435
SUP FNT 2.4 10-Jan-86 1436
FIX25 FNT 4.1 10-Jan-86 1437
NGR30 FNT 4.7 10-Jan-86 1439
GRKB30 FNT 2.7 10-Jan-86 1440
ZERO30 FNT 0.6 10-Jan-86 1440
Total=44 Blk
∂10-Jan-86 1540 RA Jack Cate
Jack Cate called. His tel. 321 1225
∂10-Jan-86 1726 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Computer Buyers' Network
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 17:25:57 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 17:25:53-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Computer Buyers' Network
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jlh@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, ar.rtb@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA,
hk.pld@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 9 Jan 86 17:17:00-PST
Message-ID: <12174245140.40.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Your draft proposal looks great, Les. I think it's worth a try.
Thanks, Tom R.
-------
∂10-Jan-86 2207 lamport@decwrl.DEC.COM
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 22:07:10 PST
Received: from magic.ARPA (magic) by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA00917; Fri, 10 Jan 86 22:05:45 pst
Received: by magic.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA26335; Fri, 10 Jan 86 22:06:37 pst
From: lamport@decwrl.DEC.COM (Leslie Lamport)
Message-Id: <8601110606.AA26335@magic.ARPA>
Date: 10 Jan 1986 2206-PST (Friday)
To: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Cc: lamport@decwrl.DEC.COM, mcdermott@yale., doyle@cmu-cs-a,
mlf%cunyvm.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU, dolev%.hujics.bitnet@wiscvm.ARPA,
rivest@mit-mc, ladner@washington, jmc@su-ai, lynch@mit-xx,
john@su-csli, barwise@su-csli, stan@sri-ai,
reiter%utai.toronto%csnet-relay.kozen%crnlcs.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of 9 Jan 86 14:28:50 PST.
<8601110502.AA00195@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Name: Leslie Lamport
I will ←←←X←←←←← will not ←←←←←←←←← attend
If you plan to attend, please fill in the rest of this form.
Affiliation: Digital Equipment Corp.
Address: 130 Lytton Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Telephone: 415/853-2170
Net address (if available): lamport@decwrl.DEC.COM
Vegetarian meals desired?: No
Preferred roommate: I will be rooming with Fred Schneider at the Byz
Workshop.
∂11-Jan-86 1634 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Jan 86 16:34:05 PST
Date: 11 Jan 86 16:32:16 PST
From: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: yao@su-score
cc: jmc@su-ai, CHEADLE@su-score
Dear Andy,
This is a letter of reference (unsolicited!) for Fangzhen Lin, who tells
me that he has applied to the Ph.D. program at Stanford for next year
(his application may read Lin Fangzhen, since it is the Chinese
tradition to write the family name first). I first became aware of
him through a paper he submitted to the Conference on Reasoning
About Knowledge. The paper was closely related to work I had done
with Yoram on trying to understand what it means to say "all I know
is p". Although there were some technical problems with the paper, I,
and indeed all the members of the program committee, were quite
impressed at the quality of research, especially given how isolated
China is from the mainstream. When I wrote to him pointing out the
technical problems, he quickly responded with a fix and sent me
another quite interesting paper he is working on. It was at this
point that I discovered, to my surprise, that he was only a
Master's student at Peking University, and was applying to American
schools to enter a Ph.D. program.
There is no question in my mind that Lin is capable of doing research
at the level that Stanford expects of its graduate students. Indeed,
I believe he is already doing that now. His enthusiasm for research
and good taste in problems is something I think you rarely see in
someone so early in the game. Judging by the papers he has sent me,
his written English is excellent. I would personally be quite
interested in acting as his advisor, although I suspect he may also be
interested in working with John McCarthy.
If you need a hardcopy of this letter, or would like to see the
manuscripts he has sent me, please let me know.
Regards,
Joe
∂12-Jan-86 1104 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: smoking and selt belts (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Jan 86 11:04:02 PST
Date: Sun 12 Jan 86 11:04:32-PST
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: smoking and selt belts (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sat 11 Jan 86 16:50:00-PST
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12174700003.46.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Well, we all know why no lawyer has ever been attacked by a shark. It's
called professional courtesy.
-------
∂12-Jan-86 1241 YM Re: My thesis
[Reply to message recvd: 11 Jan 86 23:58 Pacific Time]
These is good news. I spooled another copy of page 81 and will give it to you
or put in your mail box when I am in MJH this afternoon.
Thanks for the good news,
-Yoni.
∂12-Jan-86 1410 LES Amarel visit
When do you plan to show up for Amarel? Should I appear concurrently?
∂12-Jan-86 1841 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.ARPA Course on Technology, Values, and Society
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Jan 86 18:41:28 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 12 Jan 86 18:38:29-PST
Date: Sun 12 Jan 86 17:25:32-PST
From: Marty Tenenbaum <Tenenbaum@SRI-KL>
Subject: Course on Technology, Values, and Society
To: McCarthy%SU-SCORE@SRI-KL
John, do you have a course schedule of what topics you are discussing
on particular days. I'd like to sit in on particular sessions, as
my schedule allows.
JMT.
-------
∂12-Jan-86 2109 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Hi, John!
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Jan 86 21:09:33 PST
Date: Sun 12 Jan 86 21:09:58-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Hi, John!
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174810220.29.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Just two things...
You said you had purchased the Maxxum 7000. What's the Maxxum 9000? (They sell
7000s and 9000s).
Your winter qtr. course looks so interesting I may just drop in on the sessions
when I can. OK?
Ed
-------
∂12-Jan-86 2129 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Hi, John!
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Jan 86 21:29:48 PST
Date: Sun 12 Jan 86 21:30:17-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: Hi, John!
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 12 Jan 86 21:23:00-PST
Message-ID: <12174813917.29.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, I dont have immediate plans to buy a Maxxum but I like to keep up on
new technology-intensive gadgets.
My own class runs until 2:30PM Tuesday and Thursday, so my arrival in your
classroom each time I come will be late, alas. Thanks for telling me of the
change in room.
Ed
p.s. I bought Penny a Nikon FG last year, with a sensational 28mm-135mm
lens (made by Vivitar), and a 2x extender.
-------
∂13-Jan-86 0600 JMC
Speak to Amarel about Chudnovskys.
∂13-Jan-86 0900 JMC
Reason to Beichman
∂13-Jan-86 0915 RA meeting Hopcroft
Will it be possible for you to meet Hopcroft Wed., Jan. 15, 2:00 - 2:45.
Please let me know ASAP because Ann Richardson is trying to put together
a schedule for Hopcroft.
Thanks.
∂13-Jan-86 1117 RA John Cocks
John Cocks came by; he said he has a lunch date with you today; he will
be back around noon time.
∂13-Jan-86 1138 RA Jack Cate
Jack Cate called; his tel. 321 1225.
∂13-Jan-86 1154 JJW Machines for Qlisp
To: JMC, LES, CLT, RPG
People in Cheriton's group (Berc, Stumm) tell me that a multiprocessor
based on the Motorola 68020 would be much nicer than one based on the
National 32032. They're currently designing one called Nebula, but it
won't be available as a usable system for several years. They didn't
know whether any commercial 68020 systems currently exist.
∂13-Jan-86 1203 RPG Machines
To: JJW, JMC, LES, CLT
I would agree. You can cut 3-4 months off of Lucid's time to
implement Qlisp if we have a 68010 or 68020 based multi.
-rpg-
∂13-Jan-86 1512 CLT ucla logic conf
∂13-Jan-86 1501 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA ucla logic conf
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 14:59:19 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA13203; Mon, 13 Jan 86 15:01:28 pst
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 15:01:28 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8601132301.AA13203@kestrel.ARPA>
To: clt@su-ai
Subject: ucla logic conf
I'm thinking of attending the conference at the end of January,
although I'm not yet 100pc sure. I was wondering if you and
John McCarthy were interested in travelling down by private plane?
Cost for three people is roughly $90, for four is roughly $60.
Advantages are no messing with the airlines, SFO or LAX.
Time is two-and-a-half in flight each way, which is about the
same as the airlines once you count in waiting for baggage,
getting out of the airport, etc. We would leave from and
return to Palo Alto.
Please could you forward to McCarthy, as I don't have his
netaddress, and to anyone else thinking of going?
Thanks,
Peter Ladkin
∂13-Jan-86 1532 RA trip to LA Jan. 24
Which would you prefer: a 10:00am flight or 11:35am to LA.
Both are out of San Jose and Air Cal.
∂13-Jan-86 1625 LES Minutes of '86 Jan. 8 Meeting of CSD Facilities Committee
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Next meeting is at noon on Wednesday, February 12 in MJH-301.
Versatile File Server
David Cheriton presented a three-page draft outline of a proposed ethernet
file server that would support internet FTP, XNS FTP, NFS, and the V I/O
protocol, among others. The goal is to circumvent the current need to
rely on manufacturer-specific file servers for each kind of system on the
network.
In addition to the features discussed in the paper it was pointed out that
accounting software would be needed. The access-control problem was
discussed some more and again acknowledged to be rather nasty.
The Chair expressed interest in finding financial support for this project
and invited Dave to propose a schedule and budget for the supplementary
resources that would be needed to add this development project to his
existing activities.
Accountability and Control
The Chair grumbled about the lack of accountability and control of certain
computer-related resources. In particular,
(a) a number of home terminals have escaped the control of the P.I. who
bought them and are being treated almost as personal property by those
who have them;
(b) there is little direct verification of computer bills, which means
that errors can (and do) go undetected for long periods.
Flagrant examples of both kinds of problems were discussed as well as the
fact that our inability to locate some terminals may lead to problems with
Stanford or government auditors.
It appears that three measures are needed to solve these problems:
1. Rules of control and inheritance for computer equipment within the
department should be clearly defined and disseminated.
2. Responsibility for keeping track of home terminals should be
delegated to the projects that "own" them -- the current scheme
of trying to do this centrally in the Computer Facilities Group
is not working.
3. The computer cost center billing program should be modified to
dispatch bills as electronic mail both to the individuals who
incur them and to the responsible project administrators.
The Chair agreed to draft a proposed departmental policy statement
on these issues.
Computer Buyers' Network
At the faculty retreat on Jan. 4 an assertion was made that Stanford is
not getting as good prices on some computer purchases as some other
universities (e.g. U.C. Berkeley, CMU and MIT). This was thought to be
because we do not aggregate orders sufficiently (or exaggerate future
prospects) to gain leverage with vendors.
The committee discussed the possibility of using an electronic bulletin
board or email distribution list for the exchange of information among
prospective purchasers so as to encourage joint purchases. The consensus
was that this is a good idea and that the email distribution list approach
should be used. The Chair agreed to organize it.
Connect Time Charges
The idea of reducing connect time charges in cost centers was discussed.
It was pointed out that the allocation of charges to various measures
(connect time, CPU time, and disk storage) is somewhat arbitrary but
that the total cost of operating the system must be recovered somehow.
This means that a reduction in connect time charges must necessarily be
offset by an increase in other charges.
There was a consensus in favor of reducing connect time charges. Len
Bosack agreed to formulate specific proposals for the various systems,
to review the expected net effect of these changes on existing project
charges and to report his findings to the committee.
Computer Shuffles
The prospective availability of some AT&T Unix workstations via Jeff Ullman
was mentioned. No interest emerged instantly.
Bruce Hitson asked about the possibility of having one or more of the
CSD-purchased Suns placed at Welch road for use by CS PhD students over
there. Tom Dienstbier reported that he thought the one in Nils Nilsson's
office could be liberated. [Nils subsequently confirmed his concurrence.
Tom D. and Tom R. should negotiate a handover.]
∂13-Jan-86 1629 VAL re: circumscription names
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jan-86 15:25-PT.]
Tomasz Imielinski (Rutgers)
Jon Doyle (Carnegie-Mellon)
David Etherington and Robert Mercer (U. of British Columbia)
Ray Reiter (U. of Toronto)
Martin Davis (New York)
Jack Minker and Don Perlis (U. of Maryland)
Michael Gelfond, Halina Przymusinska and Teodor Przymusinski (U. of Texas)
Steve Hanks and Drew McDermott (Yale)
John Schlipf (U. of Cincinatti)
David Kueker (U. Of Maryland)
(the last two wrote privately circulated notes)
- and me.
And, of course, Nils discusses circumscription in his non-monotonic chapter.
∂13-Jan-86 1652 RA David Chudnovsky
David called.
∂13-Jan-86 1643 CLT reservations
is this ok? or should i try franklin directly?
∂13-Jan-86 1549 RA Re: reservations
[Reply to message recvd: 13 Jan 86 11:24 Pacific Time]
Carolyn,
You have a reservation for Friday, Jan. 24 Air Cal 506, depart SJ 8:40,
arrive LAX 9:45. On the way back, Jan 26, LA-SJ, PSA 217, depart. 2:00pm, arrive
SJ 2:59. They will reserve a car for you with an infant car seat. The tickets
will be delivered later this week.
Rutie
-----
∂13-Jan-86 1659 VAL Non-monotonic seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Next meeting:
A Review and Critique of:
"Temporal Reasoning and Default Logics"
by Steve Hanks and Drew McDermott
Yale/CSD/RR #430
October 1985
by Benjamin Grosof, inquisitioner
Thursday, January 16, 4pm
MJH 252
Hanks and McDermott in their recent Yale Tech Report pose an example
problem in temporal reasoning and claim that none of the leading
formalisms for default reasoning (namely Reiter's Default Logic,
McDermott and Doyle's modal Non-Monotonic Logic, and Circumscription)
adequately capture the type of non-monotonic reasoning that is (what
they claim is) desirable in the example. They give an algorithm which
does. They go on to conclude rather pessimistically that there seems
to be some inherent problem in the semantics of all three default
formalisms.
In this talk, I review their paper, including their temporal logic. I
argue that their example in particular is interesting and suggestive,
but that the semantical difficulty that they emphasize arises from an
underspecification of the problem. I will go on to suggest how indeed
to represent the additional CRITERION satisfied by their algorithm
(but not by their formulations in default formalisms). I show how
Vladimir's new circumscription presented in our fall sessions of the
non-monotonic reasoning seminar can solve the representational problem
they pose. I argue that circumscription, because it can incorporate
certain kinds of preferences among competing extensions via
prioritization, has an advantage over the other two default
formalisms, and promises to be able to represent the CRITERION more
generally than their algorithm does. I also discuss how their
temporal formalism occupies an intermediate place between STRIPS and
situation calculus.
-------
∂13-Jan-86 1741 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Draft of proposals
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 17:41:35 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 17:38:34-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Draft of proposals
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12175033881.40.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
A copy of Terry's draft of proposals has been put in each of
your Jacks mailslots. The proposals will be discussed in the
meeting tomorrow (2:15, Jacks 252).
Victoria
-------
∂13-Jan-86 1806 JMC
Logan Robinson, A student in Leningrad
∂14-Jan-86 0943 RA Hopcroft
Please let me know whether you can meet Hopcroft tomorrow bet. 2:00 and 2:45.
Thanks.
∂14-Jan-86 1013 CLT oh well
∂14-Jan-86 0827 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: modems
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 08:24:24 PST
Date: Tue 14 Jan 86 08:21:22-PST
From: Thomas Dienstbier <TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: modems
To: CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 12 Jan 86 11:22:00-PST
Message-ID: <12175194588.25.TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
It turns out that I wanted to get Len bosack's working first so we wouldn't
have any unkown problems with yours, but we our having line problems with
his.. I will keep you updated..We probably will not be out today.
Sorry for the extended delay..
tom
-------
∂14-Jan-86 1049 RPG Alliant
To: LES, JJW, CLT, JMC
I met with the Alliant folks yestersday, and I think their machine
is possibly the best one to start with. It is somewhat expensive,
but I think we can get up and running on it very fast. Here is a brief
description:
It has up to 8 68020-like processors that can operate concurrently on
a shared address space. They are 68020-like in that they are made from
custom CMOS gate arrays and operate about twice 68020 speeds. In addition
they do vector operations and concurrency operations.
These guys share 2 caches (4 machines each). Each cache is 64kbytes,
and the cache to processor bandwidth is 376mbytes per second. The
caches talk to up to 64mbytes of real memory at a rate of
188mbytes per second.
The basic mode of operation is to do a CTART instruction which
grabs n processors and starts them all with a common instruction stream.
Then each stream can pick up tasks from a global queue. There is no
messing around with an operating system to do this.
They implement exactly the 68020 instruction set except for the 6 register
compare and set, which would have been the right instruction for having
concurrent processes do reference-count GC. The 68020 added that instruction
after Alliant was done negotiating with Motorola.
In addition, there are n 68012's (12 mhertz 68010's). These guy talk to
users and devices. The disk drives are Eagles.
The price is high, $270k to buy into the parallel version of the machine
(the FX8). That gets you 1 68012, 1 68020, 1 cache, and 8mbytes (?) of memory.
Then the prices are approximately:
49k per processor
40k for the second cache
40k per 8 mbytes of memory (!) This is high, but it's high-speed memory,
and does some test and set operations.
We could operate with a 4 processor machine for a while.
It runs berkeley 4.2 and will switch to berkeley 4.3.
We can get delivery in late spring, and they've talked to Squires about it.
The nice part is we can probably get the uniprocessor Lisp going in less than
a week on this thing, and it will probably run much faster than a 3600 in
uniprocessor mode.
Jack Test, who was the Alliant guy here yesterday, is willing to come back to
talk to us at the end of this month. His best days are Jan 27, 28, Feb 3, 4,
Jan 29, in decreasing order of ease. Let me know the date you'd like to get a
presentation from him.
-rpg-
∂14-Jan-86 1319 CLT alliant
To: RPG, LES, JJW, JMC
∂14-Jan-86 1114 JMC re: Alliant
To: RPG, LES, JJW, CLT
[In reply to message from RPG rcvd 14-Jan-86 10:49-PT.]
Unless there is a strong reason to do otherwise, I still want to wait
until the contract at least clears DARPA.
-----CLT-----
i agree
∂14-Jan-86 1329 RPG So
To: JMC, CLT, LES, JJW
It sounds as if there is no reason to send someone to Uniforum to
see encore.
-rpg-
∂14-Jan-86 1502 RA David Chudnovsky
David called; he will try again later.
∂14-Jan-86 1606 STEINBERG@RED.RUTGERS.EDU smoking
Received: from RED.RUTGERS.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 16:06:48 PST
Date: 14 Jan 86 17:35:39 EST
From: Louis Steinberg <STEINBERG@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject: smoking
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175262726.6.STEINBERG@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
I've seen copies of some of the messages you've sent to bboards about
smokers, etc., and thought you might be interested in the following news
item:
It seems a department store here in the New York metropolitan area has a
policy of hiring non-smokers only (that is, people who don't even smoke on
their own time, away from work). A smoker is has brought suit claiming that
cigarette addiction is a "disability" in the sense of the laws that ban
hiring discrimination based on disabilities. (I assume these laws are mainly
meant to protect paraplegics and the like.) Thus, the claim goes, refusing
to hire a smoker is illegal discrimination.
-------
∂14-Jan-86 2207 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 22:07:32 PST
Date: Tue 14 Jan 86 22:03:18-PST
From: Benjamin N. Grosof <GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175344216.28.GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Hi John,
I was sorry not to be able to come to your class today, due to an unexpected
medical appointment. I'll try to come sometime soon though.
Benjamin
-------
∂15-Jan-86 0903 RA your NSF grant
A reminder. You need to do your NSF proposal. Mr. Chien from NSF called
yesterday when I was out of my office and I have to return his call, but I'd
like to hear from you before I do that.
∂15-Jan-86 1017 RA I got a call from Inference they want to know whether
you are going to participate in the meeting on Monday. Please let me know.
Thanks.
P.S. If you are, shall I make reservation for you?
∂15-Jan-86 1057 OR.MURRAY@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Re: smoking
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 10:56:20 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 10:55:40-PST
From: Walter Murray <OR.MURRAY@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: smoking
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 15 Jan 86 09:59:00-PST
As I understand it the decision of the police dept didn't have much to
do with smoking per se. The problem was that police officers who
retired prematurely due to heart problems were presumed to have
contracted it due to the stress of the job. Consequently they
received generous pensions (70% of full pay). The cost of maintaining
pensions had become a burden. The alternative discussed (to
requiring new recruits to be non-smokers) was to place the burden of
prove on the officer that any heart problems contracted was indeed job
related.
I don't disagree with your thesis about self-righteousness being
dangerous. Whether it is more dangerous than smoking depends on who
you are (I'm not sure a fetus suffers much from self-righteousness).
Walter
-----------
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1521 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Last call for updates on research interests
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 15:20:55 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 12:34:32-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Last call for updates on research interests
To: tob@SU-AI.ARPA, zm@SU-AI.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175502821.20.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We want to hand out the research interests in CSD/CSL at the annual
meeting. Under separate msg I will send you the latest version I
have on line. This information can also be used if the Dept. publishes
a CSD report. Deadline Monday, Jan. 27.
If what I have is ok, let me know. Otherwise send update.
Carolyn
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1521 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA research interests
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 15:21:24 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 12:37:31-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: research interests
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175503362.20.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
@b{John McCarthy},
Professor of Computer Science.@\
Professor McCarthy has worked in the area of formal reasoning applied to
computer science and artificial intelligence since 1957. He has recently
developed a technique for
completely characterizing LISP and other recursive programs within
first order logic by supplementing Cartwright's first order form of the
functional equation by a minimization schema.
This technique is well suited to automatic
proof checking, and in collaboration with Cartwright and Stanford students
Professor McCarthy is exploiting this breakthrough
by verifying more complex programs directly within first order logic. In
addition many of the standard program verification techniques can be
represented by axiom schemas in this system. Recently McCarthy has
discovered how to represent facts about knowledge and belief in unmodified
order logic and the solution works no matter how many mental
qualities must be treated.
He has also recently discovered that an axiom schema of first
order logic called a minimization schema can be used to represent in a
flexible way the conjecture that the entities that can be shown to exist
on the basis of the information in a certain data base are all the
relevant entities that exist. This conjecture is a common feature of
human reasoning. Professor McCarthy has investigated continuous
functionals that don't arise from simple recursive programs. Some of them
require parallel evaluation, and the work may lead to a treatment of
program correctness that unifies parallel programs with the more usual
sequential programs.
In 1979 McCarthy developed a new formalism called ``Elephant'' for
expressing sequential programs as sentences in first order logic.
The formalism permits programmers to avoid defining some data structures
by referring explicitly to the past.
Prof. McCarthy received the inaugural Award for Research Excellence at
the International Joint Conference on AI, August, 1985, in Los Angeles.
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1631 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Current CV
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 16:30:50 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 15:31:46-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Current CV
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175535084.41.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The School of Engineering is asking for a current CV for you and needs it
by early afternoon on Thursday (Jan. 16). Unfortunately, the one that I
have is not current enough so could you arrange for me to get one that
is current?
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1804 POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Bicycle Racks (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 18:04:46 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 18:04:09-PST
From: Bill Poser <POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Bicycle Racks (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: su-bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 15 Jan 86 16:38:00-PST
Another problem with the kind of bicycle rack with multiple teeth and
the box that protects your lock is that they're a lot of trouble to use
(and you get no protection for your lock) if you have something other
than a separable padlock, e.g. a Citadel or Kryptonite lock.
-------
∂15-Jan-86 2039 CLT wics
Be sure to find out if you have
any unlisted meetings the week of
July 11 or July 29 or Aug 18
The lisp conference is Aug 4-6
∂16-Jan-86 0900 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Stan Rosenschein
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 09:00:31 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 08:45:35-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Stan Rosenschein
To: cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, tob@SU-AI.ARPA,
jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175723284.27.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I had a nice talk with Stan Rosenschein yesterday. He has decided
to apply for our robotics position! (Thanks to Bill Reynolds and
Bob Cannon who twisted his arm a bit. Then I asked him to think
seriously about this, and he must have done so.)
I think he is our best candidate so far and would do a fine job in
pulling together the various robotics efforts around the campus. He
also would want to continue his own research on mobile robots---which
is outstanding in my opinion.
Stan is now writing us an application letter with vitae and with
references. We should be putting together a list of names and get a
letter out requesting evaluations. We should probably also meet soon
to discuss any loose ends and how this development affects what we
do next.
We are arranging to have Stan give a colloquium this quarter.
Yesterday's visits with John Hopcroft revealed that, although he is
interested in aspects of robotics, he is not interested in being the
focal point for robotics.
Bob, you will be calling us together soon after your return I presume?
-Nils
-------
∂16-Jan-86 0954 VAL correction to your 1980 circ'n paper
In remark (3) at the end of the paper you say about an earlier version of
circ'n that it leads to a contradiction when applied to Example 2. Actually,
it only leads to A=B. (Of course, this isn't much better).
∂16-Jan-86 1046 ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA recommendation for Industrial CS course instructor
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 10:44:29 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 10:08:33-PST
From: Lawrence Markosian <ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: recommendation for Industrial CS course instructor
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: rockmore@KESTREL.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175738389.34.ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I recommend Cordell Green from Kestrel Institute and Reasoning Systems.
As you know, Cordell has performed research in automatic programming
for many years. 15 months ago, he and others formed a company,
Reasoning Systems, that is developing commercial applications of
program synthesis technology. We have a product line that is in use
today by a number of major US & international corporations.
Lawrence Z. Markosian,
Senior Computer Scientist
Reasoning Systems
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1049 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 10:48:59 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 10:29:35-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Robotics Search Committee
To: Cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, Binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
Reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175742216.12.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a Robotics Search Committee meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 28
from 3:30 - 5:00 in MJH 220. Please mark it on your calendars.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1053 ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA recommendation for Industrial CS Lectureship
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 10:51:23 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 10:39:56-PST
From: Lawrence Markosian <ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: recommendation for Industrial CS Lectureship
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: pat%IMSSS@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175744102.34.ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I also recommend Robert L. Smith for the position. Smith received his
degree in Philosophy from Pat Suppes. At IMSSS he was a principal
developer of intelligent CAI systems. He taught computer science at
Rutgers for 6 years and is now, I believe, VP for Software Development
at Computer Curriculum Corporation. Throughout his career Smith has
demonstrated a strong interest in CS applications to teaching: at
times he has advanced the state of the art in intelligent CAI; at
other times he has synthesized new applications of existing technology
to education.
In both this and my previous recommendation of Cordell, I have
recommended individuals who not only have made significant research
contributions but also have experience in developing products in the
industrial environment. While there are individuals at Xerox
PARC and perhaps at SRI who would meet the former criterion, the lack
of experience in bringing products to market would seem to limit their
suitability for the position you describe.
Lawrence Z. Markosian
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1456 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Geneserth Recommendations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 14:56:07 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 14:52:40-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Geneserth Recommendations
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175790109.29.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
As of yesterday, recommendation responses have not been received from the
following persons:
Lesser, Davis, Hart, Szolovitz, Newell and Hayes
I though perhaps you might wish to call them.
Betty
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1502 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Planning workshop
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 15:02:26 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 15:02:32-PST
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Planning workshop
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
John,
CSLI asked if we could slightly expand our list of invited attendees at
the planning workshop to include 4 or 5 philosophers. For that they
are prepared to add $2k to the pot. Is that OK with you?
Mike.
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1513 RA leave early
Beginning today till the middle of May I will have to leave at 4:30 on
Thursdays.
∂16-Jan-86 1532 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA re: Planning workshop
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 15:30:17 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 15:30:11-PST
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Planning workshop
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 16 Jan 86 15:24:00-PST
OK, that's fine. I was not sure if you would want to know or not,
and thought it best to ask just in case.
Mike.
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1553 RA Re: Geneserth Recommendations
[Reply to message sent: Thu 16 Jan 86 14:52:40-PST]
We got Hart's recommendation. Newell responded by asking for correction
of references (which Mike did) but no recommendation yet.
Rutie
-----
∂16-Jan-86 1559 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Keith Lantz
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 15:58:23 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 15:57:24-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Keith Lantz
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
This is to welcome Keith Lantz to the committee (and check that he
has been properly added to the mailing list). He is in charge of
a committee in CSL revising the systems qual, and the overlap in
interests will help us all. Thanks, Keith. --t
-------
∂17-Jan-86 0732 JJW High-speed home lines
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ME@SU-AI.ARPA, LB@SU-AI.ARPA
From a message on the TCP-IP list:
On another note, by this summer everyone at CMU will have the capability
of having a dedicated 56k bps link from their homes back to CMU, if they
live in one of the surrounding areas nearby. This service is going to
be provided cheaply by the local telephone company.
The message went on to discuss the feasibility of using the IP protocols
over these lines, effectively hooking everyone's home into a network.
∂17-Jan-86 0927 RA David Chudnovsky
David called; he will try calling you at home; if he does not reach
you, please call him (212) 864 5320.
∂17-Jan-86 0952 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: High-speed home lines
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 86 09:52:28 PST
Date: Fri 17 Jan 86 09:46:11-PST
From: Len Bosack <BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: High-speed home lines
To: JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ME@SU-AI.ARPA, LB@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Joe Weening <JJW@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 17 Jan 86 07:32:00-PST
Message-ID: <12175996460.30.BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Some of the newer phone switches can manage a modest amount of data multiplexed
on the subscriber loop. This requires a per-line investment of about $1K to
$1.5K. There is a more costly subscriber instrument, as well.
We already have the capability of 19.2Kb data at a reasonable cost. If you
live close enough to Stanford that 'unloaded, metallic' private lines are
available, there are now very inexpensive (about $400) modems. The lines cost
about $20/mo -- a little less than the phone company will charge for the
'cheap' data service.
Len
-------
∂17-Jan-86 0951 RA long lunch
I will be out of the office between 11:15 and 1:30 today.
∂17-Jan-86 1249 CLT
Can you arrange with ian to take his picture today or this weekend?
∂17-Jan-86 1355 CLT
Ian says he put a photo on my desk, so no need to take one.
∂17-Jan-86 1410 VAL Reiter's visit
To: JMC, LES
He can't come this quarter. He says it will be easier after April 14, and I'll
contact him again at that time.
∂17-Jan-86 1520 ME home terminals
To: LB@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: JJW@SU-AI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Of course, my goal is to have a Data Disc at home, shipping video there
via the Stanford and Palo Alto cable TV networks. Is that ever going to
be plausible?
∂17-Jan-86 1524 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: home terminals
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 86 15:24:29 PST
Date: Fri 17 Jan 86 15:21:02-PST
From: Len Bosack <BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: home terminals
To: ME@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: LB@SU-AI.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Martin Frost <ME@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 17 Jan 86 15:20:00-PST
Message-ID: <12176057417.15.BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm not sure the cable people will make it easy, but technically it is
possible. Actually, you can have it now for about $6K for a line-of-sight
microwave link.
Len
-------
∂17-Jan-86 1639 VAL Non-monotonic seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Next meeting:
Pointwise Circumscription
Vladimir Lifschitz
Thursday, January 23, 4pm, MJH 252
(I have a few copies of the paper in my office, MJH 362).
ABSTRACT
Circumscription is logical minimization, that is, the minimization of
extensions of predicates subject to restrictions expressed by predicate formulas.
When several predicates are to be minimized, circumscription is usually thought of
as minimization with respect to an order defined on vectors of predicates, and
different ways of defining this order correspond to different kinds of
circumscription: parallel and prioritized.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the following principle regarding
logical minimization:
Things should be minimized one at a time.
This means, first of all, that we propose to express the circumscription
of several predicates by the conjunction of several minimality conditions, one
condition for each predicate. The difference between parallel and prioritized
circumscription will correspond to different selections of predicates allowed
to vary in each minimization.
This means, furthermore, that we propose to modify the definition of
circumscription so that it will become an "infinite conjunction" of "local"
minimality conditions; each of these conditions expresses the impossibility of
changing the value of the predicate from True to False at one point. (Formally,
this "infinite conjunction" will be represented by means of a universal
quantifier). This is what we call "pointwise circumscription".
We argue that this approach to circumscription is conceptually simpler
than the traditional ``global'' approach and, at the same time, leads to
generalizations with the additional flexibility and expressive power needed in
applications to the theory of commonsense reasoning. Its power is illustrated,
in particular, on a problem posed by Hanks and McDermott, which apparently
cannot be solved using other existing formalizations of non-monotonic reasoning.
∂18-Jan-86 0900 JMC
woody
∂18-Jan-86 1114 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Talks on Feb 6
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Jan 86 11:14:45 PST
Date: Sat 18 Jan 86 11:11:22-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Talks on Feb 6
To: Yao@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Ullman@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA,
golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12176274112.15.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
On Thursday, February 6, the "Engineering Advisory Council" is coming
to Stanford. It is a group of 30 or so that meets with Gibbons & co. once
a year to hear about what is going on in the School of Engrg. and to
give advice, etc. The people on it are all high-level administrators,
vps for engrg, prominent university people, etc. (I can get a membership
list if anyone is interested.) This year, Jim Gibbons wants to "feature"
the CSD and have a group of its leaders each talk for 10-15 minutes about
what is going on in his area. I'll start out with a general overview.
Could each of you describe the highlights of "theory," "the ug program,"
"AI," "Systems," and "AM/SC" as you see fit? The time slot for us
is 3:30-5:00 pm, Thursday, Feb. 6. Unfortunately this day conflicts with
the Forum mtg and with the CS Colloquium. -Nils
-------
∂18-Jan-86 1836 VAL giving preference to the past
Here is an interesting example of non-monotonic temporal reasoning. A robot
lives in a suite extending from North to South and can move from one room to
another when given instructions: Move North, Move South. Normally, the effect
is that it moves to the next room in the given direction. One of the things
that can go wrong is that he is told to move North when he is at the
northern end of the suite, or to move South when he is at the southern end.
Assume now that he is instructed to move North and then immediately to move
South, and it turned out that after the second step he is in a room
different from the one he occupied before the first step. From this
information we conclude non-monotonically that he was originally at the
northern end of the suite.
The straightforward application of circumscription leads us to the conclusion
that only one of two actions did not lead to the normal result. But this
could happen in many different ways, and we cannot draw the expected
conclusion. We have the usual difficulty: many minimal points where we
expected just one. But what is interesting is that giving a higher priority
to the abnormality of the first event doesn't solve the problem. This
prioritization eliminates the minimal points where the first action was
abnormal, but the "right" minimum is one of these eliminated points!
∂19-Jan-86 1638 VAL reply to today's three messages
1. Re: doing it with ordinary circ'n. I'm afraid we'll see various undesirable
things when we try to describe carefully what is varied and determine the
result of circumscription. Depending on what is varied, the result will be
either too weak or too strong. See the example with ONTABLE from Section 5 of
"Pointwise circ'n"; my intention there is to argue that in situation calculus
the generalization where "one slice" of a fluent is fixed is such a natural
thing to do that we can expect all sorts of problems if it is not used.
From my experience with a somewhat similar approach with "non-existing
situations" I expect that these problems can be fixed only at the price of
making the axiom set substantially more complex: we'll have to add axioms
about S0 that would completely describe the initial configuration of blocks
(which creates the effect of not allowing the initial slice of each fluent
to vary); in addition, we'll need some distinctness axioms. We can do this,
if you want: tell me what you want to vary (and what additional axioms, if
any, you add to your set), and I'll try to find something that goes wrong.
2. ↓At least one good thing about filtered circ'n: it's good to have a common
generalization for the global and pointwise versions. So it may be worthwile
to introduce this definition even if it doesn't have applications not covered
by its two special cases.
3. Re: robot in two rooms. I agree that this is related to your remark on
reasoning about the past; actually, my goal was to illustrate that remark by
a specific example. But I hope that we can handle problems of this sort
without mental situations, merely by applying circ'n in the style of the
newest versions. I have a question about the relation between that example
and mental situations. The example seems to be rather symmetric: what we
are told is that the positions of the robot in the earliest and the latest of
the three situations involved are different from each other. Can you explain,
even very informally, why this suggests giving preference to minimization at a
later situation?
4. Re: conference on foundations of AI. I received a message from Partridge
saying that it's hard to fit me in, too many people are coming. So let's
forget the whole thing. But I'd like to see the abstracts.
∂20-Jan-86 0001 spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM genesereth
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Jan 86 00:00:55 PST
Received: by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA27709; Mon, 20 Jan 86 00:01:05 pst
Received: By spar.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM (from krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM)
id AA20092; Sun, 19 Jan 86 23:57:45 pst
Return-Path: <hayes@krazykat>
Received: By krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM
id AA14833; Sun, 19 Jan 86 23:57:47 gmt
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 86 23:57:47 gmt
From: Patrick Hayes <spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Message-Id: <8601200757.AA14833@krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM>
To: McCarthy@sail.ARPA
Subject: genesereth
John, I just got you a letter about Genesereth before flying east. I am
sending you a hard copy, duly signed, but if you need it quicker
here it is in electronic form. Id appreciate it if you erased it as
quickly as possible since it makes some direct personal comparisons:
thanks.
Pat
-------------------------
Dear Professor McCarthy
This is my belated response to your request for my views on Michael Genesereth.
Please forgive the lateness of this reply.
I have known Mike for about five years as a professional
acquaintance in the AI field, and have always been impressed by his
intellectual strength and determination in following a clear research line,
and by his clarity in expressing his ideas. I am perhaps influenced to some
extent in my opinions by the fact that I tend to agree with his general
point of view and his basic suppositions about what are the inportant issues
in the field: but even allowing for this, I think he is one of the best
researchers in the field in his age bracket. I would put him ahead of James
Allen of Rochester in intellectual ability, for example, although perhaps
somewhat behind Hector Levesque of Toronto: but he has more energy than
Hector.
Of Genesereths published work, I am most familiar with that which is
concerned with what he calls meta-level architecture. This general idea is
now very familiar in the field, but Genesereth was one of the first to take
the somewhat abstract discussions of meta-level control and create a useful
system which incorporated them in a form usable in applications, while at
the same time preserving the semantic clarity of the logical framework.
Since then he has continued to focus on the central questions of how this
architecture can be used to control the behavior of inference systems, as
well as explore applications of it to industrial design. Maintaining
research activity simultaneously on basic and applied research in this way
is unusual and, in my view, most creditable.
It is also clear that he has the valuable ability to create active groups of
younger researchers around him, working as a team on his projects and
problems, and attracting resources from, and forming constructive associations with, the
world external to the University. Such a talent, though hard to name, is
valuable. Several of our younger researchers at Schlumberger, for example,
have been and continue to work closely with the Genesereth group for several
years, to Schlumbergers and ( I believe ) Stanfords mutual benefit.
I have no knowledge of Genesereths teaching abilities, other than
the observations made to me by some of his graduate students. He has the
reputation of being a devastating critic and an extremely worthwhile
teacher when one can get his undivided attention; but that this is quite
hard to do, since he is so busy.
I hope this short letter is some help in your decisionmaking. I
would, overall, certainly recommend keeping him on the faculty. He would be
very hard to replace with someone who would maintain his academic standard.
best wishes
Patrick J. Hayes
-------------------------------------------------
If I can help in any other way, I will be back on Thursday.
Pat
λ
∂20-Jan-86 0739 shoham%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA Chronological skepticism (a long message; sorry)
Received: from YALE-CHEOPS.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Jan 86 07:37:08 PST
Received: from yale (yale.arpa.ARPA) by yale-cheops.YALE.ARPA; Mon, 20 Jan 86 08:19:36 est
From: <shoham%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>
Received: by Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA; 19 Jan 86 13:50:25 EST (Sun)
Date: 19 Jan 86 13:50:25 EST (Sun)
Message-Id: <8601191850.AA17288@Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA>
Subject: Chronological skepticism (a long message; sorry)
To: val@su-ai.ARPA, jmc@su-ai.ARPA, grosof@su-sushi.ARPA,
nilsson@su-score.ARPA
Cc: hanks@YALE.ARPA
Chronologcial skepticism is a new nonmonotonic logic for temporal
reasoning, which borrows from circ'n and nml but is distinct from
both. Here's a short description of it.
Consider a simple "concurrent billiards" scenario, in which two balls
roll towards each other, collide, and bounce off appropriately.
The question I consider is how do we represent the initial
conditions and the physics, so that from this representation
we can infer the collision and the subsequent new trajectories.
We would like to represent the initial conditions simply as
assertion about the two balls rolling. Unfortunately, we must
represent the position and momentum of every particle (or, in our
case, ball) in the universe in order to describe the situation
correctly. Otherwise there's nothing to prohibit a third ball
from crashing into the first ball before it had a chance to
collide with the second one. For a complete axiomatization of
Newtonian mechanics see Montague's "Deterministic Theories"; or else
trust me to have given you correct conclusions from it.
So, you say, we should treat the initial description of the two
rolling balls a merely an abbreviation for the full-blown
description. The problem is none of the formalisms suggested so far
capture the nature of this abbreviation (except possibly Vladimir's
recent pointwise circ'n; more on this later.) The problem that
minimizing any particular formula is simply wrong. Clearly minimizing
the number of collisions will not do the trick. You may suggest
minimizing the number of balls, but what if I add axioms saying that
there are five
balls, but say nothing about the other three (because they
were "irrelevant")? This is essentially the problem uncovered by
Steve Hanks. However, it's clear what we want to minimize here: we
want to minimize collisions *as early as possible*.
Definition:
A model $M←1$ is *chronologically smaller* in collisions than a model $M←2$ if there exists
a time $t←0$ such that a. the two
models agree on all collisions that occur prior to $t←0$,
b. all collisions in $M←1$ at $t←0$ are also collisions in $M←2$,
and c. in $M←2$ there is a collision at $t←0$ that is not in $M←1$.
Definition:
A model is *chronologically minimal* in collisions if there is no model that is
chronologically smaller than it in collisions.
I claim that if we assume chronological minimality we get exactly the
"right" collisions. Notice that we don't necessaily get the right
rollings, exploding, or anything else - we'd have to chr. min. those
too to achieve that (and its easy do generalize chr. min. to joint
chr. min.)
So this is the correct model theoretic in our particular case, but
that's not enough for my taste. What happens when we step outside
the particular domain? How do we know what to chr. min. in new
physical scenarios? You might say that we must decide that anew for
each domain. I don't think that's true, though, and here's what I
think is really going on.
I think we minimize "everything" chronolically; we try to make as much
as possible "false" as soon as possible. Of course, for every formula
either it or its negation are true, and that's why I put the quotes.
We need a change in view: rather than think of making as few things
as possible "true", think of making as few things as possible
"believed." This is the intuition behind the following construction.
I will resurrect McDermott's NML, adopting Bob Moore's view (though
not reformulation)
of it as a nonmonotonic logic of belief. The base language will be
my reified interval logic, in which atomic propositions have the form
TRUE(t1,t2,phi) (which is really beautification of <<t1,t2>,phi>).
I'll ask you to trust me that this logic has well-defined syntax and
semantics (or else ask me to send you a paper defining the logic.)
The base language is augmented by the modal operator L, where the
intended meaning of Lx is 'x is believed'. I will assume Kripke
semantics and an S5
systems, so that the accessibility relation between possible worlds
is really an equivalence relation. We're now ready for the
definitions of chrnological skepticism.
Definition:
A structure $S←1$ is *chronologically more skeptical* than a
structure $S←2$
if there exists a time t0 such that a. the two structures agree
on all formulas
L(TRUE(t1,t2,phi)) such that $t2<t0$, b. any formula
L(TRUE(t3,t0,phi)) that is satisfied by $S←1$ is satisfied by
$S←2$, and c. there exists a formula L(TRUE(t3,t0,phi)) that is
satisfied
by $S←2$ but not by $S←1$.
Definition:
A structure is *chronologically maximally skeptical* if there is no
structure that is chronologically more skeptical than it.
I claim that this version of NML has the desired behaviour. For
example, the way we represent the two ball scenario is by stating that
we *believe* the two balls are rolling, and that we *believe* in the
laws of physics. The conclusion is that we *believe* in the correct
collision but in no others.
.... These are the main ideas. I realize that although this is a long
message, it is still a bit cryptic. I'm writing this stuff up and will
make sure you all get a copy.
A final word on the ingenuous pointwise-circ'n idea. Most of the time
I manage to convince myself that I understand it. I think it can be
generalized to modal logic, and if Vladimir can allow *all* formulas
to vary then chr. skept. will
probably be a special case of it.
But I've been wondering lately about
what that would mean. The way I see it, when we want to characterize
an abbreviation (or construct a logic) we need to characterize its
model-theoretic semantics and hopefully give a proof theory for it.
One way to do the latter is to do what circ'n does, that is translate
the abbreviated theory into an equivalent full-blown form, and apply
the usual rules to the expanded form. But that is only one
possibility; we can also give decision procedures that bypass this
translation phase. Indeed, that's what I will do for chr. skept.
I guess my question is the following. If we already have a model
theoretic understanding of the abbreviation, what is the gain of
giving a syntactic characterization of it in the form of rather
complex second-order theory? Do you intend unleashing a second-order
theorem-prover on the expanded theory?
I hate receiving such long messages, but sending one is much more fun.
Your comments on what I've said are most welcome.
Regards,
Yoav.
-------
∂20-Jan-86 1445 VAL Re: Chronological scepticism
To: shoham@YALE.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
hanks@YALE.ARPA
A few comments:
1. John expressed the view in a conversation a few weeks ago that minimizing
"as early as possible" works in some cases and doesn't work in some others. I'd
like to understand limitations of this principle. Here is an example. I hit a
billiard ball so that it should bank off the side at point P and then come to
point Q. However, it hasn't come to Q. Has it come to P? Minimizing collisions
"as early as possible" would lead us to the conclusion that it has, and that
the collision that changed its trajectory happened between P and Q. This
doesn't look right to me; I would expect circumscription to prove that there
was only one unexpected collision, but not to tell us whether it happened
before or after P.
2. As far as the technical implementation is concerned, I would expect that
it should be possible to do what you want using pointwise circ'n in a rather
starightforward way. I just finished a short paper on pointwise circ'n in which
I illustrate it, in particular on the example from Section 7.1 of the Hanks-
McDermott report. I'll send you a copy.
3. I agree that describing a syntactic translation is only one of possible
ways of defining the semantics of a new language. But this method seems to be
conceptually simpler than others, and we shouldn't overlook its applicability
when it is applicable, especially when, as in the case of circ'n,
(a) the translation is so simple (a schema, not an inductive definition or
a reinterpretation of logical connectives),
(b) the translation is into a language so basic for mathematics as the
language of second order logic (this is the language needed for
defining natural numbers, real numbers, complete metric spaces and
so many other important concepts).
Regards,
Vladimir
∂20-Jan-86 2045 RPG SHARE Lisp
What machine was this on? The 7090?
-rpg-
∂21-Jan-86 0000 JMC
ties at Meader's
∂21-Jan-86 0122 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS assignment
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 01:22:09 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 01:21:21-PST
From: Dah-Bin Kao <KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: VTSS assignment
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: kao@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Prof. McCarthy:
This is the VTSS assignment.
I am sending this to you because I will not be able to
attend the Tuesday class.
I will greatly appreciate your comments.
Thank you.
Dah-Bin Kao
******************************************
One possible application of technology
******************************************
STANFORD UNIVERSITY FRANCHISED
1. How does it work for the student?
A student, from anywhere in the country, can
go to a Stanford University Franchise nearby to take
courses, take exams, and finish a degree.
There could be one such franchise per city,
or there could be as many as there are McDonald's,
depending on the demand.
2. Technological requirements
Most of them are available today,
some are being improved, such as fiber optics,
telecommunication, video and audio recording,
picturephone, computer-aided education, and
expert systems, etc.
This would be an extension of the present
TV courses being offered to some industrial companies.
3. Would there be a demand?
I think so.
Most, if not all, parents want their children to go to college.
This system would provide their children a Stanford education
in their home town, for reduced tuition, and lowered admission
standard.
Besides, this system would solve the problem of the
shortage of engineering and science faculty.
It should improve the quality, because the best teachers
would be teaching the courses.
4. Effects on society
There would be more better educated citizens.
There would be fierce competitions among the universities,
The market will stabilize to a few national networks and
special purpose, or localized smaller stations.
Stanford would certainly be among the fittest to survive.
Star professors would be paid millions of dollars,
like the network TV stars are today.
Competition for the network professorship would be so keen,
that the quality of teaching will continuously improve.
This system does not eliminate the university as a research center.
5. Some other thoughts
I may have overestimated the marketability of a Stanford education.
But this is because I came from Taiwan where the education from
a world-class institute deserves the highest priority.
If the U.S. domestic market should turn out to be not big enough,
business would certainly be extremely good overseas.
****************************************************
-------
∂21-Jan-86 0942 RPG
∂20-Jan-86 2332 JMC re: SHARE Lisp
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Jan-86 20:45-PT.]
I don't remember, but Stoyan might know, and if he doesn't know he'll
want to find out. He is HST@SAIL.
Hm. It's described on page 93 of the Lisp 1.5 programmer's manual
(appendix I). It was implemented at SAIL while you were there, I
think.
-rpg-
∂21-Jan-86 0947 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Research Interests
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 09:47:00 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 09:08:07-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Research Interests
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: RA@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177038106.18.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is what I have now.
@b{John McCarthy},
Professor of Computer Science.@\
Professor McCarthy has worked in the area of formal reasoning applied to
computer science and artificial intelligence since 1957. He has recently
developed a technique for
completely characterizing LISP and other recursive programs within
first order logic by supplementing Cartwright's first order form of the
functional equation by a minimization schema.
This technique is well suited to automatic
proof checking, and in collaboration with Cartwright and Stanford students
Professor McCarthy is exploiting this breakthrough
by verifying more complex programs directly within first order logic. In
addition many of the standard program verification techniques can be
represented by axiom schemas in this system. Recently McCarthy has
discovered how to represent facts about knowledge and belief in unmodified
order logic and the solution works no matter how many mental
qualities must be treated.
He has also recently discovered that an axiom schema of first
order logic called a minimization schema can be used to represent in a
flexible way the conjecture that the entities that can be shown to exist
on the basis of the information in a certain data base are all the
relevant entities that exist. This conjecture is a common feature of
human reasoning. Professor McCarthy has investigated continuous
functionals that don't arise from simple recursive programs. Some of them
require parallel evaluation, and the work may lead to a treatment of
program correctness that unifies parallel programs with the more usual
sequential programs.
In 1979 McCarthy developed a new formalism called ``Elephant'' for
expressing sequential programs as sentences in first order logic.
The formalism permits programmers to avoid defining some data structures
by referring explicitly to the past.
Prof. McCarthy received the inaugural Award for Research Excellence at
the International Joint Conference on AI, August, 1985, in Los Angeles.
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1044 RPG Hm
It says:
The Artificial Intelligence Project at Stanford has produced a version of
Lisp 1.5 to be distributed by SHARE. In the middle of February 1965 the system
is complete and available from Stanford. The system will be available from
SHARE by the end of march 1965.
Oh well. I'll gloss over the facts at this point in history.
-rpg-
∂21-Jan-86 1057 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA thanks
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 10:57:01 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 10:44:49-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: thanks
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177055711.18.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, thanks for sending the research interests. You can update
it at any time, but I make a concerted effort this time of year.
Whenever we reprint it, we run a new version. You'll get a copy
as soon as we get it back from the copy center. around Jan. 31.
Carolyn
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1143 GEORGEFF@SRI-AI.ARPA Workshop on Planning and Reasoning about Action
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 11:43:25 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 11:39:40-PST
From: Michael Georgeff <georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Workshop on Planning and Reasoning about Action
To: workshop.dis: ;
Announcement and Call for Papers
INVITED WORKSHOP ON
PLANNING AND REASONING ABOUT ACTION
Timberline Lodge, Portland, Oregon, June 30 - July 2, 1986
This invited workshop will focus on work in planning, rational agency,
and representations and techniques for reasoning about action.
Emphasis will be placed on theoretical and foundational issues, rather
than on particular system implementations. To foster thorough
investigation of these topics, a primary goal of the workshop will be
to have long (45 - 60 minute) presentations as well as ample
discussion time. Invited participants are encouraged to submit a
paper in one of the following areas:
* Representation (including representations of action, time,
causality, and process).
* Planning systems (including algorithms and systems for planning,
reacting, and reasoning about behaviors).
* Multiagent worlds (including reasoning about mutual beliefs,
concurrency, and interagent communication).
* Rational agents (including formalisms for describing the beliefs,
desires, and intentions of rational agents).
Because we expect to have approximately 35 attendees and wish to limit
the workshop to approximately 16 papers of high quality, all
submissions will be refereed. It is intended that accepted papers be
published in book form (probably Springer Lecture Note Series, which
has very wide distribution), though inclusion of papers will be at the
option of the authors.
Papers should be approximately 20 pages double-spaced. Two copies
should be mailed, by April 15, 1986, to: Planning/Action Workshop,
attn: Georgeff,Lansky , Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI
International, 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025.
The workshop is being sponsored by the American Association for
Artificial Intelligence and the Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Stanford University. This will be used to help subsidize
workshop attendance for those who would otherwise be unable to attend.
An accommodations package will be offered that covers room and board
(3 meals). Rooms have been reserved for the evenings of June 29 -
July 1, and a limited number of rooms have also been reserved for
those who might like to stay on, July 2 - 5. The list of invitees is
attached below. If you feel we have left out anyone who could make a
significant contribution, please let us know (though we cannot
guarantee inclusion).
Timberline Lodge is a year-round ski resort near Portland (approx. 1 hour
drive). The lodge is a huge stone castle built by hand from native
materials and is a national historic landmark. Summertime at Timberline
offers intermediate/advanced skiing, a swimming pool, hiking, and
nearby tennis, golf, and horseback riding.
We hope that you will attend.
Sincerely,
-Michael Georgeff
-Amy Lansky
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To enable us to make appropriate booking arrangements, could you
please advise us as soon as possible (preferably immediately)
(1) If you think you could possibly attend.
(2) If you think you may bring family, and if so, how many people will
be in your party.
(3) Whether you may wish to stay on after the workshop, and for how
many days (they have some festivities on July 4).
(4) If you think you will be submitting a paper, and if so, in which
topic area.
(5) If you would like your paper to appear in a Springer Lecture Note
Series on Computer Science or not (this series has very wide
circulation, comes out about 2 months after receipt of final
manuscript, but doesn't pay any royalties -- each of us would get
one or two free copies).
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
LIST OF INVITEES:
James Allen
Jon Barwise
Michael Bratman
David Chapman
Phil Cohen
Donald Davidson
Todd Davies
Tom Dean
Tom Dietterich
Mark Drummond
Michael Genesereth
Michael Georgeff
Allan Gibbard
Matt Ginsberg
Alvin Goldman
Andy Haas
Joe Halpern
Pat Hayes
David Israel
Leslie Kaelbling
Henry Kautz
Kurt Konolige
Amy Lansky
Vladimir Lifschitz
John McCarthy
Drew McDermott
Bob Moore
Leora Morgenstern
Yoram Moses
Nils Nilsson
Ed Pednault
Fernando Pereira
John Perry
Martha Pollack
Jeff Rosenschein
Stan Rosenschein
John Searle
Yoav Shoham
Reid Simmons
Bob Stalnaker
Chris Stuart
Lucy Suchman
Austin Tate
Richard Waldinger
David Velliman
David Wilkins
George Wilson
Terry Winograd
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1251 RA Robert Morse
1. Morse is with a company called Logica. He is interested in having
their employees taking some AI courses at Stanford and forming general
ties with Stanford. I referred him to Carolyn Tajnai. He would also like
to talk to you. His tel. (415) 397 0496.
2. Your airline tickets for Friday are on your desk.
∂21-Jan-86 1342 RA Meeting with Mike Buckley
Coleen Kramer from Rockwell International Palo Alto Lab called on
behalf of Mike Buckley. He would like to meet with you tomorrow at 1:30 at his
office in order to interview Bob Englemore who is an applicant for a position there.
Will you please let me know whether this is convenient for you.
The lab address is 444 High in Palo Alto.
Coleen Kramer's tel. is 325 7145.
Thanks,
∂21-Jan-86 1524 RA Robert Morse
Morse returned your call; (415) 397 0496
∂21-Jan-86 1511 GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA mrs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 15:11:37 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 15:07:36-PST
From: Mike Genesereth <GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: mrs
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177103550.45.GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
John,
You said that you wanted to talk with me about MRS this week.
Preferences? How about lunch Thursday?
mrg
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1518 VAL seminar
1. Can I schedule a seminar on Feb. 6, or are you going to the Foundations
Workshop?
2. Would you like to give a talk about mental situations sometime? (Or about
anyting else?) If yes, when?
∂21-Jan-86 1523 RA David Chudnovsky
David called; he'll call back.
∂21-Jan-86 1552 VAL Chronological scepticism
To: shoham@YALE.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA,
hanks@YALE.ARPA
Here is another example when it apparently doesn't apply. Consider the blocks
world in which the only known reason why a block can't be moved onto the table
is that there is something on its top. Given: block A is the only object on top
of B. We perform actions: move(A,Table); move(B,Table). In the resulting
situation, B is *not* on the table. Question: has the first action led to the
normal result? I claim that we can conclude non-monotonically that the answer
is no, because the best explanation of what has happened is that A was not clear.
But "chronological scepticism" will prefer the explanation that the first
action was successful, and the second wasn't (for some unknown reason, like the
gun which mysteriously became unloaded in the Hanks-McDermott example).
How about that?
Vladimir
∂21-Jan-86 1643 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA you can mail to me on Turing now
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 16:43:38 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 16:38:40-PST
From: Michael Beeson <G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: you can mail to me on Turing now
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
if it's more convenient. Use beeson@su-csli.
I found an AT in the math bldg, and am awaiting an answer from its
owner whether I can use it or not. Probably so.
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1751 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Falwell vs. Computer
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 17:51:33 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 17:51:32-PST
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Falwell vs. Computer
To: SU-BBoards@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12177133391.13.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I have two possible answers to JMC's message:
(1) Assume for a minute that Falwell (and other TV
preachers) are in fact agents of "god", as incredulous as this
may seem to those of us who are non-superstitious (e.g. atheists)
but are reasonably familiar with Judeo-Christian dogma. Instead
of seeking legal action against the computer owner, Falwell (like
a "good christian") should turn the other cheek. After all, what
is a paltry $100K when it may be possible to save the poor chap's
immortal soul? Perhaps he is a test of faith sent from "god" to
be sure of Falwell's christian beliefs.
One would say that Falwell has failed in the criteria
established by Jesus "christ" on the proper handling of those who
injure you. Biblical references on request (fundamentalists need
not apply, since they should know the bible well enough without
requiring references).
(2) Let's take the opposite assumption, that Falwell is yet
another religous quack (leaving aside the question of whether
religion itself is quackery), exploiting the superstition of the
masses of weak-minded individuals. Falwell and other TV
fundamentalists' entire means of operation has been one of
harassment of those who disagree with his right-wing political
views or who have different cultural or sexual tastes from his
own. They have organized harassment campaigns against
politicians who refuse to knuckle under to their dictates.
What else can you call 100,000 identical postcards sent in
to a politician from poor misguided individuals who believe the
cover letter sent with these cards? For some reason, I got on
one of these goofy right-wing mailing lists. If you believe what
the junk mail I get claims, it seems that our state politicians
are having our teenaged girls seduced by homosexual male teachers
with AIDS and then brainwashed into going to abortion clinics to
"murder" the fetus conceived from the girls' "sin". They are
aided and abetted by Chief Justice Rose Bird, who sets convicts
on death row free to murder more people so she can justify a
higher salary on the grounds of more cases to try (now I'm not
particularly crazy about Rose Bird; she's an embarassment to the
Left, but this is going a little too far don't you think?).
These teenaged girls (remember? the ones impregnated by the
homosexual teachers with AIDS) then go on welfare and child
support and live high on the hog in big houses with servants and
drive Cadillacs. BUT, if you send in this postcard (with some
emotion-charged but meaningless slogan on it) you can stop it!!
I wouldn't necessarily condone computer harassment of
Falwell. It's a waste of a good computer and a good phone line.
But it is poetic justice. Remember, the guy's mother had been
induced into giving almost all the family money to Falwell.
I don't know why in this modern day and age people still
turn to religion and astrology -- to me, they are identical in
levels of quackery and in wasting money. I see it as something
seriously wrong in the technological revolution we have created.
Perhaps as scientists we should try to find out why and how we
can help.
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1944 LERNER@SU-SCORE.ARPA Event of the Month
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 19:44:45 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 19:39:50-PST
From: Sandy Lerner <Lerner@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Event of the Month
To: g.gorin%LOTS-A@SU-SCORE.ARPA, spurgeon@SU-CSLI.ARPA, jpbion@SU-SUSHI.ARPA,
jjw@SU-AI.ARPA, golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, drf@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
ruggles@SU-COYOTE.ARPA, tom@SU-SCORE.ARPA, joyce@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
a.jiml@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, a.lee@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, a.mary@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA,
a.eric@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, a.john@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, kolk@SU-CARMEL.ARPA,
alpert@SU-SCORE.ARPA, lougheed@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
s.strickland@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, jlg@SU-AI.ARPA, cower@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
almquist@SU-SCORE.ARPA, powell%Ahwahnee@SU-SCORE.ARPA, billw@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
ga.mcl@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, me@SU-AI.ARPA, rob@SU-AI.ARPA, satz@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
p.cheng@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, les@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
perry@SU-SCORE.ARPA, s.johnson@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, s.domenico@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA,
s.ball@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, bjork@SU-SCORE.ARPA, f.taylor@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA,
a.dave@SU-GSB-WHY.ARPA, g.roode@SU-SCORE.ARPA, g.eldre@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
diane@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177153107.15.LERNER@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Y O U ' R E I N V I T E D ! ! !
Len will soon be thirty-four
For those of you who are keeping SCORE
In fact, it happens Saturday
So this silly poem is to say
That we would all be much delighted
If you would come, having been invited
To eat, drink, dance, and play
As we celebrate Len's special day
We hope you'll come without FAIL
But please let us know by phone or SAIL,
By pigeon, LOTS, or HOW or WHY
If you'll share our fun by dropping by.
199 Oak Grove Avenue Dinner: 6:30 p.m.
Atherton, California R.s.v.p. 326-1967
LERNER@SCORE
-------
∂22-Jan-86 0001 JMC
Ask Elliott whether he owes $10.
∂22-Jan-86 0800 JMC
Atenolol
∂22-Jan-86 0906 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 09:06:17 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 09:00:07-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Robotics Search Committee Meeting
To: reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
Bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177298796.23.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Robotics Search Committee meeting which was scheduled for Jan. 28 at
3:30 needs to be changed due to scheduling conflicts. Please let me know
if you would be able to attend a meeting on Jan. 27 at 5:00.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂22-Jan-86 1149 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch.
∂22-Jan-86 1325 ME mail
∂22-Jan-86 1242 JMC email address
Since we have new phone numbers, I'm planning to have new business cards
made, and I want to put the email address on it. I notice that there seems
to be a new system of addresses for many people. Will JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
remain stable or will it change in the next couple of years? Second
question: do we still have a problem in replying to certain addresses
apart from the need to quote when % is used?
ME - SU-AI.ARPA will change "soon" to something like "SAIL.STANFORD.EDU",
I think. "Soon" means in the next 6 months, probably.
We cannot yet mail to domains that are not in the official NIC host table,
because we are not yet running a domain resolver. In fact, not many sites
are yet. We will start running a resolver about the same time
SAIL.STANFORD.EDU becomes "official". (There will have to be a STANFORD
incoming resolver before that works. There has to be a SAIL outgoing
resolver before we can reach all domains. Joe has written part of the
latter but is awaiting resolution (pardon the expression) of some netmail
questions and is also trying to get some thesis work done.)
∂22-Jan-86 1631 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Re: doing it with ordinary circumscription
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 16:31:17 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 16:27:48-PST
From: Benjamin N. Grosof <GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: doing it with ordinary circumscription
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 19 Jan 86 10:22:00-PST
Message-ID: <12177380293.12.GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Hi John,
[Despite your control characters, I was able to parse your axioms, I think.]
I think your fix seems impractical for anything but a very toy example, since
axioms 3. and 4. are very global. I haven't thought enough about it to
suggest a better version.
Benjamin
-------
∂22-Jan-86 2025 gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM Re: course description
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 20:25:43 PST
Received: from magic.ARPA (magic) by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA24609; Wed, 22 Jan 86 20:26:15 pst
Received: by magic.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA28754; Wed, 22 Jan 86 20:26:47 pst
From: gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM (Greg Nelson)
Message-Id: <8601230426.AA28754@magic.ARPA>
Date: 22 Jan 1986 2026-PST (Wednesday)
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: course description
In-Reply-To: Your message of 22 Jan 86 1642 PST.
<8601230052.AA21055@decwrl.DEC.COM>
I don't remember what the format is. I had the idea that by omitting
my outline and retaining my description, a suitable entry could be
produced. I will try to find a catalog around here (we ought to get
one for our library anyway), and send you a suitable entry as soon as I
can.
∂22-Jan-86 2253 JJW Byron Davies' CAREL
To: JMC, CLT, RPG, LES
I went to the HPP/AAP meeting this morning where Byron Davies described
his new parallel Lisp dialect CAREL. It is basically Qlisp with explicit
control over where processes get executed. He's got a simulator working
on top of CARE, which is their distributed architecture simulator.
The consensus is that it is a lot easier to use than CARE by itself, but
several members of the audience (Vineet Singh and myself, mainly) were
against the idea of building knowledge of the machine architecture into
the language. There's also the big question about how to do Lisp on a
non-shared memory architecture; in this case the solution is that every
form to be computed remotely is sent over as a closure, including all
parts of the environment needed. That could mean significant overhead in
communication and garbage collection. There's also difficulty with
dynamic binding and side effects when you do this.
∂22-Jan-86 2255 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 22:55:11 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 21:03:10-PST
From: Dah-Bin Kao <KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: VTSS
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Prof. McCarthy:
Thank you very much for your comments on my VSS assignment.
Obviously I have only looked at the education system from
the point of view of a student.
I have assumed that classes are necessary, and
one-on-one tutoring is the best teaching method.
In my proposal, technology would play the role of
providing every student with a simulated one-on-one
tutoring from a professor.
It would require more advanced two-way audio-visual
communication system, with sophisticated capabilities
in voice and pattern recognition.
The professor would prepare a tape for a lecture,
along with tapes for the answers to 100 questions.
The student's questions would be analyzed by a computer,
and the tape for the right answer could be played.
TV cameras would monitor the student's actions,
the computer would wake up the student if
he falls asleep.
If such things are possible, then the professor would not
have to teach the same courses every year,
and the classes will not be delayed by unproductive
questioners.
Regarding the question of motivation,
I have made the simple-minded assumption that the
students would be self-motivated.
Obvious I have been limited by my own experience
as a student from Taiwan and as a student using the
Standford TV network while working in the Silicon Valley.
In both cases, the opportunity for a Stanford education
would stimulate enough motivation.
I also assumed that those professors who have been the
most successful in research would be the star professors.
This assumption also leads to the conclusion that
professional actors would probably be less attractive.
On the other hand, TV stars are packaged and marketed
to appeal to the interest of large audiences.
Maybe the star professors would be those who teach such courses
as "How to make a million dollars without working hard".
The Chinese-speaking people would probablly be the best market
for such a system.
Besides the size of the market,
Chinese people have very high respect for education and teachers.
I think these traditional values are still preserved even under
the communist regime.
Dah-Bin Kao
-------
∂23-Jan-86 0930 AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA visit to MCC
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 09:30:18 PST
Date: Thu 23 Jan 86 11:29:55-CST
From: Ellie Huck <AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: visit to MCC
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ai.ellie@MCC.ARPA
Reservations at Hawthorne Suites (Brookhollow) have been made for you
(and Dr. Lifschitz) February 9-11 with a gauranteed late arrival --
Confirmation number R23H. Please let me know if you need anything
else.
-------
∂23-Jan-86 0935 RA meeting
Robotics Search Committee Meeting
The Robotics Search Committee meeting which was scheduled for Jan. 28 at
3:30 needs to be changed due to scheduling conflicts. Please let me know
if you would be able to attend a meeting on Jan. 27 at 5:00.
Thanks,
∂23-Jan-86 1137 RA Jennifer Ballantine
Jannifer called re copyright transfer from for Halpern Conference book.
She did not receive the form yet. Her tel. (415) 941 4960.
∂23-Jan-86 1152 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch.
∂23-Jan-86 1206 VAL Minker's workshop
Jack Minker invited me to take part in the Workshop on Foundations of Logic
Programming and Deductive Databases he's organizing in Washington after AAAI-86.
Two questions:
1. He said that the travel funds he has are intended primarily for those who can't
find other sources of support. I replied that I can get travel funds here, and
then it occured to me that I should have asked you first. It's probably not late
to send a correction. Should I?
2. Remember my talk about the semantics of STRIPS rules? When I discussed those
ideas with Reiter, he said they may be of interest from the point of view of the
theory of deductive databases. Does it make sense to you? If yes, maybe I'll
send that material to Minker.
∂23-Jan-86 1523 Samuel←C.←Yang.osbunorth@Xerox.COM Ready to take CS306 Final
Received: from XEROX.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 15:22:54 PST
Received: from Salvador.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 23 JAN 86 15:22:47 PST
Sender: "Samuel C. Yang.osbunorth"@Xerox.COM
Date: 23 Jan 86 12:08:34 PST (Thursday)
Subject: Ready to take CS306 Final
From: Yang.osbunorth@Xerox.COM
To: jmc@SU-AI.Arpa
cc: Yang.osbunorth@Xerox.COM, Givan@SU-SUSHI.Arpa, Laube@SU-SUSHI.Arpa
Message-ID: <860123-152247-1235@Xerox>
Professor McCarthy:
I hope you remember me. I was in your CS306 class in the fall, and I
was unable to take the final with everyone else. You agreed to let me
take the exam in January.
Well, I think I'm ready to take the final now. How do I get it, and
what are the time limits? Also, is it possible to get the time
allocation of my LOTS account increased to at least 6 hours per week
while I'm taking the final? My id is S.SYANG. Thanks.
///
(O-O) Sam
-
∂23-Jan-86 1533 G.GRACE@LOTS-B fld
Received: from LOTS-B by SU-AI with PUP; 23-Jan-86 15:33 PST
Date: Thu 23 Jan 86 15:31:46-PST
From: Grace Whiteis <G.GRACE@LOTS-B>
Subject: fld
To: j.jmc@LOTS-B
Message-ID: <12177632236.122.G.GRACE@LOTS-B>
-------
∂23-Jan-86 1606 RA US-Japan
The text is now in usjapa[w86,jmc]
∂23-Jan-86 1607 G.GRACE@LOTS-B Previous Message.
Received: from LOTS-B by SU-AI with PUP; 23-Jan-86 16:06 PST
Date: Thu 23 Jan 86 15:34:52-PST
From: Grace Whiteis <G.GRACE@LOTS-B>
Subject: Previous Message.
To: j.jmc@LOTS-B
Message-ID: <12177632801.122.G.GRACE@LOTS-B>
Please disregard the previous empty message. (A user wanted to know
how to send mail to you so I was demonstrating but I didn't mean to
send it!) Sorry about that!
Grace Whiteis
-------
∂23-Jan-86 1614 RA Mr. Calo
Mr. Calo from IBM Yorktown called, (914) 945 2710. Tina, the receptinist,
took the msg. so I don't know what it's all about.
∂23-Jan-86 1631 RA leaving
It's Thursday and I am leaving at 4:30.
∂23-Jan-86 1639 OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Rebirth of the energy mailing list
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 16:39:18 PST
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 19:36:37 EST
From: Oded Feingold <OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Rebirth of the energy mailing list
To: ENERGY-DIEHARDS@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, ENERGY-DSN@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].793938.860123.OAF>
Long long ago in a galaxy far away there once was an energy
mailing list. But one evil day, the mailer where this energy mailing
list lived underwent a subtle change, and proceeded to throw the poor
mailing list on the floor, without even bothering to utter an error
message. The mailer doctor was out of town for two years, and until
he came back, nobody ever found the secret formula for sending the
mailing list onto the oxide layers of the Free World. By the time the
doctor came back and subtly changed the mailer once again, the
moderator had fond other things to do, the machine was unresponsive,
the messages were old, and the gas crisis was past.
And so it stayed for another two years, through the birth,
maturity and death of many a computer account, and great changes in
the protocols of the ARPAnet and mayhap others.
Then one fine day, an aging fool found a few minutes free and
began to play with the mailing list again. The results of that
experiment are not yet in, but you're looking at them.
If you're reading this, you asked for it, at one time or another.
Let me know if you're interested in staying on. If you wish to
write about any aspect of energy policy, do so. I'll prime the pump
with old articles of current or historical interest, and maybe a few
new ones, then go back to sleep for another century, unless there's
some response.
Oded Feingold
(OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU)
∂23-Jan-86 1926 LES IBM workstation briefings
I learned too late that Hal Gerrish of IBM apparently briefed someone
about the new workstation in Jacks Hall this afternoon and invited us
to participate. (He didn't pass this information until 9:08 this morning
and I was at the Imagen Annual Meeting.)
I have also learned that they are providing a demo at IBM's Page Mill Road
facility on Friday afternoon. It will be held at 1pm, room 140, 1520 Page
Mill Road. An evaluation/demo machine is also scheduled to be installed
at Stanford in Building 1, 2nd floor by the first of next week and we can
arrange to see it there. So, do you think it is still worthwhile going to
San Jose for a briefing?
∂24-Jan-86 0739 hanks%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA Re: checking on email
Received: from YALE-CHEOPS.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 07:37:22 PST
Received: from yale (yale.arpa.ARPA) by yale-cheops.YALE.ARPA; Wed, 22 Jan 86 20:04:44 est
From: <hanks%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>
Received: by Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA; 22 Jan 86 15:57:07 EST (Wed)
Date: 22 Jan 86 15:57:07 EST (Wed)
Message-Id: <8601222057.AA00164@Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: checking on email
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>, 22 Jan 86 1221 PST
Did you receive a copy of a message from me addressed to McDermott? Is
he around? The message concerned an alleged misconception of circumscription
in your joint paper. I'm in no special rush for a reply, just checking
on whether it arrived.
yes, i got the message, and yes he's around. thanks.
speaking of mail problems, though, several of us (shoham, me, and
possibly drew) have had no luck sending mail to grosof. several
times the mailer reports that su-sushi has been down for
over 3 days. is this actually likely to be the case?
steve.
-------
∂24-Jan-86 0900 JMC
call ibm
∂24-Jan-86 0936 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA MESSAGE
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 09:35:50 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 09:29:33-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: MESSAGE
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177828440.35.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Mr. Calo of IBM phoned, regarding February 10th meeting he would like
to change the meeting time to 2:00 - 3:00. Please call.
914 945-2710.
Tina
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1123 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA New phones
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 11:22:59 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 11:18:28-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New phones
To: ventura@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
A person from ITS will be coming around next week to check on the
new phones and answer any questions about them. Now is the time, then,
to start thinking of questions.
Emma
ps. all queries and replies should be addressed to Bach-Hong
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1519 RA
Jack Cate
Jack Cate called; his tel. 321 1225
∂24-Jan-86 1620 RA James Flanegan, AT&T
James Flanagen from AT&T, New Jersey called re meeting you
Thursday, Feb. 20, bet. 1:00 and 3:00pm. He is going to be on campus
for the Industrial Affiliation meeting. Wants to talk to you about current
research in AI. His tel. (201) 582 3945.
Please let me know.
Thanks
∂25-Jan-86 1033 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 10:32:55 PST
Date: Sat 25 Jan 86 10:30:15-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Meeting
To: richardson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178101634.18.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Anne, could you please arrange a meeting to discuss the Genesereth
promotion? It should include John McCarthy, Jeff Ullman, Ed Feigenbaum,
and me. Each should have received by now copies of the evaluation letters
requested on Mike--so you might check to see that everyone has these. (If
they don't, please arrange with JMC to get copies out before the mtg.)
Thanks, -Nils
-------
∂26-Jan-86 0952 SJG NASA form
[In reply to message rcvd 18-Jan-86 16:27-PT.]
Thanks. I hope you lied through your teeth ...
Matt
∂26-Jan-86 1016 Energy Digest V86 #1.1
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 10:16:24 PST
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 86 13:16:03 EST
From: Moderator <Energy-Request@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Sender: OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Energy Digest V86 #1.1
To: ENERGY-DIEHARDS@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].796527.860126.OAF>
Energy Digest
Volume 86, Issue 1.1
Administrivia
Old topics in the queue (believe it or nuts)
An Actual New Message (instantaneous water heaters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5:02pm Friday, 24 January 1986
From: Oded Feingold <OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Administrivia
Welcome to the resurrected energy mailing list. It was gratifying
to receive so many favorable responses. En avant of answers saying
whether you're happy, the default action is to leave people on the
list until they ask to be removed, meanwhile pruning obsolete
addresses, machines and universes. If you receive this digest before
I hear your request to be removed from the list, my apologies.
Some things that should be dealt with early include what topics
the readership is interested in, and what format is most convenient.
(For now, I will produce digests similar to space, arms-d and others.)
There will of course be an archive file, perhaps a list of titles and
a clipping service from the older archives.
Your suggestions are welcome. You may send them to
ENERGY-REQUEST@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.
Cheers,
Oded Feingold
OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
------------------------------
Date: 12:46am Sunday, 26 January 1986
From: Moderator (Oded Feingold)
Subject: Old topics in the queue (believe it or nuts)
Here's what's readily available. Items are dated, titled and briefly
abstracted as to their subject matter. I hope the paraphrasing
doesn't miss the mark too badly. No editorial comment is intended.
1. 11/06/81 Austin selling out of Nuke
(Referendum on Austin selling its share of the South Texas
Nuclear project.)
2. 11/14/81 Opinions about these books?
(Request for opinions on books regarding power sources, mainly
pros and cons of nuclear power generation as against
other technologies)
3. 11/16/81 Nuclear Power
(Relative hazards of different power technologies, both actual
and worst-case. Also, estimates on the reliability of
such figures.)
4. 11/19/81 Health risks of nuclear power.
(Regarding possible shortcomings in accounting methods of pre-
ceding message.)
5. 12/05/81
(Pointer to "Energy Data Sheet," for quantitative summary of
energy sources and consumption.)
6. 12/29/81 North Pole
(Regarding feasibility of polar skyhooks, and methods of
supporting them against gravity.)
7. 12/29/81 North Pole
(Dynamics and kinematics of a skyhook at different altitudes.
Also, energy transmission via superconduction from an
SPS, through a skyhook, to the surface.)
8. 12/29/81 Transporting energy with space technology
(Questions and notes regarding the costs of shipping oil or
the energy derived from it.)
9. 12/30/81 Transporting energy with space technology
(Oil extraction and transportation costs as an argument for
space-based power production.)
10. 12/30/85 Re: Transporting energy with space technology
(Petrodollars as arguments for space-based power production.)
11. 12/31/85 Re: Cables to an SPS
(On the safety of microwave energy transmission.)
12. 01/06/82
(On the inapplicability of evaluating the danger of microwave
energy transmission by its cooking characteristics).
13. 01/11/82 An excellent article on fusion
(On problems with commercial fusion, given present research.)
14. 01/16/82 Pwer Source Health Hazards
(Request for information on health costs of different modes of
power production.)
15. 01/26/82 A NEW TYPE OF NUCLEAR INITIATIVE IN IDAHO
(On an initiative forestalling laws prohibiting nuclear power,
when not approved in a plebiscite.)
16. 02/04/82 aluminum power to the people?
(Aluminum-air battery, for cars and houses. Includes a system
to sell, distribute, and service such power packs.)
17. 02/11/82 Nuclear power cheaper than fossil, evidence at last!
(Cheaper rates from an electric utility using hydro and
fission power than from fossil fuels.)
18. 02/17/82 nuclear reactors
(Questions on the cost and viability of fission-based power in
the US.)
19. 02/24/82 News Story: #647*(DISASTER/)/INW/ON 24-Feb-82/AT 12:12
(Georgetown University study, claims Reagan's failure to take
the energy crisis seriously is a prescription for
disaster in the later 1980s.)
20. 03/02/82
(Re deaths due to coal fired plants.)
21. 03/15/82 Nuclear power cheaper than fossil, evidence at last???
(Questions preceding story on the same subject, claims hydro
power is cheap and would skew lumped statistics.)
22. 04/29/82 Muon Catalysed Fusion
(On using muon injection to catalyze fusion reactions.)
23. 09/02/82 Nifty Fusion Idea
(On increasing magnetic confinement fusion efficiency by
polarizing the nuclei in the plasma.)
24. 09/15/82 Practical Fusion Energy
(Using fusion bomb detonation in an underground cavity to
produce steam.)
25. 09/20/82 Where are they now?
(Request for information on various advanced battery systems,
kevlar flywheel, GM electric auto plan.)
26. 09/28/82 Artificial photsynthesis
(Request for info on a cheap method for solar hydrolysis,
yielding hydrogen and oxygen.)
27. 10/04/82 Nuclear energy
(On the inherent safety of fission plants as compared with
contaminant release in the semiconductor industry.)
28. 10/08/82 Cheap Hydrogen
(Pointer to article referred to in article 26, above.)
29. 10/12/82 the room temperature superconductor
(On uses for a room-temperature superconductor or quasi-super-
conducting material.)
30. 10/13/82 GUTS and total conversion
(Possible energy sources: Proton decay, GUTS monopole, neutron
oscillations, antimatter production.)
31. 11/16/82 Info needed for course project
(Request for info on pros and cons of decentralized vs
centralized energy production, arguments against
accelerated solar power development.)
32. 04/19/83 EPA ratings: why so miserable?
(Why EPA highway mileage ratings are inaccurate, particularly
so for gas-powered cars rather than diesel.)
33. 10/02/83 Microwave water heater
(Regarding a more energy-efficient water heater for houses,
including microprocessor control to eliminate heating
more than necessaray for a particular application.)
34. 04/18/84 paper on FTL and zero-point energy
(Long paper [by J. Sarfatti] proposing the possibility of
superluminal communication, and speculating on its
applicability to C3I, ABM, and the origin of life on
earth. Offered as a request for comments.)
People may request retransmission of these messages, privately or to
the list. If nothing else, they indicate what subjects were under
discussion back then...
Cheers,
Oded
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 17:22:14 pst
From: king@kestrel.ARPA (Dick King)
Message-Id: <8601240122.AA18119@kestrel.ARPA>
Subbject: instantaneous water heaters
Anyone have any comments? Consumers Reports panned them, but I liked
mine when I had it.
-dick
------------------------------
End of Energy Digest
********************
∂26-Jan-86 1038 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA Kripke
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 10:35:22 PST
Date: Sun 26 Jan 86 10:32:39-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Kripke
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178364216.10.RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
[cwr] Writing does not work. He is something of a nut and does not answer
mail. True urgency requires use of the telephone. If all else fails,
his wife, Margaret Gilbert, is help.
-------
∂26-Jan-86 1535 @MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:FONER%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Energy Digest V86 #1.1
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 15:34:48 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 JAN 86 18:34:12 EST
Date: 26 Jan 1986 18:32 EST (Sun)
Message-ID: <FONER.12178418811.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: "Leonard N. Foner" <FONER%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: Moderator <Energy-Request@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Cc: ENERGY-DIEHARDS@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Foner%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Energy Digest V86 #1.1
In-reply-to: Msg of 26 Jan 1986 13:16-EST from Moderator <Energy-Request at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Hi Oded. Could you please change my address from Foner at somewhere
to Foner-Magazines at OZ? Tnx.
<LNF>
P.S. It's hard to believe that I still remember a few of the
articles from five years ago on this list, but I do. Of course, I had
completely forgotten I was ever on it...
∂26-Jan-86 1802 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Liskov dinner Wednesday
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 18:02:23 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 26 Jan 86 17:59:47 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA01182; Sun, 26 Jan 86 15:57:30 pst
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 86 15:57:30 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601262357.AA01182@coraki.uucp>
To: jmc@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: Liskov dinner Wednesday
We'll be having a small dinner party at our house this Wednesday for
Barbara. We'd be happy if you and Carolyn (and offspring) could join us.
It was going to be a potluck, but it looks like we're all set for food now.
-v
∂26-Jan-86 2013 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Liskov dinner Wednesday
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 20:13:52 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 26 Jan 86 20:11:17 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA01385; Sun, 26 Jan 86 20:11:33 pst
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 86 20:11:33 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601270411.AA01385@coraki.uucp>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Liskov dinner Wednesday
In-Reply-To: message of 26 Jan 86 1822 PST.
<8601270410.AA01374@coraki.uucp>
Great! See you around 7, or whenever you can make it.
-v
∂26-Jan-86 2319 FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 23:19:17 PST
Date: Sun 26 Jan 86 23:18:44-PST
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 26 Jan 86 17:46:00-PST
"I am more eager to discuss both sides of whether logic is an appropriate
vehicle for AI..."
What do you view as the alternate vehicles? Connectivist networks?
What is the space of alternate possibilities? --David
-------
∂27-Jan-86 0817 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 08:17:05 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 08:14:16-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Robotics Search Committee Meeting
To: reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
Binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, Bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178601169.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to confirm that there will be a Robotics Search Committee meeting
today at 5:00 in MJH 220.
-------
∂27-Jan-86 0850 @MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:ota@s1-b.arpa Rebirth of the energy mailing list
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 08:47:56 PST
Received: from s1-b.arpa by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 27 Jan 86 11:44:57 EST
Received: by s1-b.arpa id AA00454; Mon, 27 Jan 86 08:44:05 PST
id AA00454; Mon, 27 Jan 86 08:44:05 PST
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 86 08:44:05 PST
From: Ted Anderson <ota@s1-b.arpa>
Message-Id: <8601271644.AA00454@s1-b.arpa>
To: OAF@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: ENERGY-DIEHARDS@mc.lcs.mit.edu, ENERGY-DSN@mc.lcs.mit.edu
In-Reply-To: Oded Feingold's message of Thu, 23 Jan 86 19:36:37 EST
Subject: Rebirth of the energy mailing list
Well, it's probably a mistake but go ahead and put me on the list. Good
luck with running it.
-Ted Anderson
∂27-Jan-86 0900 JMC
vtss seminar
∂27-Jan-86 0950 VAL re: Two more ideas:
[In reply to message rcvd 26-Jan-86 23:25-PT.]
1. Our ab's in the blocks world have only one situation argument apparently
because we don't need more than one situation variable to express any of the
facts to be included in the axiom set. But this will change if we make "result"
a ternary predicate: result(s,e,s').
2. I don't think I understand your remark about getting a "definite action
system". Isn't that what we always tried to do?
∂27-Jan-86 1117 RA
Research Interests
John,
Carolyn Tajnai would like to know whether the following covers your
research interests or whether there is anything you want to add or delete.
This is what she has now:
@b{John McCarthy},
Professor of Computer Science.@\
Professor McCarthy has worked in the area of formal reasoning applied to
computer science and artificial intelligence since 1957. He has recently
developed a technique for
completely characterizing LISP and other recursive programs within
first order logic by supplementing Cartwright's first order form of the
functional equation by a minimization schema.
This technique is well suited to automatic
proof checking, and in collaboration with Cartwright and Stanford students
Professor McCarthy is exploiting this breakthrough
by verifying more complex programs directly within first order logic. In
addition many of the standard program verification techniques can be
represented by axiom schemas in this system. Recently McCarthy has
discovered how to represent facts about knowledge and belief in unmodified
order logic and the solution works no matter how many mental
qualities must be treated.
He has also recently discovered that an axiom schema of first
order logic called a minimization schema can be used to represent in a
flexible way the conjecture that the entities that can be shown to exist
on the basis of the information in a certain data base are all the
relevant entities that exist. This conjecture is a common feature of
human reasoning. Professor McCarthy has investigated continuous
functionals that don't arise from simple recursive programs. Some of them
require parallel evaluation, and the work may lead to a treatment of
program correctness that unifies parallel programs with the more usual
sequential programs.
In 1979 McCarthy developed a new formalism called ``Elephant'' for
expressing sequential programs as sentences in first order logic.
The formalism permits programmers to avoid defining some data structures
by referring explicitly to the past.
Prof. McCarthy received the inaugural Award for Research Excellence at
the International Joint Conference on AI, August, 1985, in Los Angeles.
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1141 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 11:41:42 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 10:58:28-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Robotics Search
To: reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA,
jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178631059.36.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Bob Cannon and I concluded that we ought to call Tomas Lozano-Perez one
more time---just in case. I did that this morning. We had a nice
conversation, but he said he is still committed to stay at MIT. -Nils
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1307 OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 13:07:30 PST
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 86 16:08:17 EST
From: Oded Feingold <OAF@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-reply-to: Msg of 27 Jan 86 0948 PST from John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI.ARPA>
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].797856.860127.OAF>
You're off.
∂27-Jan-86 1316 RA Dr. Calo, IBM
Dr. Calo called and wanted to know whether your meeting with him, John Cocke and
Dr. Peled can be set to February 10, between 2:00 and 3:00pm. Please let me
know and I will call him back. His. tel. (914) 945 2710.
Thanks.
∂27-Jan-86 1434 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA new modems
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 14:33:45 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 14:29:46-PST
From: Thomas Dienstbier <TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: new modems
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: tom@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178669525.33.TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I will be at your house at 10:00 to install the new modem. Hope it
works this time..
tom
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1515 NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA Exxon proposal
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 15:13:53 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 15:12:57-PST
From: Helen Nissenbaum <NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Exxon proposal
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Tom Wasow asked me to forward you a copy of the proposal that will be
going to the Exxon Foundation for the Symbolic Systems Program. It's
still in rough form but the basic content is pretty complete. Your name,
in this version, has been included on the list of participants. If you'd
prefer not to have it there, or if you have any other comments, please let
us know.
Thanks,
Helen Nissenbaum
Head of unit in which Symbolic Systems Program will be conducted:
Norman Wessells, Dean of Humanities and Sciences.
Person in charge of project:
Thomas Wasow. Profesor Linguistics and Philosophy, and
Associate Director, Center for the Study
of Language and Information
Address: Center for the Study
of Language and Information,
Ventura Hall,
Stanford University,
Stanford, CA 94305
Telephone:
Project Title:
Symbolic Systems Undergraduate Program
Total Grant Request:
$305,816
\section*{Project Aims, Needs and Problems it Addressess:}
We propose to establish an undergraduate program in Symbolic Systems
at Stanford, dealing with the nature of information content as it is
represented in natural and artificial languages, and the ways in which
it is processed by minds and machines.
This rapidly advancing area of science involves active collaboration
among researchers in artifical intelligence, computer science,
linguistics, logic, philosophy, and psychology. It is not only
transforming the approaches of each of the contributing disciplines,
but providing a theoretical basis for the development of intelligent
machines.
The emerging field will see its greatest advances made by a new
generation of scholars whose multidisciplinary education will give
them greater facility with the concepts and theories of contributing
fields. At present, such training is not readily accessible to
Stanford undergraduates. Those interested must either major in the
related departments, or piece together individually designed majors on
their own. The former alternative limits the scope of the students'
multidisciplinary training, while the bureaucratic obstacles to the
latter will discourage all but the most dedicated students.
A committee of faculty from Linguistics, Philosophy, Computer Science,
and Psychology designed the new program to correct this situation.
Under the guidance of active researchers in the field, students
majoring in Symbolic Systems would receive a genuinely
interdisciplinary education, balancing technical aspects of computer
science, with the humanistic perspectives of linguists and
philosophers. It should prepare them well either for graduate school,
or for employment in areas related to information processing. In
addition, the Symbolic Systems Program will support the creation of
several new courses specifically designed for its students.
\section*{7. Related Work by Others; its reletionship to Symbolic Systems}
The Symbolic Systems Program will make available to undergraduates an
interdisciplinary major concerned with information, language, and
computation.
While Stanford has played a leading role in the developments in this
field (with grants from the Sloan Foundation and the System
Development Foundation leading to the establishment of the Cognitive
Science program and the Center for the Study of Language and
Information), this has been manifest primarily in the research
environment and graduate programs. The effect on undergraduate
education has been less evident. The Departments of Linguistics and
Philosophy have taken steps to rectify this by offering special tracks
within their regular departmental majors. Though students have
responded with enthusiasm, the tracks do not provide a satisfactory
permanent solution, for the subject area is sufficiently developed to
deserve an independent academic home. The Symbolic Systems Program
would supercede and replace the two tracks, thereby reducing
undesirable administrative redundancy due to a high degree of overlap
between the tracks.
The Symbolic Systems Program would complement Stanford's Computer
Science major, to be offered for the first time in Fall of 1986. That
major will accomodate students who are interested in computer
programming from an engineering perspective. Symbolic Systems, on the
other hand, would offer a training which combines theoretical computer
science with the humanistic, cognitive, and societal concerns of
philosophy, linguistics, and psychology.
8. A full and precise description of the proposed project or
activity, covering both what is to be done and how it is to be done.
The Symbolic Systems Program will operate as an administrative, degree
granting unit in which Stanford undergraduates can enroll as majors.
It will be overseen by a committee of faculty members drawn from the
departments of Computer Science, Linguistics, Philosophy, and
Psychology, whose research interests overlap with the academic content
of the program. Although there will be strong ties with related
departments, through the faculty committee, and shared coures, the
program will operate,
and be housed, independently. Students who enroll in the program
will be advised on courses of study by members of the committee and
other qualified personnel.
A curriculum has been worked out in detail by the faculty steering
committee. Its intent is to provide students with a core of concepts
and techniques from computer science, artificial intelligence,
linguistics, logic, philosophy, and psychology. Every students
enrolled in the
program will be required to take a prescribed core of courses.
The Core:
1. Computer Science 106B or 106X: Introduction to Software
Engineering
2. Computer Science 108A,B,C: Fundamentals of Computer Science
3. Philosophy 80: Mind, Matter, and Meaning
4. Philosophy 160A: First-Order Logic
5. Philosophy 160B: Computability and Logic
or
Computer Science 254: Formal Languages
6. Philosophy 186: Philosophy of Mind
or
Philosophy 000: Philosophy of language (new course)
7. either the following two courses:
Linguistics 120L: Introduction to Syntax and
Linguistics 130L: Introduction to Semantics & Pragmatics
or the following three courses:
Linguistics 220L: Syntactic Theory I,
Linguistics 221L: Syntactic Theory II, and
Linguistics 230L: Semantics and Pragmatics
8. Psychology 106: Introduction to Cognitive Psychology
Beyond the core, students will select an area of concentration for in
depth study. They will be required to complete four or five
additional courses in their selected specialty. The program offers
nine possibilities: artifical intelligence, theory of computation,
logic, semantics, natural language, philosophical foundations,
robotics and perception, cognitive science, and speech. Students may
also design their own concentrations. (Detailed information is
available on request)
In addition to supporting curriculum design and guiding students
through their multidisciplinary training, the Symbolic Systems Program
will support the development of several new courses. The following
are slated for the first year: Computational Linguistics,
Semantics of Computer Languages, Philosophy of Language, and Ethical
Issues in the Use of Computational Systems.
Rationale for the Symbolic Systems Program: who it will
benefit and how these benefits will be assessed.
We see the benefits of the program extending in three directions:
1. Stanford undergraduates. The program serves students who are
interested in the multi-disciplinary study of computation,
information, and language, and wish to balance technical studies in
computer science, logic, and linguistics, with philosophy and
psychology. One measure of success will be the number of majors
enrolled. A conservative estimate, based on enrollments in
Linguistics and Philosophy tracks, is that the Program would have
fifty majors by the end of three years. Other measures will be
student satisfaction (as expressed in course evaluations), and faculty
commitment to the program.
2. Stanford and other Universities. Symbolic Systems will be a
significant addition to the curricular offerings at Stanford
University, already among the nation's leaders in undergraduate
education. Members of the Program's faculty committe have
communicated with educators at other universities and will continue to
do so. A successful program at Stanford would serve as a model for
other institutions to follow in setting up similar programs of their
own.
3. After Graduation: The Symbolic Systems Program will be an
excellent training ground both for students interested in
post-graduate study, and for employment in the computer industry.
The program's graduates will possess an unusual combination of
technical skills with an understanding of relevant human and
ethical issues, which will serve them well for a wide variety
of types of work.
Those pursuing careers in research will bring to their fields the
breadth of a multi-disciplinary education. We believe that such
a perspective will be essential to future progress in this area.
11. Project Participants:
Jon Barwise. Professor, Philosophy Department
Herbert H. Clark. Professor, Psychology Department
John Etchemendy. Assistant Professor, Philosophy Department
John McCarthy. Professor, Department of Computer Science
Nils J. Nilsson. Professor, Chairman, Department of Computer Science
Helen F. Nissenbaum, Lecturer, Department of Philosophy
John Perry. Professor, Department of Philosophy
P. Stanley Peters. Department of Linguistics
Stuart T. Reges. Assistant Chairman for Undergraduate Education,
Department of Computer Science
Paul Rosenbloom. Assistant Professor, Departments of Computer Science
and Psychology
Ivan A. Sag. Associate Professor, Department of Linguistics
Thomas Wasow. Professor, Departments of Linguistics and Philosophy
Terry Winograd. Associate Professor, Departments of Computer Science
and Linguistics
DETAILED THREE YEAR BUDGET: 9/1/86 - 8/31/89
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3
9/86-8/87 9/87-8/88 9/88-8/89
MAN MONTHS SALARIES SALARIES SALARIES
OR %
A. PERSONNEL
1. Director 1-Sum Mo 6,957 7,479 8,040
2. Faculty 3-Sum Mo 9,626 10,348 11,124
(Course Dev.)
3. Lecturer 6 Mos 14,190 15,254 16,398
4. Teaching Asst. 50% 9,862 10,602 11,397
5. H.F. Nissenbaum 2/3 AY 20,000 21,500 23,113
(Prog. Coordinator)
6. Secretary 50% 9,694 10,421 11,203
TOTAL SALARIES ................... 70,329 75,604 81,275
B. FRINGE BENEFITS ................... 18,004 19,808 21,863
9/1/86-8/31/87 @25.6%
9/1/87-8/31/88 @26.2%
9/1/88-8/31/89 @26.9%
C. TRAVEL ................... 1,600 1,720 1,849
Guest speakers
(One East Coast and one West Coast)
D. OTHER OPERATING COSTS
1. Guest speakers (honoraria) 500 500 500
2. Telephone 1,796 1,931 2,076
3. Supplies/postage/copying 2,000 2,150 2,311
TOTAL OTHER COSTS .................. 4,296 4,581 4,887
E. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS ................. 94,229 101,713 109,874
F. INDIRECT COSTS @0% ................. 0 0 0
G. TOTAL PER ANNUM ................. 94,229 101,713 109,874
TOTAL GRANT REQUEST FOR THREE YEAR PERIOD .......... 305,816
COSTS COVERED BY STANFORD UNIVERSITY: Academic Year salaries for all
participating faculty, Space and Office Equipment, Computational
Facilities, 1985/86 salary for Program Coordinator,13. Duration of the project:
Program planners view Symbolic Systems as a permanent addition to
Stanford's offerings to undergraduates. The grant requested from the
Exxon Foundation is for seed money to get the program started.
Stanford University has a tradition of supporting pioneering
interdisciplinary programs, for example, Human Biology, and
International Relations. Based on this record, we believe that if
Symbolic Systems is successful, the university will support it's
continuation.
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1656 RA Bob Waddell
Waddell works for American Computer Group in Detroit which is
an employment agency; he is looking for future employees for various
companies; wanted to talk to you re
people with AI background. His tel. (313) 553 2444.
∂27-Jan-86 1714 FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 17:12:41 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 17:11:47-PST
From: David Fogelsong <FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 27 Jan 86 16:27:00-PST
Thank you for your note. What is THE best paper describing the declarative-
procedural controvery?
Which papers best sum up the anti-logic views of Hewitt and Minksy?
I've taken numerous logic courses and would welcome a fresh perspective.
--David
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1752 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 17:51:52 PST
Date: 27 Jan 86 15:48:27 PST
From: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: jmc@su-ai
John, I hope I'm right in assuming that you're planning to attend
the Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge.
Could you fill out the registration form below and ship it back to me?
Of course, for you there is no registration charge since you're an
invited speaker. -- Joe
------
Registration for Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
Name: John McCarthy
I will attend the conference.
If you plan to attend the conference, could you please fill in the
following information.
Affiliation: Stanford
Address: Computer Science Dept., Stanford, CA 94305
Telephone: 415 723-4430
Net address (if available):JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Vegetarian meals desired?: No.
Preferred roommate: none
Please enclose a check for $50 ($25 for full-time students, $0 for
invited speakers and program committee members), made payable
to "Conference on Reasoning About Knowledge % IBM". Do not
forget to add the "% IBM", as otherwise the check is much harder
to cash!
∂27-Jan-86 1757 JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Letters
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 17:57:27 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 17:54:44-PST
From: Jock Mackinlay <JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Letters
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178706840.8.JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
John, Who do we address the letter to and what is the issue about
confidentiality?
Jock
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1926 VAL
Any news about the dates of our MCC visit?
∂27-Jan-86 2130 BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA CS 306 grade from Fall 85
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 21:29:33 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 21:26:55-PST
From: Robert Bury <BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: CS 306 grade from Fall 85
To: givan@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178745464.28.BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
I was enrolled in your CS 306 class last quarter as a remote Honors Coop
student, taking the course via Tutored Videotaped Instruction at
Hewlett Packard in Fort Collins, Colorado.
I am inquiring about the status of my assignments, final exam, and course
grade.
So far, I have received back through the TV network my graded assignment #1
and my graded midterm exam. Still outstanding are my assignments #2 and #3
along with my final exam. Since I followed the course one week behind the
actual class due to delay in taping and shipping, I am sure that you did
not receive my final exam before leaving for the winter holidays. I did not
turn in assignment #4, due in part to the difficulty in using EKL remotely
on Stanford's machines. All other assignments were done on my local Common
Lisp system. I would hope that you could calculate my final grade in spite
of the missing assignment #4, accounting for it in whatever way you see fit.
I'd like to resolve my course grade before the matter is forgotten.
Thank you for looking into it.
Robert Bury HP Fort Collins, Colorado bury@sushi
-------
∂28-Jan-86 0248 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS assignment
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 02:48:18 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 02:47:25-PST
From: Dah-Bin Kao <KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: VTSS assignment
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: kao@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Prof. McCarthy:
This is the VTSS assignment for this week. I assume you will comment
on it during class, if you have a chance to read it in advance.
Thanks.
Dah-Bin Kao
*************************************************************
After several classes on "Technological Opportunities", some thoughts
have begun to form in my mind. They are nothing original. But I
seem to be able to make a consistent argument.
I will start with some general comments, and then apply them to
the redesign of Stanford University.
1. The limitation of technological innovation is the cost of implementation
As far as the technological possibilities governed by
the laws of physics are concerned,
I believe our knowledge is approaching the limit.
We know what is possible, and what is impossible.
Continuous improvements will be made. Breakthrough will be rare.
Because of the advancement of science,
our knowledge has exceeded our ability to implement.
Today we can define, forecast, prove feasible and estimate the cost of
technological "improvements". We know how things work, and
what can be done; the limitation is the cost of implementation.
2. All feasible technological innovations are now accessible
to the rich.
Technological opportunities are infinite.
But which are the most desirable?
If we accept the notion that technological innovations are
limited by the cost of implementation,
then the life styles of the rich and famous could probably
provide some clues to the desirable features in life,
and how technology can improve our lifes.
Because for the rich, cost would not be an issue.
While the cost for a innovated system for all the people in the
country would be prohibitively high, the cost of providing services for
a rich person, or a few of them, would be considerably reduced,
and the rich people should be able to afford it.
The intermediate conclusion is that all feasible technological
innovations are now accessible to the rich or the super-rich.
This is in contrast to the fact that 100 years ago even the richest
person in the world could not fly, because at that time
nobody knew how to make an airplane.
3. How can technology improve our lifes? - learn from the rich
What do the rich people do with this potential?
It may appear that the rich people are not taking full advantage
of the technological opportunities that are available to them.
Is this because of their ignorance of the technological possibilities?
or is it because their needs or desires are satisfied by other means?
Let us try to identify the desirable elements of life that
all the rich people must have.
While their tastes vary, some enjoy luxuries and some live quiet lifes,
all of the rich people have big houses and "servants".
These servants take care of the daily chores: cooking, cleaning,
and driving, etc. The more intelligent the servants are, the more
service they perform for their master.
In one sense, the automatic delivery system is available to the rich, in
the form of human servants taking orders and running errands.
4. One of people's primitive desires is to have servants.
I believe while some people may enjoy the access to the Library
of Congress, everybody will want to have affordable servants.
Therefore, one of the most desirable contributions we can expect from
technology is to make some form of servants affordable to
the average people.
Through a combination of automation in homes
and improved capabilities in robots,
the industry is already evolving in this direction.
5. AI is the key
Last week the Peninsula Times Tribune reported that a San Carlos
couple started a business doing grocery shopping for other people
for a fee. The success of their business indicates that an automatic
delivery system is desirable. It is also clear that the cost of
construction and the impact to the existing buildings and streets
can be minimized if the "carriers" have reasonable intelligence.
This weekend's San Jose Mercury News printed some samples of readers'
response on the topic of "My Dream Computer".
The authors' background were not available, but almost all of them
described some form of servant with the intelligence of a secretary,
rather than that of a house maid.
Therefore, I think that machine intelligence holds the key to
the technological opportunities which would enhance our daily life.
Being a (the ?) pioneer in Artificial Intelligence, perhaps
Professor McCarthy would consider discussing this topic in the class.
6. Houses - the great American dream
While owning a house remains the great American dream,
all the rich people have big houses far away from the crowd.
Making houses available to everybody is certainly a desirable
achievement, although wether or not it is only a technological
issue is probably debatable.
I think it is appropriate that housing construction will receive
more coverage in this class.
7. Limitations and opportunities of technology
The technological opportunities in physics or mechanics are limited
by the cost of implementation. The true inventions will probably
come from fields where our knowledge lags.
The technology based on the understanding of the human life and body,
brains and intelligence, will probably bring the true breakthroughs.
******************************************************
Redesign of Stanford University
******************************************************
The desirable features of the new Stanford University are:
1. Individual offices, even for undergraduates.
This could be combined with their dormitories.
2. Communication system
Computer terminals in every office, TV access to all the classes
and seminars on campus, etc,
3. Rapid transportation on campus.
This feature is less important, once the communication system
is in place, but still desirable.
4. Some kind of servant or secretary through automation and AI.
Some of the chores which can be eliminated from a graduate student's
life are copying articles, registration, etc. More automation in
the laboratories would also be desirable.
These features are consistent with the desirability of servants and houses
discussed earlier. I do not have any original ideas on the architecture
of the new campus. There could be a lot of flexibility. The traditional
architecture could be preserved, as long as those new features are provided.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1025 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 10:24:58 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 10:06:48-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA, eengelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178883797.13.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Nils has asked me to schedule a meeting (to include each of you) to discuss
the promotion of Michael Genesereth to Associate Professor (with tenure). I
would appreciate it if each of you would give me an idea of your availability
for both this week and next week so that I can then propose a time.
Thanks!
Anne
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1047 VAL Non-monotonic seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Next meeting:
Unsolved Problems in the Blocks World
Richard Waldinger
Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International
Thursday, January 30, 4pm
MJH252
It is often supposed that planning in the blocks world
is a solved problem. In fact, many general planning
problems that arise in the blocks world and other domains
are quite puzzling.
In this talk we consider adapting deductive program-synthesis
techniques to robot planning. Problems are approached by
proving theorems in a new formulation of situational logic.
An implementation of the Fay-Hullot unification algorithm
is applied to build situational-logic equalities and
equivalences into the rules of the deductive system.
Special attention is paid to the introduction of conditional
and recursive constructs into the derived plan. Inductive
proofs of theorems for even the simplest blocks-world
problems are found to require challenging generalizations.
∂28-Jan-86 1051 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Genesereth
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 10:48:20 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 28 Jan 86 10:48:00 pst
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 86 10:48:00 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Re: Genesereth
To: RICHARDSON@SU-Score, feigenbaum@Sumex-Aim, jmc@Sail
Cc: eengelmore@Sumex-Aim, ra@Sail
1/29: 11AM meeting
1/30: 12:30-3:30 no good
1/31: 1:30-noon and 3:15-4:30 no good
2/3: OK
2/4: 1:15-3 No good
2/5: 4PM-closing NG
2/6: 9-11AM, 4PM... NG
2/7: 2-4:30 NG
∂28-Jan-86 1113 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planning, reasoning seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:12:37 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:09:59-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: planning, reasoning seminar
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
John,
Are you still interested in giving a "planlunch" seminar here at SRI?
Monday, March 10, at 11am would be a good date for us if you are able
to do it.
Thanks, Amy
p.s. The following week, March 17, would be good too.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1129 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Stan
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:28:42 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:17:26-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Stan
To: reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA,
jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178896657.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I have arranged with Stan Rosenschein for him to come to Durand
at 2pm on Monday, Feb. 3. He will try to find the Timoshenko
Conference Room and, if he can't, he will go to Bob Cannon's office.
I may be a bit late because of a class that doesn't finish until 2:05,
but you folks should start working Stan over. -Nils
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1140 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA your math fiction story
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:38:25 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:37:17-PST
From: Michael Beeson <G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: your math fiction story
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
The story about the poles is exactly analogous to the rocket
leaving earth with approximately escape velocity. You can prove
that, given a time duration t, there is a position of the poles such
that the invaders will be unable to decide for at least t days after
the placement of the poles, but you can't prove that there is a placement
of the poles such that they will be forever unable to decide. Exactly
as in the case of escape velocity, for any time t you can find a velocity
such that after time t it still hasn't come back to earth but in fact
will later on, but for every fixed initial velocity it eventually goes
one way or the other. This clears up what was bothering me about the
story. By the way I thoroughly enjoyed both your math-fiction stories.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1141 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA more on your story
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:41:41 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:40:39-PST
From: Michael Beeson <G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: more on your story
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
It is related to an old piece of mathematics "fact": consider a
pole fastened by a ball joint to the floor of a New York City subway
car. Then there "must exist" an initial position of the pole such
that if it is in that position at the beginning of the day then at
the end of the day it is not lying on the floor but still balanced
in the air. Proof, if not so then we have a retraction of the hemisphere
onto its boundary, contradicting the Brouwer fixed-point theorem.
(We suppose there is so much friction on the floor that once the pole
falls, it doesn't move any more.)
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1240 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Questions on the proposal:
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 12:40:10 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 12:39:07-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Questions on the proposal:
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
I am putting together the draft for comment by the department at large,
and there were a few questions raised in people's comments that deserved
discussion. Rather than call a meeting, let me get your comments and
see if we need to. If there seems to be general agreement, we can just
do it online. Some simple matters I have just incorporated.
1. (From Peter) Also, as I was re-reading it, it occurred to me that
there was one task we hadn't addressed yet, namely trying to remove some
loopholes from the statement of the requirements. That is, there
currently seem to be several different ways of figuring out exactly when
it is that people have to have passed the qual or handed in the G81, and
that people often choose the way that suits them best. For example, do
you have to pass your qual within 3 years total, within a year after you
pass the comp, or a year after you file for candidacy? I'd like to see
us clear up these ambiguities.
(My comments) I propose "by the end of the academic year following the
one in which the Comp is passed". A strict one-year limit causes
problems with the timing of quals, one year past candidacy tends to get
people not to file, and a uniform 3-year seems to long for people who
pass a comp quickly.
2. (Peter) regarding petitions for the programming project
Didn't we say we wanted to limit petition submissions to 1 per year or
something so people wouldn't try to sneak through bogus projects?
(my comment) I think this could be the standard policy, but needn't be
stated, since that gets us into unnecessary detail, and may not be right
in all cases.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1455 G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: your math fiction story
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 14:55:45 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 14:54:31-PST
From: Michael Beeson <G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: your math fiction story
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 28 Jan 86 12:08:00-PST
The other story was that the Book of Mormon turned out to be
encoded in the digits of pi.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1524 LES IBMer's phone #
Hal Gerrish: Stanford 7-4296, IBM 855-3415
∂28-Jan-86 1610 RA Michael McCarthy
Your meeting with Michael is next Wednesday not tomorrow.
∂28-Jan-86 1611 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [Bruce Delagi <DELAGI@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: [<ram%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>: Of growing code and diminishing hacks...]]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 16:11:00 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 16:11:12-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: [Bruce Delagi <DELAGI@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: [<ram%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>: Of growing code and diminishing hacks...]]
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178950135.53.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Mail-From: DELAGI created at 28-Jan-86 12:21:18
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 12:21:17-PST
From: Bruce Delagi <DELAGI@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: [<ram%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>: Of growing code and diminishing hacks...]
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178908281.71.DELAGI@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Return-Path: <@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:ram%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Tue 28 Jan 86 10:54:37-PST
Received: from yale by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 28 Jan 86 13:47:21 EST
Received: by Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA; 28 Jan 86 06:22:59 EST (Tue)
Date: 28 Jan 86 06:22:59 EST (Tue)
From: <ram%YALE-RING@YALE.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8601281122.AA16563@Yale-Bulldog.YALE.ARPA>
Subject: Of growing code and diminishing hacks...
To: t-discussion@YALE.ARPA, scheme@mit-mc.arpa
A SHORT BALLAD DEDICATED TO THE GROWTH OF PROGRAMS
==================================================
by
Ashwin Ram
This is a tale of a sorry quest
To master pure code at the T guru's behest
I enrolled in a class that appealing did seem
For it promised to teach fine things like T3 and Scheme
The first day went fine; we learned of cells
And symbols and lists and functions as well
Lisp I had mastered and excited was I
For to master T3 my hackstincts did cry
I sailed through the first week with no problems at all
And I even said "closure" instead of "function call"
Then said the master that ready were we
To start real hacking instead of simple theory
Will you, said he, write me a function please
That in lists would associate values with keys
I went home and turned on my trusty Apollo
And wrote a function whose definition follows:
(cdr (assq key a-list))
A one-liner I thought, fool that I was
Just two simple calls without a COND clause
But when I tried this function to run
CDR didn't think that NIL was much fun
So I tried again like the good King of yore
And of code I easily generated some more:
(cond ((assq key a-list) => cdr))
It got longer but purer, and it wasn't too bad
But then COND ran out and that was quite sad
Well, that isn't hard to fix, I was told
Just write some more code, my son, be bold
Being young, not even a moment did I pause
I stifled my instincts and added a clause
(cond ((assq key a-list) => cdr)
(else nil))
Sometimes this worked and sometimes it broke
I debugged and prayed and even had a stroke
Many a guru tried valiantly to help
But undefined datums their efforts did squelch.
I returneth once more to the great sage of T
For no way out of the dilemma I could see
He said it was easy -- more lines must I fill
with code, for FALSE was no longer NIL.
(let ((val (assq key a-list)))
(cond (val (cdr val))
(else nil)))
You'd think by now I might be nearing the end
Of my ballad which seems bad things to portend
You'd think that we could all go home scot-free
But COND eschewed VAL; it wanted #T
So I went back to the master and appealed once again
I said, pardon me, but now I'm really insane
He said, no you're not really going out of your head
Instead of just VAL, you must use NOT NULL instead
(let ((val (assq key a-list)))
(cond ((not (null? val)) (cdr val))
(else nil)))
My song is over and I'm going home to bed
With this ineffable feeling that I've been misled
And just in case my point you have missed
Somehow I preferred (CDR (ASSQ KEY A-LIST))
:-)
==================================================
-------
-------
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1734 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 17:34:20 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 17:33:53-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Return-Path: <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 28 Jan 86 16:46:05-PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 14:43:43-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]
To: tw@SU-AI.ARPA, winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178934209.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Terry, is your committee thinking about this sort of thing? -Nils
---------------
Return-Path: <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 28 Jan 86 11:56:10-PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:55:52-PST
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: TA's and teaching
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178903652.16.ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Just after you got here, I talked with you about space and other
things. One of the other things has suddenly gotten much more
important.
The faculty has trouble attracting qualified TAs. With the new tax
law, this will get much worse. (Even if the law changes, there are
problems.) Many students are interested in TAing and even teaching
more, but they just can't afford it.
I proposed then, and I'm bringing it up again, that the CS dept offer
a teaching minor or specialty, possibly for both PhD and MS
candidates. The major requirement for this option would be additional
teaching requirements. Students chosing this option would then not
suffer any tax disadvantage.
-andy
-------
-------
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1825 LES DARPA Equipment Funds
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
Equipment money that we received from DARPA several years ago must be
committed or returned by May 31, which means that we should seek the
necessary approvals by February. These funds are earmarked for upgrading
computer facilities for research use. Incidental use for instruction is
OK, but the justification must be stated in terms of research use.
The uncommitted portion allocated to general CSD use amounts to $582,793.
CSL has another $240,100 left and Formal Reasoning has $53,779. KSL has
astutely committed all theirs.
I suggest that you think about productive uses for the CSD money. We have
talked about putting some of it into the versatile file server project,
but there is little time left. We obviously could buy some workstations
(e.g. some kind of Lisp, Sun, or McSun), a uni- or multi-processor Unix
machine, more disks or whatnot.
You may wish to invite department members who are not on the Facilities
Committee into the discussion. In fact, do you think that a general
invitation for proposals should be sent to the CSD Faculty and Staff?
Students? I am worried that our next regularly-scheduled meeting (Feb. 12)
will not leave enough time to evaluate alternatives, make decisions and
solicit vendor proposals in time for commitments to be made.
I propose that we have a short meeting on Thursday, January 30, at 5:15pm
in MJH-301 to plan on how to deal with this issue. Advance dissemination of
ideas is encouraged.
Les
∂28-Jan-86 1914 LES Re: Qlisp progress
To: JMC, CLT
∂28-Jan-86 1911 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: Qlisp progress
Received: from IPTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 19:11:21 PST
Received: by ipto.ARPA (4.12/4.7)
id AA00412; Tue, 28 Jan 86 22:01:00 est
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 22:00:55-EST
From: Stephen Squires <SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Qlisp progress
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(166)+TOPSLIB(114) 28-Jan-86 22:00:55.IPTO.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of 28 Jan 86 1518 PST
We have just completed the "Grand-Rudman" budget exercise. DARPA may have to
take a cut that is 3 to 4 times the usual because it got put in the
same budget category as SDI which is protected -- meaning DARPA and others
may have to make up for it.
Your project was given sufficiently high priority so that should not be
effected. However, I have been collecting estimates of minimum essential
funding estimates (separating people from equipment) for FY86 in case we
need additional flexibility. (Almost no ARPA Orders have been signed
for the past montEven if your ARPA Order
had been signed a few months ago, I could have still been effected.
Please send me your estimates for FY86 by the end of this week.
I will check on the precise status of the ARPA Order within DARPA.
SPAWAR has very little to do once the ARPA Order arrives. I believe
that the SPAWAR Task Order has been drafted.
What Multiprocessors are you seriously considering?
I would be interested in your views on Sequent and Multimax. I have
very up to date information on both.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1951 SCHULZ@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Specail characters on LOTS
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 19:51:13 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 19:48:15-PST
From: James R. Schulz <SCHULZ@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Specail characters on LOTS
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178989649.18.SCHULZ@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Professor McCarthy,
Last quarter in CS:306 I think you suggested that you knew how to get
the special logic characters available on SAIL to appear on LOTS.
Does that ring a bell?
If yes, is such a project a weekend job or something that would
take a quarter's worth of effort? (for the average Stanford
student) I might be interested in doing this if someone hasn't
already started it. (and if I didn't dream the whole thing up)
---
Jim
-------
∂28-Jan-86 2328 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 23:28:00 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 28 Jan 86 23:25:27 pst
Date: 28 Jan 1986 2325-PST (Tuesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
In-Reply-To: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA> /
Tue 28 Jan 86 17:33:53-PST.
This is a wonderful idea! It has been almost impossible for me to
entice students to TA for Advanced Operating Systems or Distributed
Systems, both of which require significant systems expertise.
Anything to help the situation is worth a try -- BUT the only thing
that would help is to require such students to TA one (or more!)
courses at that level, rather than the lower-level courses.
Unfortunately, it isn't clear that this approach will actually solve
the problem for me, since I rarely encounter systems students these
days who are really interested in teaching -- hence my previous
suggestion (sent to this list?) that the TA requirement for ALL PhD
students should be modified to require them to TA one such course...
Keith
∂29-Jan-86 0850 SJG challenger
I'd like to write to whomever expressing the view that yesterday's
events not reduce our national commitment to space. Do you have any
suggestions as to where such a letter will have some effect?
Thanks.
Matt
∂29-Jan-86 1009 RA Genesereth Committee meeting
Is Monday, February 3, 4:30 to 6:30 ok with you? Please let me know.
Thanks,
Rutie
-----
∂29-Jan-86 1029 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 10:29:36 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 10:04:48-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth Committee
To: feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: eengelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179145577.11.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Based on your responses, I propose that the "Genesereth" committee
meet on Feb. 3 from 4:30-6:30 (possibly followed by dinner to be
provided for by the department). Please confirm that this date and
time is okay (and let me know your feelings regarding dinner).
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1050 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: Alex Bronstein's quals
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 10:50:23 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 10:47:39 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA04721; Wed, 29 Jan 86 10:48:32 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 10:48:32 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601291848.AA04721@coraki.uucp>
To: Rutie Adler <RA@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: zm@su-ai.ARPA, jmc@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: Re: Alex Bronstein's quals
In-Reply-To: message of 29 Jan 86 1029 PST.
<8601291841.AA04669@coraki.uucp>
Unfortunately my class is MW 1:15-2:45. I guess that means Bronstein
will be missing Monday's lecture.
-v
∂29-Jan-86 1146 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA Equipment Funds
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 11:46:10 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 11:33:02-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: DARPA Equipment Funds
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 28 Jan 86 18:25:00-PST
Message-ID: <12179161641.44.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Les, I agree time is getting very tight -- especially given the significant
debate that must occur over workstations vs central shared machine vs services
(file, networks, printers, etc.). Unfortunately, I have a 5:30 meeting
Thursday evening. How about Friday afternoon? We are having a file server
technical meeting at 2:00 so it could be after about 3:30 or 4:00...
Tom R.
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1159 KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Ambiguities in PhD requirements
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 11:58:59 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 11:59:14-PST
From: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Ambiguities in PhD requirements
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179166410.14.KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Actually, the qual example in my message was meant to indicate one
of several possible problems with the current statement of the
requirements. I can't think of other problems off hand, but I think
one or more people should sit down with the requirements and talk
with Victoria and other people to track down as many ambiguities
as possible. Unfortunately, I suppose it sounds like I'm volunteering.
Peter
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1212 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA McCarthy and Lifschitz
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 12:12:29 PST
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1986 14:11 CST
Message-ID: <AI.BOYER.12179168697.BABYL@MCC.ARPA>
From: AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA
To: ai.woody@MCC.ARPA, ai.lenat@MCC.ARPA, hodges@sri-ai,
ai.scullion@MCC.ARPA, ai.ellie@MCC.ARPA, ai.hassan@MCC.ARPA
Cc: jmc@su-ai, val@su-ai
Subject: McCarthy and Lifschitz
John McCarthy and Vladimir Lifschitz are postponing their
next MCC consulting visit (originally scheduled for Feb. 10
and 11) to Thursday and Friday Feb. 13 and 14.
Ellie, please renegotiate the time and place for the talk
Vladimir is to give.
Ellie, please get them reservations for Wednesday and
Thursday nights, cancelling the Sunday and Monday night
reservations.
Thank you Ellie.
Bob
∂29-Jan-86 1226 CPE a time to see you
I'd like to talk to you about the circumscription article
you gave me a preprint of. Would Friday morning be convenient ?
If so, please let me know a time. I'm free all morning.
Charles.
∂29-Jan-86 1252 berglund@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Questions on the proposal:
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 12:48:26 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 12:46:05 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 12:46:05 pst
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: Questions on the proposal:
To: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA, phdcom@Sail
I don't think people should be punished for meeting requirements quickly.
If our students, presumed to be adults, decide to delay taking their quals
until their third year even though they've passed comps in the first year,
that should be their own business.
As a matter of fact, I delayed taking my quals until third year so that
I could work on my programming project and do more of the readings than I
would otherwise have done. I would certainly have resented someone telling
me that because I had studied well for my comps, the requirement for my
quals was going to be made tougher.
Grrrr,
--Eric
∂29-Jan-86 1312 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Ambiguities in PhD requirements
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 13:11:58 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 13:10:57-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Ambiguities in PhD requirements
To: KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA, WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>" of Wed 29 Jan 86 11:59:48-PST
Taking your indirect speech act, I accept the offer. Thanks. --t
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1336 PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Collection Program / Archives
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 13:36:45 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 13:32:39-PST
From: Henry E. Lowood <PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Collection Program / Archives
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: cn.spc@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, physicslib@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
bm.sca%rlg@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
TO: John McCarthy
FR: Henry Lowood, History of Science and Technology Collections
Mike Ryan asked me to respond to your message regarding old computer files
on the SAIL computer. Actually, we are very interested in this topic,
though the appropriate repository (since you are a Stanford professor)
would be the University Archives. Roxanne Nilan, the Curator of University
Archives, and I have been mulling over just this problem. In fact, we
were about to contact you about your professional papers, and we
anticipated that the issue of computer files/tapes would come up, as they
have just come up in the case of Ed Feigenbaum's papers.
We are both very interested in working out a solution to the specific problem
of your computer files and a general approach to the problem that we could
apply to other collections. In both cases, we would like to benefit from
your advice.
It sounds like the best thing to do would be for Roxanne and I to talk with
you about your papers and the computer files, at your convenience. Please
let me know when you would be available for a visit from us, so that we can
start thinking about solutions to these matters as soon as possible.
Thanks for your quick reply, from Mike as well as me,
Henry Lowood
Bibliographer, History of Science & Technology Collections
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1346 RA Bronstein's quals
It's ok with Zohar to change it to 2:45. I will tell Bronstein and send
a msg. to Pratt
∂29-Jan-86 1446 AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA visit to MCC
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 14:46:06 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 16:45:33-CST
From: Ellie Huck <AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: visit to MCC
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ai.ellie@MCC.ARPA
Have changed your hotel reservations to February 12-13 -- the
confirmation number remains the same R23H.
Ellie Huck
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1519 LES DARPA Equipment Funds
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 29 Jan 86 11:33:02-PST.]
In view of Tom's scheduling problem, I propose that we meet on Friday, 1/31,
at 4:00pm in MJH-301. I hope that this works for those who wish to come.
If anyone else has a conflict, I urge them to appoint a proxy.
Les
∂29-Jan-86 1541 cheeseman@ames-pluto.ARPA Workshop funding request
Received: from AMES-PLUTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 15:41:05 PST
Date: 29 Jan 86 15:27:00 PST
From: "PETER CHEESEMAN" <cheeseman@ames-pluto.ARPA>
Subject: Workshop funding request
To: "jmc" <jmc@su-ai.ARPA>
Reply-To: "PETER CHEESEMAN" <cheeseman@ames-pluto.ARPA>
Hi John,
This is a request for AAAI sponsorship of the next "Uncertainty
in AI" workshop. The previous workshop in LA (the week before IJCAI)
was very successful, with over 90 participants and nearly everyone
seriously involved in the subject attending (students and
researchers). The quality of the papers presented was very high, and
the best of these will be appearing in book form within a few months.
A review of the previous workshop should be appearing in the next AAAI
magazine. The proceedings of the workshop have sold out, so we intend
to get more printed this time.
A meeting at the last workshop decided that the prefered workshop
dates should be August 9-11, 1986 (i.e. just before AAAI conference)
and the site should be the same as for AAAI, to enable people to
attend both functions. We expect even higher attendence this year as
a result of the previous workshop. Although there is some money left
over from the last workshop, the program committee wish to request $5K
from AAAI toward this years workshop (same as last year), to cover the
cost of printing, mailing etc. In view of the expected increased
attendence, this requested AAAI finacial support would avoid having to
disappoint expectant participants.
The call for participation (which has already gone out) is included
below.
Yours Sincerely,
Peter Cheeseman, John Lemmer, Larry Carnuccio and Program Committee
(see below).
CALL FOR PARTICIPATION
Second Workshop on: "Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence"
Philadelphia, PA. August 9-11, 1986 (preceeding AAAI conf.)
This workshop is a follow-up to the successful workshop in L.A.,
August 1985. Its subject is reasoning under uncertainty and
representing uncertain information. The emphasis this year is on real
applications, although papers on theory are also welcome. The
workshop provides an opportunity for those interested in uncertainty
in AI to present their ideas and participate in the discussions. Also
panel discussions will provide a lively cross-section of views.
Papers are invited on the following topics:
*Applications--Descriptions of novel approaches; interesting results;
important implementation difficulties; experimental comparison of
alternatives etc.
*Comparison and Evaluation of different uncertainty formalisms.
*Induction (Theory discovery) under uncertainty.
*Alternative uncertainty approaches.
*Relationship between uncertainty and logic.
*Uncertainty about uncertainty (Higher order approaches).
*Other uncertainty in AI issues.
Preference will be given to papers that have demonstrated their approach
in real applications. Some papers may be accepted for publication but not
presentation (except at a poster session).
Four copies of the paper (or an extended abstract) should be sent to the
arrangements chairman before 23rd. May 1986. Acceptances will be sent by the
20th. June and final (camera ready) papers must be received by 11th. July.
Proceedings will be available at the workshop.
General Chair: Program Chair: Arrangements Chair:
John Lemmer Peter Cheeseman Lawrence Carnuccio
KSC Inc. NASA-Ames Research Center RCA-Adv. Tech. Labs.
255 N. Washington St. Mail Stop 244-7 Mooretown Corp. Cntr.
Rome, NY 13440 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Route 38, Mooretown,
(315)336-0500 (415)694-6526 NJ 08057
(609)866-6428
Program Committee:
P. Cheeseman, J. Lemmer, T. Levitt, J. Pearl, M. Yousry, L. Zadeh.
------
∂29-Jan-86 1719 VAL Non-monotonic seminar: Reminder
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Unsolved Problems in the Blocks World
Richard Waldinger
Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International
Thursday, January 30, 4pm
MJH252
It is often supposed that planning in the blocks world
is a solved problem. In fact, many general planning
problems that arise in the blocks world and other domains
are quite puzzling.
In this talk we consider adapting deductive program-synthesis
techniques to robot planning. Problems are approached by
proving theorems in a new formulation of situational logic.
An implementation of the Fay-Hullot unification algorithm
is applied to build situational-logic equalities and
equivalences into the rules of the deductive system.
Special attention is paid to the introduction of conditional
and recursive constructs into the derived plan. Inductive
proofs of theorems for even the simplest blocks-world
problems are found to require challenging generalizations.
∂29-Jan-86 1803 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Alex Bronstein's quals
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 18:03:09 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 18:00:19 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA04943; Wed, 29 Jan 86 12:46:26 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 12:46:26 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601292046.AA04943@coraki.uucp>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Alex Bronstein's quals
In-Reply-To: message of 29 Jan 86 1110 PST.
<8601292004.AA04865@coraki.uucp>
Fine. I'll be there at 2:45.
-v
∂29-Jan-86 1803 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Alex Bronstein's quals
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 18:03:20 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 18:00:32 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA04954; Wed, 29 Jan 86 12:48:04 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 12:48:04 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601292048.AA04954@coraki.uucp>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: zm@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: re: Alex Bronstein's quals
In-Reply-To: message of 29 Jan 86 1110 PST.
<8601292004.AA04865@coraki.uucp>
Is Bronstein all there is?
I thought 2 hours was about enough to do three MTC qual people.
Maybe I've forgotten the procedure.
-v
∂29-Jan-86 1809 berglund@su-pescadero.arpa Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 18:05:38 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 18:03:00 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 18:03:00 pst
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
To: lantz@su-gregorio.ARPA, phdcom@Sail
I'm all for this clever "Teaching Minor" ruse, but let me make sure that
my objections are registered once again with regard to any changes which
make the teaching requirement harder or more inconvenient to satisfy. If
the department wants a job done, it should pay the money necessary to
attract qualified people, not add requirements to the Ph.D. program. I'm
sure that there is a price at which I, an advanced systems student with
teaching experience, could be convinced to TA advanced systems courses.
But it would certainly be higher than RA rates, because I find that I am
learning much more when I'm serving as an RA than as a TA.
--Eric
∂29-Jan-86 2050 KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Teaching minor
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 20:50:17 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 20:50:37-PST
From: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Teaching minor
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179263145.14.KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I also think this sounds like a very good idea.
-------
∂29-Jan-86 2252 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 22:51:56 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 22:49:07 pst
Date: 29 Jan 1986 2249-PST (Wednesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: Eric Berglund <berglund@su-pescadero.ARPA>
Cc: lantz@su-gregorio.ARPA, phdcom@Sail, lantz@su-gregorio.arpa
Subject: Re: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: [Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: TA's and teaching]]
In-Reply-To: Eric Berglund <berglund@su-pescadero.arpa> /
Wed, 29 Jan 86 18:03:00 pst.
And I think you are mistaken with respect to learning more as an RA...
with respect to courses such as advanced operating systems, the
compiler project, distributed systems, et al. For example, you would
have learned a LOT more about V (either a lot faster or beyond what you
already knew) if you had TA'd advanced operating systems or distributed
systems. I would bet the same goes for any of the other advanced
courses. You should know that the best way to learn something is to
teach it.
On the other hand, I am all in favor of hiring more lecturers.
Keith
∂30-Jan-86 0654 ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Silico Sapiens
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 06:54:48 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 08:55:51-CST
From: ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: Silico Sapiens
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179373323.23.ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
I am sending you a copy of the above-titled book of mine, which
is just recently out. I hope you will find it accurate and at least
mildly interesting. It may be relevant to your VTS(?) course.
In any case, I welcome your remarks of any sort, which on almost
all topics I find insightful.
In your "Expert Systems are Brittle" talk a year or so ago for U.T.'s
Centennial, I was quite taken with your remarks on the importance of
"reification" issues. Being a mathematical statistician by training
(Stanford), I found the circumscription/non-monotonic formalism much more
opaque as an approach to uncertainty. As part of my job now as Program
Director for the Information Science Program at NSF (despite the net address,
which is convenient, I am no longer at Texas), it is more important than ever
for me to understand just what lies behind the "logic is the right approach"
perspective. We support a fair amount of research on uncertainty, and all
substantial, productive formalisms should be represented. In addition,
reification should be of central concern to our initiatives in the area
of research on knowledge representation.
I will be at the WFAI conference in New Mexico next week, and carefully
tuning in your presentation. If you would like to talk then on these
or other topics, I would be delighted.
Joe Deken
US mail to
Joseph Deken, Director
Information Science Program, Rm 336
National Science Foundation
Washington, D.C. 20550
-------
∂30-Jan-86 0937 RA Louise Fariello
Fariello called re Computer and Math conference this summer. Her tel. 3-3126.
She'll be away from her desk bet. 10:00 and 2:30 today.
∂30-Jan-86 1058 KWT VTSS160 assignment and comments
I will not be able to make it to VTSS160 today, so I would
appreciate it if you could send me a note telling me what assignment
was made and if you had any comments on my paper, what they were.
Thanks,
Kim Tracy, KWT, KTRACY@SUSHI
∂30-Jan-86 1251 RA Cuthbert Hurd
Hurd called, will try to reach you at home; his tel. 854 1901.
∂30-Jan-86 1257 RA Bronstein quals
The time for Bronstein quals was changed to 2:45. Do you want to have it
in your office?
∂30-Jan-86 1344 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 13:44:16 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 13:39:36-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179446825.44.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Everyone seems to be agreed on Monday, Feb. 3 at 4:30. Unfortunately,
there are no private dining rooms available (on such short notice) so
the meeting will be in MJH 216. (If anyone has any dinner suggestions
-attendance optional-let me know.)Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂30-Jan-86 1453 rapaport%buffalo.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Meinongian semantics
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 14:53:05 PST
Received: from buffalo by csnet-relay.csnet id ae00660; 30 Jan 86 17:37 EST
Received: from ellie.SUNYAB (ellie) by gort.SUNYAB (5.5/4.7)
id AA22454; Thu, 30 Jan 86 13:37:51 EST
Received: by ellie.SUNYAB (5.5/5.2)
id AA06416; Thu, 30 Jan 86 13:37:45 EST
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 13:37:45 EST
From: "William J. Rapaport" <rapaport%buffalo.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8601301837.AA06416@ellie.SUNYAB>
To: jmc%su-ai@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Meinongian semantics
Cc: rapaport@buffalo.CSNET
>From JMC@SU-AI Sun Sep 1 08:52:01 1985
>From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI>
>Subject: your "Meinongian semantics"
>To: rapaport%buffalo@CSNET-RELAY
>
>Thanks for the paper. I am still somewhat puzzled about the relation
>between its approach and the one I took in my 1979. However, when
>and if I return to the subject, I plan to look more closely at
>Church's approach, because I think there should be concepts of
>concepts.
========================================================================
30 January 86
Dear Professor McCarthy:
Thanks for your note. I intended to reply sooner, but it
arrived just as classes began, and then it got put off.
The relation between our approaches is this: Your 1979
paper treated concepts (more generally, intensions) as
individuals in a first-order theory, thus obviating the need for
possible worlds. Several philosophers were doing the same sort
of thing (for perhaps slightly different reasons) at about the
same time, most notably Routley, Castaneda, and Parsons. My
theory, unlike theirs, had BOTH intensional AND extensional
individuals, hence the similarity between your approach and mine.
E.g., your denotation relation is like my "Sein"-correlation
relation, etc. (See my 1978 paper, being sent to you by US
Mail).
My theory, however, was intended as (in part) an
ontological theory about the world; I now think it should have
been (solely) an ontological theory about mental models of the
world and, so, should not have had extensional individuals. (See
the tech. report by Shapiro and me, also being sent by US Mail.)
Sincerely,
William J. Rapaport
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Computer Science, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260
(716) 636-3193, 3180
uucp: ...{allegra,decvax,watmath}!sunybcs!rapaport
...{cmcl2,hao,harpo}!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!rapaport
cs: rapaport@buffalo
arpa: rapaport%buffalo@csnet-relay
bitnet: rapaport@sunybcs
∂30-Jan-86 1524 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA mrs sales
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 15:23:30 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 15:23:46-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: mrs sales
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179465787.58.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
You asked about copies of MRsold outside of Stanford. Here's a
record for the past 4 years. This does not include free copies
sent to colleagues at universities or companies that got it free
as part of research contracts with us.
I'm still working on the mrs testimonials, and I'll get going tomorrow
on the map color problem.
mrg
$500 tapes $200 tapes undetermined
9/82-8/83 3 2 $2216.
9/83-8/84 19 17
9/84-8/85 26 20
9/85-1/86 8 16
-------
∂30-Jan-86 1604 HX.HAL@Lindy
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 15:52:48 PST
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 15:53:28 PST
From: Hal Gerrish <HX.HAL@Forsythe>
To: JMC@SAIL
John - I am planning to deliver an RT PC next ek to CS.
It is a large system, BSD 4.2A with 4 meg memory &
210 MB disk. Will probably be Wed/Thurs.
Regards,
Hal Gerrish (x-4296)
∂30-Jan-86 1620 RA leaving early
It's Thursday and I am leaving early.
∂30-Jan-86 1716 LES
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, g.gorin@LOTS-A, greep@CAMELOT
∂30-Jan-86 1614 HX.HAL@Lindy
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 15:57:23 PST
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 15:58:04 PST
From: Hal Gerrish <HX.HAL@Forsythe>
To: LES@SAIL
list
Les - I am planning to deliver an RT PC next week.
It is a large 4.2A system with 4 meg memory &
210 MB disk. Probably be Wed/Thurs...
Regards,
Hal Gerrish
∂30-Jan-86 1930 DATJN%NEUVM1.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Info about your course Values, Technology, and Society
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 19:09:28 PST
Received: from (DATJN)NEUVM1.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 01/30/86 at
09:12:05 CST
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 11:32:19 cet
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
From: DATJN%NEUVM1.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: Info about your course Values, Technology, and Society
Dear Dr. McCarthy:
I have seen on the arpanet AIlist that you are teaching a course
"Values, Technology, and Society" emphasizing opportunities.
This is one of my interests -- and I am presently in the process of
planning a seminar of this kind.
Therefore I would appreciate very much if you would kindly send me
whatever material is available about your course: Especially a
list of reading material (or a recommendation for a good textbook)
and the course schedule.
Sincerely,
Jakob Nielsen
Department of Computer Science
Technical University of Denmark
Building 344
DK-2800 Lyngby
DENMARK
∂31-Jan-86 0823 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Will you be attending the Forum next week?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 08:23:28 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 08:19:59-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Will you be attending the Forum next week?
To: cheriton@SU-PESCADERO.ARPA, M@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
dcl@SU-AI.ARPA, zm@SU-AI.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Reid@SU-GLACIER.ARPA,
Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, als@SU-AI.ARPA, yao@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179650784.16.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have not heard from you whether or not you will be attending the
Forum functions next week. We need to send in guarantees for the
meals. Also, if you are going to be out of town, we will not make
nametags for you. Since we will have parallel sessions, we will have
nametags at CERAS and Tresidder.
Tuesday buffet
Wed. breakfast
WEd. Lunch
Wed. banquet
Thurs. lunch
Carolyn
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1057 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 10:57:32 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 10:54:05-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Meeting
To: ai.list: ;
Message-ID: <12179678839.22.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Nils Nilsson would like to schedule an AI meeting to discuss courses for
1986-1987. In order to facilitate this, I would appreciate it if each of
you could give me an indication of your available times this month. Once
I have that, I will then propose a time. (We are looking at about 1-1/2 hrs.)
Thanks!
Anne
P.S. By *this* month I actually mean February
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1127 CLT sarah
state farm called and said they are about to cancel
sarah's car insurance as they have not received any payment
∂31-Jan-86 1138 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA TA track
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 11:38:12 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 11:36:28-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: TA track
To: reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA, WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Stuart,
It has been proposed that we create a new "track" or the like for
the PhD, called "with distinction in teaching" or some such, for
which a larger amount of TAing is required. This would be voluntary,
but would allow those students who choose it to have their TAing
required, hence not taxable. Since you have the most experience
in these matters, I wanted your opinion on some questions before
we discuss it in the PhD Committee:
1) is it feasible (with University regulations, tax regulations, etc.)?
2) What might be a reasonable requirement? The ideal would be to have
it like RAing -- you are required to do exactly as much of it as you do.
This may be hard to make stick, since it doesn't lead to a specific output
like the dissertation.
3) To be serious about what it means, what other things should be included
other than just TAing (e.g., workshops, tutorials, or whatever as put
on by the Center for Teaching and LEarning). You know much more than I
about the relevant resources.
4) Any other comments on its value, or how it might be done.
Thanks --t
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1207 RPG Account
To: LES
CC: JMC
Who is supposed to be paying for the RPG account? Stanford or Lucid?
I think Stanford is, because I use RPG to deal with Stanford business -
Common Lisp administration, writing papers under the Stanford banner,
tweaking Qlisp.
I use FTL when I do Lucid business.
-rpg-
∂31-Jan-86 1301 CLT
don't forget dinner tonight at la fiesta
we are to be there at 6:30
∂31-Jan-86 1335 RPG Account
To: LES
CC: JMC
Turns out to have been a communications screwup about RPG.
All's well. I noticed tha article in the Stanford Observer about
Qlisp.
-rpg-
∂31-Jan-86 1344 RA be back
I will be back in about 1/2 hour.
Rutie
-----
∂31-Jan-86 1459 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa disks
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 14:59:00 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 31 Jan 86 14:55:01 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA07626; Fri, 31 Jan 86 14:53:36 pst
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 86 14:53:36 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601312253.AA07626@coraki.uucp>
To: facil@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: disks
I recommend the purchase of some Eagles, for immediate assembly as an NFS
server. I will provide any necessary supervision of the assembly process.
-v
∂31-Jan-86 1522 RA question
On the letter to Farielo you said "bcc: David Chudnovsky", what is "bcc"?
∂31-Jan-86 1620 RA Katie, Computer Forum
Katie called re meals for next week; she'll try to reach you later;
her tel. 7-9689
∂31-Jan-86 2009 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA maps
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 20:07:16 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 18:17:29-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: maps
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179759556.40.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
I left a copy of the first kempe transform on your door. Given a conjunctive
query (a disjunction after negation and conversion to clausal form) (c1 ... cn),the metalevel of mrs tries to prove (postorder (c1 ... cn) () &z) and uses
the binding for &z in place of (c1 ... cn). The axioms I left define
postorder. IF you want to see the axioms that use postorder, let me
know. I'm working on the second transform now.
mrg
-------
∂31-Jan-86 2137 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa complete servers
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 21:36:53 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 31 Jan 86 21:32:52 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA08547; Fri, 31 Jan 86 21:30:35 pst
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 86 21:30:35 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602010530.AA08547@coraki.uucp>
To: facil@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: complete servers
If it is felt that working at the component level (Eagle disks) is not
necessary as an economy measure, let me mention that lead times for
Sun-3-based NFS servers are presently running at 45-60 days. Sun-2
servers are 90-120 days. Sun-2 servers provide rather more sluggish
service due to significantly lower data rates through the CPU.
Also the new 330 Mb 8" Fujitsu disks provide a fast alternative to the
larger and older Eagles, not to mention a much lower power consumption.
While the Eagles run at a data rate of 15 Mhz, the newer disks run at
24 Mhz (and need the newer Xylogics 451 to match that rate). No
software changes are needed.
Better stuff unfortunately costs more. When that's an objection freebies
are the best buy.
-v
∂31-Jan-86 2228 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Formal Reasoning???
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 22:08:47 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 31 Jan 86 22:04:45 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA08592; Fri, 31 Jan 86 22:02:19 pst
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 86 22:02:19 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602010602.AA08592@coraki.uucp>
To: jmc@su-ai.ARPA, les@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: Formal Reasoning???
Who exactly is "Formal Reasoning?" I certainly consider what I do (Logics
of Programs) to fall under that heading. Does that entitle me to any of
the money that DARPA provided in this category? I would very much hope so,
presently I feel I am starving to death as far as computing support goes.
(Please let's not get into a workstation vs. timeshare argument here, just
take my word for it that my research must be done on graphics workstations.)
-v
∂31-Jan-86 2347 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa re: Formal Reasoning???
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 23:47:05 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:43:03 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA08790; Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:39:23 pst
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:39:23 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602010739.AA08790@coraki.uucp>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Formal Reasoning???
In-Reply-To: message of 31 Jan 86 2238 PST.
<8602010731.AA08768@coraki.uucp>
If you had spoken up when the ARPA proposal was being made, you
probably would have got some hardware in the first batch.
Being on leave during that period made it difficult to even see what
was going on, let alone speak up, not to mention making it impossible
to take advantage of actual hardware. I did catch the start of it, but
not enough of it to get the big picture.
Nevertheless, depending on whether DARPA wants us to put our
remaining money in the parallel machine, we may be able to help
you.
Let me see whether anything comes of my proposal to the faculty (which
you should have just received). If not then I will be most interested
in your offer. But why would DARPA not want you to put your remaining
money in the parallel machine?
-v
∂01-Feb-86 1359 JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Genesereth tenure
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Feb 86 13:59:03 PST
Date: Sat 1 Feb 86 13:55:42-PST
From: Jock Mackinlay <JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth tenure
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179974045.28.JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Two of Mike's former students should certainly be solicited for
evaluations: Russ Greiner at the University of Toranto (CSD
Ontario M5S-1A4 Canada) and Tom Dietterich at Oregon State
University (CSD Corvallis, Oregon 97331).
Jock
-------
∂01-Feb-86 1600 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 February 1986
Previous Balance 34.89
Payment(s) 34.89 (check 1/27/86)
-------
Current Charges 6.00 (bicycle lockers)
1.85 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 7.85
Please deliver payments to Debbie Woodward, room 040, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: Payment recordation takes up to three weeks after delivery of a payment
(but not beyond the next billing date).
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.5% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
∂01-Feb-86 1948 LES Pub macros
The following can be substituted for your current LET.PUB and should print
the Ershov letter correctly. If you use italics or boldface, they will
print quite small because ALS hasn't created scaled-up versions of them in
Baskerville yet. I could put together a complete set of fonts in another
style (NONIE) if you wish, but it should not take Art long to make a more
complete set.
In the process of making this work, I have found several bugs, including
(1) an inconsistency between Pub and the spooler in the order in which
they search file areas for font files,
(2) a font naming bug that makes some fonts inaccessible,
(3) a character spacing bug in the spooler,
(4) an ethernet protocol bug between SAIL and the printer.
On the whole, this has been troublesome. As various people fix these problems,
it will be necessary to change some of these macros.
.<< Feature summary
.
.Start with
.require "let.pub[let,jmc]" source;
.Letterheads: ∂<type> <to>$<from>$<subject>$<date>∞
. <type> may be:
. AIL - AI Lab Letter
. MEM - AI Lab Memo
. CSL - CS letter
. CSM - CS memo
. HOM - home address letter
. SE2 - SE2 letter
. LOT - LOTS letter
. MLOT - LOTS memo
. <from> defaults depend on <type>,
. <date> defaults to today.
. Use "↓" wherever you want a CRLF.
.Signatures:
. .sgn - sincerely yours, with signature according to letterhead
. .sgnp - sincerely yours, John McCarthy
. .reg - best regards, with signature according to letterhead
. .regp - best regards, with no titles
.
.Other handy macros:
. FAC means FILL ADJUST
. CB "<sub-heading>" means make a centered boldface subheading. If the
. subheading contains any commas, be sure to enclose it in quotes.
. BOLDIT may be called within a block to cause quoted text " ... " to
. turn into boldface (without quotes) and broketed text < ... > to
. be put in italics (without brokets).
. REF may be called within a block to print "References:", then go into
. BOLDIT mode with a format suitable for a list of references.
.
.Below is the list of addressee abbreviations. Use as, e.g. "Dave Russell↓IPT".
.The abbreviation identifier may be up to 4 letters long.
.>>
.ARPA←"Advanced Research Projects Agency↓"&
. "1700 Wilson Boulevard↓Arlington, Virginia 22209";
.
.IPT←"Information Processing Techniques Office↓"&
. "Advanced Research Projects Agency↓"&
. "1700 Wilson Boulevard↓Arlington, Virginia 22209";
.DEVICE XGP
.height←55;
.page frame height high 115 wide;
.title area heading lines 1 to 3;
.area text lines 4 to height;
.oddleftborder←evenleftborder←1500;
.
.COUNT ITEM
.AT "#" ⊂NEXT ITEM;(ITEM!);⊃;
.
.TURN ON "%{α"
.font 1 "basl30[300,sys]"; font 2 "basi30"; font 3 "basb30";
.FONT B "BAXM30[300,sys]";
.FONT C "zero30[300,sys]";
.AT "ffi" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "≠" ELSE "fαfαi" ⊃;
.AT "ffl" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "α∞" ELSE "fαfαl" ⊃;
.AT "ff" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "≥" ELSE "fαf" ⊃;
.AT "fi" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "α≡" ELSE "fαi" ⊃;
.AT "fl" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "∨" ELSE "fαl" ⊃;
.AT "--" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "¬" ELSE "-α-" ⊃;
.
.at "↓"; ⊂ }
.⊃;
.
.macro letter(data,aut); ⊂
.<< namad = toname↓addr1↓addr2↓...$author$subject$date$saluation>>
.before page ⊂ ⊃;
.if going=0 then going←1 else next page;
.nofill;
.count page from 2;
.salut←"data"; foo←scan(salut," ","","XR");
.xxx←namad←scan(salut,"$","","IS"); yyy←author←scan(salut,"$","","IS");
.subject←scan(salut,"$","","IS"); dat←scan(salut,"$","","IS");
.if length(dat)≤2 then dat←date;
.if length(author)≤2 then yyy←author←"aut";
.zzz←scan(yyy,",↓");
.zzz←scan(xxx,"↓","","IS"); ln←length(zzz);
.if length(namad)>ln+3 then start
. if length(namad)≤ln+7 then namad←zzz&"↓"&eval(xxx);
. end;
.name←scan(zzz,",");
.fill adjust;
. ⊃
.
.macro head; ⊂ nofill; SKIP 2; select 1;
.(namad)}
.subj;
.if length(salut)>1 then start
Dear {(salut);}:
.end
.⊃
.
.macro memo; ⊂ begin "memo"
.skip 3;
.fill; nojust; indent 0,8; crbreak; tabs 9; turn on "\%";
.xxx←namad; nam←scan(xxx,"↓");
To:\%1{nam}
%3From:\%1{author}
.end "memo";
.subj;
.⊃
.
.macro subj; ⊂
.fac;
.if length(subject)>2 then BEGIN "subject" turn on "%∂"; nojust; indent 0,8;crbreak;
%3Subject:∂9%1{subject}
.end "subject";
.before page ⊂ once turn on "%→←"; select 3;
.place heading;
.select 1;
.name}←{dat}→Page {page!}%*
.place text
. ⊃
.select 1;
. ⊃
.
.macro ref ⊂ select 3; nojust; boldit;
References:
.select 1; indent 0,8;
. ⊃
.
.macro sgn ⊂ BEGIN "signed" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Sincerely,
.SKIP 3;
{author}
.END "signed"; ⊃
.
.macro sgnp ⊂ BEGIN "signedplain" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Sincerely,
.SKIP 2;
John McCarthy
.END "signedplain"; ⊃
.
.macro reg ⊂BEGIN "regards" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Best regards,
.SKIP 3;
{author}
.END "regards"; ⊃
.
.macro regp ⊂BEGIN "regardsplain" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Best regards,
.SKIP 3;
John McCarthy
.END "regardsplain"; ⊃
.
.MACRO FAC ⊂ FILL ADJUST ⊃
.
.macro cb(head) ⊂ if lines<5 then next page else skip; once center; select 3
head
.⊃
.
.macro boldit ⊂ turn on "%";
. at """" ⊂ (if thisfont=1 then "%3" else "%1") ⊃;
. at "<" ⊂"%2"⊃; at ">" ⊂"%1"⊃;
.⊃
.at "∂AIL" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Director↓Professor of Computer Science|);
.if on4=0 then start on4←1; FONT 4 "STA200"; end;
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NON44"; end;
%4S%5 Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, Stanford, California 94305
.once turn on "→"
Telephone 415 497-4430, ARPANET: JMC@SU-AI→{dat}
.head;
.rxgenlines←rxgenlines-8;
.⊃
.
.at "∂CSL" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Professor of Computer Science|);
.if on4=0 then start on4←1; FONT 4 "STA200"; end;
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NON44"; end;
.place heading
%4S%5 Department of Computer Science, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, Stanford, CA 94305
.place text
.once turn on "→"
Telephone: 415 497-4430→{dat}
Electronic mail: JMC%1@%*SU-AI%B.%*ARPA
.head;
.⊃
.
.at "∂HOM" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy|);
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NON44"; end;
.begin select 5; center;
846 Lathrop Drive
Stanford, California 94305
.nofill; turn on "→"
Telephone 415 857-0672→{dat}
.head;
.end
.⊃
.
.AT "∂MEM" data "∞" ⊂
.letter("data",
."John McCarthy, Director, Artificial Intelligence Lab.");
.if on6=0 then start on6←1; font 6 "ngr40"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngr30[300,sys]"; end;
.SELECT 6; CENTER;
OFFICE MEMORANDUM * STANFORD UNIVERSITY * OFFICE MEMORANDUM
.SKIP; SELECT 7;
STANFORD ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE LABORATORY
.SELECT 3; SKIP;
{DAT}
.memo;
.⊃
.
.AT "∂CSM" data "∞" ⊂
.letter("data",
."John McCarthy, Professor of Computer Science");
.if on6=0 then start on6←1; font 6 "ngr40"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngr30[300,sys]"; end;
.SELECT 6; CENTER;
OFFICE MEMORANDUM * STANFORD UNIVERSITY * OFFICE MEMORANDUM
.SKIP; SELECT 7;
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
.SELECT 3; SKIP;
{DAT}
.memo;
.⊃
.
.at "∂SEN" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Chairman, Stanford Chapter of SE2|);
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NGr40"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngr30[300,sys]"; end;
.begin center;
%7 SE2
%5(Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy)
.skip
846 Lathrop Drive, Stanford, California 94305
.end
.rxgenlines←-4;
.once turn on "→"
Telephone 415 497-4430→{dat}
.head;
.⊃
.
.at "∂LOT" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Director↓Professor of Computer Science|);
.if on9=0 then start on9←1; font 9 "buck75"; end;
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NGr44"; end;
.begin center
%9 LOTS
%5(Stanford University Low Overhead Time-Sharing System)
.skip
.end
%5John McCarthy, Director
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, Stanford, California 94305
.skip
.rxgenlines←-4;
.once turn on "→"
Telephone 415 497-4430→{dat}
.head;
.⊃
.
.AT "∂MLOT" data "∞" ⊂
.letter(|data|,"John McCarthy, Director");
.if on6=0 then start on6←1; font 6 "ngr44"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngb30[300,sys]"; end;
.SELECT 6; CENTER;
OFFICE MEMORANDUM * STANFORD UNIVERSITY * OFFICE MEMORANDUM
.SKIP; SELECT 7;
STANFORD LOW OVERHEAD TIME-SHARING SYSTEM
.SELECT 3; SKIP;
{DAT}
.memo;
.⊃
.
.going←on4←on5←0; on6←on7←on8←on9←0;
.portion main; place text;
.next page
∂02-Feb-86 1313 SJG re: quiz question
[In reply to message rcvd 31-Jan-86 22:27-PT.]
There are a lot of answers to this one. At least at the moment, I
think Ronald Reagan gets my vote.
Matt
∂02-Feb-86 1501 ALI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Here is more than you probably want to know.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Feb 86 15:01:07 PST
Date: Sun 2 Feb 86 14:57:55-PST
From: Ali Ozer <ALI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Here is more than you probably want to know.
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 2 Feb 86 11:54:00-PST
Message-ID: <12180247514.12.ALI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Thank you for the information! I've been in this country more than
nine years and it's now I find out about Ground Hog day.
Ali
-------
∂02-Feb-86 1730 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA map coloring
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Feb 86 17:30:01 PST
Date: Sun 2 Feb 86 17:30:15-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: map coloring
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180275246.25.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
Well, I finally got to spend a couple of hours on the second
kempe transform, and it looks as if it is going to go all right.
I've handwritten the axioms but I need to debug them yet.
UNfortunately, I have to quit for the night. I'll get back at
it tomorrow morning.
At any rate, I have enclosed three files. The first is the mrs
definition of ``sequential constraint satisfaction'', the special
purpose inference procedure for solving problems like the map coloring
problem (without transforms). The second is the modified scs definition
as needed for the first kempe transform. As you'll see, the only
changes are the addition of a literal to the first axiom and
the axioms for postorder. The third file is the modification of the
second file necessary for the second kempe transform. The axioms aren't
complete yet, but you'll see how the transform is applied.
These files use the axioms in mrs's order, i.e. the reverse of prolog.
I reversed them in the file I gave you the other day, but I was
too lazy to do that with all of these axioms.
In looking at the definitions, recall mrs's basic loop, namely,
at each point in time it computes (must &k) executes the action
returned as value of &k and repeats. The stack in these axioms
is a list of tasks to work on . Each is a triple of (1) the
conjuncts remianing to be solves, (2) the set of all conjuncts,
(3) a binding list.
Here they are:
First file is scs without transforms.
(<= (must (setm query empty agenda ((&cl &cl &al))))
(value query &cl)
(value truth &al))
(<= (must (return &ans))
(value query empty)
(value answer &ans))
(<= (must (setm answer nil agenda empty))
(value agenda nil))
(<= (must (setm agenda &nstk))
(and (value agenda ((&pl &cl &al) . &stk))
(next &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)))
(<= (must (setm answer &al agenda empty))
(value agenda ((nil &cl &al) . &stk)))
(<= (next ((not &p) . &pl) &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(plug &p &al &q)
(lookups &q &bs)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk))
(<= (adds () &pl &cl &al &stk &stk))
(<= (adds (&bl . &bs) &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(alconc &bl &al &dl)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &al ((&pl &cl &dl) . &stk) &nstk))
The second file is first transform only:
(<= (must (setm query empty agenda ((&dl &dl &al))))
(value query &cl)
(postorder &cl &dl)
(value truth &al))
(<= (must (return &ans))
(value query empty)
(value answer &ans))
(<= (must (setm answer nil agenda empty))
(value agenda nil))
(<= (must (setm agenda &nstk))
(and (value agenda ((&pl &cl &al) . &stk))
(next &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)))
(<= (must (setm answer &al agenda empty))
(value agenda ((nil &cl &al) . &stk)))
(<= (next ((not &p) . &pl) &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(plug &p &al &q)
(lookups &q &bs)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk))
(<= (adds () &pl &cl &al &stk &stk))
(<= (adds (&bl . &bs) &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(alconc &bl &al &dl)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &al ((&pl &cl &dl) . &stk) &nstk))
!
(<= (postorder &s &t)
(vars &s () &vs)
(posted &vs () &s () &t))
(<= (posted (&v . &us) &vs &s &t &u)
(posted &us (&v . &vs) &s &t &u))
(<= (posted (&v . &us) &vs &s &t &w)
(threeorfewer &v &s)
(split &v &s &x &y)
(append &y &t &u)
(append &vs &us &ws)
(posted &ws () &x &u &w))
(<= (posted () &vs &s &t &u)
(append &s &t &u))
(<= (split &v (&l . &s) (&l . &x) &y)
(split &v &s &x &y))
(<= (split &v (&l . &s) &x (&l . &y))
(among &v &l)
(split &v &s &x &y))
(<= (split &v () () ()))
(<= (vars (&x . &y) &us &ws)
(vars &x &us &vs)
(vars &y &vs &ws))
(<= (vars &l &vs &vs)
(constant &l))
(<= (vars &l &vs (&l . &vs))
(variable &l))
(<= (vars &l &vs &vs)
(variable &l)
(member &l &vs))
(<= (threeorfewer &v &s)
(numoccurs &v &s &n)
(< &n 4))
(<= (numoccurs &v &s 0)
(= t t))
(<= (numoccurs &v (&x . &y) &n)
(cut)
(numoccurs &v &x &j)
(numoccurs &v &y &k)
(+ &j &k &n))
(<= (numoccurs &v &v 1)
(cut))
(<= (among &v (&x . &y))
(among &v &y))
(<= (among &v (&x . &y))
(among &v &x))
(<= (among &v &v))
The third file is what is necessary to hook in the axioms for the
second transform.
(<= (must (setm query empty agenda ((&dl &dl &al))))
(value query &cl)
(postorder &cl &dl)
(value truth &al))
(<= (must (return &ans))
(value query empty)
(value answer &ans))
(<= (must (setm answer nil agenda empty))
(value agenda nil))
(<= (must (setm agenda &nstk))
(and (value agenda ((&pl &cl &al) . &stk))
(next &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)))
(<= (must (setm answer &al agenda empty))
(value agenda ((nil &cl &al) . &stk)))
(<= (next ((not &p) . &pl) &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(kempe2 &p &cl &al &bl)
(plug &p &bl &q)
(lookups &q &bs)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &bl &stk &nstk))
(<= (adds () &pl &cl &al &stk &stk))
(<= (adds (&bl . &bs) &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(alconc &bl &al &dl)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &al ((&pl &cl &dl) . &stk) &nstk))
!
(<= (postorder &s &t)
(vars &s () &vs)
(posted &vs () &s () &t))
(<= (posted (&v . &us) &vs &s &t &u)
(posted &us (&v . &vs) &s &t &u))
(<= (posted (&v . &us) &vs &s &t &w)
(threeorfewer &v &s)
(split &v &s &x &y)
(append &y &t &u)
(append &vs &us &ws)
(posted &ws () &x &u &w))
(<= (posted () &vs &s &t &u)
(append &s &t &u))
(<= (split &v (&l . &s) (&l . &x) &y)
(split &v &s &x &y))
(<= (split &v (&l . &s) &x (&l . &y))
(among &v &l)
(split &v &s &x &y))
(<= (split &v () () ()))
(<= (vars (&x . &y) &us &ws)
(vars &x &us &vs)
(vars &y &vs &ws))
(<= (vars &l &vs &vs)
(constant &l))
(<= (vars &l &vs (&l . &vs))
(variable &l))
(<= (vars &l &vs &vs)
(variable &l)
(member &l &vs))
(<= (threeorfewer &v &s)
(numoccurs &v &s &n)
(< &n 4))
(<= (numoccurs &v &s 0)
(= t t))
(<= (numoccurs &v (&x . &y) &n)
(cut)
(numoccurs &v &x &j)
(numoccurs &v &y &k)
(+ &j &k &n))
(<= (numoccurs &v &v 1)
(cut))
(<= (among &v (&x . &y))
(among &v &y))
(<= (among &v (&x . &y))
(among &v &x))
(<= (among &v &v))
!
(<= (kempe2 &p &cl &al &bl)
(vars &p (&v))
(kempe2situation &v &cl &al (&a &b &c &d))
(kempe2reverse &a &c &al &bl))
(<= (kempe2 &p &cl &al &bl)
(vars &p (&v))
(kempe2situation &v &cl &al (&a &b &c &d))
(kempe2complement &a &cl &al &s)
(among &c &s)
(kempe2reverse &b &d &al &bl))
mrg
-------
∂02-Feb-86 2356 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA more kempe
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Feb 86 23:56:21 PST
Date: Sun 2 Feb 86 23:56:34-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: more kempe
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180345572.22.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
Well, here's a first cut at the complete solution. It's ugly and
not especially efficient. I'm also not certain that it is right
but it seems to work on my simple test cases. Good luck understanding
it. If you want, I'll drop by and try to interpret it for you. I
also intend to improve it for the report. This is just to convince
myself that it can be done.
mrg
(<= (must (setm query empty agenda ((&dl &dl &al))))
(value query &cl)
(postorder &cl &dl)
(value truth &al))
(<= (must (return &ans))
(value query empty)
(value answer &ans))
(<= (must (setm answer nil agenda empty))
(value agenda nil))
(<= (must (setm agenda &nstk))
(and (value agenda ((&pl &cl &al) . &stk))
(next &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)))
(<= (must (setm answer &al agenda empty))
(value agenda ((nil &cl &al) . &stk)))
(<= (next ((not &p) . &pl) &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(kempe2 &p &cl &al &bl)
(plug &p &bl &q)
(lookups &q &bs)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &bl &stk &nstk))
(<= (adds () &pl &cl &al &stk &stk))
(<= (adds (&bl . &bs) &pl &cl &al &stk &nstk)
(alconc &bl &al &dl)
(adds &bs &pl &cl &al ((&pl &cl &dl) . &stk) &nstk))
!
(<= (postorder &s &t)
(vars &s () &vs)
(posted &vs () &s () &t))
(<= (posted (&v . &us) &vs &s &t &u)
(posted &us (&v . &vs) &s &t &u))
(<= (posted (&v . &us) &vs &s &t &w)
(threeorfewer &v &s)
(split &v &s &x &y)
(append &y &t &u)
(append &vs &us &ws)
(posted &ws () &x &u &w))
(<= (posted () &vs &s &t &u)
(append &s &t &u))
(<= (split &v (&l . &s) (&l . &x) &y)
(split &v &s &x &y))
(<= (split &v (&l . &s) &x (&l . &y))
(among &v &l)
(split &v &s &x &y))
(<= (split &v () () ()))
(<= (vars (&x . &y) &us &ws)
(vars &x &us &vs)
(vars &y &vs &ws))
(<= (vars &l &vs &vs)
(constant &l))
(<= (vars &l &vs (&l . &vs))
(variable &l))
(<= (vars &l &vs &vs)
(variable &l)
(member &l &vs))
(<= (threeorfewer &v &s)
(numoccurs &v &s &n)
(< &n 4))
(<= (numoccurs &v &s 0)
(= t t))
(<= (numoccurs &v (&x . &y) &n)
(cut)
(numoccurs &v &x &j)
(numoccurs &v &y &k)
(+ &j &k &n))
(<= (numoccurs &v &v 1)
(cut))
(<= (among &v (&x . &y))
(among &v &y))
(<= (among &v (&x . &y))
(among &v &x))
(<= (among &v &v))
!
(<= (kempe2 &p &cl &al &bl)
(var &p &al &v)
(kempe2situation &v &cl &al (&a &b &c &d))
(kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &e &f)
(kempe2reverse &e &f &s &al &bl))
(<= (var (n &u &v) &al &u)
(plug &u &al &s)
(variable &s)
(plug &v &al &t)
(constant &t))
(<= (var (n &u &v) &al &v)
(plug &u &al &s)
(constant &s)
(plug &v &al &t)
(variable &t))
(<= (kempe2situation &v &cl &al (&a &b &c &d))
(neighbors &v &cl (&a &b &c &d))
(plug &a &al &e) (constant &e)
(plug &b &al &f) (constant &f)
(plug &c &al &g) (constant &g)
(plug &d &al &h) (constant &h)
(alldiff &e &f &g &h))
(<= (neighbors &v ((n &u &w) . &cl) &nl)
(neighbors &v &cl &nl))
(<= (neighbors &v ((n &v &w) . &cl) (&w . &nl))
(neighbors &v &cl &nl))
(<= (neighbors &v ((n &w &v) . &cl) (&w . &nl))
(neighbors &v &cl &nl))
(<= (neighbors &v () ()))
(<= (alldiff &e &f &g &h)
(unknown (= &e &f))
(unknown (= &e &g))
(unknown (= &e &h))
(unknown (= &f &g))
(unknown (= &f &h))
(unknown (= &g &h)))
(<= (kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &g &h)
(plug &c &al &g)
(plug &d &al &h)
(kempe2complement &c &g &h &cl &al () &s)
(unprovable (among &d &s)))
(<= (kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &f &g)
(plug &b &al &f)
(plug &c &al &g)
(kempe2complement &b &f &g &cl &al () &s)
(unprovable (among &c &s)))
(<= (kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &f &h)
(plug &b &al &f)
(plug &d &al &h)
(kempe2complement &b &f &h &cl &al () &s)
(unprovable (among &d &s)))
(<= (kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &e &h)
(plug &a &al &e)
(plug &d &al &h)
(kempe2complement &a &e &h &cl &al () &s)
(unprovable (among &d &s)))
(<= (kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &e &g)
(plug &a &al &e)
(plug &c &al &g)
(kempe2complement &a &e &g &cl &al () &s)
(unprovable (among &c &s)))
(<= (kempe2find &a &b &c &d &cl &al &s &e &f)
(plug &a &al &e)
(plug &b &al &f)
(kempe2complement &a &e &f &cl &al () &s)
(unprovable (among &b &s)))
(<= (kempe2complement &v &e &f &cl &al &s &t)
(neighbors &v &cl &ns)
(k2c &ns &v &e &f &cl &al (&v . &s) &t))
(<= (kempe2complement &v &e &f &cl &al &s &s)
(member &v &s))
(<= (k2c (&n . &ns) &v &e &f &cl &al &s &t)
(plug &n &al &e)
(kempe2complement &n &e &f &cl &al &s &u)
(k2c &ns &v &e &f &cl &al &u &t))
(<= (k2c (&n . &ns) &v &e &f &cl &al &s &t)
(plug &n &al &f)
(kempe2complement &n &e &f &cl &al &s &u)
(k2c &ns &v &e &f &cl &al &u &t))
(<= (k2c () &v &e &f &cl &al &s &s))
(<= (kempe2reverse &e &f (&v . &vl) &al &cl)
(change &v &e &f &al &bl)
(kempe2reverse &e &f &vl &bl &cl))
(<= (kempe2reverse &e &f () &al &al))
(<= (change &v &e &f ((&w . &g) . &al) ((&w . &g) . &bl))
(change &v &e &f &al &bl))
(<= (change &v &e &f ((&v . &e) . &al) ((&v . &f) . &al)))
(<= (change &v &e &f ((&v . &f) . &al) ((&v . &e) . &al)))
-------
∂03-Feb-86 0756 DE2SMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re:request for letters
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 07:55:48 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 07:56:03-PST
From: David E. Smith <DE2SMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re:request for letters
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Phone: (415)497-1239, 948-3259 (home)
Message-ID: <12180432861.49.DE2SMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Dear John,
I understand that you have solicited letters from students regarding
Mike Genesereth's tenure decision. I am currently on a speaking tour
of east coast universities and therefore received your request
somewhat belatedly. In the interest of time, I've sent my comments by
net mail. Please pardon my informality in this matter.
I've worked with Mike in several different capacities over the last
six years, as a student in two of his classes, as a TA when
CS223 was first offered, as an RA and advisee and currently as a
research associate. Based on these experiences I would like to
comment on several different aspects of Mike's abilities.
When I first came to Stanford there was no course on the fundamentals
of AI. All that existed was a research survey course (CS224) and
specialized seminars. One could compare this state of affairs to that
of a graduate math program without a Real Analysis course. It was
Mike who saw this need, and put the effort into developing and
teaching a course on the fundamental techniques and methods of AI. I
served as TA for Mike the first time CS223 was taught. Frankly, I was
astounded at the amount of effort Mike put into designing the course,
organizing the material, and preparing motivating examples. Mike
takes the responsibility of teaching very seriously and should be
applauded for his efforts in this regard.
In both my experience as a student and as a TA, Mike is one of the
better teachers and lecturers I have known. He organizes material
well, and motivates difficult material with crisp and interesting
examples. There are some who do not share my view that Mike is a good
teacher. Perhaps this is because Mike aims his lectures at the better
students in the class. Yet, the fact that CS223 boasts an enrollment
of several hundred students speaks highly of Mike's skills.
As an advisor I also think highly of Mike. Mike demands several
things of his students; a degree of independence and self guidance, a
concentration on the fundamental issues involved, careful scholarly
work, and good presentation. Above all else, Mike is an excellent
sounding board for ideas and unfinished work. He has an uncanny
ability for putting aside syntactic and organizational detail to get
at the heart of an argument or issue. Unlike most critics and
reviewers, Mike's comments are constructive. He offers specific
advice about what is important and should be emphasized, advice about
what is missing, and advice about organization for effective verbal or
written presentation.
In sum, it is Mike's ability to get at the key issues, to organize
material, to motivate material with examples, and to offer
constructive criticism that make him such an effective teacher and
advisor. These same qualities can be seen in Mike's research.
Certainly my view of Mike's research is suspect, but I have sufficient
respect for Mike's work that I have declined offers of faculty
positions at universities such as Yale in order to continue to work
with him. Mike fills an important need at Stanford and in the AI
community as a whole. In AI there is a serious gap between those
working on theory, and those working on more applied problems. Mike
is one of a new bread of researchers helping to bridge that gap. I do
indeed believe that Stanford would be losing a valuable asset if Mike
were denied tenure.
Sincerely,
David E. Smith
-------
∂03-Feb-86 0800 JMC
Bobrow about misprint.
∂03-Feb-86 0900 JMC
Hirsch about New Mexico.
∂03-Feb-86 1000 JMC
Jenks
∂03-Feb-86 1010 SJG circumscription (?) question
To: JMC, VAL
Suppose that we have the usual situation where birds fly be default but
ostriches don't. Then if we have a bird named Tweety, and do the
usual circumscription thing, we can conclude the following:
flies(Tweety)
bird(x) ∧ ¬flies(x) → ostrich(x)
I guess we would also have ¬ostrich(x), but we could get around that by
introducing an ostrich named Fred at the outset (although we would then
have x≠Fred → ¬ostrich(x)).
My persistent complaints with circumscription have, I think, to do with
the second of the above conclusions (bird ∧ ¬flies → ostrich). What I'd
like to know is:
(1) Is there any way to do the circumscription to generate only
flies(Tweety)? (I suspect not.)
(2) Is there any way to distinguish (i.e., via the derivation, or
whatever) conclusions of the circumscription that are "like"
the first statement, as opposed to "like" the second? I
know this is imprecise -- it is a precise statement of the
distinction that I am looking for.
Thanks for your help.
Matt
∂03-Feb-86 1135 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Umbrella Contract
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 11:35:03 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 11:26:34-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Umbrella Contract
To: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, DCL@SU-AI.ARPA, Wiederhold@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
ZM@SU-AI.ARPA, TOB@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
AS.PLB@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, MCCABE@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180471183.18.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Just had a call from John Pucci. He will visit Stanford on Tuesday,
February 25, and expressed a desired to meet with Nils and with the P.I.'s
on the 0211 contract (the umbrella). He will have to leave at 3:00 p.m. to
catch a plane. Katie Hanrahan will be coordinating the schedule of meetings,
so would you please let her know the best time for you (Hanrahan@Score, or
7-3391).
Betty
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1138 RA Bronstein quals
To: pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ZM@SU-AI.ARPA
A reminder that Alex Bronstein quals are today, 2:45 in John's office.
Rutie
-----
∂03-Feb-86 1143 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch. Be back around 1:15.
Rutie
-----
∂03-Feb-86 1209 SJG re: circumscription (?) question
To: VAL, JMC
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Feb-86 11:51-PT.]
I don't think this is satisfactory. You say, "we jump to the conclusion
that those are the only exceptions". But this seems to me to be precisely
what we DON'T do. You and I can name a few species of non-flying birds:
ostriches, penguins and emus, say. But their very presence convinces me
that there are *other* species of non-flying birds of which I am unaware.
In spite of this, though, I will still conclude that your average bird does
fly.
I think this is related to the disjunctions generated by circumscription.
It seems to force a complete classification on you: birds are either
flyers, or ostriches, or penguins or emus. Nothing else. And this
seems at odds with my intuitions.
The following may be related: suppose there are only four species of
birds, and each has some special (non-default) property. What happens
if I circumscribe in this case? Basically, I get nothing useful back, since
all birds must be abnormal in one aspect or another.
Of course, there are many more species of birds than this. But suppose
that there were only four species of birds THAT I KNEW OF. Then the
circumscription would look very much the same; my commonsense reasoning
gets around this by reasoning that there are lots of sorts of birds about
which I have no specific knowledge ("Platonic" birds, as it were).
Hope you can get a feel for my discomfort in spite of its informality --
Matt
∂03-Feb-86 1310 VAL re: circumscription (?) question
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Feb-86 13:02-PT.]
Here is my reply Matt referred to. In the second part I describe an approach
we discussed some time ago. Do you agree that it does "the right thing about
birds as a whole"?
∂03-Feb-86 1151 VAL re: circumscription (?) question
To: SJG
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Feb-86 10:10-PT.]
It doesn't seem to me that there is anything wrong with the conclusion
bird(x) ∧ ¬flies(x) → ostrich(x).
Isn't this precisely what we wanted to conclude using circumscription: since
there is no evidence that there are exceptions other than ostriches, we jump to
the conclusion that those are the only exceptions? I agree that ¬ostrich(x) isn't
desirable, and we can avoid it by not allowing ostrich to vary.
But if you want to generate flies(Tweety) only, it can be done too. Introduce
a new predicate, "present", with the axiom schema present(c) for every object
constant c available in the language (e.g., Tweety), and write the main axiom as
¬ab(x) ∧ bird(x) ∧ present(x) ⊃ flies(x).
Then, instead of the conclusion you don't like you'll get
bird(x) ∧ present(x) ∧ ¬flies(x) → ostrich(x),
which implies flies(Tweety).
Do you find this a satisfactory solution?
∂03-Feb-86 1320 VAL MCC visit
This is the abstract I'm going to send them. Is this more or less what you
had in mind?
Circumscription and Formal Theories of Actions
Vladimir Lifschitz, Stanford University
ABSTRACT. We discuss the problem of describing the effects of actions
by circumscriptive theories based on situation calculus. The forms of
circumscription proposed before appear to be inadequate for this task,
and we introduce a modification called "pointwise circumscription". We
argue that the pontwise approach is conceptually simpler than the
traditional "global" definition, and that it gives additional expressive
power needed for formalizing some of the more complex kinds of commonsense
reasoning.
∂03-Feb-86 1329 VAL the art of replying
How did you manage to send a reply to my message so that it went both to me and
to Matt?
∂03-Feb-86 1327 VAL re: circumscription (?) question
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Feb-86 13:21-PT.]
I agree that a program should not be authorized to draw conclusions about
all birds by enumerating the species of birds it knows about. But it seems
to me that we achieve this by restricting circ'n to the objects that are
"present", as I proposed.
∂03-Feb-86 1336 VAL non-monotonic seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
There will be no meetings until February 20, when Mike Georgeff will speak on
representation of actions and the frame problem. A reminder will be sent a few
days in advance.
Vladimir Lifschitz
∂03-Feb-86 1406 SJG circumscription
To: JMC, VAL
John:
With regard to "the easy qeustion": the case you mention (where all
species of birds are abnormal in some aspect) is precisely the problematical
one. If the four species are abnormal in four different aspects, then
when told that Tweety is a bird, I can conclude that Tweety is abnormal
in at least one aspect, and circumscription doesn't help me decide which
one (as well it should not, I suspect). But one suspects that this would
lead a circumscriptive theory that really did contain lots of information
about various species to be virtually helpless (sorry about the grammar there):
Ostriches are abnormal because they don't fly; canaries because they are
pets; robins because they are harbingers of spring; etc. Now when I tell
you that Tweety is a bird, it seems to me that your ability to conclude
that it can fly has evaporated. It also seems to me that it is precisely
because we have a view of a "Platonic" bird (no abnormal properties at all)
that we manage to draw the usual default conclusion.
Yes, we should all get together. Care to pick a time? (Tuesday is out
for me ...)
Matt
∂03-Feb-86 1727 RA Darmouth AI conference
Margaret Purcell from The Wagner Group (503) 245 0905 called re Dartmouth
Summer Conference on AI.
∂03-Feb-86 1746 LES Message to Squires
Sorry, I meant to send you a copy of this.
∂29-Jan-86 1809 LES Qlisp planning
To: Squires@USC-ISI.ARPA
Using the last budget that we submitted but excluding all capital
equipment (and ignoring the upward creep induced by the rising Stanford
overhead rate and the delay in funding) the burdened cost of Qlisp for one
calendar year would be $1,341,000. Of course, we would prefer to be
funded at least through May 1987 on the first shot. If you need a more
refined number, I can generate a full budget for any given starting date
(e.g. March 1).
After our review of alternative parallel systems a year ago, we have
deliberately avoided investing effort in tracking the alternatives, it
being our intention to take a hard look when we see some green.
It is my impression that Sequent is still a strong contender and that
Encore has opened a credibility gap. Other contenders that I am aware of
are Alliant, Elxsi, and Flexible. We got a briefing from Motorola a long
time ago on a proposed 68020-based multiprocessor system for which they
were seeking support from DARPA, as I recall, but I have heard nothing
since.
Dick Gabriel says that 68020-based systems, such as Alliant's, would be
permit much easier and faster implementations of the Qlisp compiler, for
what that is worth. In any case, our first task will be to carefully
document our requirements (i.e. prejudices) and see how the vendors
respond.
Please let me know if you need more specifics at this time.
Les Earnest
∂03-Feb-86 1823 CLT
buy huggies if you shop
∂03-Feb-86 2305 @SCRC-YUKON.ARPA:rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM do you still have
Received: from SCRC-YUKON.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 23:05:22 PST
Received: from RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM by SCRC-YUKON.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 195004; Tue 4-Feb-86 02:04:27-EST
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 86 23:04 PST
From: Bill Gosper <rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: do you still have
To: jdm@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <860203230442.2.RWG@RUSSIAN.SPA.Symbolics.COM>
that macsyma tape that we installed for jmc? we'd like to unborrow it
for an installation at Stanford Aero-Astro, whose legitimate tape has
become entangled in another of our administrative snafus.
∂04-Feb-86 0951 RA flight to El Paso
Leave Wed. from SJ, Western flight 12, 3:00pm; arr. Salt Lake 5:35. Leave
Salt Lake flight 114 6:15, arr. El Paso 8:53pm.
Return: America West flight 27, Sat. 6:00pm., arr. Phoenix 7:05, leave
United 1256 8:15pm, arr. SF 9:06. There is no flight arriving that late
into San Jose. Will this be ok? Would you rather depart from SF? or would you
like take a limo or get a ride? Please let me know what you want to do. I also
reserved a Hertz compact for you and made a reservation at the Holliday Inn.
∂04-Feb-86 1410 Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM Correction to McCarthy's paper
Received: from XEROX.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 14:09:26 PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 04 FEB 86 14:07:40 PST
Date: 4 Feb 86 12:46 PST
From: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Correction to McCarthy's paper
To: mcvax!vu44!botter!ark!kastelei@seismo.css.gov
cc: bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <860204-140740-2278@Xerox>
Elma
In the section of "Applications of circumscription to formalizing common
sense" by John McCarthy in the section entitled "Simple abnormality
theories" there is a displayed formula that reads
canary x AND NOTab aspect3 x IMPLIES flies x,
It should be changed to
canary x AND NOTab aspect3 x IMPLIES bird x,
In the above AND, IMPLIES and NOT stand for the logical symbols which
cannnot be transmitted and should be left as they are. Thus the change
consists of replacing the word flies by the word bird.
I hope this change can be made before the paper is printed, because
no-one will figure out the problem the formulas refer to without it.
Otherwise, there should be a correction printed.
danny
∂04-Feb-86 1545 RA El Paso trip
You need to let me know whether the flight arrangements are ok.
∂04-Feb-86 1640 RA Are you going to use the Imagen printer at home or here?
∂04-Feb-86 2227 S.SOOD@LOTS-A Vtss class
Received: from LOTS-A by SU-AI with PUP; 04-Feb-86 22:22 PST
Date: Tue 4 Feb 86 22:19:56-PST
From: S.SOOD@LOTS-A
Subject: Vtss class
To: j.jmc@LOTS-A
Message-ID: <12180852270.17.S.SOOD@LOTS-A>
Dear Professor Mc Carthy,
Sorry about not being able to attend todays class-I had to pick up a
friend from the airport and really wanted to show him around campus...This
letter also serves as a check to see if I really know how to use this mail
program...!! See you in class then.
Vidur Sood
-------
∂05-Feb-86 0104 LES Facilities Committee minutes of 1/31/86
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
Here is a proposed message to CSD Faculty. If I have left out anything
important or uttered untruths, please let me know. If I do not hear any
moans by 11:30pm tonight (Wednesday, Feb. 5) I will dispatch it. -Les
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Facilities Planning
$582k in DARPA funds are available for CSD computer facilities provided
that they are committed by the end of May this year. This note reviews
the funding program, outlines the CSD Facilities Committee's approach to
planning for use of the uncommitted funds and invites additional proposals
or participation in the review process. It is clear that beneficial uses
could be found for substantially more than the available funds, so the
challenge is to spend the available funds in ways that do the most for
departmental productivity.
Background
Several years ago certain members of the department sought and obtained
DARPA funds for upgrading departmental computer facilities. $3.3 million
was programmed and the department subsequently divided these funds into
four "pots." These allocations and current uncommitted balances are as
follows:
Uncommitted
Allocations Balances Group
$ 359,300 $ 53,779 Formal Reasoning (McCarthy)
1,051,578 240,100 Computer Systems Lab. (Hennessy)
611,625 ~0 Heuristic Programming Project (Feigenbaum)
1,357,096 582,799 General CSD facilities (Nilsson)
One of the reasons that there is so much money left in the general CSD
allocation is that the purchase of a DECSystem 20 was planned but SUSHI
was made available at no cost.
The original duration of this contract was for 2 years beginning June 1, 1983.
The department sought and was granted a one-year no-cost extension, so it
now will elapse on May 31, 1986. It is unlikely that any further extensions
would be granted.
These funds are earmarked for upgrading computer facilities for research
use. Incidental use for instruction is OK, but the justification must be
stated in terms of research use.
The Gramm-Rudman Act is exerting substantial financial pressure on DARPA,
which means that we should make sure that our proposals are soundly
formulated. Any substantial delays in the approval path will likely
result in a loss of funds. In order to meet the deadline, we should seek
the necessary approvals by the end of February.
Review Procedure
Nils Nilsson has asked the Facilities Committee to review alternative
plans for spending the CSD allocation and to make recommendations. In a
preliminary review, the committee decided that it would consider both
proposals to acquire systems for general use in the department and
proposals for project-specific systems, but that systems for general use
would generally be given priority.
Subcommittees were formed, as described below, to formulate specific
proposals and estimate costs in a number of functional areas. CSD and CSL
research groups are invited to formulate additional proposals covering
their specific needs or to introduce additional general proposals through
one or more of the subcommittees.
Any remarks about the structure of this undertaking should be addressed to
the Facilities Committee Chair (Les Earnest). Additional volunteers for
subcommittee participation will be favorably considered. A list of
current subcommittees and sketches of their responsibilities follow.
WORKSTATIONS (Len Bosack)
Acquire more workstations for general use, including Lisp
capabilities on at least some (e.g. Sun, Symbolics, TI Explorers, IBM RT PC).
FILE SERVERS (David Cheriton, Tom Rindfleisch)
Add one or more file servers to support existing Sun workstations.
Develop a flexible file server that can support workstations from assorted
manufacturers by using multiple protocols.
PARALLEL COMPUTING (Les Earnest, Bruce Hitson)
Formulate a proposal to buy a computer such as Sequent's Balance
800 to support research in parallel computing. The Formal Reasoning group
might be willing to contribute its uncommitted funds ($53k) to this
undertaking, which would effectively expand the available funds. CSL is
known to be planning a similar acquisition, so one possibility would be to
jointly buy two such machines for shared use and try to keep one as a
relatively stable development environment while permitting experimental
alterations of the operating system on the other one. Another possibility
would be to get one very large machine that can be split in two
hardwarily, if that is practical.
PARTS AND SPARES (Len Bosack)
Acquire spare parts for maintenance of existing and planned equipment
as well as for construction of gateways and ethertips that will be needed
in the near future.
McSun (Len Bosack, Les Earnest)
Fabricate and test a McSun terminal cluster to demonstrate or
disprove the utility and economics of this kind of terminal system.
(McSun is, in effect, an ethertip with frame buffers that support
multiple terminals with high resolution graphics).
The next meeting of the committee, at which the assessment of alternatives
will begin, is at noon on Wednesday, February 12 in MJH-301.
∂05-Feb-86 0115 LES Lost Subcommittee
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
Sorry, I left this one out of my draft minutes.
SOFTWARE ACQUISITION
Look into existing and prospective site licenses for the following
software, among others:
Symbolics systems - Tom Rindfleisch;
Common Lisp for Suns - Les Earnest;
Scribe - Len Bosack.
∂05-Feb-86 0951 RA airline tickets
The tickets are on your desk; Hertz does not have the No. 1 Club express
service in El Paso, because it is not a big airport.
∂05-Feb-86 1123 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: AFWAL]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 11:21:05 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 11:15:39-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: AFWAL]
To: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, TW@SU-AI.ARPA,
JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
TOB@SU-AI.ARPA, Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180993483.39.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Does anyone out there want to be a "lead person" in finding out more
about this and then possibly helping Elliott? If this is "right" for
us, I would be glad to help push it along but do not myself have the
time to organize our efforts. -Nils
---------------
Return-Path: <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 10:02:03-PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 10:05:29-PST
From: Elliott Levinthal <LEVINTHAL@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: AFWAL
To: gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, kruger@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: levinthal@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
I have forwarded to you in campus mail some correspondence I just
received from AFWAL/WPAFB concerning their plans for an Institute
for AI in Manufacturing. This would be a major commitment to spend
$5 million/year for a 5-10 year period at one or more universities
to establish this institute. I have been following this activity
since its inception and would be able to attend the meeting on
February 27th. Our competition is UCLA and CMU.
Before attending the meeting I would like to know what interests the
School of Engineering and CS Department have in this, what guidelines
for its organization would be acceptable and/or desirable and finally what
commitment of resources faculty support could be expected. I
suggest we try to arrange a meeting at as early a date as possible.
Regards,
Elliott.
-------
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1118 CLT ian
word from edinburgh is that they haven't received a letter
of recommendation from you for ian.
perhaps you could get rutie to doublecheck?
∂05-Feb-86 1155 CLT ian
The letter can be sent to Rod Burstall or Gordon Plotkin
(or both?). I'm not sure how urgent, but I just sent
a computer letter to Gordon which he acknowledged with
the comment that there were many more applicants than jobs.
So I guess the sooner the better. This is Gordon's computer
address if you want to send something electronic.
"GDP%ecsvax.edinburgh.ac.uk"@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
∂05-Feb-86 1245 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Facilities Committee minutes of 1/31/86
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 12:45:09 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 12:44:44-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Facilities Committee minutes of 1/31/86
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 5 Feb 86 01:04:00-PST
Message-ID: <12181009701.16.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Les, I recommend a couple of changes to the "Background" section of your draft
based on my recollection of the history of the DARPA Equipment Refurbishment
contract:
Pgph 2: Several years ago certain members of the department sought and obtained
DARPA funds for upgrading departmental computer facilities. $3.3 million were
justified and approved for upgrades relevant to four broad areas of
DARPA-sponsored research. Upon funding of the contract, the department divided
the funds into four "pots" representing these areas. The initial allocations
and current uncommitted balances are as follows:
Pgph 4: One of the reasons that there is so much money left in the general CSD
allocation is that the purchase of a powerful, "next generation", central
machine was envisioned -- partial funding of an S-1 computer was budgeted as a
place holder. In the past few years, no clear candidate real machine has
emerged for this purchase and so the decision was delayed. Also, through a
DARPA gift unrelated to this contract, we obtained additonal DECSystem 20
cycles in the form of SUSHI.
Tom R.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1411 LES "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
Thanks to Tom Rindfleisch, Joe Weening, and Dave Cheriton for corrections
and suggested improvements in the draft minutes.
Dave disagrees with my recollection that the committee reached a consensus
giving general priority to the acquisition of facilities for general use
over project-specific proposals. I had proposed "general use" priority
based on the way in which those funds were allocated in the first place.
I believe that I heard a consensus in favor of this position, though I was
aware that Dave disagreed at the time. I guess that I should have been
more formal about it.
Dave says: "I dont remember any decision that general use took priority
over project use. After all, research is done in projects and not by
general users. I think what we agreed to was to develop a plan that was
best for the dept. as a whole, which may mean strengthening equipment in
particular projects, because these projects are important and have
contributed to the department, etc."
I will admit that one of the reasons that I advocated general use priority
was that I wanted to avoid, as much as possible, the need to evaluate the
relative importance of various research projects.
I invite discussion and clear expressions of opinion on this issue.
∂05-Feb-86 1510 WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA TELEPHONE MESSAGE
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 15:10:02 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 15:01:33-PST
From: Deborah Woodward <WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: TELEPHONE MESSAGE
To: MCCARTHY@SU-SCORE.ARPA, GENESERETH@SU-SCORE.ARPA, PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181034607.28.WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
PROPOSED CENTER OF EXECELLENCE
FEBRUARY 6th. 4:30-6:00 pm
DURAND 450
contact: Kacko 7-1310
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1943 ASHOK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA [John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>: re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)]
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 19:41:38 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 19:37:56-PST
From: Ashok Subramanian <ashok@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: [John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>: re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)]
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181084923.8.ASHOK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
> There is talk about the persecution of other groups in the Soviet
> Union. ...... Mainly, it's because the mainline religious organizations
> in the U.S. aren't much interested in the persecution of their fellow
> Christians elsewhere, because it doesn't mesh well with their American-guilt
> ideology.
What is the American-guilt ideology you refer to ?
> As for the "Animosity towards the USSR is common in the US". The abnormal
> situation is, in my opinion, in India, where apparently news about tyranny
> in the USSR is even less reported than in the U.S. and where politicians
> can divert attention from their own failures by blaming the more prosperous
> industrial countries and accusing them of imperialism. The Russians take
> advantage of Indian hostility to Pakistan by completely accepting the
> Indian side of every dispute. They can be a much more loyal ally than
> the U.S., because they have no free press or independent-minded congressmen
> to raise the other side.
It is not (well thought out) "animosity" that I am worried about.
However, when I see VIOLENT REFLEX responses to the USSR ( for that
matter, to anyone or anything), I am troubled. I am NOT suggesting
that you exhibit this kind of reflex; I have seen it, however, in
quite a few people of school age.
The picture you paint of Indian awareness of the Soviet vs. US influences is
very slanted. A full rebuttal would be quite pointless.
ashok
-------
∂05-Feb-86 2051 roy@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Why Jews (at least, that's where we started!)
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 20:40:30 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 5 Feb 86 20:41:28 pst
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 86 20:41:28 pst
From: Shaibal Roy <roy@diablo>
Subject: Re: Why Jews (at least, that's where we started!)
To: jmc@sail
Cc: su-bboards@score
> From: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
> As for the "Animosity towards the USSR is common in the US". The abnormal
> situation is, in my opinion, in India, where ......
I suppose JMC digressed to India because that's where I come from.
I hate it when discussions take such forks, and hope that I do not
set off another sequence of flames about India. But I simply have
to reply to this message. Why?
I usually skip political flames on the bboard. They tend to have less
facts and often sidetrack the main issues. But I read almost all of
JMC's messages. I think even though some of those messages are very
opinionated, they deal in facts, and do not evade the main issue.
Not this one. I merely made the observation that JMC has quoted. If
JMC means the status of a people bearing an inexplicable hatred for
another (which is what I meant) by "the abnormal situation", his
opinion about India is wrong. Even if he were right, it would neither
explain nor disprove the existence of such "abnormality" in the US.
Why do I say that JMC's opinion is wrong? In the 21 years that I spent
in India, I have not seen any such morbid hatred for any nation as is
reflected by Red Dawn, Rocky 4, or the Wendy's commercial that shows
that Russians have no choice. (Anyone seen that one? I would say it
is quite funny if I didn't think it capitalizes on the worst kind of
mass hatred.) But then, I happened to be living among those few privileged
ones in India who can afford the luxury of education. What about those
poor illiterate masses who have no go but to be indoctrinated by
unscrupulous politicians, and thereby develop a hatred for anything
that is remotely related to Pakistan/US/....?
As it turns out, I spent a week or two every year in one of those
remote tiny villages in India -- one of those whose inhabitants are
supposedly victims of institutionalized propaganda. I have no idea
from where does JMC obtain his data about India, but most people in
this village were too busy earning their bread to be indoctrinated
into a hatred towards Pakistan, even after the flood of refuzees from
Bangladesh drove up the price of rice fourfold within a year in West
Bengal and some other neighbouring states. The politicians are not
above pandering to the baser needs of their electorates -- I personally
heard one of them promise to build a (Hindu) temple (using funds from
a secular government) if he were to be elected. But even they refrained
from trying to win votes by shaking their fists at Pakistan or US.
They did not do so not because of scruples, but because the people
were not interested in bringing Pakistan to its knees.
JMC accuses the Government India of censorship. He is right. But
if he means that it uses that to promote hatred towards another
nation, he is wrong. Most movies that are rated R in US will probably
never be allowed to be viewed in India (sigh!). But then India
does not produce movies like Red Dawn. A few years back, the Government
Bihar imposed strict censorship on the newspapers published in Bihar.
(Bihar is a state in India.) If I remeber correctly, the Chief Minister
of Bihar was ousted within two months of this incident. West Bengal
has a communist State Government. The most vigorous political discussions
that I have ever seen are in the commuter trains in Calcutta, the capital
of west Bengal. I invite JMC to read some randomly chosen editorials from
the most popular newspaper in Calcutta (used to be the most popular in
India, too), and judge for himself how strict is the censorship he's
talking about. Berkeley gets this newspaper ("Ananda Bazar"), and I'll be
glad to translate it for him.
If JMC is saying that India does not have the kind of freedom of expression
that US has, he's right. But if he's blaming me for not being like him,
then I am glad that I am not.
∂06-Feb-86 0913 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 09:13:21 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 09:13:21-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 5 Feb 86 14:11:00-PST
Message-ID: <12181233365.16.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Les, my recollection of the intent of the "CSD" pot in designing the proposal
was that it was for strengthening the general research environment of the
department and thereby (indirectly) benefiting the individual projects. For
example, this pot contained funds for Ethernet cabling, gateways, and TIP's;
file server equipment; printer equipment; and the central machine/McSun
terminal effort. Some of the money has been used already to buy machines for
individual projects (e.g. a Symbolics for Tom Binford). I would advocate
giving highest priority to purchases for the departmental environment. If we
come down to considering more allocations for individual projects, I have my
own list of things we badly need in the KSL but which I have refrained from
proposing in deference to overall CSD needs.
Tom R.
-------
∂06-Feb-86 0930 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 09:29:22 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 6 Feb 86 09:23:39 pst
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 86 09:23:39 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: "General Use" versus "Project-specific"
To: JJW@Sail, LES@Sail, Nilsson@SU-Score, facil@Sail
The department makes decisions about areas that it wants to strengthen,
such as robotics, systems, etc. and that does not involve deciding that
these areas are "more important" than other areas, simply that it feels
that it is best for the dept. to strengthen certain areas. I think the
same logic can be used with equipment, without getting into a comparison
of the relative merits of difference research efforts, which I agree we
should avoid.
∂06-Feb-86 1010 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 10:10:10 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 10:05:18-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181242820.37.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Alphonse phoned, please call. Home: 321-7819 or Office: 7-4460.
Tina
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1025 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 10:25:31 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 10:20:29-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: Papa@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Ullman@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
Mayr@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181245585.37.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Army Research Meeting has been move to AEL 109, but it is still at the
same time.
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1147 RA 1099-Misc Form
I put your 1985 1099 form from Inference on your desk.
∂06-Feb-86 1238 RA dead files
I put the dead files at the back of the TOPICS drawer.
∂06-Feb-86 1445 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 14:35:03 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 14:18:03-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181288832.38.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Garo Kiremidjian phoned, regarding Participation in a panel session to acess
expert system technology. 408 295-1818.
Tina
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1743 CLT
McCarthy, Sarah 606-268-4577
∂06-Feb-86 2048 STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 20:46:15 PST
Date: 5 Feb 86 14:09:45 PST
From: STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: jmc@su-ai
Dear Professor McCarthy,
Following are copies of the letters and forms that make up my
application for the Lectureship. Hard copies of these forms follow by
express mail. I'm sorry I wasn't able to assemble the material any
faster. Please call me at (408) 927-1758 if any other information is
needed.
Thanks,
Ray Strong
=====================================================================
βSCRIPT/VS R2.0: DEVICE 1403W6 CHARS MONO
:LETTER bt='////' tt='///Page &/'.
∪
K51-802
408/927-1800
January 31, 1986
Professor John McCarthy
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
Dear Professor McCarthy:
This is an application for the position of Stanford Indus-
trial Lecturer for the 1986-1987 school year. I am enclos-
ing a course description and resume.
The course I would like to present is similar to one that I
am teaching now at the University of California at Santa
Cruz and to one that Joe Halpern is teaching now at
Stanford. However, I propose to emphasize my experience in
implementing the algorithms discussed in these more theore-
tically oriented courses.
There is a great body of theoretical material in the area of
fault tolerant algorithms. Most of it has been produced in
the last five years, and most of it precedes implementation
work and accurately reflects a very limited range of envi-
ronments. By the end of this quarter, I expect to be able
to combine implementation experience on an IBM research
prototype distributed system that reaches, maintains, and
repairs agreement among physically separate components, with
experience teaching the theoretical aspects of the field.
Thus I expect my course to offer a fresh point of view valu-
able to those who already appreciate the theory as well as
those interested in implementation issues of distributed
systems.
During the past few years, I have had the opportunity to
move back and forth between successive versions of a proto-
type and successively more accurate theoretical models. The
interaction between theory and practice has allowed me to be
a key contributor to the theory and to direct the theore-
tical work of others toward the most serious problems
arising in practice. I believe this experience meets the
requirements of the Lectureship position exactly. Among
those in the field qualified to comment on my contributions
and ability as a lecturer, I would include Joe Halpern (IBM
Almaden Research Center), Shel Finkelstein (IBM Almaden
∪
PAGE 2
∪
Research Center), Nancy Lynch (MIT), and Manfred Warmuth (UC
Santa Cruz).
Thanks for your consideration.
Sincerely,
H. Raymond Strong
∪
∪
======================================================================
βSCRIPT/VS R2.0: DEVICE 1403W6 CHARS MONO
FAULT TOLERANT DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS
The course will cover requirements and solutions to problems
arising in the context of distributed systems that must
tolerate faults. Special emphasis will be given to two basic
problems: atomic broadcast and clock synchronization.
Design decisions for a prototype distributed system that
reaches, maintains, and recovers from failure to maintain
agreement will be studied.
Most of the course work will consist of a series of problems
of varying difficulty that students will be challenged to
solve. Some of the problems covered are still open.
Some but not all of the following outline will be covered:
PART I
The agreement problem
1/3 lower bound
need for authentication
simple broadcast doesn't work
PART II
Fault models and Communication Models
Fault models
failstop
omission
timing
Byzantine
Authentication
Communication Models
Perfect
Arbitrary Graph
Timing Sensitive
Special (rings, busses, etc.)
Algorithms and Conversions
Lower bounds
rounds
messages
connectivity
PART III
Asynchrony and Probabilistic Algorithms
Impossibility
Rabin's, Ben-Or's, and Bracha's algorithms
PART IV
Clock Synchronization
averaging (1/3 limit)
Lamport & Melliar-Smith
∪
PAGE 2
∪
Dolev, Halpern, Simons, and Strong
Lynch & Lundellius
join
possibility and impossibility
precision
PART V
Environment
partition detection
crash detection
blocking versus undo/redo recovery
adapting to changes in environment
PART VI
Applications
SIFT
HAS
Unix clock synchronization
∪
=======================================================================
βSCRIPT/VS R2.0: DEVICE 1403W6 CHARS MONO
H. Raymond Strong, Jr.
975 Marlinton Ct.
San Jose, CA 95120
SUMMARY
Ray Strong received a Ph.D. in Mathematics from the
University of Washington in 1967. Before coming to the
Computer Science Department at IBM Research San Jose, he was
Manager of Theory of Programming at the IBM Research Center
in Yorktown Heights. He has recently worked in the areas of
Access Methods, Machine Architectures, Communication and
Synchronization, and Reliable Distributed Systems. He is
currently manager of Systems Fundamentals.
VITAL STATISTICS:
Born 1942
Married
One child
∪
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY:
1954-1964
H. Raymond Strong & Assoc. -- summers -- Actuarial
Assistant
1964-1967
University of Washington -- Teaching Assistant in
Math. Dept.
1967-present
IBM Research -- Research Staff Member
General interest in Theory of Computing and Artificial
Intelligence.
Managed projects in
Semantic Information Processing,
Program Correctness,
Theory of Programming,
and Systems Fundamentals.
Recent specializations in
Data Base Access Methods,
Multi-processor Architecture for Data Base Machines,
Synchronization,
and Distributed Systems.
Current work in Fault Tolerant Distributed Algorithms.
∪
PAGE 2
∪
Part-time Teaching Positions:
Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn
(1970-1971)
Yale University (1972).
University of California at Santa Cruz (1986).
∪
PAGE 3
∪
EDUCATION:
Hillcrest High School, Dallas, Texas
Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire
B.A. with Honors (1964)
Phi Beta Kappa
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
M.S. (1966) in Mathematics
Ph.D. (1967) in Mathematics
Dissertation: An algebraic approach through uniformly
reflexive structures to generalized recursive
function theory.
∪
∪
PAGE 4
∪
A REPRESENTATIVE LIST OF PUBLICATIONS:
Algebraically Generalized Recursive Function Theory,
IBM J. Res. Develop., 12 (1968), 465-475.
Depth Bounded Computation,
J. Computer and System Sciences, 4:1
(Feb., 1970), 1-14.
Construction of Models for Algebraically Generalized
Recursive Function Theory,
J. of Symbolic Logic, 35:3 (Sept., 1970)
401-409.
Translating Recursion Equations into Flowcharts,
J. of Computer and System Sciences, 5 (1971),
254-285.
Characterizations of Flowchartable Recursions,
with S.A. Walker,
J. of Computer and System Sciences, 7 (1973),
404-447.
Recursion Structure Simplification,
with A. Maggiolo-Schettini and B.K. Rosen,
SIAM J. Computing, 4:3 (Sept., 1975), 307-320.
Systematic Recursion Removal,
with M.A. Auslander,
Comm. of the Assoc. for Computing Machinery,
21:2 (Feb., 1978), 127-134.
Search Within A Page,
with G. Markowsky and A.K. Chandra,
J. of the Assoc. for Computing Machinery,
26:1 (July, 1979), 457-482.
Slide Search,
with I.L. Traiger and G. Markowsky,
IBM Research Report RJ2274 (June, 1978).
Extendible Hashing - A Fast Access Method For Dynamic Files,
with R. Fagin, J. Nievergelt, and N. Pippenger,
ACM Transactions on Database Systems,
4:3 (Sept., 1979), 315-344.
Vector Execution of Flow Graphs,
JACM,
30:1 (January, 1983), 186-196.
Authenticated Algorithms for Byzantine Agreement,
with D. Dolev,
SIAM J. Comput.,
12:4 (November, 1983), 656-666.
∪
PAGE 5
∪
An Efficient Algorithm for Byzantine Agreement without Authentication,
with D. Dolev, M. J. Fischer, R. Fowler, and N. A. Lynch,
Information and Control,
52:3 (March, 1982), 257-274.
∪
∪
=======================================================================
βSCRIPT/VS R2.0: DEVICE 1403W6 CHARS MONO
:LETTER bt='////' tt='///Page &/'.
∪
K51-802
408/927-1800
∪
January 31, 1986
∪
Professor John McCarthy
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
Dear Professor McCarthy:
This is a letter recommending Ray Strong for the position of
Stanford Industrial Lecturer for the 1986-1987 year. Dr.
Strong seems ideally qualified for the position because he
combines depth of theoretical understanding with practical
experience.
He has been with IBM Research since 1967. In that period he
has made significant contributions to widely varied areas of
theoretical computer science including the theory of recur-
sive functions, the theory of program schemata, the theory
of search strategies in data structures, and the theory of
fault tolerant distributed algorithms. He is an author of
several patents and IBM invention disclosures in areas of
optimizing compiling, communication and synchronization, and
database access methods. His simulation and implementation
work has contributed to IBM products as well as research
prototypes. He received an IBM outstanding contribution
award as a coinventor of Extendible Hashing. His recent work
on Byzantine agreement and clock synchronization is general-
ly recognized as outstanding. Moreover this work was
motivated by the problems of a prototype distributed system.
In conclusion I heartily recommend Dr. Strong as an excel-
lent candidate for your Industrial Lectureship position.
∪
Sincerely,
∪
PAGE 2
∪
Patricia G. Selinger
jk
∪
∂07-Feb-86 0008 YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Draft of thesis
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 00:07:57 PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 03:07:13-EST
From: Yoram Moses <YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Draft of thesis
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181396086.58.YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
I've printed a copy of the draft of my thesis
on the MJH dover. Assuming no major problems
with the typesetting/printing, I expect that
you will receive a copy very soon. About the thesis:
Its title has changed from
``On theories of knowledge, communication, and
concurrent actions'' to ``Knowledge in a distributed
environment''. A paper I started writing with Cynthia Dwork
Cynthia Dwork in September which makes essential use
of the approach to knowledge and common knowledge that
was offered in an earlier paper has been added to the
thesis, replacing the two ``logics'' papers that were
there before, thus making the thesis more focused and
unified. The change was made in agreement with Joe Halpern.
I'm going to be in the Bay area in March, and am very
interested in filing for the degree in the Winter
quarter. The last date for that is March 14th. I would
therefore be grateful if you could read it within a month,
and if you see basic changes you feel are necessary,
please let me know as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Yoram
-------
∂07-Feb-86 1334 LES "General use" wins
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA,
Pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
I hereby declare that we will proceed with the solicitation and review
of computer facility proposals giving priority to "general use" over
"project-specific" proposals. This note reviews the reasons for
proceeding in this direction.
It has now been two days since I asked committee members to express their
views on the competing priorities of "general use" and "project-
specific." Dave Cheriton has stated that he would like to see the funds
divided along project lines, with preference being given to DARPA-funded
projects. Tom Rindfleisch and I favor the "general use" priority. No one
else on the committee has expressed a view. Therefore, the formal voting
is 2:1 in favor of "general use."
Vaughan Pratt would also like to see the funds divided among projects, but
with preference given to non-DARPA projects. Not only that, he proposes
to help us out by taking responsibility for spending half of the available
funds. (Quiz question: guess which of Dave and Vaughan has a DARPA
contract?)
John Hennessy's unsolicited recollections of how this fund was set up
appears to support the "general use" doctrine [message to faculty@score,
6 Feb 1986 0638-PST (Thursday)]. I have reviewed this matter with Nils
Nilsson and learned that he also favors the "general use" approach.
It is now time to get on with developing and reviewing specific proposals.
Remember that "project-specific" proposals are welcome, but they will
generally be given lower priority
Les Earnest
Facilities Committee Chair
∂07-Feb-86 1529 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 15:29:14 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.8)
id AA11470; Fri, 7 Feb 86 15:27:39 PST
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 86 15:27:39 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8602072327.AA11470@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Hello Dr. McCarthy,
I, Rajeev Aggarwal, and John Searle are doing a study which
is quite similar to the survey published by Daniel Bobrow in the
AI Journal this year. He will be helping us to make a publishable
version of this study for the AI Journal.
Basically, the whole study can be described/outlined in three stages.
In the first, we have three participants: Hubert/Stuart Dreyfus,
John Searle, and David Rumelhart. They have agreed to provide
approximate 2 page specific criticisms of traditional AI.
(Terry Winograd may also be participating, but this is not certain yet).
In the second stage, four computer scientists actively doing
work in the field will be providing responses to any parts
of the criticisms that they feel need to be refuted, based
on their work, other AI work, or their own philosophies. We
would very much like you to be one of the four participants
in this stage.
All the participants sincerely believe that your presence and views
are very important to such a discussion - for their own benefit and
the various readerships (publications) that we hope will see various
versions of this discussion.
In the last, third stage, we intend to get one last brief
response/comments from the critical side and then a final
statement from the AI researchers.
The exchange of communications will be organized in a manner
so that each participant will have a reasonable amount of time
to respond to other participants, one at a time.
If it is okay with you, we would like to conduct all communication
over the network since this will make the entire study go more
rapidly. We hope you will be able to participate and let
us know soon of your decision. We believe this will be
quite an interesting discussion!
Sincerely,
Vijay Ramamoorthy
∂07-Feb-86 1735 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: "General use" wins
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 17:35:52 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Feb 86 16:29:50 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA17195; Fri, 7 Feb 86 16:30:32 pst
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 86 16:30:32 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602080030.AA17195@coraki.uucp>
To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Cc: Pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
Subject: Re: "General use" wins
In-Reply-To: message of 07 Feb 86 1334 PST.
<8602072308.AA17035@coraki.uucp>
I hereby declare that we will proceed with the solicitation and
review of computer facility proposals giving priority to
"general use" over "project-specific" proposals.
Les, I would appreciate it if you would notify the faculty of this
decision. The only negative feedback I received concerning my proposal
was from two members of your committee. I believe many non-DARPA CSD
faculty share my views about the need for equipment in support of
non-DARPA research - in fact I would be quite surprised if there were a
single dissenter in that population. This need in US computer science
departments is a major priority for NSF, which has an annual budget of
over $20M for this exact situation, about four times its budget for its
other large programs. I think your committee shows a marked lack of
sensitivity to the reasoning that led NSF to make that commitment.
Not only that, he proposes to help us out by taking
responsibility for spending half of the available funds.
You may have overlooked my previous message, in which I withdrew my
offer to administer whatever non-DARPA project-specific money would be
made available, on the ground that as a non-DARPA-contractor I may be
an inapproriate choice.
Incidentally, pardon my being thin-skinned about this, but your tone
adds insult to the injury of being a non-DARPA researcher. To give you
a bit more insight into the injury aspect, let me just say that
Stanford has not been the easiest place for me to get my research done
at, though I value enormously the teaching opportunities it presents.
While I don't think inaccessibility of equipment for non-DARPA
researchers has been the overall intent of the funding agencies, the
effect of the Stanford organization has been to make it that way for me
since my return from Sun. This is a problem I am working on, with no
help or interest from your committee, I'm sorry to say. We will see
what the best long-term solution is. I would like Stanford to be a
good place for me to do research. It would be a shame if the principal
longterm effect of committees like yours were to make it impractical
for non-DARPA researchers such as myself to work at Stanford.
-v
∂07-Feb-86 1855 binford@su-whitney.arpa "General use" wins
Received: from SU-WHITNEY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 18:55:32 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Feb 86 18:53:03 pst
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 86 18:53:03 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
To: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.ARPA
Cc: LES@SU-AI.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa's message of Fri, 7 Feb 86 16:30:32 pst
Subject: "General use" wins
Vaughan
I invite you to suggest to the committee to suggest
ways that they might help you and others. I think
that there is great good will on the committee. It
seems natural that there be contention for the
resources.
Tom
∂08-Feb-86 1352 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: "General use" wins
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Feb 86 13:52:40 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 8 Feb 86 13:45:34 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA18579; Sat, 8 Feb 86 13:45:02 pst
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 86 13:45:02 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602082145.AA18579@coraki.uucp>
To: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
Cc: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, pratt@su-navajo.ARPA
Subject: Re: "General use" wins
In-Reply-To: message of Fri, 7 Feb 86 18:53:03 pst.
<8602080323.AA17549@coraki.uucp>
I invite you to suggest to the committee to suggest
ways that they might help you and others.
This is getting to be a joke. I've been trying to get CF to help me
since my return to Stanford last April. In all that time all that CF
has done in response to my requests is put a 24x80 terminal on my desk
and remove the ftp-only restriction on LaBrea. The response I've
received to date from the facilities committee to my suggestion that
some of the money be spent on non-DARPA research, which I had hoped
would help me as a non-DARPA researcher, has been nothing but flak,
some of it sarcastic, and none of it in the slightest bit constructive
with regard to my proposal. In contrast I heard nothing but positive
feedback from non-committee-members concerning my proposal. Either the
committee does not understand why NSF runs a $20M CER program or else
it feels that CER is irrelevant to this situation. Tell me why I
should bother to be a faculty member of an institution that makes it so
incredibly difficult for a researcher to get help with facilities. If
Sun treated its employees anything like this there'd be a mass walkout.
I think that there is great good will on the committee.
Something more than just will, whether good or ill, is needed here.
While I wouldn't mind an improvement in the quality of the vibes from
the committee, I would appreciate even more actually seeing something
positive happen with this money. Proposing to do with it exactly what
was proposed three years or so ago ("general CSD") is not my idea of
progress -- something needs to be done to break the cycle or I predict
that much of the money will return to DARPA unspent, good will
notwithstanding. I'd like to see something that is more in the spirit
of what both NSF and DARPA have in mind for this sort of money, namely
*research*. If to benefit non-DARPA CSD researchers this has to be
structured so that DARPA can account for it as "trickle-down" or
whatever then so be it, but the important thing is that some of it be
used in support of experimental research on a department-wide (as
opposed to purely DARPA-wide) basis.
-v
∂08-Feb-86 1409 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa On my serving on the facilities committee
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Feb 86 14:09:11 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 8 Feb 86 14:02:02 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA18662; Sat, 8 Feb 86 14:03:20 pst
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 86 14:03:20 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602082203.AA18662@coraki.uucp>
To: facil@su-ai.ARPA, nilsson@su-score.ARPA
Subject: On my serving on the facilities committee
Cc: pratt@su-navajo.arpa
Some of you have expressed puzzlement that I would not want to be on
the computing facilities committee. While at Sun, in anticipation of
my return to Stanford, I asked Fred Brookes about his transition from
IBM to UNC. He told me the story of CDC's suit against IBM and UNC.
Brookes had anticipated this by making clear publicly and in advance
the limited extent of his influence on UNC's computer-purchasing
decisions. This was supposedly instrumental in clearing IBM and UNC.
While Sun and CSD form a rather less likely target of such suits than
IBM and UNC, it is still conceivable that a firm like DEC, which is
presently in intense competition with Sun at universities, could base a
suit on my two-hatted influence on CSD's computer purchases, if they
valued that little corner of their market enough. By not serving on
the facilities committee (much as I would dearly like to) I make it
substantially harder for such a case to be made. I see less of a
problem with my giving technical advice to the committee when they see
fit to solicit it, or with performing administrative duties where I do
not participate in equipment decisions. (Example: under my proposal to
administer the "meek's" money, equipment decisions would be made by the
beneficiaries rather than the administrator, and then only under
goldfish-bowl conditions.)
I might add that I do not enjoy this mickey-mouse at all since it
complicates my life unproductively from my point of view. For example
I feel very strongly about the high quality of Sun software and
hardware, and would like to be able to specify it for the use of my
research projects. Unfortunately the position I have taken requires me
to ask others to make my equipment decisions for me appropriately, and
to hope that they will see the wisdom of purchasing Sun equipment. If
they feel something else is more appropriate for my needs, I'm stuck
with their decision. If anyone has ideas on avoiding all this
mickey-mouse I'm all ears (so to speak).
-v
∂09-Feb-86 1258 JK
Forgot to cc you guys on my msg to GLB:
------------------------------------------------------
Gian-Luigi:
Had a chat with clt and jmc. Sol is also concerned as to what
your plans are. I outlined the 3-phase proposal of:
(1) Designing the new EKL language with
different handling of types etc.
(2) Implementing it
(3) Running experiments.
CLT will talk to Sol. I asked JMC about priorities vis-a-vis Landau.
The general feeling seemed to be that the priorities should be:
(a) Us finishing the paper.
CLT felt that there were still questions on separating
the substance from detail and that the paper could
stand some improvement from this point of view.
Could you drop off a bound copy of the most recent version
on her desk? I believe she has only a fairly preliminary
version. Also, I would like to have a bound copy.
CLT would like to read it through and provide us comments.
(b) proceeding with steps 1-3 above
(c) then doing Landau as an experiment in this context
Of course, one more priority is you deciding as to what you want to do
and how you want to divide your time. My belief is that doing steps
(1)-(3), doing all the necessary academic duties and writing this all up
will be a year of full time work.
JK
∂09-Feb-86 2059 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Sequent Balance
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Feb 86 20:59:05 PST
Date: Sun 9 Feb 86 21:00:05-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Sequent Balance
To: les@SU-AI.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182148454.79.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Friends,
I am a member of Sequent's Technology Advisory Board. I have been through
reviews of their computer and software, have seen it in operation, and have
been through their manufacturing facility. I'm really impressed with all
of this and with their people (who I think are VERY good).
I think I may be helpful in getting an excellent price from Sequent for us.
I think they would like to work with Stanford people on extending the range
of applicability of their hardware/software. They are particularly interested
in LISP (they may already be in contact with LUCID for CommonLisp).
The idea of getting two Sequents is an interesting one. One for "developers",
and one for a rather large UNIX-jobs throughput for the department's users.
Running routine UNIX load, the machine has a rather large throughput. I don't
think that developers will want to fight for bus cycles with routine users.
Otherwise, they're compatible because the bus is the only seriously shared
resource. However, this can be tested experimentally. I could be very wrong
about bus contention.
Due to Dave Rodgers' fanaticism on the subject of reliability and consequently
the manufacturing procedures he has put in place, the hardware is extremely
reliable (way beyond what is reasonable). I don't know about software reliability.
I await your marching orders.
Ed
p.s. maybe I could arrange a two-for-one deal, like the Explorers or like
the old VAX deals with DEC?????
-------
∂09-Feb-86 2250 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Sequent Balance
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Feb 86 22:50:17 PST
Date: Sun 9 Feb 86 22:51:13-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: Sequent Balance
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 9 Feb 86 22:40:00-PST
Message-ID: <12182168685.79.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, maybe I misunderstood. I thought from Les' message that we already
had the money and were looking for a way to spend it before May 31.
Did I misread, Les? (Sometimes I wonder why I stick my nose into things).
Ed
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0729 TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 07:29:05 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 07:23:13-PST
From: Thomas Dienstbier <TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 10 Feb 86 00:14:00-PST
Message-ID: <12182261891.12.TOM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We are very close to having everything together. The new modems did arrive
and I have been checking them out for a few days.. The terminal is sitting
in Marty's office. The printer came in last thursday and after the testing,
we can go ahead and install it. I plan on coming to your house tuesday or
wednesday probably in the morning around 10:00.
tom
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0735 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa re: Sequent Balance
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 07:35:43 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Mon, 10 Feb 86 07:34:52 pst
Date: 10 Feb 1986 0734-PST (Monday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
Subject: re: Sequent Balance
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 09 Feb 86 2254 PST.
I think the committee is looking at spending a chunk of the remainder
of the department share of the money on a Sequent. This is an excellent
idea as such a machine will be of interest to a large fraction of the
department, including DARPA researchers. I am also considering
purchasing such a machine for parallel language development work; Dave
Luckham is also looking at a Sequent for his Ada work.
I agree that the Sequent is the most complete and flexible of the
multiprocessors available. We have strongly indicated our interest in
68020 versions that may become available soon.
Ed, any help you can get on a deal would be great; I strongly suspect
that we will buy at least two of these machines in the near future.
John
∂10-Feb-86 1004 CLT calendar item
mon 17-feb 11:00 Timothy to Hurds
∂10-Feb-86 1026 CLT
did the pictures get mailed to joleen b?
∂10-Feb-86 1127 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: "General use" wins
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 11:27:12 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Feb 86 11:19:11 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 86 11:19:11 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: "General use" wins
To: binford@Whitney, coraki!pratt@Navajo
Cc: Nilsson@SU-Score, facil@Sail, pratt@Navajo
I agree with Vaughan's sentiments regarding "general use". I am simply
hoping/praying that when we evaluate different proposals and ideas for
spending the money, "general use" will turn out to be a no-op (i.e. no
real ideas there) so we wont repeat the scenario of four years ago and
lose the money.
I think Vaughan is being too harsh on the committee. The issue he raised
of "fairness" in distribution of the money was legitimate and was discussed.
However, there is now a need to identify research activities that require
additional equipment and funds to cover the operating costs of this equipment.
Proposals that identify such research, the needs and the source of operating
costs are being solicited.
∂10-Feb-86 1203 RICH@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
Received: from AI.AI.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 12:02:16 PST
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 86 15:03:21 EST
From: Charles Rich <RICH@AI.AI.MIT.EDU>
To: McCarthy@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: DICK@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU, Rich@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[AI.AI.MIT.EDU].13247.860210.RICH>
John,
As part of the introduction to a volume of collected reprints
entitle "Readings in Artificial Intelligence and Software Engineering"
(published by Morgan Kaufman and edited by myself and Dick Waters),
I am writing the following paragraph:
In 1959, John McCarthy, then at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology with the core of people who were eventually to become the
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, got interested in the
possibility of a building a program which would become intelligent by
learnining from experience and taking advice. However, in order to
pursue this research, he first had to devise a way for his program to
run interactively on a single computer while other users were doing
other things -- and so time-sharing was born.
I thought I would send it to you first, however, to check its
historical veracity.
Thanks, Chuck.
∂10-Feb-86 1215 RA telex for you
The school of Engineering, Linkoeping University invites you to accept
the degree of Doctor Honorors Causa. It will be awarded at the commencement
taking place on Monday, June 2nd. The only obligation is to give an
award lecture on Saturday May 31st. We would also like to have you and your
wife here as our guests during a week before and/or after the commencement.
We, of course, cover your travel costs and cost of stay and also for your wife.
We would need to know asap the appropriate size for the hat and the ring which
will be awarded to you as simbols of dignity. If any questions, please contact
Prof. Erik Sandelwall, tel. 46 13281 408 or Mr. Lars Alm, tel. 46 13 281 012
Jan Ove Palmberg Professor and dean of school of Engineering
John, a copy of the telex will be here tomorrow.
∂10-Feb-86 1243 VAL Samizdat Bulletin
At a recent meeting of a group of former Soviets, everyone was asked to buy a
subscription to Samizdat Bulletin for an English-speaking friend. I gave them
your name. I hope you don't mind. This is a monthly digest of information coming
out of Russia by unofficial channels.
∂10-Feb-86 1439 RA trip to Austin
I made the following reservations:
Leave 2/12 from SJ 5:30pm America West flight 18, arr. Austin 11:40pm.
Return trip, Friday 2/14 6:15pm United 365 via Denver; arr. Denver 7:28.
Leave Denver, United 433, 8:30pm, arr. SJ 9:52pm.
Please let me know if this is ok. Do you need a car?
∂10-Feb-86 1501 RA David chudnovsky
David called; will call you later at home.
∂10-Feb-86 1511 HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Susans birthdate
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 15:11:45 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 14:59:16-PST
From: Katherine Hanrahan <HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Susans birthdate
To: mccarthy@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182344912.31.HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I am doing the paperwork for your daughter Susan and need to know her
birthdate. thanx Katie
-------
∂10-Feb-86 1620 RA Chris Garcia,TIME
Chris Garcia from Time magazine called re cover story on AI.
Her tel. (415) 434 5243.
∂10-Feb-86 1658 LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA re: Improving History (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 16:57:56 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 16:57:48-PST
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Improving History (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 9 Feb 86 00:09:00-PST
Thanks -- your historical insights make me feel better about the Newton
incident, despite the fact that (according to Time) the whole meeting
was a fabrication.
-- Ken Laws
-------
∂10-Feb-86 1743 RICH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Timesharing
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 17:42:13 PST
Date: 10 Feb 1986 18:17 EST (Mon)
Message-ID: <RICH.12182348291.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Charles Rich <RICH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Timesharing
In-reply-to: Msg of 10 Feb 1986 16:20-EST from John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI.ARPA>
Thanks for your quick reply and clarification. I will let you know
if I wish permission to use part of the memo.
-Chuck.
∂10-Feb-86 1917 RPG Uniforum
To: LES, JJW, CLT, JMC
Unfortunately I had to go to this for a day. I looked at the Sequent,
Encore, and Alliant machines, which were all down there and running.
Each vendor let me type at their machine (that's more than I can
say for the Franz Inc booth). Sequent seems to have a newer, bigger
machine. It seems that the OS limitation on sharing address spaces
on the sequent machine is fixed (but I'm not 100% sure).
The Alliant technical guy is visiting me next thursday. He is willing
to give a brief overview of the machine to whomever would like to
listen, either at Stanford or at Lucid. He is coming to the area for
some other reason.
-rpg-
∂10-Feb-86 1929 LES PC RT
I finished assembling it, correctly I hope, and powered it up. According
to the instructions it is supposed to flash numbers on the "two-digit display,"
which I assume is the red plastic frob on the front of the main unit.
Unfortunately, I don't see any numbers there.
Guess I'll power down and fiddle some more tomorrow.
∂10-Feb-86 1942 LES re: Uniforum
To: RPG
CC: JJW, CLT, JMC
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Feb-86 19:17-PT.]
Sequent apparently will have a 68020-based version of their system
shortly. We are getting quotes for delivery of a vanilla system with
subsequent upgrade to 68020's for consideration in the DARPA-funded
facility acquisition crunch.
I am interested in what Alliant has to say. I'm flexible on location
and am open on time Thursday except for 9:00am-11:00am and 2:30pm-3:30pm.
I can get out of the morning thing if necessry.
Les
∂10-Feb-86 1953 JJW Re: Uniforum
To: RPG
CC: LES, CLT, JMC
Thursday is fine with me too.
Joe
∂10-Feb-86 2106 LES
∂10-Feb-86 2008 RPG
∂10-Feb-86 2005 LES PC RT Common Lisp
Given that we now have an IBM PC RT spreading bits in JMC's office, you
wouldn't by chance be able to guess when a Lisp system for it might become
available would you?
--------------
I have heard no announcements or planned release date for anyone's
Lisp. I might suggest that JMC ask IBM if there could be
some vendor around for whom he could be a beta site. I would not be surprised
if someone else has gotten such an arrangement, but one can never
tell, eh?
∂10-Feb-86 2320 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS assignment
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 23:20:49 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 23:20:06-PST
From: Dah-Bin Kao <KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: VTSS assignment
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: kao@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Automated Design and Construction Aids
My opinion is that automated design and construction aids
are extremely useful for big manufacturers, but to individuals
they would be just luxuries which are only marginally useful.
Manufacturers:
1. Automobile Industry:
Automated design and construction aids are rather mature.
Automation has been used in body and engine design,
robots are extensively used in automobile assembly.
2. Semiconductor Industry:
The hottest topic in silicon research today is CAD/CAM
( Computer Aided Design and Computer Aided Manufacturing).
Engineering work-stations are used in circuit and device
design. Increased automation is being used in fabrication
laboratories. My impression is that fully automated
fabrication labs already exist, probably in Japan.
Advantages of CAD/CAM: higher productivity in general
CAD: Shorter turn-around time, less tedious and repetitive jobs,
error checking, optimization.
CAM: 24-hour production, consistency, no human contamination, etc.
Possible impacts:
1. Elimination of human jobs.
2. Japaneses superiority in manufacturing will disappear if fully
automated production is adopted, and if the Japanese are
willing to sell those automated facilities.
Technological feasibility:
Evolutionary improvements are constantly being made. The manufacturing
automation seems rather routine. The challenge lies in automated
design aids. Here the goal is to do better than what human brains
can do. Some desirable things are:
1. Super fast computers which are reasonably cheap. Since a lot of
design activities are numerical in nature, fast number crunchers
would be very desirable. How about those mini-supercomputers?
2. "Expert systems" is a hot jargon in CAD/CAM. But I think they
are most useful in human interface, and not in intrinsic design
activities.
3. Fast, high-quality graphic display systems. Both good pictures
and fast transmission of data are desirable. They can be
achieved through faster electronics and optical communication.
Individuals:
Technological feasibility:
Whatever is available to the manufacturers can be made available
to the individuals. The individual can access the design aids
through graphic terminals and fast data communication links.
The finished design can be submitted to the manufacturer for
construction.
Desirability:
I would rate this greatly enhanced design and construction capability
as useful as home access to the Library of Congress. I think a very
small group of people would enjoy them immensely, but most people
would not care much. I would even extend the same notion to home
computers. They are expensive toys most people can do very little with.
I think most people would rather have robot servants which can operate
home computers or use design aids.
-------
∂11-Feb-86 0411 HST lisp standardization
hi john. i would like to know if you have taken some position in the question
of a lisp standardization. do you like CommonLISP? do you think it is the
ritght thing? did you ever study the scheme material. do you like trhis more
(or less)?
∂11-Feb-86 0931 dreyfus%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 09:31:39 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA22260; Tue, 11 Feb 86 09:32:19 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 86 09:32:19 PST
From: dreyfus%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Hubert L. Dreyfus)
Message-Id: <8602111732.AA22260@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa
John
Got your message.
Bert.
∂11-Feb-86 1016 CLT Uniforum
To: RPG
CC: LES, JJW, JMC
Thursday is not great for me.
Perhaps Joe and/or LES can tell me
the main points of the presentation
some time.
∂11-Feb-86 1057 RA trip to Austin
The airline tickets are on your desk.
∂11-Feb-86 1158 RA Re: trip to Austin
[Reply to message recvd: 11 Feb 86 11:14 Pacific Time]
I don't think so; he made the reservations himself, but I will check.
∂11-Feb-86 1233 RA Bob Simons
Simons would like to bring you some RT software. He would like you to call
him 7-4296
∂11-Feb-86 1238 RA Ralph Preiss, IEEE
Preiss from IEEE society
wanted to know when you became full professor and whether you have
a front-facing picture instead of the leaning-over picture you sent him. If
you do he would like us to send it to him by Federal Express. He will reimburse
us for it. His tel. (914) 435 8185
∂11-Feb-86 1240 GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA AI Qual
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 12:40:06 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 12:33:59-PST
From: Grace Smith <GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AI Qual
To: TOB@SU-AI.ARPA, EAF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, GENESERETH@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, WINOGRAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: bgb@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, waleson@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, gsmith@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
mccall@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182580608.46.GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
We're trying to schedule the AI Qual for sometime mid-to-late May. Could
you let me know what your schedules look like for the week of May 19th?
There are probably going to be about 14 people taking the qual and it
would be great if you could get through them all in one marathon day.
Otherwise, how do you feel about (a) two half days or (b) a Saturday or
Sunday?
Thanks,
Grace
-------
∂11-Feb-86 1302 RA Gerard Piel
Piel from Scientific American called; he will call back.
∂11-Feb-86 1323 TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU A quick question
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 13:20:16 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1986 16:21 EST
Message-ID: <TLP.12182589175.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: A quick question
I've heard the following idea attributed to you:
The fact that in the cubical blocks world, the blocks always go into
their final position and don't have to be moved leads to a simple way
of deriving optimal plans.
Is there a published reference for this? I can't find it in the
papers I've looked through. Thanks for your help.
Tomas Lozano-Perez
∂11-Feb-86 1425 LES Lisp
Yes, I need Calo's coordinates. First name?
∂11-Feb-86 1946 LES RT priming
I have just loaded the last tape and am leaving it running. It is
supposed to take about 2 hours to finish. Thereafter, the system
can allegedly be turned off without loss of information.
∂11-Feb-86 2237 ME (on TTY63, at TV-120 2237)
I'm working on a spooler for your new printer. I assume you'll want to be
able to spool things from E, as with the other spoolers. My plan is to
implement a normal type of spooler, but not to advertise its name in general.
∂11-Feb-86 2346 ME name
∂11-Feb-86 2344 JMC re: (on TTY63, at TV-120 2237)
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Feb-86 22:37-PT.]
That's fine. I'll think about a name - perhaps COVERT.
ME - My initial idea is LATHROP.
∂12-Feb-86 0003 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa use of arpa funds, etc.
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 00:02:57 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 11 Feb 86 23:56:45 pst
Date: 11 Feb 1986 2356-PST (Tuesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: facil@sail, jlh@sonoma, pratt@navajo
Cc: lantz@su-gregorio.arpa
Subject: use of arpa funds, etc.
Unfortunately, I probably won't make the meeting tomorrow. However,
a few questions/comments on the state of affairs as noted in Les's
message:
- I'd like to hear more about the likely distribution of the remaining
CSL money.
- I continue to believe that McSuns are a clear and present loser.
Much time would be wasted "experimenting" with building them and seeing
whether they would work. I remind people of the late great
multi-68000 machine(s?) that LOTS/CSD-CF built a few years back.
- I am of at least two minds with respect to who is "deserving" of the
ARPA funds. First, I think that much of the equipment previously
purchased by ARPA PI's has seen extensive use by the CSD/CSL community
at large. In that light, since those PI's obviously did something for
the public (including the "meek"'s) good, it would seem fair to use the
remaining funds to replace much of that equipment, and let the meek inherit
the old equipment -- which they did not help acquire but from which
they, or their students, have almost certainly benefited. Note that
the new equipment will undoubtedly continue to be just as accessible to
the CSD community at large as the old equipment was, and if the meek
also make their newly inherited equipment available, so much the better.
This position is further strengthened by the fact that many of the PI's
that acquired the equipment in the first place are currently having
difficulty securing incremental funds or follow-on contracts, because
of Gramm-Rudman, etc., all of which makes it less feasible to propose
large capital expenditures in new proposals.
On the other hand, I believe it is the case that the CSD community at
large might benefit from considerably different equipment than that
currently in place or that would be purchased by the ARPA PI's. In
that light, I am not adverse to seeing some (if not all)
funds employed without regard to the needs/wishes of specific ARPA
projects. For example...
- I think we should purchase many more Sun workstations, primarily
Sun-3/50's (ca. $5000 with Stanford's discount; IBM PC RTs are in left
field somewhere; the new uVax-II GPX's "may" be competitive). In fact,
I could imagine spending virtually all the remaining funds on
workstations! I would like to see some of these placed in dedicated
teaching (ahem... research) laboratories, similar to the systems
teaching lab. Wherever they are, I think these workstations should be
configured to run either Unix or V, either of which requires some
additional file server support (and possibly "mother ship" support, a
la the Vax 750 known as Leland). For Unix, we should probably buy some
Sun file servers; I presume David has the V end firmly in hand.
- Note that the above allocation of funds might have an important p.r.
advantage, namely, it would place CSD ahead of most departments,
including MIT EECS and Berkeley, on the facilities-per-person front...
and bring us somewhat closer to CMU.
- As for my personal interests, I wouldn't mind buying some voice and
possibly video hardware to turn a few Suns into multi-media
workstations! I don't have a good price fix on this yet, but voice
should come in at around $2000 per.
Cheers, Keith
∂12-Feb-86 0032 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa comments on jan. 2 draft
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 00:32:34 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 12 Feb 86 00:26:45 pst
Date: 12 Feb 1986 0026-PST (Wednesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: phdcom@sail
Cc:
Subject: comments on jan. 2 draft
(probably hopelessly out of date by now, but all I have...)
- First, I think proposals to date would yield a better program than we
currently have. However...
- I think the comp is getting too broad. I really cannot imagine
anyone knowing anything substantive in so many areas within two years,
what with the addition of graphics, networks, databases, and who knows
what else... unless the committee is suggesting that most students will
dedicate their first two years almost exclusively to preparation for
the comp, or has some other mechanism in mind for delimiting the scope
of the comp/the students' knowledge. Actually, the bulk of the
problems seem to derive from the proposed "applications and specialized
techniques" area (including a prescription for passing that I cannot
fathom).
If, however, networks are added, note that it/they should be split
between hardware and software...
- I favor fixed progress deadlines -- e.g. must pass comp in 2 years,
must pass qual in three years -- rather than relative deadlines -- e.g.
must pass qual within one year of walking on water (= passing the new
comp). The current mechanism, or any "relative" mechanism that I can think
of, is just too prone to misinterpretation and misadministration. I
couldn't care if someone passes the comp in her first quarter here, but
doesn't pass the qual until the end of her third year.
- I am leery of expending inordinate effort to place elaborate support
structures in place for "special categories", particularly so in the
case of "ineffective" (as opposed to "non-native") English speakers. I
believe we do noone, especially the party in question, by
admitting/hiring a student, faculty or staff who cannot communicate
effectively. Doing so places unnecessary strain on everyone involved.
Time and again I have seen these students perform considerably poorer
in courses than "effective" English speakers. I believe we should
refrain from admitting (or hiring) people until they demonstrate
competence. (I also have found TOEFL scores to be adequate in this
regard. Indeed, most of the students I know who have had trouble had
VERY low TOEFL scores, but were admitted despite them.)
- As for the proposed restructuring of the quals and the introduction
of a thesis proposal defense, see the next message...
Keith
∂12-Feb-86 0112 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa CSD qual and thesis proposal presentation proposal
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 01:12:01 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 12 Feb 86 01:06:02 pst
Date: 12 Feb 1986 0105-PST (Wednesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: phd-program@navajo, phdcom@sail
Cc:
Subject: CSD qual and thesis proposal presentation proposal
As the chairman of yet another committee for revamping things, namely,
the systems qual, I thought it was time to comment on what we have in
mind vs. what is currently under consideration by the CSD PhD
Committee (of which I have just recently become a member as well)...
As a CSL (not CSD) committee, my committee is charged with devising a
scheme that satisfies the needs of both CS and EE students. (Readers
should bear in mind that this commonality is near and dear the hearts
of most if not all CSL faculty, of the chairmen of both departments,
and of the dean.) Originally, it was envisaged that we might revamp the
entire PhD program in systems, a la the CSD PhD committee, but cooler heads
prevailed and we have decided to live with whatever CS has in the way
of a comprehensive and whatever EE has in the way of a "qual"
(equivalent to the CS comprehensive). So, in terms of CS hurdles, we
are now concerned only with the post-comp student.
Although my committee has yet to make a formal proposal, it appears
that the majority of CSL faculty are in favor of introducing a "thesis
proposal defense", similar to the "disseration proposal presentation,
et al." proposed by the CSD PhD committee. Passing this defense would
be a prerequisite to completing a G81. A somewhat smaller majority
appears to be in favor of using that defense as the only
post-comp/pre-thesis hurdle. With respect to CSD, this means using the
defense as the systems qual. With respect to EE, this means
introducing a brand new requirement; there currently is no equivalent
to the CSD qual in EE.
The format of this defense differs somewhat from that proposed by the
CSD PhD committee. First, we (ahem... I) do not believe the
presentation or the written proposal should be open/available to the
public. Rather, the presentation will be open to the intended reading
committee, plus AT LEAST one other unaligned faculty member. It is
believed that a public presentation places undue stress on the student
involved. Second, the presentation WILL be subject to "debate", that
is, it will be followed by a question and answer session. Indeed, it
is this question and answer session which is intended to serve the
"ensure depth" function of the systems qual. Any and all questions
pertaining to the subject matter of the proposed thesis are fair game.
Since most reasonable theses touch on several of the subareas of
systems currently covered on the systems qual, it is felt that we can
ensure equivalent depth of knowledge -- indeed, more depth in specific
sub-sub----area of the proposed thesis.
The above argument reflects my own (and I believe the majority) opinion
that such a defense is a more-than-adequate replacement for the
current systems qual. However, there is some sentiment amongst the CSL
faculty that the defense should be used in conjunction with an area
exam. This would be more-or-less consistent with the proposals of the
CSD PhD committee. I for one do not believe an additional area exam is
necessary, but that remains to be voted. I also believe that this
approach is the right one to take for all areas, not just for systems.
I hope this contributes some useful food for thought.
Keith
∂12-Feb-86 0149 ME JMC printer
To: SB@SU-AI.ARPA, TD@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ME@SU-AI.ARPA
You can take the printer to JMC's house now. I'm done with it. The
spooler is also done, modulo knowing which line the printer will be on.
Until that point, here's how you can spool on it to test it. If the
printer is on, say, line 43, type this monitor command to SAIL:
LATHROP/TTY=43 <filename><RETURN>
Then type RETURN when it says to. The TTY better already "exist"
at the right speed (same speed as the Imagen is set to).
(To see the queue (of files requested with /TTY), use Q/SELF. When
the right TTY is known to the LATHROP spooler, Q/L will be used.)
∂12-Feb-86 1046 RA meeting with Genesereth
Mike says he will be a little late for the meeting, about 11:15.
∂12-Feb-86 1136 LES telephone call
Elliot Bloom will be at Faculty Club with a friend beginning about 11:45
today and invites you to join them.
∂12-Feb-86 1150 LES Meeting
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA
Now (noon) in MJH-301!
∂12-Feb-86 1153 LES RT Unix
It is up and running. You are logged in as "guest."
∂12-Feb-86 1230 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA PLANLUNCH seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 12:30:57 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 12:31:21-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: PLANLUNCH seminar
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
John,
A while ago you asked me if you could give a talk in the SRI
planlunch seminar series... Are you free to give a talk on
March 10 or March 17 (11AM)? Please let me know ASAP as I am
trying to set up the schedule for the next month. If Mondays
are not good for you, your talk could be given on a Wednesday
instead (same time).
Thanks, Amy Lansky
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1336 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 13:36:56 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 13:34:53-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Robotics Search Committee
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182853837.17.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Robotics Search Committee will be having a meeting Thursday, Feb. 20
from 5 - 6 or Friday, Feb. 21 from 4 on. Pleaselet me know which of these
you would be able to attend.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1353 SB New data lines
The new data lines should work now, I forgot I had to
reverse the wires at this end.
--Steve
∂12-Feb-86 1541 LES Re: 4.2 documentation
∂12-Feb-86 1539 greep@camelot Re: 4.2 documentation
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 15:38:50 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 12 Feb 86 15:36:32 pst
Date: 12 Feb 1986 1536-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: 4.2 documentation
In-Reply-To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA> / 12 Feb 86 1521 PST.
Unfortunately, the last I heard that was not a simple procedure. There
is actually a nicely produced spiral-bound set of manuals printed by
Howard Press (wherever that is), but I think the story is that it is only
available through Usenix. When I was at CSLI we went in on a group order
placed by someone at Sumex, but that was enough of a hassle that the
person who did that probably won't want to do it again. Most people just
photocopy an existing copy, but at 3000 pages this is a laborious effort.
Another possibility might be to get manuals from another supplier of Unix.
For example, DEC sells their own set of manuals which, as far as I know,
are identical with the Berkeley ones, but I think they demand an exboritant
price for them and don't know if they sell them to anyone other than
Ultrix customers.
There may be a ready source of manuals, but I don't know of one. I suggest
asking Dan Kolkowitz and, of course, your IBM rep. A good deal of the
manual is online; even if the RT doesn't have the manual pages, any of the
Vaxen will.
Let me know if either of you has any specific questions or wants a general
introduction to Unix. For the latter purpose there are also a large number
of books available, at least one of which deals specifically with Berkeley
Unix.
∂12-Feb-86 1603 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA re: PLANLUNCH seminar
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 16:03:15 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 16:03:05-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: re: PLANLUNCH seminar
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 12 Feb 86 13:34:00-PST
Thanks, that would be great.
-Amy
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1629 RPG Alliant Visit
To: LES, JJW, CLT, JMC
Jack Test from Alliant will be visiting Lucid on Thursday,
February 20. He will make a brief technical presentation of about
1 hour's length, followed by questions. He will begin around 11:30 am.
-rpg-
∂12-Feb-86 1814 ME Lathrop spooler
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: SB@SU-AI.ARPA
The Lathrop spooler now knows that the printer is on TTY43, so if the
printer and its line are working, you should be able to spool with just
LATHROP <filename><CR> and the usual spooler switches are available. The
file can be an Impress file output by TEX via DVIIMP with the /I switch.
And UNS/L and Q/L should work. It isn't supposed to generate title pages
ever (it ignores the /TITLE and /NOTITLE switches). Let me know if there
are any problems.
You can also spool text from E with the ⊗XLATHROP command now.
∂13-Feb-86 0601 TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Thanks
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 06:01:19 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1986 08:50 EST
Message-ID: <TLP.12183031441.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Thanks
In-reply-to: Msg of 12 Feb 1986 18:22-EST from John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI.ARPA>
Thank you for your prompt reply. I've been thinking along related
(though a bit different) lines. I'm trying to characterize planning
problems for which there exists very simple methods such as the one
you describe. I'm writing a short note about it. I'll send you a
copy when I finish it, in case you are interested. Thanks again.
Tomas
∂13-Feb-86 1006 STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 10:06:07 PST
Date: 13 Feb 86 10:00:19 PST
From: STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: jmc@su-ai
Dear Professor McCarthy,
Following is an abbreviated course description. I hope this fits
your requirments.
Sincerely,
Ray Strong
FAULT TOLERANT DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS
Requirements and solutions to problems arising in the
context of distributed systems that must tolerate faults.
Special emphasis: atomic broadcast and clock
synchronization. Design decisions for a prototype
distributed system that reaches, maintains, and recovers
from failure to maintain agreement. Course organized around
a series of problems of varying difficulty that students are
challenged to solve, including some problems that are still
open.
∂13-Feb-86 1214 AI.JMC@MCC.ARPA contex
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 12:13:02 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 14:12:27-CST
From: AI.JMC@MCC.ARPA
Subject: contex
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
contex
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1242 RA trip to LA
You have the following reservation for Wed. Feb. 19:
SJ-LA AirCal no. 318 10:00 arr. 11:05
LA-SJ Continental no. 844 4:20, arr. 5:25
I put it in cal[1,jmc]. Do you need a car?
∂13-Feb-86 1316 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Susan
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 13:15:57 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 13:12:40-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Susan
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183111939.15.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We came up with $15/hr. for Susan. This was satisfactory to her. Do you have
any notion as to where you want this charged? I don't have a good feel for a
"McCarthy working for a McCarthy" on an ARPA contract, but if this where you
want it charged I'll check it out. Otherwise, maybe she should be paid from
your unrestricted account--you have about $79K in your unrestricted account at
the present time.
Betty
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1405 RA trip to LA
I changed your reservation to PSA no. 202 8:25 arr. LA 9:28.
∂13-Feb-86 1441 GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA answers to questions
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 14:41:45 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 14:40:52-PST
From: Mike Genesereth <GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: answers to questions
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183127993.19.GENESERETH@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here they are. Sorry they are not more succinct. Let
me know if you want something further clarified.
mrg
Comments on AI contribution of DART
DART was developed in the context of successful work on medical
diagnosis, as exemplified by such programs as INTERNIST and MYCIN.
However, there's a difference. These medical diagnosis programs both
use "shallow" theories of human pathophysiology in the form of "rules"
that map symptoms to possible diseases. DART contains no rules of
this form but works from a "deep" theory consisting of information
about intended structure (e.g. parts and interconnections) and
expected behavior (e.g. equations or constraints on inputs and
outputs).
The deep theory is gotten as a byproduct of the design process.
If a designer uses a modern CAD system like HELIOS, then when he is
done there is an on-line description of his design. This design
information can then be passed as data to DART to diagnose faults in
manufactured instances of the design.
One advantage of DART is that it saves the labor of hand-crafting rule
bases for each new design that comes along. We also get assurance of
fault coverage where possible and an indication of undiagnosability
otherwise. Guaranteed one way or the other so long as the design
description is correct.
I have gotten some flak for always using the full ader and D74
examples, mostly from Ed and Bruce. However, I continue to use it
since it is easy for readers to understand yet suffiiently complex
that most ideas can be illustrated in its context. It is the Blocks
World for research in this area, as evidenced by the fact that since
it appeared in the dart paper, it has been used in at least a half a
dozen other papers by authors like Randy Davis and Ray Reiter.
Comments on importance of DART to EE community:
The idea of using design information in suto diagnosis is not new.
Over the years a number of test generation algorithms have been
proposed, the most well-known of which is the d-algorithm (J. P. Roth).
The primary disadvantage of these algorithms is their specificity. For
example, the d-algorithm is based on Boolean logic (or, more precisely,
Roth's d-calculus), and so it is applicable only to devices whose
behavir can be characterized in terms of 0s and 1s.
By contrast DART uses a device-independent language for design
description and a device independent diagnostic procedure. All
device-dependent information is contained in the design descriptions
it works with. Because of this generality, DART can diagnose a wider
class of devices than the d-algorithm, including non-digital and
non-electronic devices. For example, some folks from Hitachi have
applied it successfully to the cooling system of a nuclear reactor,
and we have been experimenting with the diagnosis of jet engine
control systems.
Interestingly, DART is much more efficient than the d-algorithm, and
its efficiency derives in part from its generality. The device
independence of the design language and the diagnostic procedure means
that it can be applied at multiple levels of abstraction and we can
thereby exploit the hierarchy inherent in most computer systems
designs. Rather than treating circuits only at the gate-level, we can
diagnose at the arithmetic level or the cpu level or the network level
etc. Analyses of these efficiency advantages are contained in the
DART paper and Narinder Singh's thesis and the chart on the wall
outside my office.
The flexibility of the design language (a superset of predicate
calculus) also allows a designer to express partial information, and
the flexibility of the diagnostic procedure (a variant of resolution)
allows the system to function even with incomplete information. This
is important in some applications where complete information is not
available. For example, we ran into this problem when trying to model
the Intel 8088 in the IBM PC, for which we had only partial timing
information.
Comments on Control of Reasoning
A large portion of our theoretical work in AI has concerned the
control of reasoning. We have written papers about the ordering
of conjuncts in simple constraint satisfaction problems (inference
free), controlling recursive inference, deciding when to reason
forward and when to reason backward, etc.
This work differs from the traditional work in AI on theorem
proving control in that (1) most of the control procedures use
probabilistic information to determine the costs of different
inference actions and (2) most of the procedures require more
than constant time (unlike tautology elimination, lock resolution,
etc.).
Some of this work overlaps that in other areas. For example, the data
base literature contains references to problems of query optimization
(e.g. Warren, Grant and Minker) and index selection, i.e. the forward
chaining problem in AI parlance (e.g. Roussopoulos). Our work in some
cases extends this work (e.g. the concern with mulitple query
optimization, the simple demonstration that Warren's cheapest first
heuristic is not always optimal) and in some cases deals with the
computational cost of the optimization problem itself (e.g. the
Adjacency theorom in the conjunct ordering paper and Treitel's
polynomial algorithm for deciding whether to reason forward and when
to reason backward). These results should be of substantial interest
to the data base community as well as the AI community.
I should emphasize that if one believes the logic programming
hypothesis about the correspondence between logic programs and
nonlogic programs, then one should realize that this work carries over
to programs in general. For example, the conjunct ordering work
applies whether one is programming in MRS or in LISP.
Comments on Explicit Control of Reasoning
Automated Reasoning is a combinatoric process. Whether one works
forward from data or backward from goals, there are usually several
options one has to explore. In the absence of information about
whic option to pursue, the only choice is to search the entire space
of possibilties. However, in some cases advance information is
avaialable, in the form of procedural hints, e.g. "Use lemma 13" or
"postpone coloring regions with fewer than four neighbors". Our
work on explicit control of reasoning has centered on (1) providing
a language to express such hints, (2) providing an architecture that
can integrate these procedural tidbits into a coherent reasoning
procedure, and (3) ensuring that the architecture does not waste
time doing unnecessary control reasoning, i.e. not reflecting when
it will be of no use.
A number of researchers have previously expressed similar goals,
dating back at least to Hayes's Golux paper and Davis and Buchanan's
metarules paper. We have worried about making these goals a reality.
We have produced a language with a clean semantics that is guaranteed
not to run into strange cross-level interactions. We have axiomatized
numerous inference procedures, with appropriate control hooks. And we
have proved the fidelity and consistency of various introspective
architectures, some of which save much needless metalevel computation.
Here I can level some substantial criticism at our efforts to date.
Much of this work has not been adequately reported in the literature.
The main reason for this is that the work has been difficult and long
term, with the key results coming only recently, results that could
have affected earlier work. We were reluctant to publish this earlier
work until these key results were obtained. We expect to publish more
extensively in the near future.
MRS is the practical result of this research. It includes a wide
variety of traditional knowledge representation facilties and offers
the user the ability to supply meta-level control advice. We have
used MRS in our research on control, in course work, and in building
expert systems like Helios. We have also shipped over 100 copies
for use outside of Stanford (at $200-500 per copy).
Final Comments
(1) There are other areas in which we have made significant contributions,
For example, in the arena of cooperative problem solving, there's Jeff
Rosenschein's thesis on cooperation with and without communication.
For example, there is Jock Mackinlay's work on presentation of data
base information. His paper was a nominee for best paper at AAAI-84.
There's the work on analogical reasoning by Russ Greiner and Stuart
Russell, Jeff Finger's work on the residue method (abduction) and
supersumption, and Vineet Singh's work on distributed deduction.
Eventually, there will be Devika Subramanian's work on reformulation
and Ben Grosof's work on theoretical bias in learning.
(2) In general I have some difficulty dealing with claims that someone
else has already done a piece of research when the referent is to a
paper in which an idea is merely mentioned but not worked out. There
is a lot of hard work that stands between the invention of an idea and
its theoretical analysis and eventual operationalization. In all of
our reaserach we have spent a lot of time in these latter two phases.
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1501 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 15:00:49 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.8)
id AA03983; Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:59:05 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:59:05 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8602132259.AA03983@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Hello Dr. McCarthy,
Thank you for responding so promptly; The complete list of
participants are John Searle, Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus, David Rumelhart,
Seymour Pappert, Joseph Weizenbaum, Eugene Charniak,
Douglas Hofstadter (in a "middle" position), Terry Winograd,
and yourself.
Next week we will be sending out complete information on
the discussion.
Sincerely,
Vijay Ramamoorthy
∂13-Feb-86 1533 RA Prof. Rowe
Prof. Rowe called re AI forum which he wrote to you about. His tel.
(213) 472 3566
∂13-Feb-86 1536 CLT
the terminals and printer now seem to work
∂13-Feb-86 1615 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 16:14:57 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 16:11:24-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Meeting
To: ai.list: ;
Message-ID: <12183144475.40.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
In reference to scheduling an AI meeting to discuss courses for 1986-1987
the best time I can come up with is February 27 from 2:30-4:00. Please
confirm that you can make this.
Thanks!
-Anne
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1621 RA trip to Washington DC
Is the following schedule ok?
Leave Sun. 2/23 8:30am, arr. Dulles Airport 4:23pm.
Leave Monday 2/24 5:00pm arr 7:54pm. Do you need a car? This airport is
an hour drive from DC. Both flights are non-stop and the non-stop flights
go to Dulles.
∂14-Feb-86 0719 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa DARPA reequipment money: the department section
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 07:19:13 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Fri, 14 Feb 86 07:18:28 pst
Date: 14 Feb 1986 0718-PST (Friday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: feigenbaum@sumex, jmc@sail
Cc: jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
Subject: DARPA reequipment money: the department section
Ed and John,
I have some concerns over the way CSD-CF is progressing on spending the
$500K left in the DARPA equipment contract. As I recall, we created
that pot to buy equipment that would serve all the DARPA research
centers. Since none of us is directly on the committee, I would like
to make sure that whatever decision is reached has the backing of the
PIs. Does this seem reasonable?
John
∂14-Feb-86 1206 LES
∂14-Feb-86 0958 GX.RHM@Lindy
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 09:57:57 PST
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 86 10:00:01 PST
From: Randy Melen <GX.RHM@SU-Forsythe.ARPA>
To: LES@SAIL
Les:
Quick update on 4.2 and your RT. I just talked to Hal -- he's been
away for a few days. I asked him about the licensing problem for
4.2 for the RT, thinking it had been solved since you had the
software. [IBM thought each school had a blanket license for UNIX
but AT&T says no, something about a V32 license versus a System V
license, and that it wants licenses for each machine. But they're
working it out.] Well, it turns out that it isn't solved. You have
the only 4.2 RT on campus. Hal asks that you "keep a low profile"
about it since it is an illegal copy until Stanford lawyers sign a
new agreement that makes AT&T happy. That also explains why we
haven't got our support center set up with documentation, source,
etc. Anyway, I'm interested in seeing the system so as soon as I
get the delat stuff back from the printer I'll contact you so I can
come and look. Hal or Bob will also give you a call to explain
further about the licensing stuff.
Randy
∂14-Feb-86 1416 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA next visit
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 14:16:25 PST
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1986 16:14 CST
Message-ID: <AI.BOYER.12183385371.BABYL@MCC.ARPA>
From: AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA
To: ai.woody@MCC.ARPA
Cc: jmc@su-ai, val@su-ai, ai.lenat@MCC.ARPA
Subject: next visit
Woody,
Would you or Doug mind negotiating the time for the next
visit of John and Vladimir. Late March sounds good to me,
and I have no conflicts the last two weeks.
I'd do it, but I'll be incommunicado for the next two
weeks while in Argonne.
Thanks,
Bob
∂14-Feb-86 1824 LES RT compatibility
We just ran an experiment in reading a tar tape written by a Sun on the RT
and found that it works! RWW now thinks that he can port Kyoto Common
Lisp onto the machine with very little effort.
∂14-Feb-86 1906 RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA MRG's tenure
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 19:05:57 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 19:02:37-PST
From: Stu Russell <RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: MRG's tenure
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183437787.7.RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I understand that the faculty is still soliciting recommendations
regarding Mike Genesereth's tenure application. I hope the following
information is useful.
With Doug Lenat, Mike has been my co-advisor for 18 months and on my
reading committee for 2 years. Prior to that, I took cs223
and cs222 from him, and was one of the TAs for cs223.
Teaching
Mike is a technically excellent teacher, with a clear set of ideas
he wishes to convey and a clear determination to do so. He seems to
manage to convert most of his students to his way of thinking, giving
them a well-founded understanding of the principles of AI, which is
of much greater benefit than the merely factual or survey style favoured
by other AI instructors. I was impressed by the competence attained by
the students in his classes.
The problems he had in these first courses of lack of coverage due to
inadequate preparation and overambitious depth seem to have been solved.
If I have one quibble it is that his exclusive emphasis on logic
at the expense of other fruitful approaches to AI problems makes the
subject seem less than inspiring.
Advising
Mike's style of advising seems diametrically opposed to what I was
accustomed to with Doug Lenat; for this I am grateful in many ways.
He is accessible, punctual and helpful, if somewhat overworked. He
is extremely concerned for the progress of his students and encourages
interchange of ideas at all levels including his weekly group meetings.
His appraisal of research is excellent: he is very strict in insisting
that results be concrete and provable or empirically validated, which
is a rare and valuable trait in AI. I have found his prodding to be a
great help in arriving at new, useful ideas and exploring them fully.
Even though my work is not strongly connected with his own, he seems
committed to furthering it out of his strong dedication to progress
towards the general goals of AI.
He is very good at solving given problems; on the other hand, his
admitted (relative) weak point is in inventing constructive questions
and generating ideas on the fly. This impression may be due to my
previous exposure to Doug Lenat, since this area is his forte.
Research
In this area I have less to say because I have had little exposure to Mike
'at work' on his own research. Its most visible product, the MRS system
with the various extensions and applications added by his students, is an
excellent testbed for testing logical theories of intelligence and
ideas about control, as well as an extremely flexible framework for
building any kind of application. Interest in MRS in the AI community is
evidenced by the fact that we have received over 100 requests for the
manual since its appearance as a CS report three weeks ago.
His students are making definite, lasting contributions to the science
of AI as a result of his tutelage, and he seems to apply the same rigorous
standards of concreteness and provability to his own work as he does to
others', but unfortunately this seems to stifle his creativity somewhat. All
his results seem to be solid and to enable further work to be built on them,
but in some ways it seems he gives too much of his research energy and ideas to
his students, whilst struggling himself with the hard, general issues
of control of inference and reaching for an overarching framework for
the logical basis of intelligence. His published work may not reflect this
underlying, deep commitment to the general goal of understanding all forms of
inference, including learning, but this is probably due to the self-censorship
of a rigorous research methodology. I am convinced he could do still better
if he permitted himself to attempt more speculative projects, even at the
expense of occasionally having to wave his hands.
Stuart Russell
-------
∂14-Feb-86 2304 CLT calendar item
mon 17-feb 11:00 Timothy to Hurds
∂15-Feb-86 1145 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA DARPA equipment money
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Feb 86 11:45:33 PST
Date: Sat 15 Feb 86 10:33:44-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: DARPA equipment money
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183607294.30.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, to tell you the truth, I've been hesitant to get involved in this
discussion. My own project interests are represented by Tom Rindfleisch,
who actively participates in the disucssions.
My recollection is this (and Tom and John can comment on the accuracy):
when the subject of "upgrading" the equipment of computer science
departments became an important topic in Washington, DARPA asnd NSF made
a deal. Kahn would do a one-time upgrade for the universities in the DARPA
stable (us, CMU, MIT, Berkeley, perhaps others). NSF would give big
"facilities money" to others in competition (e.g. U. of Washington, U. of
Texas, etc.). Each grant would be in the "several millions".
So we got our "several millions". Among the parts of ours were parts for
the Heuristic Programming Project (now KSL) and other DARPA-sponsored
projects. There was also a part for general upgrading for the department.
John made the case that there should be hundreds of thousands of dollars,
perhaps tending toward a million, I don't remember) for a "modern era"
time sharing system and for an enormous file server. I think that much
of this money is what is now awaiting spending.
I think the DARPA investigators can have a strong voice in how it should
be spent based on their current needs (as important research voices for
the compute-intensive part of the department). But probably not the
decisive voice; nor should they have a veto.
(Note: the KSL, after much deliberation, decided what it wanted to do with
its allotted "piece" and spent it).
If this is not correct, I'm sure John and Tom will respond.
Ed
-------
∂15-Feb-86 1316 AI.WOODY@MCC.ARPA Re: next visit
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Feb 86 13:15:57 PST
Date: Sat 15 Feb 86 15:15:28-CST
From: Woody Bledsoe <AI.Woody@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: Re: next visit
To: AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, val@SU-AI.ARPA, ai.lenat@MCC.ARPA, AI.Woody@MCC.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA" of Fri 14 Feb 86 16:15:43-CST
Yes, It turns out that the week of March 17 is bad for me (in spite of
what I told you John). Anytime the week of Mar 24 is OK with me now.
Please suggest a time (say Mar 24-25, but it does not matter to me)
and let us know. Doug let us know if you have a problem with the
arrangements that we make.
Woody
-------
∂15-Feb-86 1559 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA equipment money
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Feb 86 15:58:56 PST
Date: Sat 15 Feb 86 15:59:44-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: DARPA equipment money
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12183607294.30.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12183666640.24.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Ed's summary jibes with my recollection. Tom R.
-------
∂16-Feb-86 1213 CLT
call alfonse 321-7819
∂16-Feb-86 1256 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: DARPA equipment money
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Feb 86 12:56:34 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Sun, 16 Feb 86 12:55:40 pst
Date: 16 Feb 1986 1255-PST (Sunday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
Subject: Re: DARPA equipment money
In-Reply-To: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA> /
Sat 15 Feb 86 15:59:44-PST.
<12183666640.24.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Great. I hope the good opinions of Tom R. and others on the committee
will serve to make sure that the money is spent reasonably.
John
∂16-Feb-86 1407 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA equipment money
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Feb 86 14:07:35 PST
Date: Sun 16 Feb 86 14:08:22-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: DARPA equipment money
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>" of Sun 16 Feb 86 12:55:00-PST
Message-ID: <12183908510.18.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, why don't you volunteer to join the committee? My guess is that Les
would welcome it.....Ed
-------
∂17-Feb-86 0242 greiner%utai%toronto.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Evaluation for Prof Genesereth
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 02:41:04 PST
Received: from toronto by csnet-relay.csnet id ab25221; 17 Feb 86 5:38 EST
Received: from utai.UUCP (utai.ARPA) by utcsri.UUCP (4.24/5.1.UofT)
id AA26653; Sun, 16 Feb 86 20:42:48 est
Received: by utai.UUCP (4.24/5.1.UofT)
id AA08990; Sun, 16 Feb 86 20:41:30 est
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 86 20:41:30 est
From: Russell Greiner <greiner%utai%toronto.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Evaluation for Prof Genesereth
Cc: greiner%toronto.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
16 February 1986
Dear Professor McCarthy,
This message is in response to your recent request for letters
concerning the tenure decision for Professor Michael Genesereth.
Please forward it to any and all relevant parties.
As a graduate student at Stanford, I had the opportunity to work with
many gifted individuals -- including, as advisors, Professors Binford,
Lenat and Genesereth. Impressed as I am with all of these researchers,
I view Dr. Genesereth in a category by himself. I have the utmost respect
for both his abilities and his accomplishments, and consider him to be
one of the very best researchers in the field of Artificial Intelligence
today. His considerable breadth is manifest by his publications in
Explanation (Macsyma Advisor), Knowledge Representation and Meta-Level
Reasoning (MRS and MLA), Diagnosis and Expert Systems (DART), Presentation
Tools (with Mackinlay), Rational Agents (with Rosenschein), and Learning
(our joint work on Novelty and soon, on analogy). His ability to pinpoint
the critical issues in each of these areas attests to his considerable
depth. I was even more amazed at his insights: over our years together,
I never knew his intuitions to be in error. (These attributes led to his
annoying habit of always being right: I remember several occasion when I
was sure he was wrong on some issue, only to find myself "independently"
reaching the same conclusion, often months later.)
His service record is equally impressive. In addition to volunteering
to serve as program chair at a nation conference (AAAI-83), he has also
participated in developing a new curriculum for both the computer science
department in general, and for artificial intelligence in particular,
and is currently co-authoring a book which presents the fundamentals of
artificial intelligence.
Let me move from general to specific, and focus on the tremendous influence
he had on my research in particular. His insights led to almost all of the
ideas which appeared in my dissertation. He was also instrumental in my
"professional maturity". Through him, I developed a firm respect for
scholarly achievements, and *real* research results. I came to view his
personal record as a standard for scholarship. For example, his intellectual
honesty has kept him from publishing some of his mediocre (but still
non-trivial) papers.
He ably fulfilled the other roles one expects of an advisor: helping me
prepare presentations, evaluate the reports of others, and hunt for a job.
I do not think I could have reached my current position without his
guidance, in all of these areas.
That speaks of his immense professional competence. I value Mike even
more as a friend and companion. He sets himself apart from most other
professors by not setting himself apart from his students. As one example,
he and I were in a small recorder troupe for several years. He has also
joined his students and fellow researchers in everything from climbing
rocks to flying airplanes. His concern for my professional development
is sincere and his advice on this topic, as usual, right on the money.
(In fact, his recent visit to Toronto felt more like a visit from a
concerned parent, than from simply a former advisor.)
In my opinion as a former advisee, teaching assistant and co-author, I
feel that Professor Genesereth is unmatched as an advisor, is adequate as
an instructor, and is a superb researcher. I cannot recommend him too
highly, and strongly urge that he be approved for promotion and tenure. I
truly believe that losing Professor Genesereth would be a major set-back
to Stanford University's Computer Science Department.
If I can be of any other assistance during this tenure proceedings,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Professor Russell Greiner
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario M5S-1A4
(416) 978-6277 [sec'y 978-6025]
∂17-Feb-86 0900 JMC
Dr. Paris
∂17-Feb-86 1158 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: DARPA equipment money
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 11:58:35 PST
Date: Mon 17 Feb 86 11:59:18-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: DARPA equipment money
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
cc: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12183908510.18.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12184147159.33.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
In fact, John, we were expecting you at the last committee meeting to give us
input on your Sequent plans in CSL. We're coming down to the wire on having to
make some decisions so that the orders can be formulated, approved, and issued
by the end of May. Les will probably be in touch with you about this but we
would appreciate it if you could plan to meet with us at the next meeting --
Wed, 2/26, at 12:00 -- or at least forward the relevant information about your
plans (configuration, cost, schedule, etc.). We may want to buy more than one
BALANCE and we would have to do some serious coordinated negotiating with
Sequent asap to get the most advantageous price.
Tom R.
-------
∂17-Feb-86 1630 RA paper to Piel
It was indeed Programs with Common Sense which I sent him.
∂17-Feb-86 1732 LES Facilities Committee Minutes of 2/12/86
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA, Pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA,
Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Prospective ways of spending the remaining $582k in DARPA facilities funds
were reviewed by the committee (Tom Binford, Len Bosack, Dave Cheriton,
Les Earnest, Bruce Hitson and Tom Rindfleisch were present). Vaughan Pratt
and Joe Weening also participated.
A proposal to promote "trickle-down" was discussed and generally agreed
upon. This means that where new equipment purchased with DARPA facilities
funds is to be assigned to projects, preference will be given to
DARPA-sponsored projects with the understanding that it will displace
older equipment, that will then be made available to other groups in the
department.
Next meeting is at noon on Wednesday, February 26 in MJH 302, at which
time we will draft a proposed allocation of CSD facility funds. It is
important that proposals be put in concrete form, including all costs, and
distributed to the committee (facil@sail) as soon as possible but not
later than February 24.
Subcommittee reports follow. [Related information received since the
meeting is given in brackets.] After that is a summary of project-
specific requests received so far.
WORKSTATIONS (Len Bosack)
Current cost information is being collected on Sun, Symbolics and
TI Explorer workstations. Maintenance costs on Symbolics machines
($10k/yr. hardware, $1.3k/yr. software) argue against buying more of these
machines. Some additional memory for Symbolics machines should be
considered.
FILE SERVERS (David Cheriton, Tom Rindfleisch)
A Sun 3 fileserver with 2 Eagles costs about $41k. At least
2 are needed (e.g. Jacks Hall & Welch Rd.).
Symbolics is switching from Chaos to Nfile protocol for file
service. KSL plans to develop a file server that supports Nfile, NFS
and Vfile, all using TCP/IP.
Dave Cheriton advocated dismembering LaBrea on the grounds that it
is based on unsound principles. Les Earnest argued that the only thing
unsound was Dave's reasoning. An agreement was reached to focus on other
issues for the present.
PARALLEL COMPUTING (Les Earnest, Bruce Hitson)
John Hennessy was supposed to show up with a quotation for a Sequent
Balance 8000 system, including later upgrade to 68020 processors, but John
didn't show up. [Sequent's current reresentative (Group 3 Electronics) is
offering 33% discounts on systems ordered through them before March 3.
After that, Sequent will handle all sales directly. Even larger discounts
may be available on some "demonstration" systems. We are pursuing
negotiations with both Sequent and Group 3.]
SOFTWARE ACQUISITION
Symbolics (Tom Rindfleisch): negotiations proceeding.
Common Lisp for Suns (Les Earnest): there are at least 3 potential
sources: Lucid, Franz and Kyoto. [Lucid's Common Lisp is available from
Sun for $3.7k for the first copy and $2.7 for successive copies. It may
be possible to get a lower price through ISI. Kyoto Common Lisp will
shortly be available at no incremental cost, the site licensing fee having
been paid by CSD-CF.]
Scribe (Len Bosack): [Rich Baldwin of Procurement is reviewing
existing Scribe licenses at Stanford to check for any double coverage.]
PARTS AND SPARES (Len Bosack)
Planning is underway.
McSUN (Len Bosack, Les Earnest)
[It appears that McSun terminals can be assembled for about $1.2k
each, including 800x1000 displays, keyboards and mice, which compares very
favorably with workstation prices. Building a demonstration cluster with
8 terminals, using existing hardware where available and fabricating the
rest, will cost about $8.7k for materials and $4k to $12k for engineering.
The lower figure represents 3 mon-months of student labor and the higher
one represents professional rates. Thus, it appears feasible to build a
demonstration cluster for at most $22k and perhaps as little as $13k.]
CSD MAILSERVER (John Reuling)
$295 wanted for a small Un*x machine to handle mail forwarding
for the department. [It appears that having a separate machine for this
is not necessary and that it would be sensible to perform this function
on an existing Un*x system.]
Project-specific Proposals
The following project-specific requests have been received to date.
Binford
Symbolics 3600 or 3640 needed.
Cheriton
Experimental multiprocessor workstation: $90k.
19 2-meg. memory boards @$1500 for existing Suns: $30k.
2 Sun 3 Model 180 fileservers with 2 Eagles each: $83k.
More laser printers in MJH.
2 "multicast agents" needed: $38k.
Pratt
Sun workstation with floating point and color desired for Pratt.
Two student worstations also desired. NFS fileserver needed.
∂17-Feb-86 1737 LES Facilities Minutes Oops
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA, Pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA,
Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Under "CSD MAILSERVER," change "$290k" to "$12-20k".
∂17-Feb-86 2120 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: DARPA equipment money
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 21:20:04 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Mon, 17 Feb 86 21:19:16 pst
Date: 17 Feb 1986 2119-PST (Monday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Cc: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
Subject: Re: DARPA equipment money
In-Reply-To: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA> /
Mon 17 Feb 86 11:59:18-PST.
<12184147159.33.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I told Les that I would TRY to make the meeting, by leaving another
meeting early - didn't happen. I am playing phone tag with Dave
Rodgers. The secret to making a Sequent really useful is:
1. Try to get something other than 32032's
2. Don't try to put too many processors on.
I'll try to make the next meeting.
John
∂17-Feb-86 2324 HST lisp standardization
maybe you have heard of the european effort to prepare for a lisp standardizatio
n. we believe commonlisp is too big to be a standard (look to the lot of arithme
tic functions).and then...a symbol has 4 semantics: as normal variable (static
and dynoamic) and function name (static and dynamic).do you like this? your ai
memo (31 i believe) tried to abolish the coexistence of normal value and functio
nal value. do you still take this position? most commonlisp's do not correctley
implement the change from dynamic to static value (in different local scopes).
i argue strongly for a type function. commonlisp offers a mess there...
if you teach lisp in stanford, do you quote or FUNCTION lambda-expressions or
do you use LAMBDA as special form? (Do you know that j.Allen's tlc-LISP does
that - and SCHEME, too.) I would like to take some of your feelings (or position
s) in our european proposal.
∂18-Feb-86 0846 RA robotics committee meeting
Is Thursday, Feb. 20th, 5:00-6:00 ok with you for the robotics meeting?
Please let me know.
∂18-Feb-86 0849 RA AI courses and degrees meeting
Is Thursday, Feb. 27 2:30-4:00 ok with you for the AI courses and degrees
meeting? Please let me know.
Thanks.
∂18-Feb-86 0900 JMC
urgencies
Dr. Paris
messages re Genesereth
industrial lecturers
∂18-Feb-86 1034 CLT lisp standardization
could you send me a copy of the message stoyan sent you?
∂18-Feb-86 1044 SJM Kiremidjian
He urgently wants an abstract of your talk and a brief resume. He
will come and pick them up today or tomorrow if necessary. His number
is 408-295-l818.
∂18-Feb-86 1157 LES
∂17-Feb-86 1319 LES Parallel Computers
To: squires@USC-ISI.ARPA
Given the timing uncertainties in getting suitable hardware for the Qlisp
project, I am poking at existing funds in the C.S. Department to see if we
can afford to get such a machine sooner rather than later. You remarked
earlier that you have up-to-date information on Sequent and Multimax.
I would like to pick your brain on this issue sometime soon if you have
the time.
Les Earnest (les@sail; phone 415 723-9729)
∂18-Feb-86 1157 LES Re: Parallel Computers
∂18-Feb-86 0723 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: Parallel Computers
Received: from IPTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 07:23:06 PST
Received: by ipto.ARPA (4.12/4.7)
id AA04445; Mon, 17 Feb 86 16:56:25 est
Date: Mon 17 Feb 86 16:56:19-EST
From: Stephen Squires <SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Parallel Computers
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: Squires@IPTO.ARPA
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(171)+TOPSLIB(113) 17-Feb-86 16:56:19.IPTO.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of 17 Feb 86 1319 PST
I believe that there are some existing funds in the CS Department
which were provided by DARPA. Ron Ohlander once told me about funds
for equipment that were not expended in time and were extended.
Using these funds for a good multiprocessor would be a very good
idea. Please advise me of what is available and any redirection
approrval that may be needed from DARPA.
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1318 LES
∂18-Feb-86 1227 JMC
If I understand the sequence, Squires was not forthcoming with advice.
LES - Yes, I got that impression. I will try to call him again.
∂18-Feb-86 1319 LES Computer Facilities on DARPA funds.
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA
∂18-Feb-86 1236 EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Facilities on DARPA funds.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 12:34:33 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 12:29:05-PST
From: Eric Muller <EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Facilities on DARPA funds.
To: les@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: zm@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184414725.19.EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
After discussion with Zohar, our request for workstation on
uncommitted DARPA funds is as follows :
2 Sun workstations, model 3/75M; one in the basic 4Mb of RAM
configuration, the other in the extended 8Mb configuration. No disks.
Each with an Ethernet Attachment.
Adequate space on Sun file servers (under NFS protocol, since we
intend to run UNIX on these machines).
These machines would be used by the Tablog project.
If I did forget something, I will be happy to answer your questions.
eric.
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1332 LES QLisp
∂18-Feb-86 0723 squires@ipto.ARPA QLisp
Received: from IPTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 07:23:32 PST
Received: by ipto.ARPA (4.12/4.7)
id AA04346; Mon, 17 Feb 86 16:02:49 est
Date: Mon 17 Feb 86 16:02:41-EST
From: Stephen Squires <SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA>
Subject: QLisp
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: Squires@IPTO.ARPA
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(171)+TOPSLIB(113) 17-Feb-86 16:02:41.IPTO.ARPA>
I need some revised (informal only) budget figures to get the ARPA Order
signed. The SC program may have to take a 30% cut in FY86 unless some
unexpected magic occures. Therefore, please, tell me the minimum
funds required for the last six months of FY86 (ending 1 Oct)
and for all of FY87 as one figure for each period. As I recall
the first phase of QLisp was 18 months on the tasking contract.
Do not include the multiprocessor that you need, but do provide
as a seperate figure the minimum equipment needed to use it.
You should only include funds to support people that are
essential to the project, we cannot afford any luxuries during
FY86.
The ARPA Order is ready to be signed subject to the budget issue.
Please advise me of your progress in multiprocessor selection.
For the most up to date information on Encore, you should
contact Ike Nasssi of Encore using my name and the fact that
you are developing a Multiprocessor Common Lisp for the SC Program.
Dave Luckham has equipment funds for his project and I have
encouraged him to acquire a multiprocessor and cooperate with
you as a backup.
Thanks
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1333 RA Dr. Paris
The receptionist at Dr. Paris office called to let you know that
your appointment was changed per your request from Feb. 24 to June 16, 2:00pm
∂18-Feb-86 1358 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA talk?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 13:57:56 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 13:48:28-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: talk?
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184429176.27.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm meeting with some new PhD students every week regarding the
Principia project. We are now in the phase of having them learn
the things they have to learn next (after taking the first AI course)
if they want to work on communicating, intelligent systems. I'm also
getting them exposed to various intelligent agent "architectures" and
"implementational ideas" ---MRS, FOL, Blackboards, SOAR, etc. One
thing I'd like them to start thinking about rather early on is
communication. In that connection, would you like to meet with us
next Tuesday 9-11 (Feb 25) to talk about your ideas on CBCL?
(Or suggest another date?) -Nils
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1412 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: talk?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 14:11:57 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 14:05:51-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: talk?
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 18 Feb 86 14:01:00-PST
Message-ID: <12184432339.27.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Next quarter would be fine too (instead).
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1624 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 16:24:15 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 16:17:55-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184456383.32.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Dr. Rowe phoned, please call. 213 472-3566.
Tina
-------
743-8326 University sc
∂18-Feb-86 1811 RA Judith Lemon SU TV network
Lemon called re Stanford Video Journal. They are working now on volume II
which will deal with AI. She wanted to know whether you would be willing
to do a lecture for the Video Journal. Her tel: 7-3617
∂18-Feb-86 2105 ZM
No tickets. Zohar
∂19-Feb-86 0257 HST lisp standardisation
To: JMC
CC: CLT
you asked if there are operational lisps... our goal is not to use an existent
lisp rather to find an solution which is rational.
there is a lot of experience in lisp implementation here: j.chaillouyx group
produces a lisp (similar to maclisp) for nearly any computer in existence.
they have a nive trancsportation scheme which enables them to create a new
implementation in short time.
other implementers are j.fitch (cambridge lisp) - and (if you accept) me.
it seems to us that a standard should offer at least 3 levels of amount (size)
because CommonLISP seems to be too big to be accepted by everyone.
the first level should be minimal by containing only basic functions for the
data structures and control which cannot programmed in lisp by other functions.
the second level should be enlarged in the direction that most typiocal functi-
ons and often used functions are included.
the third level could be compared with CommonLISP.
A complicated question is this scoping thing. Most LISP programmers know how
to handle that dynamic scoping tool and believe you cannot do without it.
I think you can and I claimed to reprogram any soltion with dynamic scoping
in one acceptable solution variant with lexical (better: static() scoping.
I'm sure this works fine - with ethe exeption of evaluation of (by data ope-
rations) constructed terms (or: forms - if you like). if we restrict the pro-
gram construction to functional objects then again there's no problem. if we
permit the construction of terms and their evaluation we loose the important
feature of static scoped programs : that the variable names are exchangeable.
a possible soltution could be to introduce the SPECIAL declaration anew, but
this time not for dynamic variables. this time it is for ccooperation between
interpreter and compiler (there was a common-declaration once) to inform the
compiler it should save the variable names...
what can Tim do now? how is he?
peter szolowits has got a tape from me with the lisp-museum file. i asked him
to send you a copy by mail. did he do this?
∂19-Feb-86 0917 VAL non-monotonic reasoning seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Mike Georgeff's talk, planned for tomorrow, will be moved to a later date due
to a schedule conflict. Accordingly, our next meeting will be on March 6,
when Jerry Hobbs will be speaking. More information about his talk will be
available a few days in advance.
Vladimir
∂19-Feb-86 0942 RA
John,
You did not give me an answer on this one, could you please?
Is Thursday, Feb. 27 2:30-4:00 ok with you for the AI courses and degrees
meeting? Please let me know.
Thanks.
∂19-Feb-86 1011 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Robotics Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 10:11:51 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 10:00:47-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Robotics Search Committee
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA,
Cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, Bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184649871.23.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This confirms today's telephone conversation with your secretaries that
there will be a Robotics Search Committee meeting on Thurs. Feb. 20 from
5:00 - 6:00 in MJH 220.
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1101 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Courses and Degrees
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 10:59:19 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 10:45:46-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Courses and Degrees
To: ai.list: ;
cc: eengelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184658059.23.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a meeting of the AI Faculty on Feb. 27 (Thursday) from 2:30
to 4:00 in MJH 220 to discuss courses and degrees for 1986-1987.
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1102 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Courses and Degrees
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 11:01:58 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 10:51:49-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Courses and Degrees
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184659161.23.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The only time that I could get the majority of the AI group together to
discuss Courses and Degrees for 86-87 is at 2:30 on Feb. 27. I hope that
this is alright for you.
-Anne
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1355 ME Lathrop
To: JMC, CLT
CC: LES
The Lathrop spooler was changed yesterday to line 47 (at this end, no
change necessary at your end). This shouldn't affect you at all, and this
change was made after your problem with WONG.XGP.
As for this problem with printing XGP files, I cannot reproduce it on an
equivalently configured spooler here (using the old Imprint printer).
However, you may be noticing some slowness in printing, since WONG.XGP
specifies 7 fonts and they all get transmitted down the 4800 baud line
(Imprint here is at 9600). This could be speeded up by running the XGP
file through XPART first -- this causes any unneeded fonts and characters
not to be downloaded to the printer, and is especially effective when your
XGP file mentions many fonts you don't use.
Possibly the lack of printing for XGP files occurred because the Imagen
printer ran out of memory for all those fonts, but you seem to have the
large memory version, and the Imprint here did work (with its medium large
amount of memory).
One particular problem, although it shouldn't be causing the failure to
print XGP files, is that we are in the middle of changing what default
directories are used for fonts in spooling. Because of this, you should
specify the directory explicitly with any font (or you may get something
slightly different, which was happening earlier, since PUB and the spooler
don't have the same default directories). Your PUB macro file (LET.PUB?)
didn't have explicit directories for two of its fonts (maybe more).
Let me know if the XGP file printing problem is still there.
∂19-Feb-86 1417 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Industrial Vistors
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 14:17:17 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 13:46:58-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Industrial Vistors
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: Eppley@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184691047.16.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We are updating the 86-87 Courses and Degrees, can you please tell me
who will be under Industrial Lectureships.
Thank you,
LaDonna Eppley
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1443 LES
Done
∂19-Feb-86 1610 COWER@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: ANE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LANRE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LAUBSCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LEBEN@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 15:50:33 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 15:49:09-PST
From: Rich Cower <COWER@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: ANE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LANRE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LAUBSCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LEBEN@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: COWER@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 19 Feb 86 15:43:00-PST
in a big way...we think the mailer ate the text. it looked good up
until the point when the message actually got passed on.
i won't try this again for awhile.
thanks...rich
-------
∂19-Feb-86 2151 CLT lisp standardization
To: HST
CC: JMC
About scheme - I agree that there are a number of defects,
(including lack of clear and careful specification)
but there are also lots of good ideas that should be considered.
First are the basics of functions and continuations as first
class citizens and the small collection of program constructs
(special forms). Other small points that come to mind now
are the naming conventions (? for test and ! for operations
with possible side effects) and the idea that operations
such as SET!, which are done for effect, return unspecified
value. (I am for having multiple values as a simple basic
mode of operation - then there is the option of returning
no values.)
It was my impression that although closures (functions)
are represented as list structures in Scheme, as are forms,
that there is a predicate to test for these objects.
I have mixed feelings about the need to make them a distinct
data type. I would be interested in hearing arguments one way
or the other. It seems to me that if the abstract syntax
is specified (and used!) then generally the need for a separate
data type is secondary, tho useful. In particular, I would
like to see a specification that would allow both
implementations.
I agree that exact and inexact numbers seems a bit strange.
I think Scheme eval works like lisp eval -- its gets
the current environment as a second argument) -- thus
(let ((a 1)) (eval a)) is 1.
(in Maclisp (setq A 2) followed by (let ((a 1)) (eval a))
returns 1)
Have you contacted any of the scheme people about
the lisp standardizion project? I should think
Friedman would be interested. His electronic address is
"dfried.indiana"%csnet-relay.
∂20-Feb-86 0855 RA
John,
I could not find the file.
more of Situations, Actions and Causal Laws
I need 15 more of that one, make 30 if you have to print it. The file
is CAUSAL.TEX[F84,JMC].
∂20-Feb-86 0856 ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU re: Silico Sapiens
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 08:56:34 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 10:57:15-CST
From: ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: re: Silico Sapiens
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 30 Jan 86 10:15:00-CST
Message-ID: <12184900450.55.ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
I was very glad to hear more of your perspective on modeling with logic
in N.M. Sorry I missed you at the end; I had expected to talk with
you again Saturday evening, but you were gone (you missed your own
excommunication by Schank, a dubious loss).
When you are finished with Gardener's book, I would appreciate it if
you could just mail it back:
Information Science Program, Rm. 336
National Science Foundation
1800 G St NW
Washington, D.C. 20550
I hope to come up with some other relevant questions about
logic and uncertainty, as I sort out the portfolio of proposals
we are managing. If you can help me then as well, I will be
grateful.
If you ever read S.Sap, I'd like to hear about it.
Joe
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1108 RA industrial lectureship for next year
The deadline is Feb. 28 and we need the names of next year's leacturers
for the bulletin. Could you please give them to me ASAP.
Thanks,
∂20-Feb-86 1104 LES Facilities Committee Meeting
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
Pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, JJW@SU-AI.ARPA
We plan to draft a commitment plan for the DARPA funds in the next
Facilities Committee meeting. Given that some blood may flow at that
time, Nils Nilsson would like to participate, but he has an obligation
to be elsewhere at 1:00pm. I propose that we begin earlier: at 11:30am on
Wednesday, February 26 in MJH-301.
∂20-Feb-86 1157 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Credit for VTSS160?
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 11:55:09 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 11:49:27-PST
From: Kim W. Tracy <KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Credit for VTSS160?
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184931796.45.KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Would it be possible to get credit for VTSS160 through the CS dept.?
It it is possible then I would feel better about putting more time into
the course.
Kim Tracy
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1319 RA Greg Nelsson
Greg Nelsson returned you call. He will be in his office until 4:00 this
afternoon. His tel. (415) 853 2234.
∂20-Feb-86 1348 VAL next MCC visit
Woody proposed the week of March 24. Can we go at the beginning of the week?
If so, I'll schedule a non-monotonic seminar on Thursday, March 27.
∂20-Feb-86 1404 RA
John,
This is the msg.
∂09-Feb-86 1528 JMC
Please esp robins.xgp[let,jmc] for my signature. If difficulty, see Les.
∂20-Feb-86 1433 RA Keeble Schuchart Phtography
Janice from Keeble Schuchart called (she called a few days ago but I forgot
to give you the msg.) re a check for $77 which you apparently stopped payment
on. It is a Union Bank check no. 0755. Her tel. 327 8996. She was wondering
how they will get paid.
Sorry about the delay.
∂20-Feb-86 1434 VAL Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
I met Michael Gelfond in El Paso a few days ago, and he told me about interesting
work he's doing on relation between Moore's autoepistemic logic and circ'n.
(Actually, he is looking at the propositional case of circ'n, because Moore
discusses propositiobal case only). Gelfond found some precise correspondences.
The idea is that you take a propositional formula A, append the belief operator
at some places, and it turns out that the resulting formula A' belongs to Moore's
"stable extension" of a theory iff A can be proved in this theory using
circumscription. According to Gelfond, this gives the interpretation of circ'n
in terms of belief. I'm not sure I understand the intuitive meaning of the
interpretation, but at least the result seems to be mathematically interesting.
Have you ever thought of any connections of this kind?
∂20-Feb-86 1536 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Message from Ed Feigenbaum
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 15:36:31 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 15:31:32-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184972227.35.EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, Ed Feigenbaum (who is out of town right now) asked me to get in
touch with you and Carolyn. In case I do not succeed in reaching either
of you by phone:
Ed and Penny have been asked by Kennedy's office to host a dinner
on Monday, March 10 for two members of the SU Board of Trustees (and
their companions) inviting another faculty couple to join them. Ed
and Penny have agreed to have the dinner and would like you and
Carolyn to come.
Please let me know as soon as you can whether or not you will be able
to be there. (The evening will begin at about 6:30 or 7:00).
Ellie
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1631 RA leaving
It is Thursday and I am leaving at 4:30.
∂20-Feb-86 1842 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Re: Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 18:41:56 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 18:33:53-PST
From: Benjamin N. Grosof <GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
To: VAL@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA,
phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 20 Feb 86 14:34:00-PST
Message-ID: <12185005422.29.GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Hi Vladimir,
I've thought a bit about this in the following fashion: circn <->
default logic, whose consistency properties in the meta-theory are
(attempted to be) simulated by the M modal operator in McDermott and
Doyle/ Moore non-monotonic modal logic (NML). The link between
default logic and NML is especially suggestive due to their using
fixed point constructions of extensions. It would be interesting to
try to relate this indirect link via default logic to Gelfond's ideas.
Benjamin
-------
∂20-Feb-86 2327 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 23:27:15 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 23:28:54-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 20 Feb 86 23:18:00-PST
Message-ID: <12185059127.27.EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Wonderful! They will be very pleased to hear that you will be able to
be there.
Ellie
-------
∂20-Feb-86 2347 GHG
YES! 323-0105. GENE
∂21-Feb-86 0800 JMC
ring size on way back from MAD.
∂21-Feb-86 0838 RA trip to Washington
The airline tickets are on your desk.
∂21-Feb-86 1026 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rutie
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 10:25:50 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 10:21:12-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rutie
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185177874.20.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, when you handed me Rutie's performance review I thought you said that
you had discussed it with her. LaDonna was going to talk with her this morning,
and Rutie said you had not discussed performance with her. Did I misunderstand?
Betty
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1026 RA Re: trip to Washington
[Reply to message recvd: 21 Feb 86 09:51 Pacific Time]
I put the schedule in your CAL file. I called Dina Bolla and they are
trying to seat you and Mike together. They will call me back and I will
let you know.
∂21-Feb-86 1101 RA John Pucci
John Pucci from NAZELEX called re whether you had any discussions lately
with Steve Kaisler from DARPA. Pucci will be in the Stanford area next
Mon. and Tuesday and was wondering whether you would like to spend some
with him. He will be on campus on Tuesday. He would like you to let him know.
His tel. (202) 692 9207.
∂21-Feb-86 1118 RA Washington trip
Mike is on a different flight going to Washington. He is leaving at 1:15pm
arriving at 9:05. Do you want me to change your flight? On the way
back you are on the same flight.
∂21-Feb-86 1153 RA lunch
I am going out for lunch; be back about 1:15.
∂21-Feb-86 1157 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 11:57:01 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 11:40:11-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185192255.10.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Kelly O'Brien phoned, please call. 498-5792.
Tina
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1243 CLT
call mini scrandis (se2) 212-840-6595
∂21-Feb-86 1358 VAL David Etherington
Here is the end of a recent message from him:
On a completely different front, do you know of anywhere
in the Palo Alto area where an aspiring soon-to-be
graduating (one hopes) PhD student should be looking
for a place to begin a research career?
Thanks,
...David.
Would you like to invite him here?
∂21-Feb-86 1414 RA Re: Washington trip
[Reply to message recvd: 21 Feb 86 13:51 Pacific Time]
I have changed your flight to United 58, depart 2/23 1:15, arr. Dulles 9:05.
Dina Bolla is working on seating you and Mike next to each other. They will
call me and let me know. You can change your ticket at the airport.
∂21-Feb-86 1504 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA More/Trustees' Dinner
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 15:04:08 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 15:05:44-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: More/Trustees' Dinner
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185229672.49.EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Bob Hamrdla (in Kennedy's Office) 723-3623 will soon be sending you some
more information about the Trustees who will be having dinner with
you at Ed and Penny's house. All that I know now is their names: John
("Jack") Ditz and Thomas W. Ford.
Do you have a short bio you would send to Hamrdla/Building 10 to be
given to those Trustees?
Ellie
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1527 RA Meeting: Nilsson, Reid, and you
Is Thursday, Feb. 27 11:00 - 12:00 ok with you for the meeting?
∂21-Feb-86 1532 LES let.pub file
Here is another edition of your let.pub file, which has been adjusted
to accomodate font file renamings. The fonts in [300,sys] are now named
according to their point size instead of pixel height. E.G. "basl10"
is a 10 point Baskerville.
-------------------------
∂21-Feb-86 1615 RA Dr. Alan Rowe
Dr. Rowe called. Please call back. If you call today, call (213) 472 3566 (home);
if you don't call today, call (213) 743 8326 (USC)
∂21-Feb-86 1737 RA trip to Washington
Mike has a seat right behind you; you have 23E and he has 24E. I hope
you can convince someone to switch.
Have a nice trip.
∂21-Feb-86 1757 ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: photo
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 17:57:10 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 15:36:45-PST
From: Bob Engelmore <Engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: photo
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 17 Feb 86 11:52:00-PST
Office-Phone: (415) 497-8444
Home-Phone: (415) 322-0627
Message-ID: <12185235320.28.ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
I just read your message today. Haven't received the photo, but I'm looking
forward to it. It will go well with Derek Partridge's account of the
conference -- have you seen that? If not, I'll send you a copy.
Bob
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1759 ME not printing XGP files
To: JMC
CC: LES
∂21-Feb-86 1645 JMC
Is there a chance that the mod to delete title page sometimes deletes the file?
ME - No, I don't think so. The file you weren't able to print there printed
here fine, running EXACTLY the same spooler except that the name of the TTY
line was changed. However, now the font names on [300,SYS] have been changed
from XGP pixel heights to point sizes, so you need to change your macro file.
BAxx30 has changed to BAxx10 on [300,SYS]. I don't think this is the problem,
however, as your problem started before the fonts were renamed.
One thing: please print the test page (which reports Imagen settings), I
believe with the key sequence RESET and TEST (or something like that) on
the Imagen processor. If you don't see how to do this (it's explained
somewhere in the manual), please bring in the manual and I'll find it. If
you do print the Imagen test (NOT the Canon test-print button on the
printer), then please bring me the page of settings printed. The printer
MAY be set up to the wrong version of the Sequenced Packet Protocol,
although I'm not sure it that would matter.
If nothing else works, I'll come out next week and check it out.
∂22-Feb-86 1444 LES Alliant versus Sequent
Here is an exchange that started with RPG asking me what I thought about
the Alliant machine.
∂21-Feb-86 1403 LES Alliant
To: RPG
CC: JJW
Looks like a very hot machine for numerical analysis -- indeed, Joe Oliger
and friends have been thinking about buying one. It should perform well
for Qlisp, though it is certainly not optimized for that. The upper bound
of 8 CE's is a barrier to exploring the effectivness of larger number of
processors.
Robert Nikora expressed a willingness to put a machine at Stanford at no
cost, including free maintenance, provided that it was in a reasonably
presentable location to which they could bring prospects. I mentioned
this to Oliger and he immediately said "Take it!"
McCarthy regards their floating point and vectorizing hardware as an
attractive nuisance as far as Qlisp experiments are concerned. My
inclination is to get and use the Sequent for our development, even though
it will involve a larger effort to port your system, because of the bound
on number of processors.
Squires is urging us to look some more at the Encore Multimax for reasons
that are not at all clear. We probably should look at the parallel
machine from Flexible too, but I don't have any information and there is
little time left as far as the departmental buy is concerned.
Les
∂21-Feb-86 2110 RPG Alliant
What about the Sequent 68k version of the machine?
My impression of Alliant is that they have built more
into the hardware that is of use to us than Sequent. With Sequent
we will have to finesse the operating system, unless they have
fixed it. The limitation of 8 processors is completely irrelevant
as far as I'm concerned. I think the range of 4 through 8 will provide
all the information we need to get right away. Alliant also assured
me that the next machine will have more processors.
I would much rather spend my time investigating how to implement parallel
Lisp and how to use it than investigating how the 32032 works.
My guess is that Alliant could have a simple Qlisp within 6 months, while
Sequent will take a year.
Also, there is no special deals going on, because both Sequent and Alliant
want to deal with Lucid. I want to avoid unnecessary work. Lucid doesn't
care about floating point, anyway.
-rpg-
∂22-Feb-86 2315 KWT Where does PARRY reside?
You mentioned that PARRY is still on some of the systems around here.
Do you know which ones? I have been unable to find it.
Kim
∂23-Feb-86 0900 JMC
room plan, industrial
∂23-Feb-86 1111 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS223A, CS323
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 11:08:42 PST
Date: Sun 23 Feb 86 11:04:03-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS223A, CS323
To: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, TW@SU-AI.ARPA,
JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
TOB@SU-AI.ARPA, Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185709965.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Several people have asked me "why are there so many AI courses concentrated
in Spring Quarter and none in Fall Quarter?" CS223A, CS323 is Winter, Spring;
CS223B is Spring; CS525 is Spring. Are there any reasons why CS223A, CS323
shouldn't be changed to Fall, Winter? -Nils
-------
∂23-Feb-86 1247 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tues
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 12:47:29 PST
Date: Sun 23 Feb 86 12:42:20-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tues
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185727856.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, I'm assuming that we are going to wait until Spring Quarter
to have you talk on CBCL at the weekly mtg I have with students?
-------
∂23-Feb-86 1705 SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: CS223A, CS323
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 17:04:07 PST
Date: Sun 23 Feb 86 17:05:28-PST
From: Ted Shortliffe <Shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: CS223A, CS323
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, TW@SU-AI.ARPA,
JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, Rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
TOB@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12185709965.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Office: Room TC-135, Stanford Med Center; Phone: (415) 497-6979
Message-ID: <12185775759.75.SHORTLIFFE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Moving an AI course to the fall quarter would hlep take
some of the pressure off the winter quarter in the MIS core curriculum.
Ted
-------
∂24-Feb-86 0933 RA Judith Lemmon
Judith Lemmon called re Stanford Video Journal. Her tel. 7-3617.
∂24-Feb-86 1052 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Yuri Gastev
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 10:52:45 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 10:43:05-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Yuri Gastev
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185968290.21.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Nils asked me to let you know that he has approved the appointment of
Yuri Gastev as a Visiting Scholar. These appointments are limited to
one year, but can be extended. What effective date do you want--or shall
I check with Michael Bernstam?
Betty
-------
∂24-Feb-86 1505 VAL Nakagawa's visit
He's coming at 10, and I have a plane to Lexington about noon. So I can come for
a half hour or so (if this makes sense).
∂24-Feb-86 1532 LES RT account
JMC is now a legitimate account, courtesy of greep.
∂24-Feb-86 1636 VAL paper on pointwise circ'n
In case you haven't read it yet, I left a new version in your mailbox.
∂24-Feb-86 1700 RA John Pucci
Pucci called today and said he would like to meet with you in the morning
(he has a 4:30pm flight back). I set a tentative meeting between you and him
at 10:00am. If you cannot make it you can call him at the Best Western
Tropicana 961 0220 and let him know or you can let me know and I will call him
first thing tomorrow morning.
∂24-Feb-86 1716 ME printing XGP files via Lathrop spooler
To: JMC, CLT
CC: LES, ME
I've made a change to the Lathrop spooler that I hope will solve
the problem of printing XGP files. The change involves no longer
using an Impress language command that Imagen apparently no longer
supports. Please tell me the results of spooling XGP files now,
including the WONG file that lost before. Thanks.
∂24-Feb-86 2117 norvig@usc-cse.usc.edu Number of `facts' per brain.
Received: from [192.5.10.255] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 21:16:54 PST
Received: by usc-cse.usc.edu (4.12/S2.2) id AA13682; Mon, 24 Feb 86 21:08:37 pst
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 86 21:08:37 pst
From: Peter Norvig <norvig@usc-cse.usc.edu>
Message-Id: <8602250508.AA13682@usc-cse.usc.edu>
To: mccarthy@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Number of `facts' per brain.
I am comparing estimates of the number of `facts' or `rules'
either (a) needed for general intelligence, or (b) resident in
the average human mind. David Waltz has given me an estimate
of 2 million, which is extraordinary not for its magnitude, but
because it is the only estimate I have seen that doesn't start
with the digit `1'. I seem to remember you giving a much lower
figure, perhaps 10↑4 or 10↑5, but I can't find a reference.
Could you help me?
Thanks,
Peter Norvig
∂24-Feb-86 2300 ME Lathrop
To: CLT, JMC
∂24-Feb-86 1943 CLT lathrop
doesn't seem to work at all now.
I get lathrop? in response to the lathrop command at monitor level.
Joe fixed spool so I can
.r spool
*lathrop <fname>
but q/l shows `waiting for lathrop to be available'.
I checked to see that it was turned on.
ME - This happens when the system had that line turned off for one
reason or another. After a couple of minutes, it should be working
(the spooler turns it on and waits a couple of minutes to make sure
it isn't running wild).
The monitor command slipped through our fingers when we put up the
new system, but that shouldn't happen again (if it does, R SPOOL
to get around the problem).
∂24-Feb-86 2321 S.SOOD@LOTS-B VTSS HOMEWORK
Received: from LOTS-B by SU-AI with PUP; 24-Feb-86 23:21 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 23:18:46-PST
From: Vidur Sood <S.SOOD@LOTS-B>
Subject: VTSS HOMEWORK
To: J.JMC@LOTS-B
Message-ID: <12186105859.17.S.SOOD@LOTS-B>
Prof. Mc Carthy,
I was unable to attend last Thursdays class and wanted to know if we had
an assignment due for tomorrow...could you send me a message or something
so that I could have it done on time, instead of handing it in late...
Thank you,
Vidur
-------
∂24-Feb-86 2326 WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: sail jingles.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 23:26:25 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 23:21:52-PST
From: Marianne Winslett <WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: sail jingles.
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 24 Feb 86 22:49:00-PST
Message-ID: <12186106422.8.WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Well, thank you! I am most honored. It seems criminal to take money
for writing poems, though.
--Marianne
-------
∂24-Feb-86 2330 HST proposal for the 30-years lisp conference
what do you prefer: "the 30-years lisp conference" or "the 30th anniversary of
lisp conference" ?
i propose the following program (for 2 days):
1. basic ideas and their historical relation to LISP
a) functional programming
b) recursive functions
c) lambda calculuys
2. The work on LISP at MIT 1958-1963
a) LISP design and LISP reality 1958-1959
b) The LISP1 system
c) the LISP1.5 system
3. The spread-out of LISP into dialects
a) the missing next step - the LISP2 project
b) from LISP1.6 to MacLISP
c) from BBN-LISP to InterLISP
4. the question of language description and standardisation
a) the LISP1.5 description as first semanic description of a progr. lang.
b) formal specification of scheme and LISP
c) virtual LISP machines
d) StandardLISP
e) CommonLISP
5. 29 years of LISP application
a) Formula manipulation - computer algebra
b) LISP as language implementation language
c) the dendral system as firts big application of lisp
d) expert-system shells - the big business
6. LISP machines and parallel LISP's
a) the MIT (LMI/SYMBOLICS) LISP machine
b) the XEROX machines for LISP
c) the scheme chip
d) parallel LISP
7. the development of LISP-implementation
a) binding strategies in LISP
b) history of LISP compilers
c) LISP transport systems
d) storage management for LISP
of course that's the first proposal. you see my german through all of it.
we should develop a list of speakers for this (or a similar) program.I propose:
(in sequence of themes):D.Friedman-H.Rogers-D.Scott-H.Stoyan-S.Russell-T.Hart-
P.Abrahams-JLWhite-W.Teitelman-M.Wand-W.Clinger-J.Moore-A.Hearn-G.Steele
-J.Moses-D.Bobrow-W.White-R.Fikes-R.Greenblatt-P.Deusch-G.Sussman-R.Gabriel-
D.Wise-F.Blair-M.Griss-J.Fitch
∂25-Feb-86 0718 GHOSH@SU-SIERRA.ARPA re: HAM radios
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 07:18:46 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 07:19:34-PST
From: Sumit Ghosh <GHOSH@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: re: HAM radios
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 24 Feb 86 22:38:00-PST
Thank you very much JMC. I appreciate your answer greatly.
-sumit
-------
∂25-Feb-86 0826 RA John Pucci
I just talked to Pucci and he said that he will pass all his messages through
Les so you needn't come in at 10:00.
∂25-Feb-86 0835 RA Judith Lemmon
Judith Lemmon called again this morning reStanford Video Journal. Her tel.
7-3617.
Lecture on AI, clearly on the logic approach. Taped during Spring quarter.
Trivial royalties.
∂25-Feb-86 0944 hitson@su-pescadero.arpa Tomorrow's meeting...
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 09:44:24 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 09:34:51 pst
Date: 25 Feb 1986 0934-PST (Tuesday)
From: Bruce Hitson <hitson@su-pescadero.arpa>
To: les@sail
Cc: facil@sail, jjw@sail, pratt@navajo
Subject: Tomorrow's meeting...
Les,
Are we planning to meet at 11:30 tomorrow? I saw a suggestion to
change to that time, but don't recall seeing confirmation that everyone
could make it then (most any time tomorrow is fine with me).
If possible, could you please send a copy of the current "shopping
list" to facil so that we will have a chance to review/comment on the
latest version before the meeting tomorrow? I've seen bits and pieces,
but never everything all on one page/msg. Thanks.
I assume that the entire meeting tomorrow will be consumed with
discussions related to the immediate allocation of funds. If possible,
however, I think we should reserve 5-10 minutes to talk specifically
about how this relates to longer-term departmental planning. We should
also schedule another meeting soon to continue our discussion of
this important area.
--- Bruce
∂25-Feb-86 1127 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa more input / request for output
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 11:26:53 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 11:18:07 pst
Date: 25 Feb 1986 1118-PST (Tuesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: facil@sail
Cc:
Subject: more input / request for output
I sent some comments to the committee a few weeks ago and received no
feedback (except from Bruce). Here are some comments based on that
feedback:
- Independent of whether the ARPA funds are used to purchase a Sequent,
such a purchase seems like a good idea. I've talked to two groups (MCC
and RIACS) in the last few weeks who are VERY happy with their
Sequents. Bob Brown at RIACS, formerly of Purdue, also indicated that
Purdue had purchased one for instructional use, and that that appeared
to be a good idea as well (the logic being that even if you couldn't
get as much throughput for a batch job, you would get better response
for the usual avalanche of student (interactive) jobs, since each would
be running on their own processor). Finally, Group 3 is selling at
least two of their systems at a discount because Sequent is cutting
them out of their business; i.e. Sequent will be providing their own
maintenance and support in the future.
- Notwithstanding continuing arguments that the HARDWARE for McSuns would be
cheap to build, I find it hard to believe that the ENGINEERING and SOFTWARE
can/will be pulled together in short order or for a small amount of
money. I realize I'm just whistling in the dark here, given the makeup
of the committee.
- Using an existing UNIX machine as a mail forwarder is probably a
mistake, unless you use Carmel for example. Mail processing chews up a
lot of cycles. Most people outside Stanford throw PDP-11's or
VAX-11/730's or Suns at the problem. In this vein, I think it would be
useful for CSD-CF to support further development of Taliesin, the
distribution bulletin board and mail system that we've developed for
the V-System (that's software) ON a machine to be dedicated for mail.
- Noting that my "project-specific" proposal seems to have fallen in
the cracks, here are a few more details (which Bruce may augment
momentarily) related to a new ARPA project in multi-media conferencing:
2 Sun 3/75+color workstations: ca. $44K
2 vocoders: ca. $10K
Keith
∂25-Feb-86 1131 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Dinner/Monday, 3/10
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 11:31:16 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Feb 86 11:12:17-PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 08:57:21-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Dinner/Monday, 3/10
To: JMC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186211187.52.EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Ed and Penny's dinner is set to begin (at their house) at 6:30pm.
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1149 RA Dr. Appointment
I have a 1:15 doctor appointment. Since he is going to dilate my eyes I don't
know whether I will be back this afternoon. If there is something you want
me to do before I leave, please let me know.
∂25-Feb-86 1208 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Horn
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 12:08:37 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 11:44:33-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Horn
To: cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA, reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186241624.27.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I talked with Bert Horn today by phone. I told him generally of
our continuing interest in having him come to Stanford and that
our committee still has a bit of work to do before making a
final decision on appointments. I think he guesses that the chances
are high that we will ultimately be making him an offer. He is
prepared to return to MIT for Fall '86 (if our indecision makes
that necessary) and then come to Stanford in Jan '87.
Letters requesting evaluations of Rosenschein and Latombe are being
typed and should be going out soon. -Nils
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1209 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: Yuri Gastev
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 12:09:01 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 11:49:47-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: Yuri Gastev
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 24 Feb 86 21:32:00-PST
Message-ID: <12186242577.37.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We'll appoint immediately, for one year.
Betty
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1216 AI.PETRIE@MCC.ARPA MRS
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 12:15:51 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 14:16:37-CST
From: Charles Petrie <AI.PETRIE@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: MRS
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Here are my short thoughts on MRS that you requested:
MRS is a good research project: there are many known expert system techniques
and problems. These techniques tend to be scattered among many
different expert system tools. The MRS crew attempts to integrate the
techniques and solve the problems. They start from a FOL base as it
is the most flexible. I have been sufficiently impressed with the
approach to try to emulate it. I have worked with Mat Ginsberg and Ben
Grosof and find their research to be of high quality and relevant.
MRS has been used on some reasonably large applications and is successful as
a tool to that extent. It is unsuccessful in that it is a complex program
that places a large burden on the user without benefit of much written
guidance. I know of a least one situation where a potential MRS users group
simply gave up on it because it was simply too complicated to use.
It may be that Stuart Russell's new document will help, but it also may be
that Genesereth's metalevel reasoning is too flexible to apprehended by
novices without personal instruction. The last is only a suspicion and
there may be counterexamples. In any case, such a complicated system
may even be the right result for a research project.
In summary, I think that the MRS research is of good quality even though
the resulting tool may not be as widely used as more simple ones.
Charles Petrie
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1257 norvig@usc-cse.usc.edu re: Number of `facts' per brain.
Received: from [192.5.10.255] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 12:57:16 PST
Received: by usc-cse.usc.edu (4.12/S2.2) id AA02026; Tue, 25 Feb 86 12:30:44 pst
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 12:30:44 pst
From: Peter Norvig <norvig@usc-cse.usc.edu>
Message-Id: <8602252030.AA02026@usc-cse.usc.edu>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: re: Number of `facts' per brain.
Here are the estimates I get, from low to high:
First, consider the number of words in an average vocabulary.
By random sampling from a dictionary, I estimate this at 10K.
The psycholinguist Liz Bates gave me a figure of 40K, which may be
high, but she says that includes proper nouns, etc, which we would
want to count under `facts'. Then if the number of facts/word is
in the range 1-100, that gives from 10K to 4M total facts. Then
we would have to add non-verbal knowledge; if this is 2-10 times
the amount of verbal knowledge, we arrive at 20K to 40M.
Another estimate comes from counting time: a 32 year old has
lived a billion seconds. So if the number of seconds to learn a
fact is again in the range 1-100, then we get 10M to 1G as answers.
This number is monotonically increasing over time, which seems wrong;
we should count forgetting and generalizing. (We should also count
some down time for sleeping; just how much you count depends on how
seriously you take dreaming.) So a guess would be 1M to 500M.
I suppose the absolute upper bound comes from the number of neurons;
I'm told this is 10G, and suppose you can't get much more than one
fact/neuron.
Hope this speculating was interesting,
Peter Norvig
∂25-Feb-86 1514 NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA Symbolic Systems Program
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 15:14:18 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 15:13:39-PST
From: Helen Nissenbaum <NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolic Systems Program
To: Herb@SU-PSYCH.ARPA, Reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
Barwise@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Etchemendy@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Sag@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
Nissenbaum@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Wasow@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
peters@SU-CSLI.ARPA, sf@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The Symbolic Systems Program has been approved by the Committee on
Undergraduate Studies, and next week goes before the Senate.
Humanities and Sciences, which has been supportive all along, has come
up with a financial contingency plan which, though modest, would be
sufficient to support the program in the event that our proposal is
not funded by any outside sources. In other words, prospects for
Symbolic Systems are quite good.
We are now putting together copy for Courses and Degrees. The
deadline is February 28. To complete this, we need to list faculty
members who are going to be associated with the program; that is, we
need a more-or-less firm commitment of your interest in the program
(and an idea of the extent of your desired involvement). Would you:
A. be willing to serve on the Faculty Steering Committee?
B. be willing to advise Symbolic Systems majors
C. both A and B.
I'd appreciate your response as soon as possible (please, no later
than Thursday).
Thanks,
Helen Nissenbaum
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1801 jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
Received: from FORD-WDL1.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 18:00:52 PST
Received: by FORD-WDL1.ARPA (5.15/5.9)
id AA18440; Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:01:02 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:01:02 PST
From: jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA (John B. Nagle)
Message-Id: <8602260201.AA18440@FORD-WDL1.ARPA>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa, jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA
Subject: re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
Cc: dinolt@Ford-wdl1.ARPA
Thank you. I though you had devised that formulation.
John Nagle
∂25-Feb-86 1813 LES Facilities Committee Meeting
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Meeting at 11:30am Wednesday, 2/26, in Nil's Conference Room (NOT MJH-301).
Bring your crying towels.
Some information on parallel computers, Common Lisp for Suns and McSun is
given below. I have received no reports from subcommittees (grumpf!).
Project-specific requests are also attached.
PARALLEL COMPUTING
John Hennessy collected a quotation for a Sequent Balance 21000 system
for 32 users, including 8 CPUs, 16 MB memory and 396 MB disk for $116,100.
This is a 40% discount from list price. Group 3 Electronics, which
represents Sequent only through March 3, has taken themselves out of the
picture but says that after March 3 they will be able to offer very good
prices on a few demonstration systems that they have.
Encore clearly wants to deal. I expect to receive a quotation from
them on Wednesday morning for a system under $100k. The question is, how
real are they?
Alliant has the highest-performance parallel systems around and is
of particular interest to the numerical analysts. A system with 4 central
processors, 3 IO processors and assorted peripherals would cost $362k.
There is also a possibility that they will make a 1-CPU demonstration system
available at no cost and invite us to augment it with purchased equipment
if we wish.
Flexible Computer offers both 32032 and 68020 based computers.
a 6 processor system based on 68020 processors would cost about $200k.
COMMON LISP FOR SUNS
Lucid: available from Sun for $3.7k for the first copy and $2.7
for successive copies. It may be possible to get a lower price through ISI,
but I can't seem to get their attention.
Kyoto: a $3k site license is being purchased by CSF-CF that permits
any number of copies to be run on Suns and VAXen at no extra cost.
Franz: $3k for first Sun, $1.5k for each additional unit plus 40%
per year for software maintenance; alternatively, $1k per workstation without
maintenance.
Looks like Kyoto Common Lisp will be the standard package unless
some worms crawl out.
McSUN
An 8 terminal system could be constructed as follows, with separate
costs shown for a demonstration system and additional systems.
Qty. Unit Description Demo. Cost Replication Cost
1 $500 68K CPU card -- $ 500
8 250 128k frame buffers 1,500* 2,000*
1 250 16 port RS232 card -- 250
1 1000 Ethernet card -- 1,000
8 500 Hi-res. monitors 6,000** 4,000**
8 100 Mouses 800 800
8 50 Keyboards 400 400
1 600 Multibus cage & power -- 600
3 4000 Engineer months 12,000***
Technician time 400
------- ------
TOTALS $20,700 $9,950
* It is likely that the cost of the frame buffers can be substantially
reduced by using 256k RAMS on one or two cards instead of 64k RAMS.
** For the demonstration system, 6 monitors would be needed and the unit
price would be about $1000 each.
*** The engineering cost would be reduced by about $8,000 if a suitable
student were found.
It appears that McSun terminals can be replicated for under $1.2k
each, including 800x1000 displays, keyboards and mice, which compares very
favorably with workstation prices.
Project-specific Proposals
The following project-specific requests have been received to date.
Cheriton
Experimental multiprocessor workstation: $90k.
19 2-meg. memory boards @$1500 for existing Suns: $30k.
2 Sun 3 Model 180 fileservers with 2 Eagles each: $83k.
More laser printers in MJH.
2 "multicast agents" needed: $38k.
Pratt
Sun workstation with floating point and color desired for Pratt.
Two student worstations also desired. NFS fileserver needed.
Manna:
∂18-Feb-86 1236 EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Facilities on DARPA funds.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 12:34:33 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 12:29:05-PST
From: Eric Muller <EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Facilities on DARPA funds.
To: les@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: zm@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184414725.19.EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
After discussion with Zohar, our request for workstation on
uncommitted DARPA funds is as follows :
2 Sun workstations, model 3/75M; one in the basic 4Mb of RAM
configuration, the other in the extended 8Mb configuration. No disks.
Each with an Ethernet Attachment.
Adequate space on Sun file servers (under NFS protocol, since we
intend to run UNIX on these machines).
These machines would be used by the Tablog project.
If I did forget something, I will be happy to answer your questions.
eric.
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1152 binford@su-whitney.arpa equipment
Received: from SU-WHITNEY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 11:52:09 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 21 Feb 86 11:52:02 pst
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 86 11:52:02 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
To: les@su-ai
Subject: equipment
Les
Concerning ARPA equipment:
My proposal has two parts: First, completing the Symbolics buy.
The second, imaging and graphics facilities for the vision lab.
Symbolics Lisp Machine Buy
The arrangement which had been negotiated was pairs of Lisp
machines, one used 3600 with one new 3640.
We secured funding for one machine. Dan Salas finds that he
cannot sell us one. My proposal is for funds to buy the
second machine, i.e. $45,000.
I had participated in the recent buy of Lisp machines with
equipment money which had been approved previously. We sent
off a request to buy two machines for $90,000 instead of one
for $90,000. There was no answer to our request. It appeared
as though the request had fallen through the crack. Recently
we found that we had indeed carried through the request but that
it had been overlooked at AFOSR. At the last minute we pushed
through a purchase order for the one machine which had
been approved. The contract was ending and it was very uncertain
at that point. We did subsequently get approval to buy one machine.
Imaging and Graphics Hardware
We propose to improve imaging and graphics facilities in the vision lab.
We are especially interested in a video switch for images; the best
candidate at the last survey was one from Grass Valley group for $25,000.
For demos and research, we seek a video disk, Panasonic TQ1023F at $35000.
∂25-Feb-86 1815 ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA ["Derek Partridge <derek@nmsu>" <derek@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>:]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 18:15:11 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 18:11:21-PST
From: Bob Engelmore <Engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: ["Derek Partridge <derek@nmsu>" <derek@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>:]
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Office-Phone: (415) 497-8444
Home-Phone: (415) 322-0627
Message-ID: <12186312040.37.ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
Here's Derk Partridge's account of the Foundations conference.
Incidentally, where's the photo?
Bob
---------------
Return-Path: <derek%nmsu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Feb 86 14:57:34-PST
Received: from nmsu by csnet-relay.csnet id ag10120; 25 Feb 86 17:24 EST
Received: from sparta (sparta.ARPA) by nmsu (4.12/)
id AA00246; Mon, 24 Feb 86 14:45:03 mst
Received: from pylos by sparta (2.0/)
id AA00432; Mon, 24 Feb 86 11:32:21 mst
Received: by pylos (2.0/)
id AA01761; Mon, 24 Feb 86 11:32:13 mst
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 86 11:32:13 mst
From: "Derek Partridge <derek@nmsu>" <derek@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8602241832.AA01761@pylos>
To: engelmore@sumex-aim.ARPA
expert summary
Bob,
I'm glad that you liked my offering. I have in fact sent it to
the AISB quarterly in England. I think that the overlap between these
two AI information disseminators is, unfortunately, quite small.
So, here is the online copy (I hope):
.ce 2
\fBWorkshop on the Foundations of AI: an on-the-spot report\fR
6th, 7th, and 8th February 1986 in Las Cruces, New Mexico
.sp 0.50i
\fB Friday 7th February -- 9:35 am\fR
.PP
Yesterday we made some progress. Let me elaborate slightly.
In his introductory overview Chandra[other name too
long]sekaran noted that in AI (and thus I presume in RI
also) power is more important than correctness. {The rest of
the analysis was shouted in order to compensate for the
possibility of minor errors of interpretation that may have
crept in.}
.PP
Roger Needham, and others, showed that AI doesn't really
exist: as soon as you successfully code up some aspect, it
ceases to be AI. Mark Halpern exposed the real reason for
Turing's self-destruction: acute embarrassment resulting from
a realization that he had failed to appreciate a fundamental
axiom of western intellectual thought, to wit, `machines
can't think.'
.PP
Jerry Fodor suggested that the mind/brain muddle might not
be an object worthy of scientific study (like Tuesdays in
whereveritwas Connecticut, even though the garbage man comes
that day etc.). Despite the early successes, brains and
Tuesdays are just not the sorts of things that you can have
a science about. He then proved that network
representations (such as that of the brain) cannot possibly
exhibit intelligence -- tapes, as in Turing Machines, appear
to be critical. Thus showing why Lashley failed to
find the engram, etc. -- he was looking in the wrong
place! Fodor's contentions were hotly disputed by both the
connectionists present, and his Auntie who had apparently
spoken to him about it beforehand. The implication is that
the hitherto unrecognized, seminal paper is ``Artificial
Digestion'' (AISBQ, no. 46, p.30), even though it fails to
draw attention to the (as we now know) crucial role of tape worms.
.PP
Bert Dreyfus completed a wonderful day of progress by
revealing that he is really one of us. Everyone bad-mouthed
expert systems, and that behavior was generally agreed to be
a good thing.
.PP
In sum: AI doesn't exist; the brain is not the seat of
intelligence; and Dreyfus has seen the light, at last.
.sp 0.50i
\fBSaturday February 8th -- 10:10 am\fR
.PP
Yesterday again progress continued apace, undermining
the foundations of AI. On Thursday we
saw working programs removed from the domain of AI.
Yesterday we made great strides towards a further paring
down of AI -- more encumbering baggage was thrown away in
the hopes of revealing a lean and vibrant discipline within
this flabby body of folk-knowledge, folk-theories, etc.
( or simply, folk-all, as Churchland said, if I heard
him correctly).
.PP
Alan Bundy gave theories to Cognitive Science,
and truth to anyone who wanted it. John McCarthy was, of
course, right there to make a grab for it in the guise of
the magic of non-monotonous logic. Not being a logician
myself, I can clearly see the merits of making logic less
boring, but I'm dubious about the introduction of magic,
even as a truth-preserving wheeze.
.PP
Somewhere about here the tide turned, and we began to hear
about features that do contribute to a discipline of AI.
Magic, I've already mentioned; and from John Campbell we got
the two R's of AI -- Rational Reconstructions (roughly,
failed attempts to reproduce famous AI programs). We also
heard about a methodological constituent: the evaluation of
programs a posteriori. In keeping with this trend to more
bottom-up characterization of the field (and, I suspect, a
desire to preserve some vestiges of civilized behavior),
Karen Sparck-Jones advocated that the ultimate question of
`AI, or not AI?', must be decided democratically, i.e. by a
show of hands.
.PP
At this point it became clear that we had heard, from a
number of speakers, of an implementation-independent
(indeed, notation-independent) goal of AI research: the
accumulation of brownie points. Let me illustrate this:
.nf
. a brownie point (to a first approximation)
..
...... an accumulation of brownie points
..
.fi
This was the major insight of the workshop at this point, as
best as I could tell. And, of course, Zenon Pylyshyn
latched onto this realization in his talk, the last one of
the day. It is true that he never actually mentioned these
intriguing objects -- but we could all read between the
words.
.PP
In an effort to put theory into practice, I polled my family
at breakfast this morning as to whether what I had drawn
adequately represented brownie points. The resultant three
blank faces immediately told me that a lot of computation
was being invested in this question (there were no answers
just popping out; partial differential equations were
perhaps being solved in those heads). In fact the answers
are still not in [10:12 am] and with reaction times
currently running at about 1hr 53min, I predict that there
is a lot of structure in brownie points (they are only
weakly equivalent to dots and periods). And when my three
reaction times finally come in, I expect (after analysis of
this data) to be well on the way to discovering some of the
functional primitives of brownie points. Clearly, they are
not cognitively impenetrable.
.sp 0.50i
\fBSunday February 9th -- all day\fR
[No visible signs of life]
.sp 0.50i
\fBMonday February 10th -- 10:00 am\fR
.PP
On Saturday, after a game of `find the meeting room', Paul
Churchland, flying in the face of reason, sided with Fodor's
Auntie and insisted that study of the brain might contribute
to our understanding of RI (and by implication, AI). He
argued that this neuronal clump is a sort of surrealistic
lunch box containing phase-space and state-space sandwiches.
The inevitable Star Wars question was raised by Aravind
Joshi; the fundamental problem seems to be in the use of bad
language: non-starred and ill-starred sentences.
.PP
Dave Rumelhart reiterated the view that AI is no place for
theories. He then weighed into the networks-versus-symbol-
processing battle with the suggestions that the
microarchitecture of brownie points is likely to be
connectionistic, and that this microarchitecture cannot be
dismissed as mere implementation detail.
.PP
Aaron Sloman, thinly disguised as Marvin Minsky, argued
against a dichotomization of systems into those with minds
and those that don't mind. He illustrated his argument with
a continuum from viruses through ants, gerbils, and chimps
to Yoricks, but he could not be lured into a clear statement
of the direction in which mindedness was increasing in the
continuum presented.
.PP
Maggie Boden wound up the day's proceedings with an argument
that the benefit of AI in psychology was to be found in the
power of computers to draw researchers into such messy and
complex theories that they never get out and bother anyone
else again. Fortunately, prior perfect analysis a la Marr is
unlikely when a dynamic researcher, itching to build a
respectable heap of code, is given ready access to a
powerful, interactive, program development environment --
it's our only hope for a science of Tuesdays in
whereveritwas Connecticut. At the banquet in the high-tack
setting of a local eating house, Roger Schank reminded us
about the significance of reminding and the nonsignificance
of mathematics (which, incidently, he doesn't like). Frank
Harary proposed a vote of thanks in which he handed out
hand-crafted brownie points and thanked us for having the
good sense to opt for a graph-theoretic representation of
these pointy objects (i.e. the trivial graph).
.nf
from the diary of A.I. Person.
I am working on the serious stuff, but it is bound to be polluted
with rational reconstructions, carefully considered thoughts, and
other artifacts of RI -- the fresh and clear vision that you have before
you will be gone.
I appreciate the quick response, thanks,
Derek
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1845 jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
Received: from FORD-WDL1.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 18:44:55 PST
Received: by FORD-WDL1.ARPA (5.15/5.9)
id AA18831; Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:45:27 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:45:27 PST
From: jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA (John B. Nagle)
Message-Id: <8602260245.AA18831@FORD-WDL1.ARPA>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa, jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA
Subject: re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
OK. I'm actually using Oppen's formulation from his "Simplification
by Cooperating Decision Procedures" paper, in which he is more concerned with
putting the axioms in a form that is suitable for mechanical theorem proving
than with the historical formulation.
I have a constructive form, and like most constructive mathematics,
it is very painful. But with the Boyer-Moore prover doing most of the work,
it works out quite nicely.
Having ported the Boyer-Moore prover from the Symbolics to the VAX
and thence to the SUNs, I have hope of in time moving it to something that
the typical student can afford. Perhaps next year.
John Nagle
∂25-Feb-86 2111 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa color graphics
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 21:10:53 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 21:11:14 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA01184; Tue, 25 Feb 86 21:07:01 pst
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 21:07:01 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602260507.AA01184@coraki.uucp>
To: facil@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: color graphics
Cc: fournier@su-navajo.ARPA, guibas@su-score.ARPA, nilsson@su-score.ARPA,
pratt@su-navajo.arpa
Earlier today I talked with Alain Fournier about the need for color
graphics machines around the department. In their absence there is
little opportunity for anyone to learn much, either on their own or
in the context of a class, about color graphics.
It occurs to me that a relatively cheap source of color graphics --
complete with extensive supporting software -- would be obtained by
equipping some of the existing Sun-2's with 640x480 color frame
buffers. These are more or less obsolete Sun products. They used to
sell for around $4K each (retail), but I would guess they could be
picked up for less than $2K (Stanford price) these days, assume they
are still available. They require RGB color monitors; 13" monitors
should be $1K or less.
About half a dozen would be a good number. I suggest therefore that
$20K be allocated for color equipment, for public and instructional
use around the department, subject to its availability.
-v
∂25-Feb-86 2327 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Revised rates
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 23:27:40 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 23:28:17-PST
From: Len Bosack <BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Revised rates
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186369734.36.BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
[I propose to send this message to the faculty and post it as a system
message on the victim systems. -- Len]
At the retreat in January, it was suggested that we change our cost
recovery policy for the cost-center computers to reduce the cost of
connect time. The primary purpose of this change is to permit most
users to stay logged-in without undue cost, thus saving the delay of
repeated logins and gaining notification of arriving mail. This suggestion
was discussed by the facilities committee and deemed desirable.
Using our cost model, the rates for the systems have been recomputed as
shown below. These changes should show little change in costs for the
'average user', should such a person exist. We propose that these rates
take effect 1-March-86. Note that these are rates are subject to review
and approval by the University Controller and the resident Government
auditors.
The new rates reflect a roughly 2/3 reduction in connect rates. As the same
amount of money must be raised, the other rates have gone up to compensate.
Also effective 1-March-86, charges will commence for the public printers
based on Canon printer technology (the Imagen 8/300 and Apple Laserwriters).
Len Bosack
old new old new old new
System ACPU ACPU AConn AConn Disk Disk Disk Unit
SAIL 1.85 2.50 1.85 0.5 0.13 0.179 block
Score 1.67 2.50 1.55 0.5 0.07 0.097 page
Navajo 0.38 0.65 1.40 0.5 0.029 0.039 kbyte
Printers: (rates unchanged)
Type Per Page
Dover-class 0.059
Canon-class 0.065
Boise 0.044
-------
∂25-Feb-86 2336 JMC re: Revised rates
To: BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Tue 25 Feb 86 23:28:17-PST.]
It looks like I'd better find another place than SAIL to keep my disk files.
It's unfortunate to be driven off after so many years, and you'll have to
find another source of income to replace it.
∂26-Feb-86 0120 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Worstations & 'Glue' for the Darpa discussion
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 01:20:16 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 01:20:50-PST
From: Len Bosack <BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Worstations & 'Glue' for the Darpa discussion
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186390226.36.BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Following are 'midline' estimates for expenditures that are beneficial to
our various projects. As you can see, we could spend a great deal more money
than we are likely to be able to spend.
Workstations
It appears wise to consider upgrades to our existing population of
workstations. As the software has gone on, the need for ever larger memories
is upon us. A quick census of our machines reveals the following potential
need (all prices reflect the most likely discount):
Quan Item $/ea $K
16 Sun2/50 2MB memory addition 2100 33.6
48 Sun2/120 1MB memory addition 1050 50.4
9 Symbolics 8MB memory addition 18.5K 166.5
--------
250.5
We have to opportunity to upgrade some of the existing workstation population
to faster models at fairly attractive prices. By doing this, we free older
equipment per our "trickle-down" discussions. Based on requests from the
non-Darpa PIs and our current population and distribution of workstations,
it appears we have beneficial uses for:
Quan Item $/ea $K
8 4MB Sun 3/50 with 68881&Ether 6370 51
4 4MB Sun 3/52 with 68881,Ether,Disk,Tape 9730 39
---
90
Should we wish to purchase 8MB machines, we would have to purchase
Sun 3/75M-8 systems at $14.3K/ea. If we were reasonably sure we could
use such machines to satisfy what is now Symbolics demand, the higher price
would be justified.
All of the above purchases assume the basic software covered by existing
Stanford site licenses. We have every reason to believe Lucid is interested
in providing Stanford with a reasonable site license. As they appear to have
an exclusive arrangement with Sun, Sun also must be convinced. The price
for such a license is currently quite vague. If we were fairly sure Lucid
common lisp was a significant component of our needs, I feel a site license
with an initial cost in the $20K range (about 10 copies at regular price)
could be arranged.
"Glue"
We have a population of Vax 750 and 780 machine that take considerable
expense to maintain. We see a significant (30-50%) saving possible by doing
some or all of the work in-house. By purchasing a reasonable collection of
equipment for use as 'hot spares', we can offer improved service as well as
a lower cost.
Item $K
750&peripheral spares 32
780 spares 18
---
50
We have come to depend on the Stanford network as an important part of doing
our work. Currently, we depend on the power in MJH for an alarming number of
paths in the network. To ensure more reliable service, we can either add
additional cable paths or provide better power to the network complex in MJH.
The cable project appears prohibitively expensive. The power might be afforded
if we feel the improvement is justified.
Item $
15KVA UPS (2 hour) and installation 24K
Much of our laboratory equipment is over 15 years old. As technology has
progressed, we now must work with much higher clock rates then ever before.
At the moment, our best pulse generator is 18 years old and can barely
produce 20MHz pulse trains. We have no oscilloscope that can accurately
present 50MHz pulses. Fully re-equiping with modern instruments would cost
well over $200K and I feel is not justified. A substantial improvement could
be obtained as follows:
Description $K
Signal and pulse generators 19
Oscilloscopes (2) 12
Microprocessor/logic analyzer 11
Miscellaneous (power supplies, DVM) 4
---
46
Summary of items
Workstations
Description $
Memory Upgrades 250.5
New workstations 90
Possible Lucid site license 20-40
-------
360.5 - 380.5
Glue
Spare computer parts 50
UPS for critical net components 24
partial laboratory re-equipment 46
------
120
-------
∂26-Feb-86 0932 VAL
I am in and can join you and Nakagawa for an hour.
∂26-Feb-86 1000 CLT calendar item
fri 07-mar 10:00 Timothy to Dr. Ginter (3rd floor 1150 veterans blvd)
∂26-Feb-86 1100 JMC
vtss about Susie
∂26-Feb-86 1127 RA check and letters
I left a check on your desk; there are also letters to be signed; they too are
on your desk.
∂26-Feb-86 1356 RA leaving early for course
I am currently enrolled in a course at UC Berkeley extension on Wed. evenings.
It would help a lot if I could leave early, about 2:00, on Wednesdays, to
avoid the traffic and to prepare for class. Do you have any objections?
Thanks,
∂26-Feb-86 1426 BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA updated Workstation/Glue text
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 14:26:06 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 14:22:03-PST
From: Len Bosack <BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: updated Workstation/Glue text
To: Facil@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186532440.52.BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Workstations
It appears wise to consider upgrades to our existing population of
workstations. As the software has gone on, the need for ever larger memories
is upon us. A quick census of our machines reveals the following potential
need (all prices reflect the most likely discount):
Quan Item $/ea $K
10 Sun2/50 2MB memory addition 2100 21
48 Sun2/120 1MB memory addition 1050 50.4
--------
71.4
We have to opportunity to upgrade some of the existing workstation population
to faster models at fairly attractive prices. By doing this, we free older
equipment per our "trickle-down" discussions. The Sun 3/75 machine below are to
be used in exploring alternatives to Symbolics for serious Lisp work. The
machine will have to be augmented by their users in KSL and Robotics to be
fully functional Lisp workstations. Based on requests from the non-Darpa PIs
and our current population and distribution of workstations, it appears we have
beneficial uses for:
Quan Item $/ea $K
8 4MB Sun 3/50 with 68881&Ether 6370 51
4 4MB Sun 3/52 with 68881,Ether,Disk,Tape 9730 39
6 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether 11.5 69
---
159
"Glue"
We have a population of Vax 750 and 780 machine that take considerable expense
to maintain. We need at least a minimal spare backup for the Sun 3/50s now
being purchased. We see a significant (30-50%) saving possible by doing some
or all of the work in-house. By purchasing a reasonable collection of equipment
for use as 'hot spares', we can offer improved service as well as a lower cost.
Item $K
750&peripheral spares 32
780 spares 18
Sun 3/50 6.4
---
56.4
Much of our laboratory equipment is over 15 years old. As technology has
progressed, we now must work with much higher clock rates then ever before.
At the moment, our best pulse generator is 18 years old and can barely
produce 20MHz pulse trains. We have no oscilloscope that can accurately
present 50MHz pulses. Fully re-equiping with modern instruments would cost
well over $200K and I feel is not justified. A substantial improvement could
be obtained as follows:
Description $K
Signal and pulse generators 19
Oscilloscopes (2) 12
Microprocessor/logic analyzer 11
Miscellaneous (power supplies, DVM) 4
---
46
Summary of items
Workstations
Description $
Memory Upgrades 71.4
New workstations 159
-------
230.4
Glue
Spare computer parts 56.4
partial laboratory re-equipment 46
------
102.4
-------
∂26-Feb-86 1510 RA leaving
I am leaving now; see you tomorrow.
∂26-Feb-86 1542 HQM%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 15:41:43 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 Feb 86 18:33-EST
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 18:31:48 EST
From: Henry Minsky <HQM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: JMC@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
cc: HQM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].831750.860226.HQM>
I thought you might be interested by a few excerpts from a discussion
that was flaming around the SPACE-DIGEST mailing list last week. It
started when someone sent a message "asking a few questions" about the
value and purpose of space exploration. These are some of the replies
to those questions.
******************************************
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 86 22:26:05 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@mc.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Save the Unborn Shuttles
To: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Cc: KFL@mc.lcs.mit.edu, Space@s1-b.arpa
From: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Andrew J Fine)
So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for 100
missions (best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean water, and
other necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten decades, easily.
Assuming that food, clean water, and other necessities for one
person cost just one dollar a day, and that shipping them to Ethiopia
costs nothing at all, since Ethiopia has a population of 32 million, 2
billion dollars would last just about two months. Not 'ten decades'.
Ethipoia's problems stem from it's socialist economy. Why should WE
bail them out? Why not the USSR? When did the USA become the world's
nanny?
Any what makes you think that any money that doesn't go to space
will go to Ethiopia?
Note that the 2 billion dollars is not being shot into space. The
money is staying right here on Earth, where it is benefiting hundreds
of thousands of people directly. It is of course benefiting all
mankind in the long run, unlike two months of feeding Ethiopia.
If you feel bad about the fate of Ethiopians, feel free to send them
your own food and money. Just don't ask the government to use my
money to subsidize Ethiopia's bogus economic system. And keep in mind
the harm you are doing to Ethiopia's farmers. (What if whatever
product you made was to be shipped in from another country for free -
you would soon find another line of work, right? And if all Ethiopian
farmers did so ...)
Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the
privacy and keep records on a captive populace?
With the low cost of computers and other high technology items, they
are available for the use of individuals like you and I. As you must
surely be aware. You didn't enter this message with a quill pen by
candlelight.
Why have land and weather satellites at all, except to take advantage of
another nation's resources and vulnerabilities?
Resource satellites are primarily used to explore the resources of
the country that launches them. Though many countries have made great
use of landsat pictures the US made at considerable expense and
provided for free.
When there is a storm in Texas or Florida, few people are hurt,
since plenty of warning is given by weather satellites. Contrast that
with the situation in Bangladesh, where a year in which only a
thousand people perish from typhoons is considered lucky. Or with the
situation in Texas and Florida before weather satellites.
Why explore the planets, interesting though they are, except to find
more virgin landscape to despoil and riches to plunder?
Is this what people do? Would you rather live in a nice warm
apartment, or naked in the wilderness?
Man is a product of nature and what we do and build is just as
natural as anything else on Earth. Just as birds find nests better
than bare branches, and groundhogs find holes better than the bare
ground, similarly has man transformed his environment to his benefit.
Do you think the first creatures to release oxygen into the Earth's
atmosphere were evil? Should the atmosphere have remained in its
'natural' state, free of oxygen?
Do you think the first creatures to live upon the land were
despoiling the natural barren moon-like wilderness? Should the great
forests have been left in their 'natural', life-free state?
Do you think that a barren moon is to anyone's benefit? Do you
think evil is done by introducing life to that previously lifeless
cinder of a world?
Would Venus be ruined by an attempt to convert its poisinous red hot
atmosphere into temperate oxygen and blue seas, where life like us
might live in comfort?
Would empty space be despoiled by large free floating manned
colonies? Seems to me that space is the best place for our large
populations and heavy industries. So we can leave Earth's ecosystems
unspoiled.
Or do you think that heavy industries and mechanized farms should be
dismantled? And large populations reduced? Well, the former would
certainly take care of the latter, and it wouldn't be much fun.
Why put a man, or a women for that matter, in space? What is so special
about anyone that we must exhalt that person above all others in such an
eletist fashion?
I would like to see the day when anyone who wants to move to space
may do so. That day isn't yet, it's still to expensive. The shuttle
is the best bet we have currently to get to the next step. Not
everyone can ride the shuttle. Not everyone in 1492 could sail with
Columbus, either.
Why shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world rather
than that person's ego?
Put to a task? Put by whom? Are we slaves now? To be put to
tasks, tasks that serve the world in some tyrant's estimation? Like
Pol Pot's recent regime in Cambodia, in which he had everyone leave
the cities to be put to a 'useful' task in the countryside. The
results were as awful as any sensible person would have imagined.
Nobody is going into space except volunteers. If you want to
volunteer for one of these worthy tasks, go right ahead. Join the
peace corps instead of sending ignorant flames to the net.
... ( the concept of having to work for one's bread is deadly when there
is not enough work to go around ), ...
You mean when there is not enough bread to go around. There is
always enough work to go around, if only baking bread! Unemployment
is a product of stupid government regulations.
If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to
something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough.
We are descended from herbiverous apes.
If we were all dead, Earth would also be enough. Is this what you
want? Or only most of us dead?
...Keith
****************************************************************
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 13:53:34-PST
From: Steve Dennett <DENNETT@sri-nic.arpa>
Subject: re: few questions [LONG]
To: space@mc.lcs.mit.edu
> Date: 9 Feb 86 04:10:48 GMT
> From: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Andrew J Fine)
> Let's ask ourselves a few questions:
> ****************************************************************************
> Does humanity (men and women) really *need* to populate space? Do we
> really need to explore, in person or otherwise, other planets?
Only if we want to remain human beings, creatures who can look past their
immediate survival needs. Only if we want our race to survive when the
earth becomes uninhabitable due to climatic changes/cosmic accident/
or political stupidity.
> Historically, exploration and open boundaries only encouraged exploitation,
> slavery, and genocide of indigenous peoples such as African, American
> Natives, and East Asians.
We are the solar system's only indigenous race, as far as we know.
> It widened the gap between the rich and the poor
> at home, and the massive funds spent on ships and weapons in that previous
> era caused more people to starve.
Are you certain that >exploration< caused the gap to widen? Since a great
deal of wealth was returned from the New World, perhaps it was only the
inequitable distribution of that weath (caused by the political system)
that made this happen. And what about the poor who chose to become
colonists/explorers, and became wealthy because of it?
> It also increased the likelyhood of the
> lawless being able to escape justice, for example Botany Bay and the HMS
> Bounty.
There will always be places the lawless can run to escape justice,
for example Libya, South America, etc.
> So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for 100
> missions (best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean water, and
> other necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten decades, easily.
The Ethiopian problems are political; throwing money at them would make
them >worse< by supporting the rulers who choose to export crops rather
than feed their own people.
> So what do space-faring nations prove when they invoke national prestige
> and the desire of humanity to expand, by consuming all that money and
> men-centuries? "I'm rich enough to do this and you're not, so there!". "My
> rocket is bigger than yours!". "We are leaving you behind to scratch the
> dust while we inherit the universe!"
I agree that national prestige is a poor reason for space exploration;
nationalism is pretty stupid in itself. Unfortuately, the people
who rule us work at just that level, so such arguments often succeed
where more "rational" reasons fail.
> One man's glory is another man's
> humiliation. One man's wealth is another man's poverty. One man's
> livelihood is another man's serfdom.
Only when wealth is a zero-sum game, as it will be if we stay on earth.
> Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the
> privacy and keep records on a captive populace? Why have land and weather
> satellites at all, except to take advantage of another nation's resources
> and vulnerabilities?
Would you like to fly or across the state or country, knowing that the
pilot had no idea what weather conditions they might encounter during
the trip? Would you like to give up all the channels of information
that are now routed through satellites (telephone, television, data
networks)? Would it be better for farmers to be surprized by sudden
freezes, rather than warned so they can protect their crops?
Communication satellites have been a boon to the Third World, bringing
information and education into areas that could never be reached by
strictly land-based means.
> Why explore the planets, interesting though they are, except to find more
> virgin landscape to despoil and riches to plunder? Why put a man, or a
> women for that matter, in space? What is so special about anyone that we
> must exhalt that person above all others in such an eletist fashion? Why
> shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world rather than
> that person's ego?
Partly, we explore the planets because, to paraphrase Hilary, "They are
there." Curiousity led man from the savannah to the city; when man is
no longer curious, he will no longer be human.
More pragmatically, we must explore because the universe may hold solutions
to the problems we face here on earth. On the most basic level, our
physical resources are finite, and space can supplement them. More
speculatively, who knows what we may find out there? Cures for the many
diseases that still plague us. New insights into the nature of the universe,
which can be translated into technology to feed the hungry and shelter the
poor. For example, what if we found a cheap, nearly inexhaustible power
source; how about a method of predicting weather with >absolute certainty<.
Perhaps all the dangerous and environmentally destructive industries could
be moved off-planet, letting the earth become once again rustic and rural.
> The main problem with all of us is we are still essentially barbarians at
> heart. The Viking who was the explorer was also the Viking that also raped
> and pillaged. The Columbus who was the explorer was also the Columbus who
> converted people to his religion by force. The shuttle pilot who was the
> explorer was also the pilot who killed husbands, wives, and children in
> North Korea and North Vietnam.
The ad hominem fallacy, and an untrue generalization. None of the above
applies to Christa McAuliffe or any of the civilian scientists who have
gone into space. Nor does it necessarily apply to those who have
explored the arctic and the deep sea. "We" are many things, from
headhunter to philosopher.
> The wanderlust we all experience is just
> another word for the lust and coveting for the outside world that blinds us
> to the potentials of the inside world and the darkness of the soul that we
> need to correct. Do we really deserve to go "out there" when we have such
> a mess "down here"?
Will staying "down here" as we have since the beginning of human history
do anything to solve the mess "down here". Space exploration is no panacea
but it may provide a place for experiments in human growth that will
ultimately help man to reach ethical maturity. Just seeing the earth
from the moon, as a single planet lacking any borders has catalyzed
new ways of thinking.
> Earth is enough for us, if we have the will to cooperate, to transcend the
> bigotries that confound us, the borders that seperate us, to dare to have
> peace instead of waging war, to share what we have as far as we can give it
> without anyone having to pay for it ( the concept of having to work for
> one's bread is deadly when there is not enough work to go around ), to
> recognize that the most humble peasant in Mexico or India is worth more to
> us than the President of the US or the Queen of England.
Again, solving these problems is not mutually exclusive with space
exploration. However, I wonder who will make the bread that we needn't
work for, and who will hold the gun used to force the producers to
give up what they have created.
> If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to
> something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough.
> We only try to escape the Earth because we try to escape our own natures.
No, trying to reach out beyond our current environment is the epitomy
of our curious ape-natures.
> **************************************************************************
> I, personally, am in full support of the Shuttle, the Space Program, and
> the exploration and exploition of space, and it's eventual population by
> humanity. BUT NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED US THESE QUESTIONS, NOBODY HAS EVER
> CHALLENGED US TO QUESTION OURSELVES! We need to be able to answer them,
> especially if those who have not, question the motives of us, those who
> have. Somehow, net.space would benefit from a really in-depth discussion
> of our justifications of our actions in space and thier consequences.
> Andrew Jonathan Fine.
These kinds of questions are asked every time NASA's budget is discussed
whether in Congress or over cocktails. How many times have you heard or
read the statement "Why spend money of space, when there's such a crying
need for social services here on earth."
I agree that anyone who supports space exploration must be able to answer
these kinds of questions, and that discussion of the multitude of answers
to them would be valuable.
Steve Dennett
dennett@sri-nic.arpa
****************************************************************
Date: 1986 February 21 00:53:02 PST (=GMT-8hr)
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM@mc.lcs.mit.edu>
To: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Cc: SPACE@s1-b.arpa
Subject: answer to devil's advocate re space and destiny of humans
Sender: REM%IMSSS@su-score.arpa (for undeliverable-mail notifications)
Reply-To: REM%IMSSS@SU-SCORE.ARPA
F> Date: 9 Feb 86 04:10:48 GMT
F> From: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Andrew J Fine)
F> Subject: Re: Scuttle the Space Program?
F> Does humanity (men and women) really *need* to populate space?
Yes, if we expect to survive we absolutely must either populate space
or move Earth away from the Sun to another star in about 5-10 billion
years.
F> Do we really need to explore, in person or otherwise, other planets?
No, not specifically, but generally if we explore everything we become
aware of then our science will advance further than if we omit some
categories of exploration.
F> Historically, exploration and open boundaries only encouraged
F> exploitation, slavery, and genocide of indigenous peoples such as
F> African, American Natives, and East Asians.
For the time being this point is totally moot. We are pretty certain
there is no intelligence life whatsoever anywhere except Earth in this
solar system, thus during the next two phases of exploration (local
Earth/Moon system, and Ringworld/DysonSphere) we won't be conquering
anyone already out there, and we will be relieving a lot of need to
conquer that has been going on on this overcrowded Earth.
F> It widened the gap between the rich and the poor at home, and the
F> massive funds spent on ships and weapons in that previous era caused
F> more people to starve.
We'll have to be careful to avoid repeating that. Massive collectors
of solar energy in space, feeding pure electricity via microwaves or
other means to Earth so that we can provide everyone on Earth with
nearly free energy instead of only the rich while avoiding the
inefficiency of traditional power plants on Earth that waste half
their energy in heat into the local environment, will shrink the gap
between rich and poor in my opinion. We'll have to make sure that
potential becomes actuality. Something between the "moon treaty" which
prevents anyone from getting a return on investment, and a totally free
enterprise where the rich get richer and the poor stay the same but
feel worse by comparison with the rich, needs to be adopted within the
next 30 years. With lots of cheap energy to desalinate water and pump
it into the deserts, there'll be more food to support more people.
With habitat in space there'll be hundreds of times as much living space
as there is on this tiny Earth, so that we can support 500 billion
people comfortably instead of having trouble supporting the 6 billion
we have now.
F> It also increased the likelyhood of the lawless being able to escape
F> justice, for example Botany Bay and the HMS Bounty.
I see nothing wrong with Botany Bay, especially compared to locking
them in jail and then supporting them until we parole them. I think on
this point I can't argue with you, just say I disagree on what is more
desirable.
F> So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for
F> 100 missions (best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean
F> water, and other necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten
F> decades, easily.
Do we spend our last 100 years of industrial society squandering our
resources on feeding ourselves but not developing any long-range plan,
then the fossil fuel supply collapses and we have no alternative so we
revert to pre-industrial society and 90% of the world's population
dies within a few years due to starvation, and then before continental
drift can uncover new fossil fuels the Earth gets too warm to support
life and we all die (permanently; unlike Saturday-morning cartoon
shows when you are dead you stay dead)? Or do we spend our last 100
years of Earth-based industrial society developing industry in space
and then go on to survive to the end of the Universe?
F> So what do space-faring nations prove when they invoke national prestige and
F> the desire of humanity to expand, by consuming all that money and
F> men-centuries? "I'm rich enough to do this and you're not, so there!".
I don't like that argument for space either. I wish we didn't have to
appeal to "national prestige" and politics just to develop the
space-based resources we will need to survive the next two centuries.
F> "My rocket is bigger than yours!". "We are leaving you behind to scratch the
F> dust while we inherit the universe!" One man's glory is another man's
F> humiliation. One man's wealth is another man's poverty. One man's
F> livelihood is another man's serfdom.
Each individual person will die, within a hundred years from birth in
most cases although some live slightly longer and next century perhaps
many will. Thus the topic of "leaving you behind to scratch dust" must
be applied not to individual people, all of which will turn to dust
anyway, but to genetic lines, i.e. to descendents. Even somebody who
never goes to space can have children who do, if my plan is adopted. I
proposed (and repeat now) that once we have largescale space-based
habitat, that we encourage sperm and egg to be sent to space and
"test-tube" births to occur there. I figure within about 40 years the
technology for an artificial womb will be developed, about the same
time large-scale space-based habitat is developed. Then what we can do
is have each couple have one child on Earth (mandatory birth control)
but an unlimited number of children in space via artificial womb. It
is advantageous for the survival of our species that *all* people on
Earth partake in this, rather than just the rich, because it gives
more variety of genetic component and thus better chance of surviving
various new envirionments in space. Further, it is advantageous that
other species are brought with us into space. For one-celled life and
other microscopic life we can bring the life itself. For large
organisms we can use the same artificial-womb method we use for
humans. I would then advocate we actually do this, reproduce *all*
Earth-based life into space one way or another. Very few species will
go extinct after we do that. Among humans, the poor as well as the
rich will (via descendents) move into space. Telecommunications will
be such that parents on Earth can conference with their children in
space, so maybe they can't hug them but they can do just about
everything else in the way of raising their children. (With
teleoperators that have good tactile feedback they may even be able to hug!)
F> Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the
F> privacy and keep records on a captive populace?
I think you're getting absurd on this point. How about these
electronic-mail discussions we're having? Don't you think they're
worthwhile? If you don't, why do you participate? Or did you take
electronic mail so much for granted you completely overlooked the fact
it is an information system? -- Yes, we have to be careful not to turn
the electronic revolution into 1984. We need concerned people such as
you and me to speak out against Orwellian use of our technology. But
so far I see more good than bad.
F> Why have land and weather satellites at all, except to take advantage
F> of another nation's resources and vulnerabilities?
Ridiculous again. Mostly we try to predict the weather so we can warn
people of bad weather and eventually be able to change the weather not
to be so bad sometimes. -- Of course we have to speak out against misuse.
F> Why explore the planets, interesting though they are, except to find
F> more virgin landscape to despoil and riches to plunder?
Do you eat plants or animals to stay alive? If plundering is immoral
you should stop eating and starve to death. I think you are wrong to
equate use of resources with loaded words such as "despoil" or
"plunder" so long as you are alive doing exactly that to stay alive.
F> Why put a man, or a women for that matter, in space? What is so
F> special about anyone that we must exhalt that person above all others
F> in such an eletist fashion?
Somebody has to be first, and naturally the first to do something gets
some special media attention. I've already argued that it's good to
move out into space, so I guess we just have to put up with the first
few people getting an inordinate amount of attention. I do wish there
was a program on TV that picked random hardworking normal people and
exhalted them a little, so we can appreciate the vast numbers of
hardworking busdrivers and stockroom clerks and grocery checkers and
street mainteners and computer programmers and typists etc. There are
already programs that exhalt doctors&nurses, police officers & private
detectives, and various kinds of very successful business
owners/managers, probably too many such programs. Maybe if more
ordinary people (but not like that stupid "ordinary people" program on
TV) were exhalted on TV routinely, the attention of astronauts wouldn't
upset you so much? I.e. I see your problem and I think the solution is
to exhalt lots of regular occupations rather than to demean astronauts.
F> Why shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world
F> rather than that person's ego?
It shouldn't be an either/or situation, and in case of astronauts it
is in fact both; as I argued above it's necessary for the survival of
the human race, and as you argue it is ego building.
F> The main problem with all of us is we are still essentially barbarians at
F> heart.
Yup, but we're also apes at heart, and most apes (chimpanzees being
the principal non-human exception) are rather peaceful. We have the
choice. For a few centuries we (our ancestors, not us personally)
acted mostly like barbarians, and now we are learning not to do that
so much. I think Captain Kirk (Startrek) said it best; my paraphrase:
yes we tended to kill in the recent past, but we can decide not to kill today.
F> The Viking who was the explorer was also the Viking that also raped
F> and pillaged. The Columbus who was the explorer was also the Columbus who
F> converted people to his religion by force.
Because (1) the lands explored were already inhabited, unlike space;
(2) he wasn't watched minute by minute by three major metworks, one
cable network, and lots of minor networks and individual stations, so
he could do whatever he wanted and then have months to figure out an
explanation before he got back to Scandanavia/Portugal, (3) global
responsibility hadn't yet become popular, theirs was an age of
glorious war and conquest, (4) the lands explored were small compared
to the lands already known whereas space is orders of magnitude larger
than Earth so there's lots of elbow room so even if we find some
planet around some distant star already inhabited we don't have to
conquer them or be conquered, we can simply keep our distance.
F> The shuttle pilot who was the explorer was also the pilot who killed
F> husbands, wives, and children in North Korea and North Vietnam.
Yup. Today he is not killing, he is doing something useful instead.
F> The wanderlust we all experience is just another word for the lust and
F> coveting for the outside world that blinds us to the potentials of the
F> inside world and the darkness of the soul that we need to correct.
I respect the desire to survive, to stay alive in terms of genetic
lines (descendents). Do you want Homo Sapiens and in fact all life on
Earth to go extinct? Or is it just you who wants to die? Regarding the
rest of your above remark, it may take centuries for us to completely
get rid of the bad parts of our culture, our "inner flaws". Unless we
survive (via descendents) the next several centuries we won't live
long enough to finish the self-purification task. I don't think one
person in one lifetime can go from where we are now to a correct inner
perfection. Some have tried, such as the monks of the middle ages and
the hippies of the 60's, but all of their plans were flawed in some
way. With further experiments in the future, and with general
cleansing of our overall culture, perhaps those lofty goals can be
reached someday, but only if we (our descendents) are alive then.
F> Do we really deserve to go "out there" when we have such a mess "down here"?
Fact of nature: Nobody deserves anything, period. We have no right to
be alive in the first place, but on the other hand there's no
immorality inherit in being alive. We just are alive, period. You no
more or less deserve to live on this planet than others deserve to
live in space. Those who are successful at living will live, the rest
will die out. -- Note, your remark and my answer are basically
statements of religious belief, not science or engineering. I think
you're grossly wrong in implying there's some global morality that
makes it inherently wrong to go to space, and you probably think I'm
grossly wrong in denying the global morality you believe in.
Fortunately in this country we have religious freedom, not only to
believe in recognized religions, but to believe in things that others
may not even accept as a religion much less a good religion. I trust
my debate with you on this matter won't be construed as opposing your
right to believe as you do, although I hope you don't hogtie the rest
of the world to your particular religious belief.
F> Earth is enough for us, ...
Definitely not in the long run, and these next hundred years (or less
if those military people have their long-planned thermonuclear war)
are crucial for getting our much-needed space.
F> (the concept of having to work for one's bread is deadly when there is
F> not enough work to go around)
There's plenty of work to go around, just not enough paying work in a
society where paying work is both the means of maintaining
self-respect and respect of society and the means of getting decent
food on the table and roof over head. I have lots of things I want
done, like cleaning up the broken glass in the street where I have to
bicicle, and I wish somebody would do that, I wish society would pay
somebody to get it done so the person who does it doesn't have to
starve because of doing it instead of something else, with the rest of
us chipping in our share of the pay. I'd be willing to clean up the
glass myself if somebody paid me to do it and provided me with tools
for doing it properly and transportation for moving tools around from
one site to another. -- This is getting far afield of development of
space, let's move this topic to a private distribution list??
F> to recognize that the most humble peasant in Mexico or India is worth
F> more to us than the President of the US or the Queen of England.
I think that's stupid. The peasant and president should be equal in
basic worth, just like our Constitution says for citizens of the USA,
I want that extended worldwide. -- Again, off topic of space.
F> If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to
F> something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough.
I respectfully repeat my claim that Earth isn't enough in the long
run. Re altruism, read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins.
So-called altruism is either really helping copies of genes to survive
(thus really selfish, but not evil) or truly stupid altruism that dies
out soon.
F> We only try to escape the Earth because we try to escape our own natures.
I disagree. Maybe some do that, but I want us to escape certain
extinction on Earth. Our nature is to try to survive, not to knowingly
suffer certain extinction.
((By the way, you have asked some good questions, and a few stupid
ones. That's better than par for the course lately.))
F> ***************************************************************************
F> I, personally, am in full support of the Shuttle, the Space Program, and
F> the exploration and exploition of space, and it's eventual population by
F> humanity. BUT NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED US THESE QUESTIONS, NOBODY HAS EVER
F> CHALLENGED US TO QUESTION OURSELVES!
S**t, I go to all that trouble rebutting your anti-space claims, and
then it turns out you are on our side anyway. Instead of playing
devil's advocate, why couldn't you have answered some of them yourself?
F> We need to be able to answer them, especially if those who have not,
F> question the motives of us, those who have. Somehow, net.space would
F> benefit from a really in-depth discussion of our justifications of our
F> actions in space and their consequences.
I agree. You should try answering them too. You may have good answers
a little different from mine.
****************************************************************
∂26-Feb-86 1832 KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Ambiguous requirements
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 18:32:48 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 17:45:06-PST
From: Peter Karp <KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Ambiguous requirements
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186569405.31.KARP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Well, I have finally gotten around to reading both the CSD statement
of requirements for the PhD program, and those in the Stanford
bulletin. I can find no substantial ambiguities or contradictions.
Either I missed them, there is another document I should read, or the
"community knowledge" of the requirements has diverged from the written
version.
Peter
-------
∂26-Feb-86 2045 JMC
quit spider
∂27-Feb-86 0055 GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA How about a non-mon workshop at AAAI this year? (Deadline 3/1)
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 00:55:42 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 00:56:21-PST
From: Benjamin N. Grosof <GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: How about a non-mon workshop at AAAI this year? (Deadline 3/1)
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, val@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186647913.14.GROSOF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Hi Folks,
How does the idea of a non-monotonic reasoning workshop at AAAI-86 strike
you? Has one already been organized? The approximate deadline for
workshop proposals is March 1, with a few days leeway.
Benjamin
-------
∂27-Feb-86 0412 YEARWOOD@SRI-AI.ARPA Files archived from directory <PS:<COMMONSENSE>>
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 04:10:20 PST
Date: 27 Feb 1986 0409-PST
From: Yearwood at SRI-SPRM.ARPA
Subject: Files archived from directory <PS:<COMMONSENSE>>
To: COMMONSENSE
COMMONSENSE.PEOPLE.3 1 page
1 file 1 page
-------
∂27-Feb-86 0619 kddlab!nttlab!kddlab!nttlab!α@seismo.CSS.GOV
Received: from SEISMO.CSS.GOV by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 06:19:32 PST
Return-Path: <kddlab!nttlab!kddlab!nttlab!α>
Received: from kddlab.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV with UUCP; Thu, 27 Feb 86 09:06:49 EST
From: kddlab!nttlab!kddlab!nttlab!α@seismo.CSS.GOV
Received: by kddlabs.junet (4.12/4.7)
id AA08003; Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:38:20 jst
Received: by kddlabs.junet (4.12/4.7)
id AA07997; Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:38:14 jst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA08785; Thu, 27 Feb 86 07:32:25 jst
Received: by kddlabs.junet (4.12/4.7)
id AA04720; Thu, 27 Feb 86 05:36:24 jst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA02983; Wed, 26 Feb 86 22:32:34 jst
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 22:32:34 jst
Message-Id: <8602261332.AA02983@ntt.junet>
Apparently-To: nttlab!kddlab!hplabs!utah-cs!jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
∂27-Feb-86 0835 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 08:35:29 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 08:36:01-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Meeting
To: ai.list: ;
Message-ID: <12186731592.37.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to reconfirm that there will be a meeting today (Feb. 27) at 2:30
in MJH 220 of the AI Faculty to discuss courses and degrees forr 1986-87.
-------
∂27-Feb-86 0845 SJM productivity essay
See unfinished essays produc.ess[ess,jmc]
and racket.ess[ess,jmc].
Also, sort of, standa.ess[ess,jmc]
∂27-Feb-86 0904 RA meeting reminder
Just a reminder that you have an 11:00 meeting with Nilsson and Reid.
∂27-Feb-86 0914 BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Shankar
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 09:13:02 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 09:12:13-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Shankar
To: SF@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Nils@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, stan@SRI-AI.ARPA
A Natarajan Shankar has applied for a CSLI postdoc. He is from texas
and has terrific recommendations from Boyer, Moore, Bledsoe, etc. His
work is on automated proof checking for metamathematics.
I am on the postdoc committee here. Given the current funding
situation, and the desire to get people whose work would really
contribute to the projects under way here, I doubt that he will get a
regular postdoc this year. Last year we would have jumped at him.
But I am wondering if there were some way we could help someone else
bring him to the area? Do a little leveraging? If any of you had
been thinking of him for some other post, perhaps we could help out in
some way.
Jon
-------
∂27-Feb-86 0915 RA Loretta Britten, Time-Life
Britten called re: chapter in the book Understanding Computers which you
are writing with Sarah Mark. Britten's tel. (703) 838 7304. She would like
you to call her collect.
∂27-Feb-86 1001 JMC
alphonse
∂27-Feb-86 1008 RA Re: leaving early for course
[Reply to message recvd: 26 Feb 86 16:20 Pacific Time]
My current schedule is:
9:00 - 5:00 M,Tu,W,Fr.
8:30 - 4:30 Th.
Proposed schedule:
Mon. 8:00 - 5:00
Tue. 10:00 - 5:00
Wed. 9:00 - 2:00 (till the end of May)
Thu. 8:30 - 4:30 (till the end of May)
Fri. 9:00 - 5:00
We can discuss the evaluation whenever you wish.
∂27-Feb-86 1035 CLT Axioms for arrays - need a reference
∂25-Feb-86 2201 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
∂25-Feb-86 1845 jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
Received: from FORD-WDL1.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 18:44:55 PST
Received: by FORD-WDL1.ARPA (5.15/5.9)
id AA18831; Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:45:27 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:45:27 PST
From: jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA (John B. Nagle)
Message-Id: <8602260245.AA18831@FORD-WDL1.ARPA>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa, jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA
Subject: re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
OK. I'm actually using Oppen's formulation from his "Simplification
by Cooperating Decision Procedures" paper, in which he is more concerned with
putting the axioms in a form that is suitable for mechanical theorem proving
than with the historical formulation.
I have a constructive form, and like most constructive mathematics,
it is very painful. But with the Boyer-Moore prover doing most of the work,
it works out quite nicely.
Having ported the Boyer-Moore prover from the Symbolics to the VAX
and thence to the SUNs, I have hope of in time moving it to something that
the typical student can afford. Perhaps next year.
John Nagle
-CLT
I don't see what I am to get out of this msg.
∂27-Feb-86 1116 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Epsilon
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 11:16:40 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 11:17:11-PST
From: Kim W. Tracy <KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Epsilon
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186760930.42.KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
I am wondering what the "epsilon" amount of extra work will be for
VTSS160.
Kim Tracy
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1213 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa a data point on servers
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 12:09:15 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Feb 86 12:08:26 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA05439; Thu, 27 Feb 86 10:13:21 pst
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 10:13:21 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602271813.AA05439@coraki.uucp>
To: facil@su-ai.ARPA
Cc:
Subject: a data point on servers
The following is a message I just received from David Chase, who has
been bringing up various tex packages to run on servers. It should
give an additional data point on why workstations rather than graphics
terminals are the appropriate architecture of the future - look at the
wall times for a workstation (a slow Sun-2) vs. a timeshared system
(Navajo, in the evening), both running 4.2 BSD Unix. The gap would
widen yet more if Sun-3 class machines were use.
It also should give further insight into the need for servers, cf.
Chase's urgent plea for one.
-v
-------------- Forwarded Message
Unix-From: rbbb%sun-eos@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA Wed Feb 26 21:22:31 1986
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA04163; Wed, 26 Feb 86 21:22:27 pst
Received: from sun-eos by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Feb 86 21:12:37 pst
Received: by sun-eos with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Feb 86 21:10:44 pst
Return-Path: <rbbb%sun-eos@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 20:08:55 PST
From: David Chase <rbbb%sun-eos@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA>
Subject: Latex on Suns and use of texserver
To: pratt@su-navajo, nb@sail, kent@navajo, worley@su-navajo
Message-Id: <104.rbbb.sun-eos@Stanford>
I have latex, bibtex, and dviimp running on a Sun. There are some
cosmetic bugs (because of byte-order problems, the dviimp sometimes
grumbles about checksums, and existing bugs have not been removed).
latex:
A vanilla version. If there are any local modifications added after
loading lplain, they will be missing.
bibtex:
Exactly what runs on Navajo, compiled on a Sun
dviimp:
Exactly what runs on Navajo, except for changes to reflect differences
in Pascal compilers on Vaxen and Suns. Uses "gf" fonts, whatever those
are (a product of Metafont, I am told).
To run latex, you need:
latex 912 blocks
macros 1551 blocks (includes tex macros, .bst files)
font metric tables 271 blocks
TOTAL 2734 blocks
To run bibtex, you need
bibtex 200 blocks
.bst files charged to latex above
TOTAL 200 blocks
To run dviimp, you need
dviimp 172 blocks
gf font files 6688 blocks (metric files charged to latex)
TOTAL 6860 blocks
To run tex (in addition to latex), you need:
tex 920 blocks
Support binaries (not necessary to run tex or latex):
undump 38 blocks
tangle 89 blocks
virtex 336 blocks
initex 576 blocks
inimf 616 blocks
virmf 608 blocks
mf 904 blocks
TOTAL 3167 blocks
Configurations:
Latex and tex 4000 blocks
Latex, tex, and dviimp 11000 blocks
Latex, tex, dviimp, and support software (not including sources)
14000 blocks
Latex, tex, and support software (not including sources)
7000 blocks
I don't have any use for the support software, but other people might. I
don't have any use for it, other than to bring up latex and tex. So, I
think it is a choice between 4000 blocks on a server and 11000 blocks on a
server. To help with these choices, I ran latex, bibtex, and dviimp on a
sample 13 page file on sun-eos (a 2 megabyte Sun-2 with local disk) and
su-navajo (a 16 megabyte Vax 11/780 with interleaved memory, = 115% of a
unit Vax). The sun was very lightly loaded, the Vax beyond my control
(I did run these in the evening, so the load average was about 3). The
timings:
sun-eos su-navajo
latex
cpu 80 50
wall 1:30 4:30
bibtex
cpu 7 6
wall 7 36
dviimp
cpu 50 30
wall 53 1:11
The output of dviimp is, of course, suitable for printing on an imagen
printer using ipr. This was done, and the output did appear to be
formatted correctly.
Why I am telling you this?
Obviously, this is a pitch to place all these files on some server
machine. This machine would be a FILE server, not a TEX server, so that
it would not be loaded down with everybody's TeXing (I suppose that it
could process TeX's, as long as they did not interfere with the machine's
activities as a file server). Do you feel that the machine I know as
"texserver" is a suitable machine for this use, and if not, can you
suggest another? I am told that perhaps it is "too far" from this network
(the one which sun-eos and the various numerical sins share) for NFS
access, though I have had no difficulty while bringing up latex. (Note
that I am also proposing that whatever is on texserver be shared with the
numerical analysis group; I have no idea what is desirable along those
lines, either technically or socially, except that duplicating files fewer
times is good, and that it is nice to feel that distant meddlers will not
destroy software on which one depends.)
Scott Comer also has some opinions about how these files should be
arranged on the server, so that clients could use the files with a minimum
of hassle on their part. He proposes that all of the TeX software should
be gathered under one directory "/tex", to simplify the symbolic links
needed (it lacks taste to remotely mount the server's /usr partition only
to access /usr/local/lib/tex and /usr/local/lib/latex).
Please do reply. I would like to not run this software on Navajo (notice
the wall timings), but I would also like to have a little disk space on
this machine for day-to-day use. That means (if I am to live in a better
world) that we must find a server for this software.
Thanks,
David Chase (rbbb@sun-eos, chase@su-navajo)
------- End of Forwarded Message
∂27-Feb-86 1214 LES memo.pub
Done. Give it a try.
∂27-Feb-86 1235 gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM Re: Industrial lecturer
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 12:35:33 PST
Received: from magic.ARPA (magic) by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.03/4.7.34)
id AA16609; Thu, 27 Feb 86 12:35:44 pst
Received: by magic.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA16717; Thu, 27 Feb 86 12:36:27 pst
From: gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM (Greg Nelson)
Message-Id: <8602272036.AA16717@magic.ARPA>
Date: 27 Feb 1986 1236-PST (Thursday)
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM
Subject: Re: Industrial lecturer
In-Reply-To: Your message of 25 Feb 86 2340 PST.
<8602260744.AA17567@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Title: Methods for program verification
Description:
An introduction to practical methods for writing difficult programs
without errors. Starting with axiomatic semantics, the predicate
calculus, and E. W. Dijkstra's theory of predicate transformers, the
course will lead into a series of example programs that will be derived
using the methods. Additional topics, to be covered if time permits,
include mechanical theorem proving techniques, constraint languages,
and compiler correctness.
∂27-Feb-86 1504 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA paper
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 15:04:00 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 15:04:33-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: paper
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186802323.16.RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
[cwr]
Professor McCarthy:
I'm trying to locate one of your papers; Is there a copy on-line?
The paper was about Knowing What and Knowing That [functions from
things to concepts of them, relations between knowing what and
knowing that, unquantified modal logic, philosophical examples
(well known ones), Propositions expressing quantification, possible
applications to AI and abstract languages, as I recall].
Many thanks,
Chuck
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1726 SJG circumscription reference(s) sought
Hi John:
I'm trying to prove a variety of theorems about circumscription,
prioritized circumscription and pointwise circumscription. Where
should I look to find the most up-to-date definitions of the
various schema?
Thanks.
Matt
∂27-Feb-86 1840 LES Alliant vs. Sequent
To: JMC
CC: RPG
I reached RPG by phone and asked for his estimate of the lengths of time
to develop the basic Common Lisp system on the Alliant and Sequent
machines. His estimates were 1 month (probably less) and 4 months.
Multiplying the 3 month differential by Lucid's burn rate under the
proposed subcontract works out to a differential cost of $104k.
The people costs for the rest of the project for 3 months is about $200k.
Of course, not all of this amount would be saved by slicing 3 months off
the development time. Assuming that half of this amount would be saved,
we get an overall saving in project funds of about $200k. Of course, the
likely effect of making such savings would be that more work would get
done rather than leaving funds unspent.
I suggested that we call Dick tomorrow (Friday) around 11:30am to discuss
this issue. He said that he expects to be around.
∂27-Feb-86 2048 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:jlh@su-sonoma.arpa MacQueen
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 20:48:30 PST
Received: from su-sonoma.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 20:48:55-PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Thu, 27 Feb 86 20:47:48 pst
Date: 27 Feb 1986 2047-PST (Thursday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: ullman@score, nilsson@score
Cc: pratt@score, jmc@score
Subject: MacQueen
Dave MacQueen (ML person) has indicated that he might be interested in
a faculty position; he sort of falls between systems and theory (i.e.
programming languages + logic ). I think ML is good work.
Opinions and thoughts?
∂27-Feb-86 2114 BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
Received: from XEROX.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 21:13:50 PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 27 FEB 86 19:54:58 PST
Date: 27 Feb 86 19:57 PST
From: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
In-reply-to: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>'s message of 15 Feb 86 12:38
PST
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: Gary Chapman <parc-csli!chapman@su-glacier.arpa>,
BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <860227-195458-6143@Xerox>
John,
I've been ill, alas, so sorry for the late response to your note.
As it happens, the speakers for the conference this Saturday are already
confined to 15 minutes or so, and it seems impossible to squeeze any
more in. Also, it wouldn't make for a very substantial discussion.
Much better, we thought, would be to invite you to speak on this topic
at a full meeting of the Palo Alto CPSR chapter (the main one, of
course). That way we could devote the whole meeting to it, which would
allow discussion as well as the presentation.
Could we interest you in doing this? It would be great if you would.
Brian
∂28-Feb-86 0132 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa MacQueen
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 01:32:27 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 28 Feb 86 01:31:25 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA07168; Fri, 28 Feb 86 01:28:13 pst
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 86 01:28:13 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602280928.AA07168@coraki.uucp>
To: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.ARPA>
Cc: ullman@su-aimvax.ARPA, nilsson@su-score.ARPA, jmc@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: MacQueen
In-Reply-To: message of 27 Feb 1986 2047-PST (Thursday).
<8602280853.AA06970@coraki.uucp>
I would say MacQueen's claim to fame lay more with his theoretical
contributions to type theory in particular than with his ML work in
general. His interpretation of types as ideals sparked a small
revolution in type theory, getting a lot of people going on the
subject and even stimulating a conference or two on types.
Besides the fame he has achieved with type theory, he is a meticulous
scholar, careful with his evaluations of other's work as well as with
his own proofs. He also puts much more effort into system
implementation than most other people who do his level of theoretical
work, the main value of which I see as keeping his theory honest.
I feel he would be an excellent catch for Stanford.
-v
∂28-Feb-86 0900 JMC
Duda at Syntelligence
408 745 6666
∂28-Feb-86 0911 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: paper
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 09:11:14 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 09:11:48-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: paper
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 27 Feb 86 16:13:00-PST
Message-ID: <12187000248.33.RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
[cwr]
Professor McCarthy:
RA doesen't remember where "First Order Theories of Individual
Concepts and Propositions" is kept. Would you tell me?
Thank you,
Chuck
-------
∂28-Feb-86 0958 SJM personal flying machines
I've messed with your personal plane essay a little, and indicated in it
what I think it needs. That is, I've messed with my copy of it, which
is called `flying'. Take a look when you get a chance.
---Susie
∂28-Feb-86 1045 SJM helicopter data
I got some information on helicopters for you. See my file `copter'.
---Susie
∂28-Feb-86 1130 RA Eliot Blum, SLAC
Eliot Blum called re Miro Todorovich coming to town. Blum would like you
to call him back. His extension at SLAC is 2469.
Replying-To: RA
Reply-Subject: re: Eliot Blum, SLAC
Reply-Text:
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Feb-86 11:30-PT.]
That's Elliott Bloom for future reference.
Write the Swedes: ring size 8.5 (4th finger right hand) (jeweller
suggests 9 if ring is thick). hat size 7.5 (American sizes).
∂28-Feb-86 1209 RA going home
I don't feel well and am going home. I will see you Monday.
∂28-Feb-86 1345 MDIXON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA re: dump?
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 13:42:17 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 13:42:40-PST
From: Mike Dixon <MDixon@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: re: dump?
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 28 Feb 86 00:11:00-PST
Message-ID: <12187049560.22.MDIXON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
but if i'd merely looked in the phone book i'd have missed out on the
interesting replies i got with such useful information as...
- how to save money by throwing your junk in someone else's dumpsters
- which dumpsters are the best candidates
- what sort of materials the people at the dump are likely to complain
about
.mike.
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1352 SJG oops ...
Well, in my usual disorganization I forgot to include your name
on the list of people I sent the roundtable message to. I'll
inform them when they all suggest you ...
Sorry about that --
Matt
∂28-Feb-86 1341 SJG potential AI roundtable
To: "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: mugs@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Well, some people never learn.
In spite of the grief I generated for myself bringing Dreyfus over
this afternoon, I think it was productive enough to warrant a follow-on.
What I had in mind was an evening public get-together to discuss the
general question of "whether traditional AI is going to work", give
or take.
The reason I am contacting you about this is to ask:
(1) Would you be prepared to take part in this, some time in spring
quarter?
(2) What overall ideas do you have about organization:
(i) is a public forum ok?
(ii) should the press be informed (I think so)
(iii) how many speakers?
(3) Any suggestions about participants?
(4) Do you think the whole thing is a good idea?
Copies of this message are going to Dreyfus (Hubert), Nilsson, Roger
Shepard, John Perry, Winograd, Buchanan, Feigenbaum and Genesereth.
Thanks!
Matt
∂28-Feb-86 1509 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: potential AI roundtable
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 15:09:02 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 15:09:29-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: potential AI roundtable
To: SJG@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA, mugs@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 28 Feb 86 13:41:00-PST
Message-ID: <12187065365.8.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'd be glad to participate. -Nils
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1554 ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: photo
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 15:53:56 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 15:29:54-PST
From: Bob Engelmore <Engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: photo
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 17 Feb 86 11:52:00-PST
Office-Phone: (415) 497-8444
Home-Phone: (415) 322-0627
Message-ID: <12187069079.49.ENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Return-Path: <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Mon 17 Feb 86 11:55:15-PST
Date: 17 Feb 86 1152 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: photo
To: engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
I'm sending you a picture of Roger Schank and Alan Bundy I took at the
Foundations of AI Conference in New Mexico for possible publication in AI
Magazine. It might be entitled "Are those the foundations of AI? When's
lunch?"
John, I received the photo. Did you have the following in mind for the
caption:
Schank: Are those the foundations of AI?
Bundy: When's lunch?
It does look like they both have very quizzical expressions, with
appropriately deep thoughts such as those you suggest. Schank might also be
thinking, "Damn these fleas."
Thanks again,
Bob
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1645 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 16:35:12 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 16:36:58-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187081291.73.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
MORE FROM MATT......Ed
---------------
Return-Path: <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 14:56:19-PST
Date: 28 Feb 86 1341 PST
From: Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: potential AI roundtable
To: "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: mugs@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Well, some people never learn.
In spite of the grief I generated for myself bringing Dreyfus over
this afternoon, I think it was productive enough to warrant a follow-on.
What I had in mind was an evening public get-together to discuss the
general question of "whether traditional AI is going to work", give
or take.
The reason I am contacting you about this is to ask:
(1) Would you be prepared to take part in this, some time in spring
quarter?
(2) What overall ideas do you have about organization:
(i) is a public forum ok?
(ii) should the press be informed (I think so)
(iii) how many speakers?
(3) Any suggestions about participants?
(4) Do you think the whole thing is a good idea?
Copies of this message are going to Dreyfus (Hubert), Nilsson, Roger
Shepard, John Perry, Winograd, Buchanan, Feigenbaum and Genesereth.
Thanks!
Matt
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1725 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 17:18:19 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 17:19:59-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12187081291.73.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12187089122.32.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I don't understand why Matt is spending time beating on these topics. Tom R.
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1732 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Personnel Survey of AI Salaries
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 17:32:43 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 17:34:04-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Personnel Survey of AI Salaries
To: KSL-Exec@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
TOB@SU-AI.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187091683.32.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Friends, the Personnel Dept is about to survey AI companies to find out how
Stanford salaries compare. I think this can only help us argue around what
will probably be a very limited raise guideline this year for the university as
a whole. Karen Machado has asked for my help in getting started and the
following is a draft of some guidelines for her. Could you review this asap
and give me your comments so I can forward it to Karen so she can begin
organizing her quest for information.
Thanks, Tom R.
------------
To: Karen Machado, Personnel
Karen, this is a first cut at the information you requested to begin doing a
market survey of industrial salaries for AI researchers and programmers for
comparison with Stanford salaries. I've tried to give you:
a) a guide to the kinds of positions we have, noting the relevant Stanford job
classifications. The corresponding titles to look for in industry will vary
from company to company and should be matched with the indicated responsibility
levels. Of course, there are ranges of experience at each level that will
affect individual salaries.
b) a list of examples of companies which are strong competitors for AI research
and programming manpower. Many of these are outside the bay area so
cost-of-living and other local market factors have to be weighed to relate
salaries. In many ways, the start-up companies listed represent the biggest
competitors in that they offer equity-based financial incentives and the most
exciting technical development goals.
JOB CATEGORIES
Proj. Mgmnt SU CLASSIFICATIONS: Faculty, Sr. Research Associate
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATIONS: President, Vice President, Director,
Manager
RESPON: Overall technical and managerial responsibility for a
substantial R&D, system, engineering, or product activity
involving multiple projects, funding sources, and diverse
staff.
Proj Leaders SU CLASSIFICATIONS: Faculty, Sr. Research Associate, Research
Associate, Computer Specialist,
Programmer IV
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATIONS: Asst. Director, Asst. Manager, Sr.
(Knowledge) Engineer, Sr. Scientist,
Project Leader
RESPON: Technical and managerial responsibility for a specific
R&D, system, engineering, or product project. Generally
involves one funding source and less than about 10 people.
Task Leaders SU CLASSIFICATIONS: Research Associate, Programmer IV/III
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATIONS: (Knowledge) Engineer, Scientist,
Group/Task Leader
RESPON: Technical and partial managerial responsibility for a
significant portion of an R&D, system, engineering, or product
project.
Programmers SU CLASSIFICATIONS: Scientific and Systems Programmer III/II
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATIONS: Jr. (Knowledge) Engineer, Jr.
Scientist, Applications and Systems
Programmer
RESPON: Technical implementation of portions of an R&D,
system, engineering, or product project.
AI COMPANIES COMPETING FOR PERSONNEL
1) AI START-UP EXAMPLES
Adv Decision Syst Mountain View
AION Palo Alto
APEX Boston, MA
Carnegie Group Pittsburgh, PA
IntelliCorp Mountain View
Lisp Machines Inc. Los Angeles
Lucid Menlo Park
Palladian Boston, MA
Quintus Palo Alto
Reasoning Systems Palo Alto
Symbolics Boston, MA
Syntelligence Menlo Park
Teknowledge Palo Alto
2) ESTABLISHED COMPANY EXAMPLES (refers to AI R&D or product groups only)
Aerospace Corp Los Angeles
Boeing Computer Co Seattle, WA
DEC Maynard, MA
FMC Santa Clara
Hewlett Packard Palo Alto
Rockwell Intl
Palo Alto Palo Alto
Science Center Thousand Oaks, CA
Schlumberger
Palo Alto Palo Alto
SDR Ridgefield, CO
System Control Tech Palo Alto
Tektronix Beaverton, OR
Texas Instruments Dallas, TX
TRW Los Angeles
3) RESEARCH LAB EXAMPLES (refers to AI R&D groups only)
KESTREL Institute Palo Alto
MCC Austin, TX
SRI Intl Menlo Park
Xerox PARC Palo Alto
-------
∂28-Feb-86 2029 RA
John,
This is a msg. I got from Tina, the receptionist:
John Nafeh phoned. He said, Lunch on Wednesday with Prof. McCarthy is
fine, he just needs to know where and when.
Tina
-------
∂28-Feb-86 2031 YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Visit
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 20:31:47 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 23:32:46-EST
From: Yoram Moses <YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Visit
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187124216.12.YORAM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
I will be coming to Stanford on March 5th, and will be in the area for
a week or so. In hope of officially submitting my thesis to the school
by March 14th (the last for filing in Winter Quarter), I'd like to
schedule a meeting with you to discuss your comments on the draft I
sent you. I've already received Joe Halpern's comments, and followed them
(they were almost exclusively suggestions of ways to improve the presentation
of Chapter 6). Would it be convenient for you to meet sometime in the late
afternoon on Wednesday?
Yoram
-------
∂01-Mar-86 0050 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa re: a data point on servers
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 86 00:50:44 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 1 Mar 86 00:51:18 pst
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 86 00:51:18 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: re: a data point on servers
To: JMC@Sail, NB@Sail, coraki!pratt@Navajo, facil@Sail, kent@Navajo,
pratt@Navajo, worley@Navajo
For what is worth, many of the people in my group have switched to using
(la)Tex rather than scribe so that we can run the formatting on our workstationand thus get formatting done faster. Seems like when we need to reformat,
we dont want to wait. Just as with the men's room example, the wait time
may be of greater concern than average thruput.
∂01-Mar-86 1315 worley@su-navajo.arpa re: a data point on servers
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 86 13:15:21 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 1 Mar 86 13:11:56 pst
Date: 1 Mar 1986 1311-PST (Saturday)
From: Pat Worley <worley@su-navajo.arpa>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: worley@su-navajo.arpa
Subject: re: a data point on servers
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 27 Feb 86 2358 PST.
I would appreciate it if you could forward me the message your
comments were a reply to. I was not a recipient of the original
message and am unable to get much out of your comments without
knowing the background.
Thanks,
Pat Worley
∂01-Mar-86 1325 SJG re: message to Dreyfus
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Feb-86 18:12-PT.]
OK -- Matt
∂01-Mar-86 1400 JMC
Lowood about value of proposals as first sign of many ideas.
∂01-Mar-86 1802 binford@su-whitney.arpa workshop
Received: from SU-WHITNEY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 86 18:02:41 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 1 Mar 86 18:02:02 pst
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 86 18:02:02 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 01 Mar 86 0014 PST
Subject: workshop
John
Chen was a program manager at NSF. I don't know him
personally. What support does he want?
I presume that he wants AI vision people associated with the
workshop or to publicize it. That could be done informally
through vision people.
I suggest that AAAI handle it as it routinely handles workshops.
If I understand the usual, it has some associated workshops
which it promotes; everything else AAAI ignores. That might
fit here.
Tom
∂01-Mar-86 2309 T.TALM@LOTS-B VTSS 160 writing assignment #5 from Todd Gates
Received: from LOTS-B by SU-AI with PUP; 01-Mar-86 23:09 PST
Date: Sat 1 Mar 86 23:06:09-PST
From: Todd Gates <T.TALM@LOTS-B>
Subject: VTSS 160 writing assignment #5 from Todd Gates
To: j.jmc@LOTS-B
cc: T.talm@LOTS-B
Message-ID: <12187414283.15.T.TALM@LOTS-B>
Professor McCarthy, I am sorry I did not make it to class yesterday. I
have been exceptionally busy this last week. However, I have written a
short paper about an application of AI as you had asked us to do last
Tuesday. I hope I can figure out how to send it to you using this computer
deal.
Artificial Intelligence Uses in Data Base Systems
I remember watching "Batman and Robin" as a small child and I re- member
that whenever the caped duo became confused about what next to do or who
next to chase in a certain case, they gave all their information to a
grand computer which after just a few minutes magically revealed new steps
for the caped duo to pursue. More often that not, the computer's
suggestion was all that Batman and Robin needed to break open their case
and find the bad guys. What strikes me about the machine of Batman and
Robin was that it was smart enough to take simple instructions from a
human's point of view, sift through vast amounts of information, and
provide an answer which the caped duo could not provide on their own.
Mostly, it seems to me that their machine was nothing more than a data
base system which was very simple to use. From the little data base
experience I have had, I have found that the systems are really not very
easy to use simply because they are so dumb. The systems are stupid in
the sense that I must be very precise in explaining to the machine how and
where to find a piece of information in its data base, or it will fail. A
human aid is much easier to deal with. If, say, I kept a filing cabinet
full of accounts received, I could just ask my human aid to go retrieve
client x's record of payment from last july. He might look first in the
file named client x, and then if not finding the requested information
there he would look for it in the file for accounts received in july of
1985 thus finding the information. Though not a complex problem, the
person was able to find the requested information by deciding for himself
the different places where it might be. A dumb computer could find the
same information also but only if Iinstructed it where to search
beforehand. Even if the person had not figured out the different places
to look, it would be much easier to teach him about other possibilities
than to teach the computer. e Computers are great tools with which to
analyze, store and access data. They have vast capacity for storage, and
once directed to the correct pile of information they sift through it much
faster than a person ever could. But it takes a lot of knowledge about
how to communicate and think for those computers, consequently information
services can cost a vast amount of time and money. The use of AI to help
these computers figure out for themselves where to look in their own data
bank for a particular answer would make data base systems much more
valuable to the average person who, from his point of view, is asking form
an answer to a fairly uncomplicated question.
Talking about computers and confusion, I am not so sure that I know very
well what I am doing with this one. I hope this letter gets to you.
Todd Gates, VTSS 160, Writing assignment # 5
-------
∂01-Mar-86 2349 worley@su-navajo.arpa re: a data point on servers
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 86 23:48:58 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 1 Mar 86 23:49:29 pst
Date: 1 Mar 1986 2349-PST (Saturday)
From: Pat Worley <worley@su-navajo.arpa>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: worley@su-navajo.arpa
Subject: re: a data point on servers
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 01 Mar 86 1526 PST.
Thank you for the information, and for the quick reply.
∂02-Mar-86 1147 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA BAD NEWS!
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 11:47:23 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 11:41:30-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: BAD NEWS!
To: cannon@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, reynolds@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187551790.11.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Stan Rosenschein (aka "on-again-off-again-Stan") has just decided that
he would like to withdraw his application for the robotics position.
(He will still be giving the CSD colloq this Tuesday on "Reasoning
and Perception in the SRI Mobile Robot." Skilling 4:15, Tues 3/4/86.)
So, it looks like our main "tenure-track" type candidate is J-C Latombe.
Letters are going out asking for Latombe evaluations on Monday.
-Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1152 CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA congratulations
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 11:51:58 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 11:53:40-PST
From: Mark Crispin <Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: congratulations
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Postal-Address: 1802 Hackett Ave.; Mountain View, CA 94043-4431
Phone: +1 (415) 968-1052
Message-ID: <12187554003.71.CRISPIN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Congratulations on your honorary doctorate from Linkoeping!
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1240 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA MRG
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 12:40:05 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 12:39:16-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: MRG
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187562305.11.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, I'm presuming that you are coming along well on working on
the MRG papers. As chairman, I think I need to write a few paragraphs
also, and will do that. Betty will be able to prepare some of the
material also. But as chairman of the ad hoc promotion committee, you
are the best one to write up parts of it. Let's make sure we keep in
close touch with how that is coming along so that I'll be able to
plan on getting the papers to the SOE by our deadline of March 14.
-Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1332 GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 13:32:09 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 13:31:19-PST
From: Jeffrey Goldberg <GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA, GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 2 Mar 86 13:09:00-PST
There is little doubt that the "we spread a little love" song is fairly
disgusting (as JMC pointed out). Furthermore, I don't think that this
is a result of a bias against Pete Seager. It is merely some degree
of taste which has lead JMC to this conclusion in ignorance of the
songs creators. The piece of trash in question was, I suspect, the
Partridge Family theme song.
-Jeff Goldberg (GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI)
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1334 GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 13:34:48 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 13:34:18-PST
From: Jeffrey Goldberg <GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA, GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jeffrey Goldberg <GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>" of Sun 2 Mar 86 13:31:25-PST
Yes. "Seeger" not "Seager". Sorry :-{
-jeff goldberg
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1409 GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 13:59:03 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 13:58:36-PST
From: Jeffrey Goldberg <GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 2 Mar 86 13:46:00-PST
Ah, well. I should inspect the headers more carefully when I use reply.
No doubt there will be a sufficient number of postings to the same effect
within the next 24 hours.
-jeff goldberg
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1432 binford@su-whitney.arpa workshop
Received: from SU-WHITNEY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 14:31:53 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 3 Mar 86 14:52:18 pst
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 86 14:52:18 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 01 Mar 86 1824 PST
Subject: workshop
I cannot say whether he is current or not but
believe he warrants the benefit of the doubt.
∂02-Mar-86 1449 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: workshop
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 14:49:33 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 14:51:16-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: workshop
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sat 1 Mar 86 00:14:00-PST
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12187586336.53.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
I've never spoken to Chen.
Claudia
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1810 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA ONR Proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 18:10:45 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 18:10:00-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: ONR Proposal
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, les@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187622513.15.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Do the four of us want to get together soon to talk about the
possibility of a joint proposal to ONR under their "University
Research Initiative Program?" From reading the RFP, it appears
that my PRINCIPIA proposal could be reworked slightly to make
it appropriate for this. -Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 2138 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Congratulations!
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 21:38:19 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 21:40:08-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Congratulations!
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187660768.48.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The honorary doctorate is richly deserved!! And by the "halo effect" some of
the honor rubs off on all of us. Congratulations and best wishes.
Do you have to make a speech there?
Ed
-------
∂02-Mar-86 2241 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planlunch
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 22:41:26 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 22:36:35-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: planlunch
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
John,
Just a reminder that you are scheduled to give planlunch next Monday
(the 10th) at 11AM at SRI. I would appreciate it if you could send
me a short abstract for your talk by Wednesday, Thursday at the latest.
Thanks,
Amy
-------
∂02-Mar-86 2250 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Congratulations!
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 22:50:23 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 22:52:01-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: Congratulations!
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 2 Mar 86 22:43:00-PST
Message-ID: <12187673852.45.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John if you write the speech, I'd like to read it......Ed
-------
∂02-Mar-86 2355 LES re: ONR Proposal
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Sun 2 Mar 86 18:10:00-PST.]
Sure. I'm free Monday except for 1:00pm-1:45 and 4:00pm-4:30 and any time
Tuesday.
∂03-Mar-86 0109 LES Facility Committee Minutes of 2/27/86
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
The Committee and other interested members of the department reviewed
specific proposals for spending the remaining $582k of departmental
DARPA funds. After discussion, the following remain on the shopping
list. [Developments since the meeting are shown in brackets.]
As usual, this is largely a record of what the Chair heard, which may be
different from what others heard. Furthermore, some pieces have been
deliberately distorted a bit to in an attempt to fit them together.
Corrections or arguments are invited.
The total cost of the things listed below is $787k, or $205k more than we
have to spend. This must be resolved by taking some combination of the
following actions:
(a) drop some things from the list;
(b) reconfigure or refine some items so as to reduce their cost;
(c) round up additional funds to supplement those under consideration.
We should examine all of these choices.
PARALLEL COMPUTER $150k
The following quotations had been received:
Alliant (4 CE, 4 IP, 16 MByte memory, etc.) $322k
Encore (8 CPU, 16 MByte memory, etc.) 97k
Sequent (8 CPU, 16 MByte, etc.) 116k
After discussion, the committee tentatively selected Sequent on the
grounds of economy and the fact that the reality of Encore is uncertain.
The $150k figure was chosen to allow for more disk storage and other
peripheral expenses. John Hennessy and David Luckham said that they also
plan to buy Sequent systems and are interested in the possibility of
getting pricing leverage by linking the orders.
[Representatives of Alliant have subsequently proposed to make an
expandable system with 1 CE and 2 IPs available at no cost provided that
they can demonstrate it to prospective customers occasionally. We could
purchase additional modules as needed. A 4-CE configuration apparently
would be the minimum number for parallel computing research and would cost
$195k based on list prices. Alliant will give us a quotation on this
equipment (probably discounted) in the next day or two.]
[A 4-CE Alliant would have substantially higher performance than the other
8-CPU machines and is strongly preferred by numerical analysts in the
department. I estimate that the use of the Alliant machine would save the
Qlisp project about 3 months' time and something over $200k in project
funds. Supplementary funds for the purchase of an Alliant system may be
forthcoming from certain projects.]
[The Chair has been investigating the reality of Encore and its machine,
with the aim of confirming or refuting their apparent flakiness. The
picture that emerges now is that they are real and that their management
and technical staffs are in good shape. Argonne took a beta-test unit
last November which they have since purchased. They have had a Sequent
for some time and expect to receive an Alliant system on Monday. Paul
Messina there says that the Encore machine is quite solid; there were some
inefficiencies in the C compiler earlier but it is now fixed and runs at
about the same speed as the Sequent one. Ken Klingenstein at the
University of Colorado received an Encore machine a month ago and paints a
similar picture. He says it was brought up in 45 minutes and has been
quite solid ever since.]
SPARES AND TEST EQUIPMENT $102.4K
Len Bosack proposed purchasing $56.4k worth of spare parts
for VAXen and Suns and $46k worth of test equipment for a total of
$102.4k, which would reduce the cost of maintaining various equipment
already purchased.
Item
750&peripheral spares $32k
780 spares 18
Sun 3/50 6.4
-----
$56.4k
Description
Signal and pulse generators $19k
Oscilloscopes (2) 12
Microprocessor/logic analyzer 11
Miscellaneous (power supplies, DVM) 4
-----
$46k
McSUN
This (debatably) wonderful idea was dropped because the necessary
engineering probably could not be completed in the short remaining life of
the DARPA facilities contract.
PROJECT-SPECIFIC ACQUISITIONS $534.5k
A number of workstations, workstation upgrades and file servers
are to be purchased with departmental funds and administratively assign to
various research projects. These devices are to be treated like other
equipment belonging to projects and the projects that use them will be
responsible for their maintenance. However, the department administration
reserves the right to reassign or reallocate this equipment, including
storage allocations in the fileservers.
We wish to upgrade the performance of existing workstations by adding
memory as follows.
Qty. Description @ Total
10 Sun2/50 2MB memory addition $2100 $21 k
48 Sun2/120 1MB memory addition 1050 50.4
-----
$71.4 k
The following additional project-specific requests were received. [The
proposals below have been matched to expressed needs of various projects.
The numbers of devices do not correspond exactly to the proposal of Len
Bosack, though the unit prices do. Note that there are no workstations
listed here for general departmental use -- all are allocated to projects,
at least initially.]
Binford
1 Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles $ 41.5 k
1 4MB Sun 3/52 with 68881,Ether,Disk,Tape 9.7
1 Symbolics 3600 or 3640 45
1 Video Switch (Grass Valley group) 25
----
$121.2 k
Cheriton
1 Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles $ 41.5 k
1 4MB Sun 3/52 with 68881,Ether,Disk,Tape 9.7
1 Experimental multiprocessor workstation 90
2 "multicast agents" 38
-----
$179.2 k
Lantz
2 Sun 3/75+color workstations: @$22K $ 44 k
2 vocoders: @$5K 10
------
$ 54 k
Manna
2 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether @$11.5k $ 23 k
Rindfleisch
1 Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles $ 41.5 k
1 4MB Sun 3/52 with 68881,Ether,Disk,Tape 9.7
3 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether @$11.5k 34.5
-------
$ 85.7 k
A request from Vaughan Pratt for a Sun workstation with color that would
cost $28k was deferred for lack of a rationale for DARPA approval. Some
of the other proposals above may yet get stuck on this issue.
∂03-Mar-86 0849 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:HART@SRI-AI.ARPA VIPship
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 08:48:36 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Mar 86 08:40:25-PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 08:40:45-PST
From: HART@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: VIPship
To: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: hart@SRI-AI.ARPA
Dick and I want first to thank you for inviting us to give a course
next academic year-- it's an unusual opportunity and we appreciate it
being offered to us.
After much thought, regrettably, we have had to conclude that we cannot
now commit the time required to do a first-rate job of developing
a course. Our responsibilities at Syntelligence are considerable and,
looking ahead, they will most likely remain so.
As an alternative, perhaps it would be possible for us to give a graduate-
level seminar sometime next year. Although we recognize that without a
committment now we forgo a catalog entry, it might still be possible to
announce such a seminar less formally at some appropriate future time.
Should we be thinking along these lines?
--Peter
-------
∂03-Mar-86 0900 JMC
msg.msg[1,jmc]/142p
∂03-Mar-86 0921 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: VIPship
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 09:20:43 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 09:19:36-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: VIPship
To: HART@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: JMC@SU-SCORE.ARPA, NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "HART@SRI-AI.ARPA" of Mon 3 Mar 86 08:40:27-PST
Message-ID: <12187788100.29.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Peter and Dick, A "graduate level seminar" is just what the visiting
industrial professors usually give. So if you think you would be able
to do that, you may as well sign up to be "vips." -Nils
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1000 JMC
Cohen 856-6930, Sher 7-2959
∂03-Mar-86 1027 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa CS PhD proposal
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 10:27:50 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 3 Mar 86 10:14:05 pst
Date: 3 Mar 1986 1014-PST (Monday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: phdcom@sail, phd-program@score
Subject: CS PhD proposal
Not surprisingly, I am sympathetic to the bulk of the discussion and
sub-proposals contained therein. The basic set of proposals is
consistent with the "ideal" presented in the draft of the "Report of
the Systems PhD Committee". Indeed, since the votes in favor of that
ideal were accumulating so fast, we have made that ideal (well, a
slightly modified version thereof) the bottom-line proposal (stay tuned
for a posting of the revised report towards the end of the week).
One point on which we differ from the CS PhD proposal is that we are
adamantly opposed to make the thesis proposal public; we see no
constructive purpose to this requirement, given that students already
have ample opportunity (and seminar requirement!) to give technical
presentations in public.
Keith
∂03-Mar-86 1030 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA MAD tools
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 10:30:13 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 10:29:21-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: MAD tools
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187800800.24.RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
[cwr]
Professor McCarthy:
What sort of tool does MAD use for its expert systems development
for microcomputers? I haven't produced sufficient results to be
pleased, but am still working on this chess problem from Filman's
thesis. I thought perhaps you might have a solution and had it
embodied in whatever tool being employed at MAD.
Work is going slowly; it seems at times that little learning is
accomplished while servicing this undergraduate credential overhead.
Am slowly working on backgammon program. If you would be interested in
working on the doubling routine to interface with the stuff that I'm
working on, here's some interface info. It's running under a lisp,
and pascal.
Chuck
const
white = 1;
empty = 0;
black = -1;
WhiteBar = 0;
BlackBar = 25;
type
PointRange = 0..25;
PointCount = -15..15;
GameBoard = array[PointRange] of PointCount;
GameState = record
board : array [PointRange] of PointCount;
cube : -64..64;
end;
White moves from 1 to 24 (0 holds pieces that are on the bar), and
black moves from 24 to 1 (25 holds pieces that are on the bar). A
positive value in the board array specifies the number of white pieces
on the point, a negative value would specifiy the number of black
pieces on the point.
For now, since white and black do not move symmetrically, I am writing
everything in regards to just white. If we need to run a procedure
for black instead, we can simply swap the black and white pieces, and
ask about white instead.
I almost have valid move generation working. More later ...
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1042 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Commonsense Knowledge in the TACITUS Project
Jerry R. Hobbs
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
Thursday, March 6, 4pm
MJH252
In the TACITUS project for using commonsense knowledge in the
understanding of texts about mechanical devices and their failures, we
have been developing various commonsense theories that are needed to
mediate between the way we talk about the behavior of such devices and
causal models of their operation. Of central importance in this effort
is the axiomatization of what might be called ``commonsense
metaphysics''. This includes a number of areas that figure in virtually
every domain of discourse, such as granularity, scales, cycles, time,
space, material, physical objects, shape, causality, functionality, and
force. Our effort has been to construct core theories of each of these
areas, and then to define, or at least characterize, a large number of
lexical items in terms provided by the core theories. In this talk I
will discuss our methodological principles, such as aiming for the
maximum abstraction possible in order to accommodate metaphor and
analogy, and I will describe the key ideas in the various domains we are
investigating.
∂03-Mar-86 1112 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Round table
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 11:07:44 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 11:06:54-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Round table
To: sjg@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, genesereth@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
jmc@SU-CSLI.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
john@SU-CSLI.ARPA, dreyfus%ucbcogsci@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
shepard@SU-PSYCH.ARPA, shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
John McCarthy seems to have a different idea than I do about what this
event is. He sees it as a research activity, and proposes ways to go
about the kind of research he wants to do. I see it instead as an
educational activity for the benefit of the audience. I am happy to
participate, not because I expect to learn anything new myself, but
because I hope to do some teaching. If John considers this unfruitful,
the other conference sounds like a fine thing for him to organize.
As to pubilicity, press, etc. I wouldn't try to make a huge media event
out of it (I doubt the degree of preparation will warrant that), but
since I (like Dreyfus and probably others on the list) am currently
trying to let the world know about a recent book, it would be nice to
have it noted outside the confines of the CS Dept.
As to content, I agree that "traditional AI" has no "established
meaning", and it is just through discussions like this that meanings get
established. I agree with Dreyfus that there is a coherent paradigm
(call it "traditional" or not) based on cognition as symbol
manipulation, which does span most of the existing work in AI, which is
not the only imaginable way to build intelligent machines, and whose
advantages and disadvantages can indeed be debated without bogging down
in the details of non-monotonicity and if-then-rules.
--t
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1112 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Review of CS PhD program
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 11:10:25 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 11:09:37-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Review of CS PhD program
To: phd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-faculty@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The PhD committee has completed a review of the CS PhD program and made
a number of proposals. These will be modified on the basis of
departmental discussions, and proposed for faculty action in the Spring,
to take effect this Fall.
The complete report (11pp. formatted) is being sent to all faculty
members, and is available at the CSD front desk. A de-formatted
version has been appended to the BBOARD set up for discussing the
programs and is also available as {SCORE}<WINOGRAD>PHD-REVIEW.TXT.
Comments and suggestions should be addressed to the members of the
committee, or put onto the BBOARD.
To read the bulletin board:
on DEC-20's : BBOARD PHD-PROGRAM
on UNIX: rn csd.phd-program
on WAITS: read phdpro.txt[2,2]
To send to the bulletin board: from anywhere: mail to PHD-PROGRAM@Sushi,
PHD-Program@Score, PHD-PROGRAM@Sail, or PHD-Program@Navajo
Faculty will have an opportunity to give some first comments at
the faculty lunch tomorrow (Tues. March 4).
--t
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1125 RA John Nafeh, MAD
John Nafeh is going to bring two more people with him to the lunch; he would
like to know when and where you want the lunch to be. Please let me know and
I will call him back.
Thanks,
∂03-Mar-86 1216 VAL The wise men problem
Gelfond wants to read what has been written on the subject (and then try to apply
circ'n to it). Can you give me references?
∂03-Mar-86 1217 RA Invitation to Milan, Italy
A letter re the invitation is in your incoming mail box; you got a call
from Italy and they want to know whether you are going to attend the
GREAT APRIL FAIR which will be held in Milan April 12 - 20, 1986. They
will call again tomorrow morning, what shall I tell them?
Thanks,
∂03-Mar-86 1239 SJG AI roundtable
Dear John:
Here is my (believed) optimal list of participants for the AI roundtable:
Dreyfus
Lenat
McCarthy
Minsky
Nilsson
Perry
Winograd
Is this too big a group, or might I get you to participate? (If not,
how small does it have to get, or it this simply not your cup of tea?)
Thanks. How about if you, Vladimir and I get together for an hour
before this week's non-mon seminar? (When is that?)
Matt
∂03-Mar-86 1326 RA Casey Farrell
Farrell is working on Natural Language programming and NASA; he would like
you to call him (415) 661 9325.
Seems to be a crank.
∂03-Mar-86 1352 VAL re: Etherington
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Feb-86 22:15-PT.]
I have not been asked for a recommendation for him. I can say three things:
First, in his work that I have seen he always addressed the right issues: he's
interested in clarifying the basic concepts and determining their limitations.
Second, he takes the mathematical aspects of the theory seriously. He works
on his ideas until they become precise results. I've sent a few of my drafts
to him, and he usually tried to check the proofs, to give counterexamples when
he saw problems, etc.
Third, I remember a seminar he gave here two years ago; I think he is a good
lecturer.
(It seems to me that he would be probably quite useful to us if he could spend
some time at Stanford).
∂03-Mar-86 1443 SJG re: why I think Minsky will come
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Mar-86 14:36-PT.]
(1) optimism
(2) my winning smile
∂03-Mar-86 1443 SJG
To: JMC, VAL
3.30 Thursday it is. -- Matt
∂03-Mar-86 1441 VAL re: AI roundtable
To: JMC, SJG
[In reply to message from JMC rcvd 03-Mar-86 14:38-PT.]
3:30 this Thursday is fine.
Vladimir
∂03-Mar-86 1530 RA Judith Lemon
Lemon needs a final answer from you re video journal. Her tel. 7-3617.
∂03-Mar-86 1630 LES re: ONR Proposal
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Sun 2 Mar 86 18:10:00-PST.]
How about Thursday, 3/6, at 10:00am in Nils' office?
∂03-Mar-86 1642 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Curriculum changes
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 16:40:32 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 3 Mar 86 16:40:19 pst
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 86 16:40:19 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Curriculum changes
To: buchanan@sumex, feigenbaum@sumex, jmc@sail, nilsson@score,
rosenbloom@sumex
Cc: curr@diablo
Kathy Berg says that a group of AI faculty told her to make certain
changes in numbers of AI courses.
As some of these are part of the undergraduate curriculum, I don't
think we can unillaterally create or distroy such courses any more;
sorry folks--this is one of the drawbacks of having an UG program
that I didn't tell you about.
I've generally been following the policy that creation of courses
at the 300 or higher level are the business of the faculty in the
area, and while the curriculum committee needs to know
about changes, it should pass on them pro forma.
However, changes to courses below 300 should definitely be considered
by the curriculum committee for the effects it may have on our BS
or MS programs.
As the catalog is getting close to the point of closure, please
mail any proposed changes to me, or better, directly to curr@diablo.
---jeff
∂03-Mar-86 1646 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Curriculum changes
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 16:45:57 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 16:44:20-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Curriculum changes
To: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
cc: buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA,
rosenbloom@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, curr@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>" of Mon 3 Mar 86 16:38:10-PST
Message-ID: <12187869064.35.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Sorry, it was I who told Kathy about "the changes." Stuart and
I have just talked about them, he had some useful suggestions and
will talk to the curric committee. Pending curric comm approval,
Stuart will forward any changes to Kathy. Jeff's right about the
need to coordinate these sorts of things with the curric comm. -Nils
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1714 LES re: ONR Proposal
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Sun 2 Mar 86 18:10:00-PST.]
2nd probe: how about Monday, 3/10, at 2:00pm in Nils' office?
∂03-Mar-86 1720 LES
To: VAL
CC: JMC
∂03-Mar-86 1714 LES re: ONR Proposal
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Sun 2 Mar 86 18:10:00-PST.]
2nd probe: how about Monday, 3/10, at 2:00pm in Nils' office?
∂03-Mar-86 1735 LES
From: Hal Gerrish <HX.HAL@Forsythe>
∂03-Mar-86 1758 SJG topic for AI roundtable
To: "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Nils and John have suggested that "Will Traditional AI Work?" is too
vague; perhaps we might talk about, "in what ways will fundamental
qualities of knowledge impact AI"? Or something like that; the idea
is to get people who think that knowledge is holistic/rule-based/logical ...
to admit it and say what they think it means ...
Comments?
Matt
∂03-Mar-86 2026 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Meeting
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 20:25:48 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 20:26:40-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Meeting
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I would like to have a meeting next Tuesday (3/11) at 2:15 to discuss
the comments on the report. Is this still a good time for people (if
not, yell, otherwise it's set). --t
-------
∂03-Mar-86 2038 LES Facility Committee update
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Next meeting is at noon on Wednesday, 3/5, in MJH 220 (Nils' conference
room).
PARALLEL COMPUTERS
More complete proposals have been received from Sequent and Alliant.
The current set of alternatives is summarized below. The detailed proposals
are available to anyone who is interested (see me).
The Alliant proposal now includes as an option a "free loan" of part of
the system for one year, with the stipulation that if we wish to purchase
the system at the end of this period we must pay 75% of the list price.
I have told Alliant that this would not be of interest unless the "free
loan" period is at least 2 years.
The principal alternatives now look like this:
Purchase Maintenance
(per year)
Alliant (4 CE, 4 IP, 16 MByte mem., 758 MB dsk) $322 k $47.6 k
or $168.5k now and $262.9k later = 431.4 47.6
(8 CE, 8 IP, 32 MB mem., 758 MB dsk.) 468.1 68.7
Encore
(8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 500 MB dsk, 16 port TIP) 96.8 10.5
(12 CPU, 24 MB mem., 500 MB dsk, 16 port TIP) 122.0 14.9
(20 CPU, 32 MB mem., 500 MB dsk., 16 port TIP) 161.6 22.1
Sequent
Balance 8000 (8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 792 MB dsk) 114.1 22.9
Balance 21000 (8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 125.6 25.2
Balance 21000 (12 CPU, 24 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 158.0 31.6
Balance 21000 (20 CPU, 32 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 209.6 41.9
MATCHING THE BUDGET
We soon must match our shopping list to the available funds, which
currently differ by $205k. As a starting point, I would like to suggest
that in the case of project-specific purchases, we focus on buying only
equipment that is likely to be of general use (i.e. could readily be
transferred between projects) and drop requests that are very project-
specific. Thus, ordinary workstations and fileservers would qualify and
the other stuff would not.
By my accounting, if we adopt this approach we will drop about
$207k from the shopping list, which is about right.
∂03-Mar-86 2209 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: ONR Proposal
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 22:09:44 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 22:11:25-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: ONR Proposal
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 3 Mar 86 17:14:00-PST
Message-ID: <12187928605.29.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
All,
Monday at 2:00 is also fine with me.
mrg
-------
∂04-Mar-86 0005 cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Facility Committee update
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 00:05:20 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 4 Mar 86 00:04:38 pst
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 86 00:04:38 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: Facility Committee update
To: "@XTRA.DIS[1, LES@Sail, LES]"@Sail, facil@Sail
I think we should review the requested items with based on expected research
return and dept. benefit. Blinding using "ordinary" as the criterion
seems less than positive for the research health of the dept.
Nevertheless, I think I can come up with a considerably pared down version
of my own request for equipment.
∂04-Mar-86 0851 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: topic for AI roundtable
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 08:51:37 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 08:50:49-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: topic for AI roundtable
To: SJG@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA, NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 3 Mar 86 17:58:00-PST
Message-ID: <12188045006.25.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The issue, I think is really something like "Will JMC's Advice-Taker
Proposal Work?" That thesis is that 1) the knowledge needed by
intelligent machines can be represented declaratively (in some kind
of logical language), and that 2) reasoning methods based on logic
and its extensions can be used to apply that knowledge to the
tasks faced by the machine. Most of us AI folk subscribe to that
thesis, and I think the brothers Dreyfus and Terry Winograd don't.
I'm not sure that either side will have much evidence for their
points of view, but at least the issue can be put sharply. -Nils
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1106 ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Cognitive AI course
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 11:06:09 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 11:00:58-PST
From: Paul Rosenbloom <ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Cognitive AI course
To: Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Winograd@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
tob@SU-AI.ARPA, Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Berg@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188068699.38.ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
There appears to be a little confusion about what is happenning with
CS 123 (Introduction to AI) and Psychology 126/245 (AI for
Psychologists). The plan is for me to merge those two courses into a
new course (Cognitive Introduction to AI) which shares features with
both. This is a general non-rigorous introduction to AI, with tie-ins
being made to relevant work in cognitive psychology. I have a
description written if you want to see it and haven't. Evidently
there was an impression that this would be a rigorous alternative to
CS 223A, but from the CMU perspective. It definitely is not supposed
to be that, at least at this time. Stuart has pointed out that a 200
number for the course (within CS at least) is probably inappropriate
therefore. I agree with him. It should probably be left as a 100
number. Ideally, it should have the same number within CS and
Psychology, but I don't care whether it is 123 or 126. -- Paul
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1108 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS 309C
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 11:07:16 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 11:06:21-PST
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS 309C
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: berg@SU-SCORE.ARPA, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-4776
Message-ID: <12188069678.18.BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I just received a phone call from Daniel Bobrow, one of the
lecturers scheduled to teach CS 409C this spring. Dr. Bobrow
told me that he was unable to organize the course for this
spring, and he was cancelling the course on behalf of the group.
We will need to let the students know that the course is cancelled
immediately, as they are planning their spring study lists now.
We must announce this change in the next day or so.
If there is a chance that someone else can be found to teach
409C, please let me know asap.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Kathy
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1136 RA Lunch tomorrow
I made reservation for 5 under your name at ECCO in the Hyatt Cabana, 4290
El Camino, for noon.
∂04-Mar-86 1204 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA Industrial Lectureship 86/87
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 12:03:40 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 11:24:43-PST
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Industrial Lectureship 86/87
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-4776
Message-ID: <12188073021.18.BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John:
Thank you for your reply.
Any word yet on the third lectureship for next year?
thanks
kb
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1210 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: CS 309C
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 12:09:51 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 12:00:34-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: CS 309C
To: BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA, NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12188069678.18.BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12188079549.25.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
That's disappointing news. Any chance that Stefik, DeKleer or one
of the others would be willing to give a seminar? -Nils
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1210 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: New Cognitive AI course
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 12:09:33 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 11:59:23-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: New Cognitive AI course
To: ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Winograd@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
tob@SU-AI.ARPA, Berg@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12188068699.38.ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12188079332.25.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I agree with Paul. Let's keep it at a 100 level number. -Nils
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1331 LES ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
How about 1/2 hour later, on Monday, 3/10, at 2:30pm in Nils' office?
∂04-Mar-86 1340 GROSZ@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA AAAI workshop funds
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 13:39:48 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 13:41:02-PST
From: Barbara J. Grosz <GROSZ@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: AAAI workshop funds
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: grosz@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA, grosz@SRI-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(177)+TOPSLIB(114)+PONY(0) 4-Mar-86 13:41:02.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
John --
Phil Cohen, Ivan Sag (who is in the Linguistics Dept.) and I would
like to talk with you about AAAI sponsoring some of the AI-related
activities being planned for next summer's Linguistic Institute.
Would you have some time (I would guess half an hour would be
sufficient) sometime early next week to do this? Times on Monday
or Wednesday between 10 and 12 or Tuesday after 2 would work best
for us if any of those are good for you.
thanks
Barbara
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1416 RA call from Sarah
Sarah called this morning and wanted to know whether you got the financial
aid material. She said she'd try to reach you at home, if she did, disregard
this msg.
∂04-Mar-86 1434 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Faculty lunch discussion
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 14:32:12 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 14:32:23-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty lunch discussion
To: phd-program@SU-SCORE.ARPA, phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The following topics were raised in discussing the proposal at the
faculty lunch meeting today:
1. Whether we should have course requirements in place of or in
addition to comprehensives. One possibility was to require each student
to take one course in each "area" (however defined), which would mean
that someone who already had basic knowledge could take an advanced
course rather than repeating familiar material. If course requirements
are included, what will have to be done to better coordinate course
contents, scheduling, and loads so students don't get squeezed?
2. Whether there should be a public dissertation proposal. Several
people argued that the disadvantages of going public with early
directions (particularly the possibility of having ideas stolen)
outweighed any advantages of getting feedback from a public audience or
getting practice in speaking (since it wasn't speaking about real
results, but about directions and speculations). In response the
question was raised as to what degree the department should be treated
as essentially a group of critics and competitors, or as a mutually
helpful collection of colleagues. Discussion of this issue was
inconclusive.
3. Whether there should be an oral (like the final thesis oral) at an
earlier stage when there was still the chance to influence the course of
the research, rather than at the end, or whether final quality control
was more important.
4. Whether it was a good idea to allow different parts of the comp to be
passed in different attempts, because knowledge learned on subsequent
passes might "overwrite" rather than "integrate" with the parts that
weren't being taken.
5. Whether students should in general not take the comps until the
second year, so they didn't focus so much on them the first year (e.g.,
neglecting course work to study for them). Some faculty felt this would
help reduce the pressure on first year students. Others argued that it
led students to wait for feedback on how well they could pass, until it
was essentially too late.
6. Whether there should be some kind of diagnostic "pre-exam" (early in
the first year) which helped an incoming student identify areas that
needed study, but which was not seen as something to be studied for.
--t
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1443 LES Encore visit
The President of Encore is slated to be here at 4pm today.
∂04-Mar-86 1535 LES ONR discussion, final
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
On 4th thought, it appears that everyone can make it at 2:00pm on
Monday, 3/10, in Nils' office, so there it is.
It is clearly time to develop computerized "scheduling agents" to
handle negotiations of this sort more expeditiously.
∂04-Mar-86 1653 CLT calendar non item
Timothy's appt (fri 07-mar 10:00) with Dr. Ginter
has been cancelled as Dr. G is still ill.
∂04-Mar-86 2020 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 20:18:08 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 20:20:07-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 3 Mar 86 22:37:00-PST
Message-ID: <12188170490.18.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
Do you just want the list of all committees I've served on or
the list itemized by year (harder) or just this year?
mrg
-------
∂04-Mar-86 2024 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 20:22:18 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 20:24:13-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 4 Mar 86 13:31:00-PST
Message-ID: <12188171236.18.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I'll be there at 2:30 next Monday.
mg
-------
∂04-Mar-86 2049 berglund@su-pescadero.arpa Re: Faculty lunch discussion
Received: from SU-PESCADERO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 20:49:18 PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 4 Mar 86 20:48:35 pst
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 86 20:48:35 pst
From: Eric Berglund <berglund@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: Faculty lunch discussion
To: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA, phd-program@SU-Score, phdcom@Sail
Let me state once again my severe objections to course requirements that
cannot be waived or tested out of. Students mature enough to study on their
own should be given every opportunity to do so; there is no reason for them
to be forced to conform to any other person's model of learning.
--Eric
∂05-Mar-86 0030 LES Squires views
Here is something I sent Squires yesterday and his response,
which I find a bit puzzling.
While I think it likely that we will see some interesting RISC
parallel machines in the next generation, it appears to me that
Squires' push on MIPS-like machines is premature as far as software
development is concerned.
∂04-Mar-86 1436 LES Parallel Computer & Qlisp
To: Squires@USC-ISI.ARPA
When John Pucci came through a week and a half ago he mentioned that he
had not yet received a DARPA order on Qlisp. Has it escaped the DARPA
head office yet or are you still Gramm-Rudmanizing?
Our Facilities Committee is reviewing alternative proposals for parallel
computers and other equipment. Attached, for your information, are
summaries of what we are considering, showing the discounted prices.
Given that the Alliant computer uses the 68000 instruction set, which
would speed the porting of Common Lisp, the Qlisp project would save
about 3 months in the implementation phase with that choice compared
with the others. It is also rather expensive, of course.
Cheers,
Les
-------------------
Purchase Maintenance
(per year)
Alliant (4 CE, 4 IP, 16 MByte mem., 758 MB dsk) $322 k $47.6 k
or $168.5k now and $262.9k later * 431.4 47.6
(8 CE, 8 IP, 32 MB mem., 758 MB dsk.) 468.1 68.7
Encore
(8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 500 MB dsk, 16 port TIP) 96.8 10.5
(12 CPU, 24 MB mem., 500 MB dsk, 16 port TIP) 122.0 14.9
(20 CPU, 32 MB mem., 500 MB dsk., 16 port TIP) 161.6 22.1
Sequent
Balance 8000 (8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 792 MB dsk) 114.1 22.9
Balance 21000 (8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 125.6 25.2
Balance 21000 (12 CPU, 24 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 158.0 31.6
Balance 21000 (20 CPU, 32 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 209.6 41.9
* The Alliant proposal includes as an option a "free loan" of part of
the system for one year, with the stipulation that they get to use it
periodically for demonstrations to prospective customers and that if we
wish to purchase the system at the end of this period we must pay 75% of
the list price. I have told Alliant that this would not be of interest
unless the "free loan" period is at least 2 years.
∂04-Mar-86 2005 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
Received: from IPTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 20:04:24 PST
Received: by ipto.ARPA (4.12/4.7)
id AA00536; Tue, 4 Mar 86 23:04:44 est
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 23:04:38-EST
From: Stephen Squires <SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(171)+TOPSLIB(113) 4-Mar-86 23:04:38.IPTO.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of 04 Mar 86 1436 PST
The QLisp project was approved within IPTO some time ago.
I expect the ARPA Order to be signed very soon and expect the GRH to have
only the effect the already delayed start.
There are important strategic issues associated with parallel computer
choices. One major considerations is the major role that I expect
RISCs to play in the future as a generic processing element.
I have been able to get DARPA to spin off a complete family
of RISCs based on the MIPS design from simple CMOS, to VHSIC,
to GaAs...all with a common symbolic assembly language
and therefore the means to have common and very high
quality programmming support. Therefore, I would like to
see projects like QLisp move in this direction and am very
concerned about the future of the architectures b.
I have additional information about some of the systems
you are considering. Who have you talked to about these
multiprocessors in each company? Who have you talked to
in other parts of DARPA community about these issues?
Have you had a chance to talk to Luckham? Do you have
any ideas about how Lucid Common Lisp would work out on
MIPS processors?
-------
∂05-Mar-86 0049 LES re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Mar-86 00:35-PT.]
Yes, MIPS is Hennessy's company I believe.
What I find puzzling about Squires' guidance is the seemingly random aim
of his successive nudges. The last one was in the direction of Encore.
Now he is pushing toward future RISCs while alluding to other knowledge
that he has. I have called him several times and invited memory dumps
but he seems to express himself only in semi-random emissions.
Incidentally, I have been talking with Luckham. His expressed goal
(as of last Wednesday) was to get a Sequent.
I will poke RPG on the question of Lucid's adaptability to RISC
architectures, though I think I know the answer. I will then call
Squires again and attempt to elicit further arcane knowledge.
Unless you would prefer to do the honors.
∂05-Mar-86 0904 MACMILK@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: JMC's letter to Stanford Daily (from SAIL's BBOARD)
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 09:03:44 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 08:45:22-PST
From: Katie MacMillen <MACMILK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: JMC's letter to Stanford Daily (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 5 Mar 86 01:19:00-PST
Message-ID: <12188306158.21.MACMILK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
john,
does this then mean that, for english to be used correctly,
it must remain static?
-katie
-------
∂05-Mar-86 0916 RA industrial lecturer
Kathy Berg needs the name of the third industrial lecturer. Could you please
let me know who this person is. The catalog deadline is today.
Thanks.
∂05-Mar-86 1101 VAL MCC visit
Boyer will be out of town on March 27. There are two things we can try:
(1) April 2-3 or 3-4 (and cancel seminar on April 3), or
(2) April 7-8 or 8-9.
∂05-Mar-86 1347 RA Msg. from Zohar
Zohar would like me to remind you that he is waiting for your comments regarding
the Quals Syllab.
∂05-Mar-86 1400 RA leaving
It's Wed. and I am leaving early for my class. See you tomorrow.
∂05-Mar-86 1533 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planlunch abstract?
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 15:32:23 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 15:32:34-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: planlunch abstract?
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
John,
Just a reminder that I will need your abstract for your Monday talk
(11AM -SRI) by tomorrow at the latest...
Thanks, Amy
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1538 VAL Reminder: Non-Monotonic Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Commonsense Knowledge in the TACITUS Project
Jerry R. Hobbs
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
Thursday, March 6, 4pm
MJH252
In the TACITUS project for using commonsense knowledge in the
understanding of texts about mechanical devices and their failures, we
have been developing various commonsense theories that are needed to
mediate between the way we talk about the behavior of such devices and
causal models of their operation. Of central importance in this effort
is the axiomatization of what might be called ``commonsense
metaphysics''. This includes a number of areas that figure in virtually
every domain of discourse, such as granularity, scales, cycles, time,
space, material, physical objects, shape, causality, functionality, and
force. Our effort has been to construct core theories of each of these
areas, and then to define, or at least characterize, a large number of
lexical items in terms provided by the core theories. In this talk I
will discuss our methodological principles, such as aiming for the
maximum abstraction possible in order to accommodate metaphor and
analogy, and I will describe the key ideas in the various domains we are
investigating.
∂05-Mar-86 1658 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: MAD tools
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 16:58:13 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 16:38:34-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: MAD tools
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 3 Mar 86 14:30:00-PST
Message-ID: <12188392302.31.RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Professor McCarthy:
Oh, I thought MAD might be rolling something interesting as far as building
tools goes.
I was in your office about a year ago after one of these Non-Monotonic
Reasoning meetings. You took out Filman's thesis, opened it up to a
position. The problem was to consider the represented position, imagine
leaving the room while it was your opponents turn to move, returning
after your opponent moved jarring the board before you could sweep the
board with your eyes to see where he moved, and determining what piece
had fallen off as a result of knocking the board.
I have been losing interest with computer chess and actual chess per se.
Realizing that game playing at a high level is primarily a fecund
pleasure [and somewhat unproductive activity]has been important to me.
I am serious about completing this ug credential and completing
graduate school. There are other things as interesting as chess
but I need to pursue my own development in order to offer any sort
of a worthwhile contribution. I don't want to stop writing computer
programs that I find interesting though.
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1807 GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA response
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 18:07:42 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 18:09:37-PST
From: Michael Genesereth <GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: response
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188408876.46.GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John,
Here's the answer:
CSD Committees
Curriculum Committee
Comprehensive Exam Committee
PhD Admissions Committee
MSCS Committee
MSAI Committee
Facilities Committee
Interdepartmental Committees
Mathematical and Computational Sciences Committee
Medical Information Science Committee
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1904 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 19:04:05 PST
Date: 5 Mar 86 14:55:16 PST
From: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: val@su-ai, lynch@mit-xx, maida%psuvax.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa,
mazoo.toronto@csnet-relay, jmc@su-ai, MEGIDDO, mischu%allegra.btl@csnet-relay
silvio@mit-mc, jcm.btl@csnet-relay, bmoore@sri-ai,
morgenst@nyu-csd2, yoram@mit-xx, nilsson@su-score,
odonnell%gargoyle.uchicago@csnet-relay, RIPBC%CUNYVM.BITNET@wiscvm.arpa,
judea@locus.ucla.edu, pereira@sri-candide, rperrault@sri-ai,
perlis@maryland, john@su-csli, gdp%ecsvax.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
princeton!mind!ian@seismo.css.gov, coraki!pratt@su-navajo,
reif@harvard, stan@sri-ai, fbs@cornell.arpa, shapiro.buffalo@csnet-relay,
shoham@yale, briansmith.pa@xerox, mmvy%cornella.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa,
STOCK, hlp.sw@mit-speech, wol@su-ai, yao@su-score,
VARDI, jim%sfucmpt!sfulccr.UUCP@harvard, pfps@sri-kl,
bonnie%upenn@csnet-relay, PELEG, kasif@hopkins-eecs-bravo,
paai%htikht5.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa, blum@berkeley, STRONG,
phayes@sri-kl, thomason@cmu-cs-c, sam%gvax@cornell.arpa,
mcvax!uva!peter@seismo.css.gov
Subject: Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
The conference will start in two weeks. In case you haven't made
flight reservations yet, you should certainly do so soon! The best
places to fly into are San Jose and San Francisco. From San Jose
it is about 1.5 hours to Asilomar, while from San Francisco it is
2.5 hours. On the other hand, there are roughly hourly flights from
SF to Monterey (cost: about $100 round trip). I've appended the current
list of registrants, with telephone number and net addresses where
available. Some of you may want to carpool together to Asilomar.
There doesn't seem to be much point in have 90 rental cars all sitting
in the Asilomar lot. Please try to come to Asilomar about 3 P.M on
Wednesday, March 19, so that we can start the first session right
on time. By the way, if for any reason any will not be able to
attend the conference, please let me know right away! I have to
pay for the rooms I have booked at Asilomar whether they get used
or not. As well, I still have long waiting list of people who would
like to attend the conference. Similarly, if you plan to leave
the conference early, please let me know. Thanks again.
See you all in two weeks!
-- Joe Halpern
----------------------
CONFERENCE REGISTRANTS
Setsuo Arakawa
Research Institute of Fundamental Information Science
Kyushu University
Higashi-ku, Hakozaki, Fukuoka-shi
812 Japan
Nicholas Asher
Cognitive Science Center
University of Texas
Austin, TX 78712
512-471-4204
cgs.asher@utexas
Prof. R. Aumann
Dept. of Mathematics
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Givat Ram, 91904 Jerusalem
ISRAEL
011-972-2-638264
danit%humus@israel (csnet); danit@humus (bitnet)
Manuel Blum
Dept. of EECS
U.C. Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720
415-642-1662 (415-642-1024 for messages)
blum@berkeley
Alex Borgida
Rutgers University
Dept. of Computer Science
Hill Center for the Math. Sci.
New Brunswick, NJ 08903
201-932-4744
Borgida@rutgers
Harry Bunt
Tilburg University
Computational Linguistics Unit
Dept. of Language and Literature
Tilburg University
P.O. Box 90153
5000 LE Tilburg
Netherlands
013-66-2653, 013-662668 (sec.)
bunt@htikht5.bitnet
Dr. J. Cave
RAND
1700 Main St.
Santa Monica, CA 90406
213-393-0411
Dr. P. Cohen
SRI International, EK270
333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025
415-859-4840
pcohen@sri-ai
Jim Delgrande
Simon Fraser Univsersity
School of Computing Science
Burnaby, British Columbia
V5A 1S6
CANADA
Jim des Rivieres
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
Toronto, CANADA M5S 1A4
(416) 978-5182
jeem@toronto.csnet
Professor Danny Dolev
Dept. of Computer Science
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Givat Ram, 91904 Jerusalem
ISRAEL
972-2-343918
Dolev@hujics.bitnet
Jaysri Dutta
Dept. of Economics
Barnard College
New York, NY 10027
212-280-2082
Dr. Cynthia Dwork
IBM Almaden Research Center, K55/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
408-927-1752
Dwork@IBM-SJ
Dr. R. Fagin
IBM Almaden Research Center, K53/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
408-927-1726
fagin@ibm-sj
Prof. M. Fischer
Yale University
Department of Computer Science
Box 2158, Yale Station
New Haven, CT 06520
203-436-0744
fischer@yale.arpa
Prof. M. Fitting
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
Herbert H. Lehman College
Bedford Park Boulevard West
Bronx, New York 10468
212-960-8116
mlflc@cunyvm (bitnet)
Haim Gaifman
SRI International and Hebrew University
333 Ravenswood Ave.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Dept. of Computer Science
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Givat Ram, 91904 Jerusalem
ISRAEL (after September, 1986)
Gaifman@sri-ai
415-424-9451 (until September, 1986)
Christophe Geissler
E.N.S.T.
16 Rue de Vaurigard
75006 Paris
FRANCE
Tel. 46335604
ircam!geissler@seismo
Dr. M. Georgeff
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025
415-859-4769
georgeff@sri-ai.arpa
Matt Ginsberg
Stanford University
Dept. of Computer Science
Stanford, CA 94305
415-723-1239
ginsberg@sumex-aim
Prof. S. Goldwasser
MIT Lab. for Computer Science
545 Technology Sq.
Cambridge, MA02138
617-253-5914
shafi@mit-mc
Dr. J. Groenendijk
Centrale Intefaculteit, afd. Taalphilosofie
Univ. van Amsterdam
Grimburgwal 10
NL-1012 GA Amsterdam
The Netherlands
020-5254540
mcvax!uva!theo@seismo (subject: stogro)
Anil Gupta
Dept. of Philosophy
University of Illinois
P.O. Box 4348
Chicago, IL 60680
312-761-4937
Joe Halpern
IBM Almaden Research Center, K53/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
408-927-1787
Halpern@ibm-sj (arpa or csnet)
halpern@almvma (bitnet)
William Harper
Dept. of Philosophy
University of Western Ontario
London, Ontario
N6A 3K7
519-293-3058
Pat Hayes
Schlumberger Palo Alto Research
3340 Hillview Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94304
(415) 496-4631
PHAYES@SRI-KL.ARPA
Prof. J. Hintikka
Dept. of Philosophy
Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306
(904) 644-1483
Tomasz Imielinski
Rutgers University
Dept. of Computer Science
Hill Center for the Math. Sci.
New Brunswick, NJ 08903
Imielinski@rutgers
201-932-3551
Dr. D. Israel
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025.
415-859-4254
ISRAEL@SRI-AI.ARPA
Aravind K. Joshi
Room 268 Moore School/ D2
Dept. of Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
215-898-8540
Joshi@upenn.csnet
Leslie Kaelbling
SRI International
333 Ravensweed Ave.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
415-859-2578
Kaelbling@SRI-AI.ARPA
Prof. H. Kamp
Cognitive Science Center
University of Texas
Austin, TX 78712
512-471-4204
cgs.kamp@utexas.arpa
Simon Kasif
Dept. of EECS
The Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
301-338-8296
Kasif@Hopkins-eecs-bravo
Dr. K. Konolige
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025
415-859-2788
KONOLIGE@SRI-AI
Sarit Kraus
Dept. of Computer Science
Hebrew University
Givat Ram
Jerusalem 91904,
ISRAEL
02-762563
sarit@hujics
Dr. V. Kuo
Department of Computer & Information Science
School of Engineering & Applied Science D2
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
kuo%upenn-graded@csnet-relay
Dr. R. Ladner
Dept. of Computer Science, FR-35
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195
415-643-6026 (until July, 1986)
206-543-9347 (after July, 1986)
Ladner@washington
Gerhard Lakemeyer
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
Toronto, CANADA M5S 1A4
416-978-5182
gerhard@toronto.csnet
Dr. L. Lamport
DEC SRC
130 Lytton Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94301
415-853-2170
Lamport@decwrl.dec.com
Dr. F. Landman
Brown University
Dept. of Linguistics
Bpx 1978
Providence, RI 02912
Prof. D. Lehmann
Dept. of Computer Science
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Givat Ram, 91904 Jerusalem
02-585258
lehmann@hujics (bitnet)
Wolfgang Lenzen
Universitat Osnabruck
Dept. of Philosophy
Postfach 4469
Neuer Graben/Schloss
4500 Osnabruck
WEST GERMANY
0541/6084422 or 0541/15216
Prof. Hector Levesque
University of Toronto
Computer Science Department
Toronto, Ontario
M5S1A4
Canada
Hector@toronto.csnet
416-978-3618
Prof. V. Lifschitz
Computer Science Dept.
Stanford University,
Stanford, CA 94305
415-497-3334
val@su-ai.arpa
Prof. N. A. Lynch
MIT Lab. for Computer Science
545 Technology Sq.
Cambridge, MA 02138
617-253-7225
lynch@mit-xx
Prof. A. Maida
Department of Computer Science
Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802
814-865-1803
maida@psuvax1.bitnet
Murray Mazer
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario
M5S 1A4
CANADA
416-978-7321
mazoo@toronto.csnet
Prof. J. C. McCarthy
Department of Computer Science
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
415-497-4430
jmc@su-ai
Dr. N. Megiddo
IBM Almaden Research Center, K53/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
408-927-1786
megiddo@ibm-sj
Dr. M. Merritt
3D-458
AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mt. Avenue
Murray Hill, NJ 07974.
201-582-5334
mischu%allegra@btl.csnet, allegra!mischu (uucp)
Dr. J. F. Mertens
CORE
34 Voie de Roman Pays
1348 Louvain-La-Neuve
BELGIUM
415-643-6021 (until 6/86)
Prof. S. Micali
MIT Lab. for Computer Science,
545 Technology Sq.
Cambridge, MA02139
617-253-5949
Silvio@mit-mc
John C. Mitchell
AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Ave., 2C-421
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
201-582-3828
jcm@btl.csnet, research!jcm (uucp)
Dr. R. Moore
University of Cambridge
Computer Laboratory
Corn Exchange Street
Cambridge CB2 3QG
ENGLAND
bmoore@sri-ai.arpa, rcm%cam.cl@ucl-cs.arpa
Leora Morgenstern
New York University
Dept. of Computer Science
251 Mercer Street
New York, NY 10012
212-781-6539; 212-927-0142
morgenst@nyu-csd2
Yoram Moses,
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, NE43-520A
545 Technology Sq.
Cambridge, MA 02139
617-253-5905
Yoram@MIT-XX.ARPA
415-497-9745
nilsson@su-score
Professor M. O'Donnell
Dept. of Computer Science
The University of Chicago
1100 East 58th St.
Chicago, IL 60637
312-962-3486
odonnell@uchicago.csnet
Prof. L. Ojala
Helsinki University of Technology
Digital Systems Laboratory
Otakaari 5A
SF-02150 ESPOO
FINLAND
Professor R. Parikh
Dept. of Computer Science
Brooklyn College
Brooklyn, NY 11210
ripbc@cunyvm (bitnet)
ripbc%cunyvm.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa (arpa)
914-833-0288, 914-834-5681
Prof. B. Partee
Dept. of Linguistics
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, MA 01003
413-545-0885 or 413-545-0889
Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Schlumberger Palo Alto Research
3340 Hillview Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94304
415-496-4627
pfps@sri-kl
Judea Pearl
Room 4731 BH
U.C.L.A.
Los Angeles, CA 90024
213-825-3243, 213-825-4033
judea@locus.ucla.edu
David Peleg
IBM Almaden
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120
408-927-1790
Peleg@ibm-sj.arpa
Dr. R. Perrault
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025.
415-859-6470
RPerrault@SRI-Ai.Arpa
Don Perlis
Univeristy of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742
301-454-7931
perlis@maryland.arpa
Prof. J. Perry
CSLI, Ventura Hall
Stanford, CA 94305
415-497-1275
John@su-csli
Gordon Plotkin
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Edinburgh
James Clerk Maxwell Bldg.
The King's Bldg.
Mayfield Road
Edinburgh EH9 3JZ Scotland
(31) 667-1081 ext. 2775
GDP%ECSVAX@UCL-CS.ARPA
Prof. H. M. Polemarchakis
Columbia University
Department of Economics
New York, NY 10027
212-280-4225
Ian Pratt
Dept. of Philosophy
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ 08544
609-924-9385
Prof. Vaughan Pratt
Department of Computer Science
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
415-494-2545
pratt@su-navajo (arpa)
Prof. M. O. Rabin
Harvard University
Aiken Computation Laboratory
Cambridge, MA 02138
617-495-1870
Rabin@harvard
Ramaswamy Ramanujam
c/o Prof. R. Parikh
CUNY Graduate Center
33 W. 42nd St.
New York, NY 10009
212-460-8641
Prof. J. Reif,
Harvard University,
Aiken Computation Laboratory,
Cambridge, MA 02138.
617-495-3673
Reif@harvard.arpa
Dr. S. Rosenschein
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Ave,
Menlo Park, CA 94025.
415-859-4167
stan@sri-ai
Prof. F. Schneider
Computer Science Dept.
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
607-256-4052
fbs@cornell.arpa
Stuart Shapiro
Dept. of Computer Science
University at Buffalo
State University of New York
Buffalo, NY 14260
716-636-3183
shapiro@buffalo.csnet
Yoav Shoham
Yale University
Computer Science Dept.
10 Hillhouse Ave.
New Haven, CT 06520
203-436-2773 x48, 203-782-2242
shoham@yale
Brian Cantwell Smith
Xerox Corporation
Intelligent Systems Lab
Palo Alto Research Center
3333 Coyote Hill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
415-494-4336
BrianSmith.pa@xerox.arpa
R. Smullyan
Dept. of Philosophy
026 Sycamore
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
812-335-4205
Prof. R. Stalnaker
Philosophy Dept.
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
607-256-5000
mmvy@cornella (bitnet)
Dr. L. Stockmeyer
IBM Almaden Research Center, K53/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 951920-6099
408-927-1789
stock@ibm-sj
Dr. M. Stokhof
Centrale Intefaculteit, afd. Taalphilosofie
Univ. van Amsterdam
Grimburgwal 10/13
1012 GA Amsterdam
The Netherlands
020-5254540
mcvax!uva!theo@seismo (subject: stogro)
Dr. H. R. Strong
IBM Almaden Research Center, K55/801
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA 95120-6099
408-927-1758
strong@ibm-sj (arpanet or csnet)
Tommy Chin-Chiu Tan
University of Chicago
Graduate School of Business
1101 E. 58th Street
Chicago, IL 60637
312-962-8628
Prof. R. Thomason
Dept. of Linguistics
U. of Pittsburg
Pittsburg, PA 15260
412-624-5791
thomason@c.cs.cmu.edu
Elais G.C. Thijsse
Tilburg University
Dept. of Langauge and Literature
P.O. Box 90153
5000 LE Tilburg
Netherlands
013-662158
PAAI@HTIKHT5.BITNET
Prof. S. Toueg
Computer Science Dept.
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
607-256-4052
Sam@cornell.arpa
Les Valiant
Harvard University,
Aiken Computation Laboratory,
Cambridge, MA 02138.
617-495-5817
Valiant@harvard.arpa
Dr. P. van Emde Boas
ITW/VPW, Univ. of Amsterdam
Roetersstraat 15
1018 WB Amsterdam
Netherlands
011-31-20-5223065
seismo!mcvax!uva!peter (uucp)
mcvax!uva!peter@seismo.css.gov (arpa)
Dr. M. Vardi
IBM Almaden Research Center
650 Harry Rd.
San Jose, CA (5120-6099
408-927-1784
vardi@ibm-sj
Bonnie Lynn Webber
U. of Pennsylvania
Dept. of Computer and Information Science
Philadelphia, PA 19104
215-898-7745
bonnie@upenn.csnet
Prof. S. Weinstein
Dept. of Philosophy
305 Loyan Hall/CN
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA 19104
215-898-1728
wienstein%upenn@csnet-relay
Pierre Wolper
AT&T Bell Laboratories
3D462
600 Mt. Avenue
Murray Hill, NJ 07974.
201-582-6435
pw!allegra@btl.csnet wol@sail
Prof. A. Yao
Dept. of Computer Science
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
415-497-3432
yao@su-score.arpa
∂05-Mar-86 1921 LES Facility Committee Minutes of 3/5/86
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
The Committee re-reviewed specific proposals for spending the remaining
$582k of departmental DARPA funds and pared the shopping list to match
available funds. [This budget is looser than I remember calculating
during the meeting. Did I forget something?]
PARALLEL COMPUTER $150k
The following configurations were reviewed:
Purchase Maintenance
(per year)
Alliant (4 CE, 4 IP, 16 MByte mem., 758 MB dsk) $322 k $47.6 k
or $168.5k now and $262.9k later * 431.4 47.6
(8 CE, 8 IP, 32 MB mem., 758 MB dsk.) 468.1 68.7
Encore
(8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 500 MB dsk, 16 port TIP) 96.8 10.5
(12 CPU, 24 MB mem., 500 MB dsk, 16 port TIP) 122.0 14.9
(20 CPU, 32 MB mem., 500 MB dsk., 16 port TIP) 161.6 22.1
Sequent
Balance 8000 (8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 792 MB dsk) 114.1 22.9
Balance 21000 (8 CPU, 16 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 125.6 25.2
Balance 21000 (12 CPU, 24 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 158.0 31.6
Balance 21000 (20 CPU, 32 MB mem., 792 MB dsk.) 209.6 41.9
* The Alliant proposal includes as an option a "free loan" of part of the
system for up to two years, with the stipulation that Alliant gets to use
it part of the time for demonstrations to prospective customers.
Several members of the department have expressed interest in getting the
Alliant machine in view of its high performance: Golub, Oliger, Ullman,
and Binford. The Committee decided unanimously to allocate $150k toward
the purchase of an Alliant system provided that enough additional funds
can be found to get at least a four processor system.
Failing that, $75k will be made available to McCarthy toward the purchase
of the parallel machine of his choice with the understanding that some
time on this machine would be made available to other members of the
department at operating cost.
DEPARTMENTAL WORKSTATIONS & GATEWAY $106.5 k
The following equipment is to be purchased to upgrade the
performance of Sun workstations in the department and to replace the
decrepit Golden gateway.
Description
1 Arpanet gateway (Protean) $ 15 k
1 Fileserver (Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles) 41.5
Additional memory modules for Sun 2/50 & 2/120 50
--------
$106.5 k
SPARES AND TEST EQUIPMENT $79.4 k
The following spare parts and test equipment are to be purchased
so as to reduce the cost and repair time for maintaining departmental
equipment already purchased.
Description
750 & peripheral spares $32 k
780 spares 18
Sun 3/50 spares 6.4
2 Oscilloscopes 12
Microprocessor/logic analyzer 11
-----
$79.4 k
PROJECT-SPECIFIC ACQUISITIONS $232.3 k
A number of workstations and file servers are to be purchased
with departmental funds and administratively assigned to various research
projects. These devices are to be treated like other equipment belonging
to projects and the projects that use them will be responsible for their
maintenance. However, the department administration reserves the right to
reassign or reallocate this equipment, including storage allocations in
fileservers.
Binford
1 Symbolics 3600 or 3640 $ 45 k
Cheriton
Upgrade 2 existing fileservers $ 50 k
2 "multicast agents" (Sun hardware) 29
-----
$ 79 k
Lantz
1 Sun 3/160 color workstation $ 26 k
1 Sun 3/50 workstation 6.3
------
$ 32.3 k
Manna
1 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether $ 11.5 k
Rindfleisch
1 Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles $ 41.5 k
2 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether @$11.5k 23
-------
$ 64.5 k
MISCELLANEOUS $13.8k
Freight and installation expenses.
-------
-------
TOTAL $582 k
NON-ALLIANT OPTION $42.7
In the event that only $75k is spent on the parallel computer,
the following additional project-specific purchases would be made and the
funding for miscellaneous expenses (freight, installation and whatnot)
would be increased to $46.1k.
Lantz
Replace Sun 3/50 with
Sun 3/160 color workstation $ 19.7 k
Manna
1 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether $ 11.5 k
Rindfleisch
1 4MB Sun 3/75 with Ether $ 11.5 k
∂05-Mar-86 1931 LES Facilities 3/5/86 Minutes Correction
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Near the end under the NON-ALLIANT OPTION change to read:
In the event that only $75k is spent on the parallel computer,
the following additional purchases would be made and the funding for
miscellaneous expenses (freight, installation and whatnot) would be
increased to $26.1k.
Additional memory boards for Suns $ 20 k
Lantz
. . .
∂05-Mar-86 2244 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS class
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 22:44:17 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 22:42:29-PST
From: Dah-Bin Kao <KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: VTSS class
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Prof. McCarthy:
I will not be able to attend the next two VTSS classes. I am scheduled
to give a talk in CIS review tomorrow(Thur. 3/6/86), and my Ph.D. orals
will be next Tuesday, 3/11/86. I will come to the class on Thursday, 3/13.
Thanks.
Dah-Bin Kao
-------
∂06-Mar-86 1330 RA Roxie France, Time Life Books
France from Time Life books called re pictures which she things you own and which
appear in Richard Wexelblat book. Her tel. (703) 838 7015.
∂06-Mar-86 1611 RA Cuthbert Hurd
Hurd called; he wants to have lunch with you next Wed. March 12, at noon
at ECCO. He will bring Beau Vrolyk with him. If it's ok with you, let me know and
I will call Hurd and make the reservation.
∂06-Mar-86 1730 CLT
we have a reservation at La Terrasse for 7:30, perhaps you could be home by 7
∂06-Mar-86 1815 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 6 March 1986
Previous Balance 7.85
Monthly Interest at 1.5% 0.12
Current Charges 6.00 (bicycle lockers)
0.60 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 14.57
Please deliver payments to Debbie Woodward, room 040, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: Payment recordation takes up to three weeks after delivery of a payment
(but not beyond the next billing date).
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.5% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
Your last Pony payment was recorded on 1/27/86.
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-Mar-86 2334 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA Symbolic Systems
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 23:21:37 PST
Date: Thu 6 Mar 86 21:59:40-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolic Systems
To: ROSENBLOOM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Peters@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
John@SU-CSLI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, SF@SU-CSLI.ARPA, PCohen@SRI-AI.ARPA,
Israel@SRI-AI.ARPA, Stan@SRI-AI.ARPA, RPerrault@SRI-AI.ARPA,
BrianSmith@XEROX.COM, Kaplan@XEROX.COM
cc: Nissenbaum@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Barwise@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Dear Colleagues,
Thank you all for agreeing to be associated with the new Symbolic
Systems program. Together with the original committee that developed
the program proposal (consisting of Herb Clark, Stuart Reges, Nils
Nilsson, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy, Ivan Sag, Helen Nissenbaum, and
me), you are the people whom we have listed in the Symbolic Systems
entry in "Courses and Degrees" (some on the Program Committee, and
some as "Affiliated Faculty" or "Affiliated Consulting Faculty").
Our proposal was approved by the faculty Senate today on a unanimous
voice vote. There was little discussion, mostly revolving around such
things as the name and funding.
I believe that the program still needs the approval of the Provost
before it becomes official, but that is certain to be given. Thus,
it is now safe to assume that it will be in place in the fall.
Bob Lindquist, of Stanford's Development Office, is currently in the
east, making inquiries at the Exxon Foundation and other possible
funding sources about the prospects for getting seed money for the
program. I expect to hear from him next week. If no outside
funding is found, the H&S deanery has committed itself to $25K/year
for the next five years to help run the program, plus some secretarial
support.
I have put in a request for space for a program office somewhere in
the quad; I am optimistic about getting some, but it may be some time
before I hear anything definite about this.
One remaining major question is who will chair the program. The choice
of a chair is up to the dean, though I have not been shy about offering
my opinions about who would be good. I hope that Jon Barwise will be
asked and will accept. I think this is likely, though neither the dean
nor Jon has committed himself.
I am pleased and excited that our proposal has been accepted. Thanks
to all of you for agreeing to be affiliated with the program.
Tom
-------
∂07-Mar-86 0908 RA be late
I will be late this morning.
Rutie
-----
∂07-Mar-86 0931 SJG meeting this AM at 10.30?
To: JMC, VAL
Vladimir and I agreed on this as a possible time, John. So I'll
assume it's still OK with him and wait for you to confirm it before
wandering upstairs.
Matt
∂07-Mar-86 1126 pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: colo(u)r graphics
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 11:26:07 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Mar 86 11:21:43 pst
Date: 7 Mar 1986 1121-PST (Friday)
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@su-navajo.arpa>
To: Fournier@Alain, <fournier@su-navajo.arpa>
Cc: facil@su-ai.ARPA, nilsson@su-score.ARPA
Subject: Re: colo(u)r graphics
In-Reply-To: Alain.Fournier, <fournier> / Thu, 6 Mar 86 15:36:08 pst.
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 86 15:36:08 pst
From: Alain.Fournier, <fournier>
Subject: colo(u)r graphics
To: pratt
Was the $20K estimated for the cost of Sun-2's frame buffers and
monitors
to come from the $500K or so the department has in "excess". If so
was that discussed recently?
I proposed it to the committee and (if I understood correctly what happened
to the proposal) they turned it down. Sorry about that. My understanding
is that none of this money is available for teaching equipment. We need
to consider other sources, I'll try to find out what sources exist.
-v
Here's a slightly tighter version.
∂07-Mar-86 1149 SJM
By all means, let's continue the totally irrelevant debate. I
write in answer to Jim Suhre's response (March 6) to my letter
of February 26 on whether agriculture is nature. Suhre says that cows
are nature, the vanishing of oak trees is nature, and the Dish itself is
nature. Sure, if you define nature as, say, "the system of all
phenomena of space and time; the physical universe" - one of the dictionary
definitions.
However, since the caption referred to technology and nature coexisting,
that's not what the Daily meant.
Suhre suggests that the caption could have simply read "Nature". By
his criterion, every picture could be thus captioned. It may seem
odd, but let's not reject it unthinkingly. All great innovations seem odd
at first. How about it, Daily? Why not caption all pictures "Nature"? Why
not headline all stories "Nature"? All editors would edit the "Nature"
section. The Daily could break new ground in journalism.
No, what was clearly meant by nature in this case is "Natural
scenery; as, wild nature". Or, "the objects and phenomena of nature, as
birds, flowers, weather, etc.". Not agriculture.
Suhre's just worried that I think humans are unnatural. Yes and
no. It's not always so bad to be unnatural.
Suhre's letter is disingenuous. Everybody knows what's meant
by nature here. If we just use the word to mean everything there is, why
go on nature walks? Why have nature preserves? Why denature alcohol?
S.J. McCarthy
Staff, Computer Science
∂07-Mar-86 1312 Carnese@SRI-KL.ARPA positive responsibility of computer professionals
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 13:09:12 PST
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1986 09:42 PST
From: Carnese@SRI-KL
To: jmc at su-ai
Subject: positive responsibility of computer professionals
John,
Brian Smith told me that you might be interested in giving a talk to the
Palo Alto chapter of CPSR on this topic. It seems quite interesting and
sure to cause at least a small amount of controversy.
I haven't scheduled a speaker yet for our April meeting. Would the evening
of Wednesday the 9th fit in your schedule?
-- Dan
∂07-Mar-86 1405 VAL Negation in NAIL!
To: avg@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
CC: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, "@UTEP.[NET,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
I was trying to make something precise from your remark about the relation
between circumscription and the treatment of negation in NAIL!. Here is what
I came up with.
First, the notation we use for circumscription: Circum(A; p; q1,...,qn) is the
result of circumscribing p in A with q1,...,qn allowed to vary. It expresses
that p cannot be made stronger without violating A even at the price of
changing q1,...,qn. For instance, let A be p(X) -> q(X). If we circumscribe
p with q allowed to vary then the result is that p is identically false (this
can be achieved if q is made identically false too). But if p is circumscribed
with nothing allowed to vary (n=0) then the result will be merely that p is
equivalent to q.
Now let A be a NAIL! program (without directives) which satisfies your condition:
(*) for any rule of the form
p(...) :- ... not q(...) ...
program A should not define q in terms of p.
For any predicate p, let R↓p be the set of predicates defined by A in terms
of p ("reachable" from p in the graph of dependencies for A).
CLAIM. The meaning of A is given by the conjunction A' of circumscriptions
Circum(A;p;R↓p) over all predicates p.
EXAMPLE. A is
p(a).
q(X) :- not p(X). (1)
A' is the conjunction of
Circum(A;p;q) and Circum(A;q).
The first formula says that p(X) iff X is a; the second says that q(X) iff
not p(X), i.e., iff X is different from a. If we rewrite the second rule as
p(X) :- not q(X) (2)
then A, as a predicate formula, will essentially remain the same, but the
circumscriptions will become
Circum(A;p) and Circum(A;q;p).
The second formula says that q(X) is identically false; the first says that
p(X) iff x is a or not q(X), i.e., that p(X) is identically true.
Generally, we can say that the meaning of a program is determined by two
things: first, by its "declarative" meaning (the meaning of the program viewed
as a formula); second, by the sets R↓p. This second component is not invariant
with respect to logically equivalent transfomations, such as the
transformation of (1) into (2).
What is then the role of condition (*)? Circumscription is unlike recursive
definitions, in the sense that it does not necessarilly provide a unique
definition for each predicate. It may happen that p(a) is true in one model
of circumscription and false in another. What should the machine in this
situation when asked about p(a)? The role of (*) is that it guarantees (I think)
that this doesn't happen:
THEOREM (?). A' has exactly one Herbrand model.
Vladimir
∂07-Mar-86 1421 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa Systems PhD Program
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 14:21:23 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Mar 86 14:19:44 pst
Date: 7 Mar 1986 1419-PST (Friday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: csl-faculty@sierra, csl-students@sierra
Cc: phd-program@sushi, phdcom@sail, phd@score
Subject: Systems PhD Program
Appended is a revised draft of our proposal, to be discussed at the
CSL faculty meeting on Monday. It is not our intention to have a
binding vote at that time, since additional feedback from students, in
particular, is desirable. Please direct all electronic mail at
phd-program@score, taking care to distinguish when you are discussing
this proposal and the more general proposal of the "CS PhD Committee".
******
REPORT OF THE SYSTEMS PHD PROGRAM COMMITTEE
Keith Lantz (Chairman), Miriam Blatt, Helen Davis,
Bruce Hitson, Mark Linton, and Doug Pan
Draft of 7 March 1986
1. Charge to the Committee
To devise a new structure for the PhD program in systems which would
satisfy the needs of CSL students in both the CS and EE departments.
2. Proposal
In sympathy with the proposals of the CS PhD Program Committee, we
believe that systems PhD students need to demonstrate:
1. breadth in the overall area of computer science and electrical
engineering
2. breadth in computer systems
3. sufficient depth in an area to prepare the student for research
in that area
4. ability to follow through on a research program, culminating in
a thesis
A student qualifies as a ``systems PhD student'' if his principal advisor
is a CSL faculty member and, in the opinion of both advisor and student,
the student is doing a ``systems thesis''. There will be cases where the
principal advisor is a CSL faculty member, but the student is doing, for
example, a ``theory thesis''; such students may not be subject to the
requirements that follow.
Unfortunately, systems students currently are treated quite differently
depending on which department they happen to be in. First, CS admissions
policy is to admit only those students who are assumed to be capable of
getting a PhD; EE admissions policy is to defer that decision until the
qual. Consequently, the format of the departments' respective breadth
requirements is markedly different. Second, CS addresses systems depth via
an exam, whereas EE addresses it via course requirements.
In the ideal, we would prefer that these differences be eradicated.
Realizing that this will not be possible in the foreseeable future --
primarily due to the different admissions policies -- we have divided our
proposals into ``resolutions'' and ``recommendations''. The former are
submitted for adoption now; the latter for consideration in long-term
planning.
2.1. Resolutions
We submit the following resolutions, which may be voted on independently:
1. modifications to the systems breadth exam -- for CS students
only
2. introduction of a formal thesis proposal
3. minor modifications to the thesis oral
2.1.1. The Systems Breadth Exam
We propose that the CS systems qualifying exam be revised as follows:
- The main part of the exam will be consist of a 3-hour written
exam in 3 depth areas (out of n, where n currently = 6).
- A 1-hour oral exam may be used to supplement the written exams in
questionable cases. No other form of conditional pass will be
offered.
- The exam must be passed by the end of the student's third year,
regardless of when the CS comprehensive is passed. However,
students should target to pass both exams by the end of their
second year.
As now, EE students will not be required to take this exam. Due to the
extent of their course requirements, it would be inappropriate to impose an
additional hurdle. However, they should be given the opportunity to take
the exam if they wish!
2.1.2. The Thesis Proposal
We propose to formalize the notion of a thesis proposal. The intent is
to ensure both the student's preparation for research in a particular area
and the faculty members' early involvement in that research.
The thesis proposal will consist of both a written component and an oral
component. The written component will consist of a written thesis
proposal. The oral component will consist of a presentation by the student
of his proposal, followed by a question and answer session.
The following additional guidelines are proposed:
- The oral presentation will be approximately 30-45 minutes in
length.
- The oral component will take no longer than two hours.
- The oral component will not be open to the public. Rather...
- The ``audience'' will consist of the student's prospective
reading committee, which must contain at least one CSL faculty
member, and one ``random'' CSL faculty member who is not directly
involved in the student's proposed research area -- for a total
of at least two CSL faculty members.
- The thesis proposal should be approximately 10 pages in length.
It must be submitted to the ``audience'' at least two weeks prior
to the oral presentation.
- The thesis proposal (and presentation thereof) should describe
the planned area of research, justification, and an overview of
previous work. Put another way: ``What's the problem? What has
been done? What needs doing? What are you going to do?" It is
not expected that the student should have a detailed grasp of all
the implications of what is being proposed; that is one of the
areas on which faculty are expected to provide useful comments
and suggestions. Possible outcomes of the proposal are:
1. The proposal requires a major rework and the student should
present it again.
2. The proposal needs minor work -- to be reflected in a
revised written proposal. However, another oral
presentation is not required.
3. The proposal is approved without modification.
The last two results are grounds for signing the student's G81.
- This requirement as a whole may be met at any time after the
student completes his systems breadth requirement, but no later
than the middle of his fourth year (end of 10th quarter) in the
PhD program -- subject also to the usual constraints imposed by
faculty schedules, etc. The student is responsible for
scheduling the exam.
- In the event that the student changes reading committees or
thesis topic, he may be required to submit a new proposal and/or
make another presentation, at the discretion of the new reading
committee.
2.1.3. The Thesis Oral
We propose the following two minor requirements with respect to the
thesis oral:
1. Formalize the increasingly common practice of not permitting a
student to take the oral before submitting a complete draft of
this thesis to his reading committee. Specifically, a student
must submit such a draft no later than two weeks before his
scheduled oral.
2. Require the reading committee to return that draft, with
comments, at or before the time of the oral.
2.1.4. Who's Affected and When?
We propose that the changes to the systems breadth exam be made effective
as of September 1986. Note that the only students affected are CS
students, that they already have such an exam, and, therefore, that the
changes constitute a relatively minor change in the ``syllabus''.
The thesis proposal and the changes to the thesis oral can be made
effective immediately upon adoption. The thesis proposal will be required
of anyone who has yet to file a G81. The thesis oral changes will affect
anyone who has yet to have their oral.
2.2. Recommendations
As noted above, we believe that the ideal systems program would have one
set of requirements for systems PhD students regardless of which department
they are in. The fact that CS and EE students are treated differently only
serves as another barrier to making CSL a joint laboratory. Unfortunately,
the above resolutions lead to commonality only at the point that the
student presents his thesis proposal. While this is better than the
current situation, it is not as good as we would like.
Working backward from the thesis proposal, we would prefer, first, that
all students satisfy their systems breadth requirements in the same way.
This could be achieved in one of at least three ways:
1. Considerably reduce the (post-qual) course requirements for EE
students and have them take the CS systems breadth exam (as
refined herein).
2. Eliminate the systems breadth exam and require CS students to
take courses equivalent to those required of EE students.
3. A compromise between the two.
We currently favor the first approach.
Assuming the systems breadth requirement could be made common, the next
target is the departmental breadth requirement. Changing this would
require that admissions policies be changed, which appears unlikely.
Nevertheless, assuming it were possible, we suggest that CSL is
``spiritually'' closer to CS than to EE and, therefore, that its admissions
policies and breadth requirements be identical to those for CS.
3. Discussion
We believe that adoption of this new set of requirements will
considerably strengthen the systems PhD program. Because these
requirements are in line with those proposed by the CS PhD Program
Committee, and because the report of that committee included a lengthy
discussion of the basic motivations and tradeoffs of these requirements, we
refer the reader to that report. The rest of the discussion here focuses
on the differences between our proposals and those of the CS PhD Program
Committee, especially in light of any additional ``problems'' that arise
due to our trying to solve problems for two departments rather than just
one.
First and foremost, we have every reason to believe that the students
themselves are in favor of these proposals. Indeed, it was primarily the
students who caused us to abandon our previous proposal (for adding only a
thesis proposal ``exam'') in favor of a combination of systems breadth and
thesis proposal.
With respect to the thesis proposal, we note first that many faculty have
already required written thesis proposals of their students. However, it
is still rare to see reading committees meeting at this point in time to
discuss the proposal face-to-face. We believe that the proposal presented
here provides a structure whereby both the student and his reading
committee can more effectively channel their efforts into producing a
thesis. The oral component, in particular, encourages more active
interaction between students and faculty at an early stage in the evolution
of the thesis. The student should receive more coherent (unified) feedback
and the faculty will better appreciate just what they are committing to
support -- prior to signing on as a reading committee member. This latter
fact, in particular, should avoid the all-too-common problem of oral
defenses and pre-signing periods where faculty make strong complaints and
require extensive changes. If a faculty member expresses his approval at
thesis proposal time, and the actual thesis comes in with a couple of years
of that, then the student should be assured of approval (of content if not
presentation) at orals/signing time. All in all, the entire procedure is
intended to be a constructive review of the proposed research topic, not a
``pass or fail'' exam per se.
Primarily for logistical reasons, we had initially proposed a ``thesis
area exam'' that subsumed both the thesis proposal and the systems breadth
exam proposed here. While even this would be better than the current
system, several faculty and many more students were quite adamant in their
support for having separate requirements for breadth and depth.
However, care must be taken to ensure the quality of the breadth exam.
The existing CS qualifying exam has been plagued by inconsistency,
especially between its oral and written variant. While the former provided
a better opportunity for asking interdisciplinary questions, the 1-hour
time limit made it difficult to ask enough questions in each area to ensure
the sought after breadth. The written variant, on the other hand, with its
4-hour time limit, gave ample opportunity for demonstrating breadth, but it
was difficult to ask cross-disciplinary questions. In either case, the
difficulty of the questions was often suspect, due in large part to the
inadequate treatment of systems in the CS comprehensive. We are operating
under the assumption that this last problem will be solved, pursuant to
ratification of the proposals of the CS PhD Program Committee.
All things considered, we believe a written exam to be more effective and
therefore propose it. We expect to be able to introduce some
cross-disciplinary questions in that framework, but the bulk of such can
safely be relegated to the question and answer session associated with the
oral component of thesis proposal. Should someone be a borderline case on
the systems breadth exam, we have proposed a supplementary oral exam.
Indeed, to solve what has habitually been a logistical nightmare, we have
proposed that the supplementary exam be used in place of any other form of
conditional pass.
We object to the proposal by the CS PhD Program Committee that any three
faculty can define an area. This would mean, for example, that three
faculty could create an area breadth exam that would be completely subsumed
by an existing area exam -- for example, a ``database breadth'' exam would
be completely subsumed in the ``systems breadth'' exam. The proposal
should be refined to avoid such problems.
At first glance, it would seem that a student would require more time to
clear the proposed set of hurdles than it takes to clear the existing sets.
On the contrary, we posit that the proposed set of hurdles may actually
shorten the length of time taken, simply by channeling the students'
efforts in a more productive fashion. On the other hand, we must balance
our desire to get students out sooner against the pedagogic and practical
advantages of letting students ``experiment'' or simply ``hack''.
As to whether the thesis proposal, written or oral components, should be
open to the public, we see no advantage to make it public. It can only
serve to place undue stress on the student involved and perhaps delay the
time it takes for him to be ``willing'' to clear that hurdle. Moreover, in
a public forum, it is more difficult for the examining committee to
question the student effectively. We expect that students will practice
their presentations in forums of their choosing, as is typically done with
thesis orals, for example.
∂07-Mar-86 1451 RA post office
I am going to the post office to pick up a parcel for you from Germany.
∂07-Mar-86 1452 LES
∂07-Mar-86 1233 RPG MIPS etc.
We already do a RISC machine. There are several others we are
considering, and MIPS Inc is one of them. I understand that
the MIPS processors are not all the same, so... Also, if someone else
is defining the `symbolic' assembly stuff, you'd better duck.
-rpg-
∂07-Mar-86 1639 hpm@rover.ri.cmu.edu Re: computer controlled vehicles
Received: from ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 16:39:37 PST
Date: 7 Mar 1986 19:01-EST
From: Hans.Moravec@ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: computer controlled vehicles
Message-Id: <510624097/hpm@ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU>
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's mail message of 07 Mar 86 1530 PST
Still pitiful. A few recent road followers (Japanese and Darpa sponsered)
sort of work using 80% effective road locators with accomodating
and prediction helped stereo or (more often) edge and color region
segmenters. On top of the pixel crunchers are controllers not much
fancier than Rod Schmidt's line follower. We have one that can sometimes
turn properly at intersections. Kubota has some experimental
laser beacon guided earth movers. None of these big systems is going
to be let loose in human company for quite a while - they're much too
dumb and dangerous.
I wrote an article on smaller mobile robots for Salamander books -
it has a lot of good pictures - I'll send you a copy.
-- Hans
∂07-Mar-86 1914 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Negation in NAIL!
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 19:14:28 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Mar 86 19:16:39 pst
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 86 19:16:39 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Re: Negation in NAIL!
To: VAL@Sail
Cc: "@UTEP.[NET, JMC@Sail, VAL]"@Sail, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-Score,
ullman@diablo
Your examples do not address the condition (*) but the role of that condition
is to make life easy for us. Recall that condition (*) rules out a
program like (reading :- as "if")
p(X, Y) :- r(X,U), s(V,Y), not q(U,V).
q(X, Y) :- r(X,U), s(V,Y), p(U,V).
q(X, Y) :- e(X,Y).
together with some facts about e, r, s, because p and q are
interdependent and have "not" in a rule. E.g., if the database has
r(1,2) r(2,1) s(3,4) s(4,3)
then
q(2,3)
is in all models, but will not be derived by finite failure techniques
that I am aware of; subsumption-resolution or factoring is needed.
(Anyone game to try this on Prolog, with trace?)
We are embarrassed to deliver a wrong answer,
or go into a loop, so we don't allow the question in NAIL.
Hope this sheds some light. -- Allen
∂08-Mar-86 1122 SJG transportation to/from Reasoning About Knowledge workshop
To: "@RAK.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Hi Guys,
I'm writing to ask a favor about Halpern's conference, and
possibly to offer one.
I'd like to fly down from San Jose, so I'm looking for:
(1) Someone to take my luggage down, meet me at
Monterey airport, and take me back there, and
(2) Some brave soul interested in flying down as
well (there's one spare seat in the plane)
I'll be happy to take anyone satisfying (1) for a ride while
we're all down there. The trick with (2) is that you
should be warned that I intend to spend at least some fraction
of the trip upside down.
Everything is, of course, weather permitting.
Matt Ginsberg
∂09-Mar-86 1203 BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA cs 306 grade from Fall 85
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 12:03:02 PST
Date: Sun 9 Mar 86 12:00:40-PST
From: Robert Bury <BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: cs 306 grade from Fall 85
To: givan@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189390286.12.BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Professor McCarthy & Bob Givan:
I was a remote Honors Coop student in cs306 last fall, taking the class via
tutored videotape at HP in Fort Collins, Colorado.
As of yet, I have not received grades for assignments #2, #3, the final exam
and the course. I would appreciate your help in completing this course and
getting a final grade.
Thanks for looking into this.
Robert Bury Hewlett Packard Fort Collins, Colorado Honors Coop Remote
-------
∂09-Mar-86 1304 EVAN@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: cartoon
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 13:04:14 PST
Date: Sun 9 Mar 86 13:03:10-PST
From: Evan Kirshenbaum <evan@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: cartoon
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: evan@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 9 Mar 86 12:45:00-PST
I wasn't the one, but I think I know the cartoon you're talking about.
It's by Sidney Harris and ran in American Scientist. I have it in his
collection "What's so funny about science?". The book is at home, so
I can't give you the publisher, etc. right now, but I can look it up
when I get home.
evan
-------
∂09-Mar-86 1520 VAL cooperating experts
It occured to me that the idea is somewhat alike the architecture of
mathematics a la Bourbaki. Their books on algebra, general topology, etc. are
like experts in specialized fields. If this is the right analogy then we can
expect this: a time expert may be a good idea, but, in addition to it, we'll
need experts on specialized fields that will handle those facts about time
that relate it to more specific domains. It's like fact about real numbers:
some of them are purely algebraic, some purely topological, etc., and there
are sufficiently many general facts to form separate volumes on each category;
still, some information is more specific, so there will be also a volume on
functions of real variable with this more specific information.
∂09-Mar-86 1533 VAL Edward Zelenin
If you know any other people who might like to see his work then, of course,
you are welcome to tell them or bring them with you. (My address is 1050
Miller, and it's at 9 tonight). Do you think Nils would be interested?
∂09-Mar-86 1739 @SRI-BISHOP.ARPA:Kaelbling@SRI-AI.ARPA Penguin cartoon
Received: from SRI-BISHOP.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 17:39:32 PST
Received: from XITLCATL.SRI by SRI-BISHOP.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 18052; Sun 9-Mar-86 17:41:04-PST
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 86 17:41 PST
From: Leslie Kaelbling <Kaelbling@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Penguin cartoon
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <860309174119.1.PACK@XITLCATL.SRI>
I sent it to you in ID mail from SRI, along with a copy of the paper I
wrote with Stan. I don't have the reference right now, but I'll try to
remember to bring it to your talk tomorrow morining.
- Leslie
∂09-Mar-86 2249 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Reminder re Trustee's Dinner
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 22:48:53 PST
Date: Sun 9 Mar 86 22:51:03-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder re Trustee's Dinner
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189508684.21.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, please forward this msg to Carolyn.
Just a reminder that the dinner with the two Stanford trustees and their
wives is tomorrow (Monday) night at 6:30PM at our house.
Ed
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0601 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: phone call
Received: from IPTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 06:01:10 PST
Received: by ipto.ARPA (4.12/4.7)
id AA15234; Mon, 10 Mar 86 09:01:51 est
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 09:01:45-EST
From: Stephen Squires <SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA>
Subject: Re: phone call
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(171)+TOPSLIB(113) 10-Mar-86 09:01:45.IPTO.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of 09 Mar 86 2359 PST
OK
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0912 AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA next visit
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 09:08:24 PST
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1986 11:06 CST
Message-ID: <AI.BOYER.12189620745.BABYL@MCC.ARPA>
From: AI.BOYER@MCC.ARPA
To: Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL@SU-AI>
Cc: AI.LENAT@MCC.ARPA, AI.WOODY@MCC.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI
Subject: next visit
In-reply-to: Msg of 7 Mar 1986 13:36-CST from Vladimir Lifschitz <VAL at SU-AI.ARPA>
I have checked with Woody and Doug. April 7 and 8 will be good
days for your and John's next visit.
∂10-Mar-86 1409 RA reminder
You have a meeting with Nils at 2:00 today.
∂10-Mar-86 1359 VAL re: Negation in NAIL!
To: avg@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
CC: "@UTEP.[NET,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
[In reply to message from avg@diablo sent Fri, 7 Mar 86 19:16:39 pst.]
It seems to me that the role of condition (*) is more fundamental than what
your example suggests. Even with the full resolution theorem prover built in
your system, you would have been in trouble without (*). Consider this program:
p(X) :- not p(Y), q(X,Y). (1)
If q(1,2) and q(2,1) are in the database, what would you consider to be the
right answer to the query p(X)? Neither p(1) nor p(2) logically follows from
(1) and the given facts about q, so the set of answers is apparently empty.
But then the interpretation of "not" in (1) as failure tells you that both
1 and 2 should be included in the answers! So we have a semantical difficulty
without (*), it's not just a question of computational complexity.
Vladimir
∂10-Mar-86 1549 RA Roger Wainwright, University of Talsa
Wainright called re your scheduled talk April 1 and 2. He needs the title
of your talk. You can call him (918) 592 6000 ext. 2228, or let me know,
and I will call him.
Thanks,
∂10-Mar-86 1549 RA John Nafeh
Nafeh would like you to call him (408) 943 1711.
∂10-Mar-86 1738 LES Parallel computer buy
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
I mentioned your idea to John McCarthy. He would like to discuss it some
time soon. How about tomorrow (Tuesday) preferably at 3:45pm or later,
else at 1:00pm?
∂10-Mar-86 2205 LLW@S1-A.ARPA Late CSD Application
Received: from S1-A.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 22:05:05 PST
Date: 10 Mar 86 2159 PST
From: Lowell Wood <LLW@S1-A.ARPA>
Subject: Late CSD Application
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: LLW@S1-A.ARPA
John, I'm writing to ask your intercession in the case of an untimely
application for admission to CSD from a really outstanding young man,
Ramin Zabih, currently a first-year graduate student in MIT's EE&CS Dept.
Ramin (whose father, a staff member of the Hoover Institution, you may
have met) has been more-or-less planning to do his dissertation research
at MIT, under the direction of either Tom Knight or Rich Zippel, probably
in the area of computer mathematics (as he is currently struggling fairly
earnestly to decide whether he's a mathematician or a computer scientist).
As the MIT Revolving Assistant Professorship roulette wheel spun down this
year, however, neither Knight or Zippel got tenure; Knight will be
spending the next two years (at least) at Symbolics CRC, and Zippel's
plans appear to be thoroughly up in the air (he seems to have a chance of
being reviewed for tenure next year, on some sort of ad hoc post-deadline
basis).
When Ramin got the word that neither of his intended advisors would be
around for the duration of his dissertation work, he asked my advice; I
suggested that he seriously consider moving the site of his graduate work
to the Bay Area, taking courses at both SU and UCB, and turning his
dissertation into someone appropriate at SU/CSD. He was startled that he
might have this option for the coming academic year, as the nominal
application deadline was past, but I encouraged him to do so anyway, in
the hope that you (and perhaps other like-minded faculty members) might be
willing to intercede with the bureaucracy in his (very unusual) case.
Ramin is one of the half-dozen brightest CS types I've run into during the
past two decades of Hertz Foundation interviewing, in a class with Guy
Steele and Lee Guibas in terms of sheer intellectual strength and depth.
He unquestionably was the best to graduate from the CS end of MIT EE&CS
Dept. last year, and is also the star of this year's graduate freshman
class (in my judgment, as well as that of people at MIT and in the S-1
Project--where he worked last summer). I will be flabbergasted if he
isn't awarded a Hertz Fellowship at the end of next week, when these
matters are decided for the coming year; he didn't apply for one last
year, as he was informed that these awards were based at least partly on
need.
I was surprised to see very recently that his MIT transcript didn't
contain straight As; this is to be understood, I believe, as an expression
of his being so confident of his ability to blaze his way out of any
academic hole with 48 hours of all-out effort that he's occasionally let
things slip so far that an outraged faculty member has punished him with a
B, no matter how strongly he may have finished on a final exam. It is
only because he is so extraordinary that I'm appealing to you to intervene
to get his untimely application for admission to CSD this coming September
considered.
I'm mailing you a copy of his application to CSD, for your review. I
understand that he'll be in the Bay Area next week (during MIT Spring
Break), and have suggested that he come by and meet you. (Jerry Sussman
appears to be leading the MIT Departmental effort to persuade Ramin that
he's doing the Wrong Thing by seriously considering moving to Stanford--
I've been surprised at the depth of partisan feeling back there about SU
CSD, in this case and in previous ones. I know that you and others will
be able to convince him that CSD is populated by reasonable folks!) If
you would care to discuss his case in any respect, please give me a call
at (415) 422-9058 anytime this evening, tomorrow, or next week (as I'll be
leaving on travel late tomorrow PM for the rest of the week).
Thanks for your consideration of this matter. If you get Ramin to come to
Stanford, you'll be doing very well by the Department, and you may even
land yourself an extraordinarily fine student!
Lowell
zippel, knight, sussman will praise him.
∂10-Mar-86 2243 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: meeting
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 22:43:30 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Mon, 10 Mar 86 22:43:37 pst
Date: 10 Mar 1986 2243-PST (Monday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: les@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: meeting
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 10 Mar 86 2230 PST.
Unfortunately, I have a lunch engagement in Sunnyvale and probably
can't be back on campus till about 1:45.
John
∂11-Mar-86 0633 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 06:32:59 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Tue, 11 Mar 86 06:33:13 pst
Date: 11 Mar 1986 0633-PST (Tuesday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 10 Mar 86 2335 PST.
I'll be out of town Wed and Thurs; Friday 8AM or lunch are both OK.
John
∂11-Mar-86 0643 rjk@mitre-bedford.ARPA Situational Calculus
Received: from MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 06:43:00 PST
Full-Name: Ruben J. Kleiman
Message-Id: <8603111443.AA05067@mitre-bedford.ARPA>
Organization: The MITRE Corp., Bedford, MA
To: jmc@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: Situational Calculus
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 09:42:58 -0500
From: rjk@mitre-bedford.ARPA
I should be interested in obtaining a copy (if available) of your
lecture at SRI on March 10 on Situational Calculus. Of course, I am
familiar with your past thinking on this and am interested on
recent developments, even if sketchy.
Thanks and regards,
Ruben J. Kleiman
rjk@MITRE-BEDFORD
∂11-Mar-86 1049 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Reminder - meeting today 2:15
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 10:48:09 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 10:46:23-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Reminder - meeting today 2:15
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In 301. --t
-------
∂11-Mar-86 1135 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.ARPA Photo
Received: from CS.UCL.AC.UK by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 11:35:23 PST
Received: from aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk by 44a.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id a002312; 11 Mar 86 15:38 GMT
From: Alan Bundy <bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 14:23:30 GMT
Message-Id: <23861.8603111423@aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk>
Via:
To: jmc <jmc%su-ai.arpa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Photo
Cc: bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa
John
Thanks for the photo. It is lovely. I have not had mine
developed yet, but will send the one of you when I have.
Alan
PS - do you have a reference for the work you did representing
∂11-Mar-86 1315 rjk@mitre-bedford.ARPA Situation Calculus
Received: from MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 13:15:00 PST
Full-Name: Ruben J. Kleiman
Message-Id: <8603112115.AA18677@mitre-bedford.ARPA>
Organization: The MITRE Corp., Bedford, MA
To: jmc@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: Situation Calculus
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 16:14:56 -0500
From: rjk@mitre-bedford.ARPA
Thanks for replying to my query.
rjk
∂11-Mar-86 1537 CLT phon call
Degliantoni (sp??) called from U of Milano re Milano conference in April
He will call again tomorrow around 4pm. I gave him your office number
and said you would probably be there.
∂11-Mar-86 1717 LES re: meeting
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent 11 Mar 1986 1703-PST.]
I just cornered JMC and found that he will be gone Friday.
How about any time Monday or Tuesday of next week?
∂11-Mar-86 1736 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: uucp through the ethertips
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 17:36:20 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 11 Mar 86 17:33:18 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA04215; Tue, 11 Mar 86 17:33:49 pst
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 17:33:49 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8603120133.AA04215@coraki.uucp>
To: Dan Kolkowitz <navajo!kolk@su-navajo.arpa>
Cc: facil@su-ai.ARPA
Subject: Re: uucp through the ethertips
In-Reply-To: message of Tue, 11 Mar 86 10:47:13 pst.
<8603112005.AA03905@coraki.uucp>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 10:47:13 pst
From: Dan Kolkowitz <navajo!kolk>
Subject: uucp through the ethertips
To: pratt
I believe that you can execute uucp through the ethertips by
specifying one more level of indirection in the "login" portion
of the L.sys file
I tried this already. What you say is true in theory but not in
practice: the tip can't accept data typed at 1200 baud sufficiently
reliably to stay in sync. The error-correction algorithm presently
used by uucp only works for reasonably reliable lines, it falls apart
altogether for the level of errors induced by typing fast at an
ethertip. I doubt whether any error-correction algorithm can usefully
recover from that level of errors.
From the beginning I have wanted an ethertip that was symmetric
with respect to supported data rate. This has never happened. This is
a serious limitation of ethertips.
I would like to see a datarate-symmetric dialup service that supports
both uucp and tip (= phone telnet) service (and kermit if there is
a demand, the software is there). At present this service is provided
in an ad hoc way on those hosts which have uucp wizards. It would be
nice if this were made a CSD-CF service.
-v
∂11-Mar-86 1929 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 19:29:35 PST
Received: from ohio-state.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 11 Mar 86 19:27:08-PST
Return-Path: <CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Received: from OSU-20 (osu-20.ARPA) by ohio-state.ARPA (4.12/6.1.OSU-CIS)
id AA03173; Tue, 11 Mar 86 22:29:07 est
Message-Id: <8603120329.AA03173@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 22:28:54-EST
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Subject: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
To: JMC@SU-SCORE.arpa
Cc: Lerman@SRI-KL.arpa, Fikes@USC-ECL.arpa, Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA,
JosephsoN%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA, Huff-C%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA
John,
The Darpa Strategic Computing Initiative program
review meeting will be held at Ohio State in October of this
year. A planning
committee consisting of myself, Rich Fikes of Intellicorp, Lee
Erman of Teknowledge and Allen Sears of Darpa has been looking
into the desirability of holding a workshop immediately
following this meeting. The workshop will be on "High Level
Tools for Knowledge-Based System Design." Our opinion is that
there is widespread interest in the new generation tools that
tend to be less "universal" and more task-specific, and this
is a good time hold such a workshop. Currently, plans are under way
to enlarge the planning committee to include a number of additional
names. I am writing to you now to request approval (and if necessary
to find out what additional information will be needed) for the
Workshop. We'd certainly like AAAI endorsement, and a grant
of $5K for preparation of announcements, support of graduate
student travel, etc., would be particularly appreciated.
(I was earlier awarded a similar grant for the 1984 AIM Workshop
at OSU, and it was one of the more successful AIM workshops.)
I am enclosing a description of the purposes of the Workshop.
The dates (as of now; subject to minor variation) are October 9-10,
1986. In order to encourage maximum discussion and to encourage
a "workshop" atmosphere, no rpoceedings are planned, but
extended abstracts of presentations will be made availabel to the
participants. It is planned that one of us will write a
summary of the workshop for AI Magazine. (I wrote one on
the 84 AIM Workshop, which appeared in AI Magazine.)
It is currently planned that we will ask submission of an
extended abstract or summary by July 1, and authors will be
notified by August 1. We also expect to have a certain
number of graduate students researchers who will be
attending to participate inthe discussions.
Please let me know what other information will be needed.
Thanks for your and AAAI's consideration of this request.
Chandra
---------
Workshop Abstract
It has become increasingly clear to builders of knowledge based
systems that no single representational formalism or control
construct is optimal for encoding the wide variety of types of
knowledge and problem solving strategies that are commonly
needed. The structures specific to diagnosis appear ill adapted
for use in design tasks, and those for prediction seem unsuitable
for intelligent data retrieval. Thus, there appears to be a need
for task-specific constructs at levels of organization above
those of rules, frames, and predicate calculus, and the control
structures typically associated with them. There is a similar
move to higher level tools for knowledge acquisition and
explanation as well.
The objective of this workshop is to bring together theoreticians
and builders of knowledge based systems to explore the need and
prospects for tools that make use of such higher level
structures.
Presentations will be invited on all aspects of high level tools
for knowledge based systems, including (but not restricted to)
these topics:
- The powers and limitations of existing knowledge
engineering tools and techniques.
- Delineating the ``natural kinds'' of knowledge based
problem solving that can provide the basis for task
specific tools.
- Matching AI techniques to tasks.
- Design proposals for high level knowledge engineering
tools.
- Integrating task-specific tools into ``toolboxes'' for
building systems that perform complex problem solving
tasks.
-------
∂11-Mar-86 1929 LES re: meeting
To: JMC, CLT
∂11-Mar-86 1927 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa re: meeting
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 19:27:40 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Tue, 11 Mar 86 19:27:54 pst
Date: 11 Mar 1986 1927-PST (Tuesday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc:
Subject: re: meeting
In-Reply-To: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA> / 11 Mar 86 1717 PST.
I'll be gone Monday and Tuesday, back Wednesday afternoon.
John
∂11-Mar-86 1931 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA [B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra@OSU-20>: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop]
Received: from OHIO-STATE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 19:30:59 PST
Return-Path: <CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Received: from OSU-20 (osu-20.ARPA) by ohio-state.ARPA (4.12/6.1.OSU-CIS)
id AA03210; Tue, 11 Mar 86 22:31:13 est
Message-Id: <8603120331.AA03210@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 22:31:04-EST
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Subject: [B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra@OSU-20>: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop]
To: JMC@SU-AI.arpa
I am forwarding a message I had sent to JMC@SU-SCORE, since
I see that the correct net address is SU-AI. Sorry if you
get too many copies of this. -- Chandra
---------------
Mail-From: CHANDRA created at 11-Mar-86 22:28:54
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 22:28:54-EST
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra@OSU-20>
Subject: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
To: JMC%SU-SCORE.arpa@OSU-EDDIE
cc: Lerman%SRI-KL.arpa@OSU-EDDIE, Fikes%USC-ECL.arpa@OSU-EDDIE, Chandra@OSU-20,
JosephsoN@OSU-20, Huff-C@OSU-20
John,
The Darpa Strategic Computing Initiative program
review meeting will be held at Ohio State in October of this
year. A planning
committee consisting of myself, Rich Fikes of Intellicorp, Lee
Erman of Teknowledge and Allen Sears of Darpa has been looking
into the desirability of holding a workshop immediately
following this meeting. The workshop will be on "High Level
Tools for Knowledge-Based System Design." Our opinion is that
there is widespread interest in the new generation tools that
tend to be less "universal" and more task-specific, and this
is a good time hold such a workshop. Currently, plans are under way
to enlarge the planning committee to include a number of additional
names. I am writing to you now to request approval (and if necessary
to find out what additional information will be needed) for the
Workshop. We'd certainly like AAAI endorsement, and a grant
of $5K for preparation of announcements, support of graduate
student travel, etc., would be particularly appreciated.
(I was earlier awarded a similar grant for the 1984 AIM Workshop
at OSU, and it was one of the more successful AIM workshops.)
I am enclosing a description of the purposes of the Workshop.
The dates (as of now; subject to minor variation) are October 9-10,
1986. In order to encourage maximum discussion and to encourage
a "workshop" atmosphere, no rpoceedings are planned, but
extended abstracts of presentations will be made availabel to the
participants. It is planned that one of us will write a
summary of the workshop for AI Magazine. (I wrote one on
the 84 AIM Workshop, which appeared in AI Magazine.)
It is currently planned that we will ask submission of an
extended abstract or summary by July 1, and authors will be
notified by August 1. We also expect to have a certain
number of graduate students researchers who will be
attending to participate inthe discussions.
Please let me know what other information will be needed.
Thanks for your and AAAI's consideration of this request.
Chandra
---------
Workshop Abstract
It has become increasingly clear to builders of knowledge based
systems that no single representational formalism or control
construct is optimal for encoding the wide variety of types of
knowledge and problem solving strategies that are commonly
needed. The structures specific to diagnosis appear ill adapted
for use in design tasks, and those for prediction seem unsuitable
for intelligent data retrieval. Thus, there appears to be a need
for task-specific constructs at levels of organization above
those of rules, frames, and predicate calculus, and the control
structures typically associated with them. There is a similar
move to higher level tools for knowledge acquisition and
explanation as well.
The objective of this workshop is to bring together theoreticians
and builders of knowledge based systems to explore the need and
prospects for tools that make use of such higher level
structures.
Presentations will be invited on all aspects of high level tools
for knowledge based systems, including (but not restricted to)
these topics:
- The powers and limitations of existing knowledge
engineering tools and techniques.
- Delineating the ``natural kinds'' of knowledge based
problem solving that can provide the basis for task
specific tools.
- Matching AI techniques to tasks.
- Design proposals for high level knowledge engineering
tools.
- Integrating task-specific tools into ``toolboxes'' for
building systems that perform complex problem solving
tasks.
-------
-------
∂11-Mar-86 2251 HX.RLS@Lindy
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 22:51:43 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 22:54:01 PST
From: Bob Semans <HX.RLS@SU-Forsythe.ARPA>
To: JMC@SAIL
The RT instructions set is detailed in the RT PC technical
Reference Manual, I have put one on order for you and,
in the interim, I will try to find one I can borrow for you.
The 4.2 Assembler is part of the ACIS 4.2A system installed
on your RT and should be referenced in the 4.2 documentation
binder.
1
∂11-Mar-86 2359 avg@su-aimvax.arpa re: Negation in NAIL!
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 23:59:13 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 12 Mar 86 00:01:31 pst
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 00:01:31 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: re: Negation in NAIL!
To: VAL@Sail
Cc: "@UTEP.[NET, JMC@Sail, VAL]"@Sail, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-Score,
ullman@diablo
Vladimir's last example is another excellent illustration of the problems
that arise with "recursive negation by failure to prove." Some comments,
but first, here is a replay of his message:
> It seems to me that the role of condition (*) is more fundamental than what
> your example suggests. Even with the full resolution theorem prover built in
> your system, you would have been in trouble without (*)
> Consider this program:
> p(X) :- not p(Y), q(X,Y). (1)
> If q(1,2) and q(2,1) are in the database, what would you consider to be the
> right answer to the query p(X)? Neither p(1) nor p(2) logically follows from
> (1) and the given facts about q, so the set of answers is apparently empty.
> But then the interpretation of "not" in (1) as failure tells you that both
> 1 and 2 should be included in the answers! So we have a semantical
> difficulty without (*), it's not just a question of computational complexity
Note that p(1) does not fail FINITELY, even with my extended notion of
finite failure over tight derivation trees only.
?- p(1) ?- p(2)
?- q(1,2), not p(2) ?- q(2,1), not p(1)
Neither of these is a failure tree.
According to Le's definition in J. Logic Prog., in spirit anyway,
the subgoal "not p(2)" is considered to have failed only when p(2) has
succeeded, which does not happen.
Secondly, observe that if the rule for p(X) is given the IFF interpretation,
together with q(1,2) and q(2,1), we derive
p(1) xor p(2)
which makes sense. Apt and Van Emden showed that starting with Horn rules
and using the IFF interpretation was equivalent to finite failure,
provided all queries were ground. Evidently, this is not true for
non-Horn rules (i.e., rules with negative subgoals).
I hope this has muddied the waters, further. -- Allen
∂12-Mar-86 0923 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Yesterday's committee meeting
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 09:22:56 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 09:20:55-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Yesterday's committee meeting
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA, phd-program@SU-SCORE.ARPA
At the meeting of the committee we reviewed the comments received so far
on the proposal, and agreed on the following modifications:
1.) Our thesis proposal proposal will be dropped in favor of the one
Keith Lantz has proposed for the CSL version. For details see his entry
of March 7 on the phd program bulletin boards. In that version the
proposal presentation is not public.
2) The problem of getting better guidance on thesis projects before the
very end was discussed at length. We propose the following:
At least once each year after the G81 is filed, the entire thesis
committee will meet together with the student to discuss the research.
The primary advisor will be responsible for reporting on this meeting at
the Grey Tuesday meeting. There is no outcome (in the sense of a pass
or fail), just commentary. The purpose is to provide guidance and keep
the committee informed of what the student is doing. The proposal oral
(in item 1) is essentially the first of these meetings.
3) We discussed at length the role of the University Oral -- whether it
should be a check of the end result (as it is now) or something earlier
(as it is in many other departments), including as far back as the
initial proposal. We decided that with item 2, we were providing other
mechanisms for the earlier stages and should keep it at the end. We
will basically adopt Keith's proposal for the orals (same document as
above), with a slight modification he is doing, in which the written
comments are to come back within a week after the oral, instead of
before (to allow for interactions at the exam).
4) We discussed various comments on the makeup of the comprehensive
areas. We decided that there was no sense in trying to clarify it in
broad category terms, but that we should put together a prototype
reading list for the areas to see what material was on it and how the
balance looked. Keith Lantz (via CSL) will be coordinating the list for
hardware and software. Leo Guibas will do the theory part. Terry
Winograd will poll the various specialties (AI, NA, etc.) to put
together the techniques and applications part. On the basis of these
lists, we may end up reorganizing the areas, or just being able to give
a much clearer account of what they are intended to cover.
5) A number of other topics raised on the bulletin boards and in the
faculty meeting were discussed, with the decision not to modify the
proposal (e.g., passing the exam all at once, requiring courses,
changing the way qual areas are created, etc.)
We will meet again when we have the preliminary reading lists. --t
-------
∂12-Mar-86 0941 VAL re: Negation in NAIL!
To: avg@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
CC: "@UTEP.[NET,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
[In reply to message from avg@diablo sent Wed, 12 Mar 86 00:01:31 pst.]
I agree that your interpretation of my example as
p(1) xor p(2)
makes sense. This is precisely the result of circumscription. But now we
have a fundamental problem: WHAT DO WE EXPECT THE MACHINE TO DO when the
program has a "disjunctive meaning", as in this example, and the answer to the
query depends on which disjunctive member you select? I see at least three
possibilities:
(i) Such programs should be forbidden (NAIL!).
(ii) No answer should be given (PROLOG. Right?)
(iii) The answer is the set of tuples of values for the variables possibly
preceded by the word "maybe" (which indicates that the predicate is true for this
tuple in some models and false in some others. In this case, we may wish to
allow conjunctions and disjunctions of atoms to be allowed as queries, because
the answer to such a complex query cannot be determined from the answers to its
atomic parts. In our example, the answer to p(X) is "maybe 1, maybe 2"; the
answer to "p(1) or p(2)" is "yes", and the answer to "p(1) and p(2)" is "no".
This third possibility was suggested to me in a conversation by Michael Gelfond.
Has anything of this kind been ever implemented?
Vladimir
∂12-Mar-86 0942 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
There will be no meeting this week (we don't want to miss Smullyan's talk at
CSLI) and next week (Conference on Knowledge).
Vladimir
∂12-Mar-86 0950 RA lunch today cancelled
Hurd called to let you know that today's lunch is cancelled because Vrolyk
is sick. Please acknowledge this msg.
Thanks,
Rutie
∂12-Mar-86 1002 RA reminder to call Franklin Hersch
You asked me to remind to call Hersch re your travel.
∂12-Mar-86 1003 RA Larry Lesser, Inference
Lesser called; would like you to call him (213) 417 7997. He says you know
what it's about.
∂12-Mar-86 1056 VAL Pointwise circ'n paper
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
I have a new version, with two sections added at the end: another example of
applications to the blocks world and a summary of advantages in comparison
with the old definition.
∂12-Mar-86 1113 CLT
ed fredkin called, please call him, he is at home
∂12-Mar-86 1140 SJM sjm
I'm going to go get some lunch in the psych deli. There is a new draft
of the current essay under women2[1,sjm]. I have finished the Alcorn
book, which started out bad and continued bad, finally reaching a bad
end. I can be more specific if necessary. Must go-- I find the need
for a mountain lion sandwich overwhelming.
--Susie
∂12-Mar-86 1238 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK re: Photo
Received: from CS.UCL.AC.UK by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 12:36:02 PST
Received: from aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk by 44d.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id a000713; 12 Mar 86 13:41 GMT
From: Alan Bundy <bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 13:05:26 GMT
Message-Id: <2615.8603121305@aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa
Subject: re: Photo
Cc: bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk
John
Sorry, not sure what happened to truncate my PS.
I wanted a ref to your "colouring maps in logic programming" work.
Alan
∂12-Mar-86 1247 RA Talk at Fermilab
Lee Chapman from Fermilab called to confirm your talk at Fermilab, March 24.
He would like to know the title of the talk; at the time you said something about
Naive's Physics, is this indeed what you are going to talk about? If possible
he would also like to have a short abstract. His tel. (312) 840 4416. His sec.
name is Claudia and her tel. (312) 840 2155. He would also like to make arrangements
for your hotel.
∂12-Mar-86 1316 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
Received: from OHIO-STATE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 13:16:36 PST
Return-Path: <CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Received: from OSU-20 (osu-20.ARPA) by ohio-state.ARPA (4.12/6.1.OSU-CIS)
id AA02766; Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:13:57 est
Message-Id: <8603122113.AA02766@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 16:16:03-EST
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Subject: re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Tue 11 Mar 86 21:51:00-EST
Thanks for your message endorsing the Workshop. The condition
placed, viz., fairness to all commercial companies, is entirely reasonable
and will be no problem to meet. As the planning proceeds, do
you wish to be in the loop, or is it sufficient for me to interact
w. AAAI staff on the basis of need? I assume that Ms Mazzetti will
let me know if there are any reporting requirements.
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1317 RA Igor Maximovich Bobko
Feigenbaum's letter did not include any dates about Bobko nor how he can be
reached, do you have this information?
Thanks
∂12-Mar-86 1332 RA Ed Fredkin
Please call Ed Fredkin (617) 277 4444.
∂12-Mar-86 1334 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 13:34:11 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 13:30:54-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190193145.34.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
When you have a minute I'd like to ask you a couple of questions about
your Genesereth appointment information.
Betty
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1449 rar@kestrel.ARPA tense logic < first order theory of time ?
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 14:48:52 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA08271; Wed, 12 Mar 86 14:34:37 pst
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 14:34:37 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603122234.AA08271@kestrel.ARPA>
To: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl.arpa
Subject: tense logic < first order theory of time ?
Cc: jmc@sail, rar@kestrel.ARPA
Our hypothesis that van Benthem would discuss the matter was correct. I
reviewed the relevant 15 pages, and thought I'd distribute a short summary
of his main points (with the object of stimulating further discussion).
At this point, I'd say that, while there may be some sense in which tense
logic is inherently weaker than some first order theories of time, explication
is needed; prima facie, the two are just incomparable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The translation of formulae of propositional tense logic into first order
axioms for the theory of the ordering relation on times is considered in
section II.2.2 of van Benthem's book. He makes a number of points relevant
to the "tense logic < first order theory of time?" discussion.
1) M = <T, <, V>, where V is a valuation of the propositional
parameters in the language, can viewed as a structure for
the first order language used for the translation (in which
the propositional parameters become monadic predicate
parameters on times) in a straightforward way. On these
structures, the translation ( trans(p) = p(n), where n "means"
now; trans(Gf) = (t)[n < t -> (trans(f)[n/t])], where f[n/t]
is the result of substituting t for n in f, and t doesn't
occur in trans(f); . . . ) is yields a first order formula.
But on point structures <T, < >, the p's must be considered
variables rather than parameters, and so trans(f) must be
universally closed--i.e., the result of the translation is
a pi-1-1 monadic second order formula. So the question arises:
when can a first order equivalent to trans(f) be found?
"One of the main charms of Kripke semantics" is that popular
tense axioms turn out to have *natural* first order
equivalents. E.g.,
<T, < >, t0 |= Fp -> Gp
iff
<T, < >, t0 |= (p)[(E t)[n < t & p(t)] -> (t)[n < t -> p(t)]]
(as that's its standard translation) iff
<T, < >, t0 |= (t)[n < t -> (t')[n < t' -> t = t']]
(i.e., t0 has at most one successor). Now, it turns out that
many tense logic axioms have no first order equivalents *in
this sense*--e.g. Dummett's axiom ( []([](p -> []p) -> p) ->
(<>[]p -> p) ), McKinsey's axiom ( GFp -> FGp ), and L"ob's
axiom ( H(Hp -> p) -> Hp ). There's even a nice (though,
unfortunately, nonsyntactic) characterization of when such
equivalents exist: a tense logic formula has a first order
equivalent in the above sense iff it is preserved under
ultrapowers (van Benthem). Partial effective methods for
finding first order equivalents exist, but van Benthem
conjectures that the class of formulae with first order
equivalents is not even arithmetical.
2) Conversely, many natural classes of structures are not tense
logically definable--the irreflexive structures, the linear
structures, . . .. The analogue of the nice characterization
above is: a first order sentence in the language { < } has
a tense logical equivalent iff it is preserved under
p-morphisms, disjoint unions, and generated substructures,
and is anti-preserved under ultrafilter extensions (Goldblatt
and Thomason). No effective syntactic criterion is known.
For a longer version of the story, the best reference is probably van
Benthem's article "Correspondence Theory" in volume II of the
←Handbook←of←Philosophical←Logic←.
I guess the moral of the story is that the relationship between tense logics
and first order theories of time is complicated enough that simply writing
"tense logic < first order theory of time" is misleading.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- rar
∂12-Mar-86 1528 RA leaving now
I am leaving now for my class.
∂12-Mar-86 1639 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA more time comments
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:39:22 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA11647; Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:40:05 pst
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:40:05 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603130040.AA11647@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@su-ai, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
Subject: more time comments
I believe the closed-under-ultrapowers condition is
equivalent to axiomatisability by Horn sentences.
This seems plausible.
The standard translations of box and diamond involve
Hornish prefixes
box(p) translates to (forall z)(xRz implies p(z))
diamond(p) (exists z)(xRz and p(z))
Clearly, if p has a Horn translation, both of the
above do.
However, I don't see how to prove the result yet.
Secondly, the p-morphism etc constructions come from
translating Birhoff's Theorem (algebras equationally
defined iff closed under homomorphisms, subalgebras
and direct products) through the inverse of
Jonsson-Tarski's theorem (extending Stone's theorem
to Boolean Algebras with additive operators (i.e.
they commute with +)). Modal, and particularly tense,
logics may be phrased as boolean algebras with extra
unary operators, which are also conjugate in the
tense logical case (past and future operators).
Jonsson-Tarski says that n-ary operators on the
boolean algebra arise from taking images of sets
in the BA under n+1-ary relations e.g.
f(X) = {y: xRy for some x in X}.
The almost identity with the Kripke semantics
seems to be missed by most commentators. Diamond
is the additive operator in this case.
Goldblatt's thesis performed the translation of
Birkhoff to the Kripke semantics. He's visiting
Stanford this quarter.
The first proved examples of non-first-order modal formulae
were produced independently by V Benthem and Goldblatt,
in the JSL.
My apologies if you knew this stuff already.
On a different note, John, I believe it's mistaken to
claim that the only way domain experts can share information
is via the channel of the common sublanguage provided by
Craig's Theorem. For instance, it's quite plausible that
you could have a first-order theory (the domain expert)
of certain objects which are predicates or functions in
the other first-order theory, and use the domain expert
to perform what are essentially second-order calculations
in the other. This doesn't fall under the domain of Craig.
A specific example - let us assume time is to be
represented by timestamps, in our first-order planning theory.
With each task P, we might want to associate the set of times
over which P is happening. My favorite example is processor
scheduling; the class of times that P has control of the CPU.
This would be simulated by a predicate X(P,t) whose intended
meaning is that at timestamp t, P is executing.
If you wish to calculate time relations between the X(P,.)
for different P, you would pass to a first-order theory in
which the basic objects were int(P), the interval of time
over which P was taking place. The int(P) are the X(P,.)
in the other theory, in a strong sense. And information
gleaned from this first-order interval theory may be
reattached at the right places in the other via the parameter P.
I believe that not only can you factor out time knowledge in
this way, but that you *have* to, to accomodate different
and incompatible models of time in different domains.
For example, in the currently popular semantics for concurrency,
time is linearly ordered and discrete, with one end-point
i.e. the natural numbers. In planning theory, and
for real-time process control, we may want densely-ordered time.
We may have this by formulating a domain expert which allows
general calculation about time-thingies (intervals, in my
chosen form) without committing to specific structure.
This is vague, but I shall be talking on April 4 in Matt
Ginsburg's seminar on how to do this for the case where
intervals are unions of convex intervals (for which I
have a taxonomy of useful relations already).
Generally, it is probably better to have equational theories
than general first-order ones in AI, where you can. In the
case of convex time intervals, James Allen's calculus is
both equational and in a precise sense, adequately general.
(I still need to fix that proof). Craig's theorem can tell
nothing about how information is passed between algebraic
theories, since there are no relation symbols. Therefore,
if time information is stored in an equational calculus,
one can intuitively pass all of it along to the situation
calculus, provided that the situation calculus is phrased
in terms of intervals rather than timestamps. Thus the
situation calculus needs no time knowledge in this case,
either.
Finally, I wasn't sure what was meant by *first-order time
with sets of points*. My guess is, that to make such a
theory workable, you need most of set theory. Even so, there
are certain intervals which cannot be defined in a first-order
way without quantifying over sets of timestamps. For example,
an infinite union of convex intervals over a dense linear
order without endpoints. Since these are objects in my
interval calculus, it seems that first-order-time-with-sets-
of-points cannot be the most general first-order theory of
time. Mine, and the convex calculus, are equational
(so far - James and Pat, I understand, are investigating
the expressiveness of the full first-order extension of
the interval calculus).
I hope these comments were worth your patience in reading them.
I'd welcome continued discussion.
Cheers,
Peter
2-Mar-86 1721 ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA re: Can you recommend a body shop? (Or warn me off a bad one?)
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 17:21:33 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 17:19:49-PST
From: Paul Roberts <ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Can you recommend a body shop? (Or warn me off a bad one?)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 12 Mar 86 16:01:00-PST
Message-ID: <12190234818.50.ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Thanks John: I've got a couple of other good reprots of akins, they may be the
ones...
Paul
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1727 RPG ISO steering committee
We have agreed to you conditions. The steering committee is:
Bob Mathis, Private Consultant
Steve Squires, DARPA
Ron Ohlander, USC-ISI
John McCarthy, Stanford University
Guy Steele Jr, Thinking Machines
Dick Gabriel, Lucid
Do you still agree to serve? I think there are 0 or 1 meetings
per year, and probably at IJCAI or AAAI or the Lisp conference.
∂12-Mar-86 1909 CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU Speaker on Leibniz's logic
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 19:09:16 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 21:10:09-CST
From: CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: Speaker on Leibniz's logic
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190254905.20.CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
I thought you and Carolyn might be interested in hearing
Prof. Wolfgang Lenzen speak on a reconstruction of
Leibniz's logic. He spoke at UT today and told me he
will be speaking at the Stanford philosophy dept. this
friday. He basically extracts the axioms out of
Leibniz's writing and shows how they form a system
which is deductively equivalent to a complete
Boolean algebra of sets.
Regards,
Shankar
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1926 LES re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
To: Siegman@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 12 Mar 86 11:15:07-PST.]
John McCarthy says:
> Wait till IBM gets around to selling Stanford a general purpose system
> that presumes terminals and provides an alternative to multi-part forms.
Unfortunately, if you wait for John's solution you will certainly die of
old age before you get rid of the typewriters.
A more practical step that can be implemented immediately is to mount one
or two typewriters on rollable typing stands and timeshare them among a
number of typists. We started using this scheme about 16 years ago in the
old A.I. Lab and it worked quite well. Of course, someone must be made
responsible for keeping the typewriters in repair.
You may be able to avoid having so many printers by sharing them using
one of the following schemes.
1. Connect the PCs to an ethernet (either directly or via RS232 lines to
an ethertip) and use an ethernet laser printer for each office cluster.
There may be some software problems in making this work, however.
2. For printers that connect via RS232 interfaces, buy an RS232 switch
that connects one port to any one of a number of other ports, connect
the printer to one side of the switch and the various PCs to the other,
then manually switch the printer to whichever PC needs to print at the
moment.
3. Similar switching kludges can be concocted for parallel printer
interfaces such as Centronics.
This may not always make the secretaries happy but it sould make them feel
less crowded.
Les Earnest
∂12-Mar-86 2053 CLT
To: JMC, LES
∂12-Mar-86 1704 JMC
To: LES, CLT
I assume we sent back or paid for that report of parallel arch's.
---CLT---
I gave it to Rutie to return some time ago -
within two weeks of the time we received it.
∂13-Mar-86 0825 CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU re: Speaker on Leibniz's logic
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 08:24:28 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 10:25:28-CST
From: CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject: re: Speaker on Leibniz's logic
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 12 Mar 86 20:35:00-CST
Message-ID: <12190399686.32.CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU>
He said he was writing a book on the subject. His handout is
quite clear and coherent. I'll mail you a copy of it.
Shankar
-------
∂13-Mar-86 0900 JMC
Chapman at Fermi
∂13-Mar-86 0927 BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 09:27:29 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 09:24:17-PST
From: Alexandre Bronstein <BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 12 Mar 86 16:03:00-PST
Message-ID: <12190410394.10.BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Prof. McCarthy,
I don't understand your answer, and yet I was interested in
figuring it out. Would you mind expanding on it a little bit?
Thanks,
Alex Bronstein
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1103 BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 11:03:17 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 10:29:16-PST
From: Alexandre Bronstein <BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 13 Mar 86 10:23:00-PST
Message-ID: <12190422225.32.BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Thank you.
Alex
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1212 rar@kestrel.ARPA You first conjecture
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 12:11:28 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA16082; Thu, 13 Mar 86 12:12:06 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 12:12:06 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603132012.AA16082@kestrel.ARPA>
To: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA
Subject: You first conjecture
Cc: jmc@sail, phayes@sri-kl
. . . seems implausible to me. Recall that (given CH) f is equivalent to a
Horn sentence iff Md(f) is closed under reduced products, not just
ultraproducts. On the other hand, a class K of structures that is closed
under isomorphism is Md(f) for a first order f iff K and ~K are closed
under ultraproducts. (This is the basis for the result on modalities, since
the translations are pi-1-1, and sigma-1-1 classes are obviously closed under
ultraproducts--just extend the language so that the predicate variables are
parameters, drop the predicate quantifiers, and observe that an ultraproduct
of extensions is the extension of the ultraproduct.) Maybe the non-ultra
reduced products don't add anything for the class of sentences we're
interested in--but is this *plausible*?
-- rar
∂13-Mar-86 1419 RA Stuart Craine
Stuart Crain from Battelle would like to talk to you about expert systems.
His tel. (614) 369 4431 ext. 149
∂13-Mar-86 1420 RA letter signing
Do you really want me to sign the addmission letters or will you do it?
∂13-Mar-86 1428 LES re: meeting
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent 11 Mar 1986 1927-PST.]
(Sigh.) John McCarthy plans to be gone Wednesday through Friday of next
week, though he might be back a bit early. Looks like we should aim for
the week of March 24. Is Monday 3/24 OK? Or Tuesday? . . .
I am convinced that it is time to write a scheduling-agent program.
Les
∂13-Mar-86 1941 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 19:41:18 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA13465; Thu, 13 Mar 86 19:42:23 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 19:42:23 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8603140342.AA13465@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
***************************************************************
FINALLY --- IT'S HERE!!!
OUR AI DISCUSSION WILL BEGIN NEXT WEEK!!
***************************************************************
Thank you again for your participation, we hope that everyone
will benefit from having the advantage of putting forth their
ideas and receiving responses from such a diverse and dis-
tinguished group of people.
Following is some general information about the written dis-
cussion this study entails:
PURPOSES: We would like this discussion to be a free expression
of ideas about artificial intelligence. It will start with a
series of `critiques' on the traditional approaches that many AI
researchers have, and currently are taking. This will probably be
enough to provoke many responses against the criticisms, and then
responses to those responses. But it needn't always; agreement
is perhaps one of the best things to come out of any discussion,
and we hope that it will emerge in some form from this one. Par-
ticipants will have the consequence of sharpening their positions
and ideologies, and since this is a written discussion, everyone
will have the chance to get at the heart of the beliefs of others
- both by allowing time to think about certain ideas, and by be-
ing able to formulate responses without having to publish them
each time.
We also hope that "this meeting of the minds" will be a testing
grounds for new ideas/hypothesis to gain feedback from others.
There really isn't one sharp line that divides everyone, for al-
most no one agrees completely with anybody else anyway.
FRAMEWORK: There are 3 general stages to this discussion. The
first two will be somewhat formal, with the third being a general
"anything goes" informal exchange. They are outlined as follows:
Stage 1: This stage will consist of some criticisms on
current/traditional AI research; this is basically
to start the discussion; it will be given from group
one of the participants (as we have divided them)
to the other; the each of the criticisms will be
approximately 2 pages.
Stage 2: This stage will be the first response to these criti-
cisms; Each participant from group 2 will have the
opportunity to respond (support/agree or criticize)
anything in each of the critical papers - based on
their research, philosophies, or beliefs. These
responses will then be passed on to the group 1 par-
ticipants.
Stage 3: This last stage will partly build on the first two,
and be supplemented by whatever else comes up. Here
there will be rapid exchanges amongst the various
participants. Everyone will be able to monitor the
the discussion as it progresses.
PARTICIPANTS: This grouping really only applies to the first
2 stages; in the last, it is not important.
Group 1 Group 2
John Searle John McCarthy
Stuart/Hubert Dreyfus Daniel Bobrow
Terry Winograd Seymour Papert
Joseph Weizenbaum Eugene Charniak
In The middle:
Douglas Hofstadter
David Rumelhart
The division was not meant to be a major classification of any
type. It was arrived at based on past stances to traditional
information-processing oriented research. It's only purpose is
to provide part of a knowledge base/foundation for Stage 3.
One note about "In the Middle": for purposes of the first and
second stages, we decided to have Douglas Hofstatder and David
Rumelhart in a position where they will converse with both sides.
TIMETABLE: At the outset, we told everyone that there would be
"a reasonable amount of time to respond." This really applies
to the first two stages, where we would like to keep it to 2
weeks for the production of the first stage, and 2 weeks later
for the responses in the second stage. The third stage will
probably last several weeks, but this is generally open.
The time we have in mind for obtaining the criticisms of stage 1
is... FRIDAY, MARCH 21. At that time, we will pass all of the
papers on to all the group 2 participants. Two weeks from then,
we request all the group 2 responses to be in by FRIDAY, APRIL 4.
These responses will be forwarded to the group 1 members, and the
informal (stage 3) discussion will then begin (probably the most
interesting part). At that point, responses to specific people
will be forwarded immediately to the individuals involved. At
the end of each week, a transcript of the entire week's discus-
sion will be distributed to everyone.
COMMUNICATIONS: The entire discussion, as we have mentioned, will
take place entirely by electronic mail -- the fastest form of
written communication of this sort available to everyone. The
account that will be dedicated to handling all the communications
will be the following:
vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Once we start, all information will be processed immediately
after it is received. All messages received will be ack-
nowledged immediately and we hope that everyone will do the same
also. E-mail is reliable, but not "that" reliable.
PUBLICATION: Daniel Bobrow has been kind enough to offer his
help for collating multitudes of responses for publication in the
AI Journal. Furthermore, there will be a neutral introduction
and analysis to the entire discussion.
However, we will also be offering various editions of this dis-
cussion to various prominent national science publications. Our
philosophy here is that noting the quality of articles on AI, it
is clearly better that the current ideas driving AI research be
discussed by those directly involved with it, not by journalists
left to interpret it.
Furthermore, it almost goes without saying that everyone partici-
pating will receive a final copy of the sum total of all com-
munications that go on between the various participants in this
discussion.
Any further questions/problems, please forward them to this
account: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Sincerely,
Vijay Ramamoorthy, U.C. Berkeley (Computer Science)
Rajeev Aggarwal, Bell Laboratories
John Searle, Dept of Philosophy, U.C. Berkeley
Daniel Bobrow, Xerox
(Project Organizers)
P.S. Remember, please acknowledge receipt of this message
through the account you would like us to send all your
responses/coments/information to.
∂13-Mar-86 2057 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA a partial answer
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 20:57:51 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA06760; Thu, 13 Mar 86 20:57:20 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 20:57:20 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603140457.AA06760@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: a partial answer
Cc: israel@su-csli, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
For an example of how interval tense logic may be more
expressive than first-order time, I submit the following:
We want a connective *tand* to stand for temporal conjunction,
that is, A tand B means A immediately followed by B.
Von Wright gave an axiomatisation, which was shown to be
equivalent to (A and next B), if you have a *next* operator.
However, this has certain disadvantages.
(A and next B) entails A, but not B (so it is *biased*).
Similarly, *and next* is not associative:
(A and next B) and next C refers to two time points -
it is equivalent to (A and next(B and C)).
(A and next(B and next C)) refers to three -
it is equivalent to (A and (next B) and (next next C)).
So if we want an unbiased, associative operator here,
which intuition might lead us towards, we have to plump
for interval semantics. Here I will assume we can give
a reasonable semantics for (A is true over an interval I),
for standard tense-logical formulae.
We may now define the operator *tand* as follows:
(A tand B) true over I just in case I may be split into
left and right subintervals J and K such that
A is true over J and B over K.
Associativity is straightforward, and
(A tand B) implies neither A nor B (in the definition above,
neither A nor B have to be true over the whole interval I).
The semantic condition is more natural than it seems -
(J starts I and K ends I and J meets K) in Pat and James's
terminology.
I claim, without even a hint of proof, that this temporal
conjunction probably isn't expressible in a points-based
first-order time logic.
And I realise that you were asking for an example of a standard
tense-logical formula, rather than a new connective, and a
points-based example rather than an interval example. As they
say, we're working on that one.
My source is I.L. Humberstone: Interval Semantics for
Tense Logic, J. Philosophical Logic 8 (1979) pp171-196.
Peter Ladkin
∂13-Mar-86 2233 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA uucp, my paper and the other class essays
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 22:26:57 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 22:25:22-PST
From: Kim W. Tracy <KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: uucp, my paper and the other class essays
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190552585.32.KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
First of all, I don't think I explained very well today how uucp
works with my UNIX PC. Uucp on my machine works well over the
phone lines and I can send e-mail this way rather cheaply. It is
simple to limit the times that my machine can dial out to any
particular machine. I specify the mail address in the same way
that I do on any UNIX machine. I personally don't use this
feature because I had a bad experience with it. My machine kept
dialing up another but could not deliver the message that I had
sent because I had something set up wrong. I did not catch it
until it had spent about $30 in telephone charges! I do use uucp
via the phone lines for downloading software and this works well
and downloads the software at minimum cost.
I would like to hear any comments that you have on my
paper on computer education. Also, does your secretary still have
our other essays with your comments?
Kim Tracy
-------
∂13-Mar-86 2359 KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA VTSS
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 23:59:12 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 23:57:27-PST
From: Dah-Bin Kao <KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: VTSS
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: kao@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Prof. McCarthy:
Thank you very much for a quarter of enlightening classes.
A thought has come to me about the arrangement of the class:
perhaps this class should be listed in the School of Engineering,
at least cross-listed. I have come up with three reasons:
1. Interest and background: I think people with more technical
training in Computer Science or Engineering can appreciate
and benefit more from this course than VTSS undergraduates.
2. I think most students don't venture very far outside their
major subject. I had never heard of VTSS until I read your
course announcement on BBOARD. Even then it was your name
rather than "VTSS" that attracted me to the first class.
In the E.E. Department, there is a requirement for two non-EE
courses for the M.S. degree. I took accounting and LISP.
I think your course would be an ideal candidate.
3. It has been done. VTSS 106 is cross-listed as E221 - "The Social
Impact of Technology". Another course "Problem Solving" is E190 and
VTSS 181, etc. E7 is "Black Perspectives in Engineering".
One final note is that the word "Humanity" in the course title
can be misleading. My bias is that it somehow weakens the title.
The content of the course was really futuristic and bold.
May I suggest "Technological Opportunities for the Future",
which may be more suited for Engineering than VTSS.
-------
∂14-Mar-86 0144 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK re: Photo
Received: from CS.UCL.AC.UK by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 01:44:12 PST
Received: from aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk by 44d.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id a000234; 14 Mar 86 9:15 GMT
From: Alan Bundy <bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 09:21:41 GMT
Message-Id: <2051.8603140921@aiva.ed.ac.uk>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa
Subject: re: Photo
Thanks for ref.
∂14-Mar-86 0516 PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Letter of reference
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 05:16:01 PST
Received: ID <PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 14 Mar 86 08:16:13-EST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 08:16:11-EST
From: Zenon <Zenon.Pylyshyn@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Letter of reference
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: pylyshyn%deepthot.cdn.Ubc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190627374.42.PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research program in Artificial
Intelligence and Robotics (of which I am director) wrote you a week or more
ago asking for a letter of reference on behalf of David Etherington who
is being considered for a Fellowship. If you have not received the request
please let me know. If you have, would you write a few words about David?
We are trying to speed up the refereeing process to help Etherington's
career decisions.
Thanks.
-------
∂14-Mar-86 0737 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA re: reports
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 07:37:26 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 07:33:28-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: re: reports
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 13 Mar 86 18:34:00-PST
Message-ID: <12190652363.17.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Here's my original message....
This year we will be reporting our "faculty accomplishments" through the
School of Engineering instead of through Humanities and Sciences. SOE has
a stanford form for "faculty accomplishments" which is attached to this
net message. (You will also receive a hard copy through ID mail.)
Please return your completed forms to me either by e-mail or hard copy by
December 2 for forwarding to SOE.
Thanks,
Anne
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stanford University
School of Engineering
Annual Faculty Report for Academic Year 1984-85
November, 1985
It is time again for a Faculty Report. This office finds it very useful to
have the information outlined below, and I appreciate you taking time to fill
out the form carefully. I realize that this represents only a summary
of your contributions to the School and misses completely your goodwill
and spirit which are equally important to our mission.
Please give this completed form to your departmental secretary by
December 2, 1985. Thanks for your help with this chore and
for your contributions to the School and the University.
Cordially,
Jim Gibbons,
Dean
(Please note: Information requested pertains to the period 9/1/84 to
8/31/85 only.)
NAME←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Last, First, Middle
ACADEMIC RANK←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
DEPARTMENT←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Publications: (Please indicate nature of work, such as books,
monographs, journals, technical reports, etc., giving title, date, pages and
publisher or issuing agency. Include papers submitted for publication and
designate as such.)
Teaching: (Please indicate by quarter, course title, number of units and
enrollment. Also include course or curriculum development, computer education
software tutorials, specially prepared television presentations or other
relevant work.)
Advising:
Number of freshman advisees
Number of undergraduate advisees
Number of graduate advisees
Supervision of Ph.D. Candidates:
Number of students for which you
are principal dissertation advisor.
Number of students for which you
are on reading committee.
Research Projects:
Project title and Names of Principal Approx. annual dollar
Funding Source and co-Principal value of project for
Investigators, which you are
if any responsible.
University Service Other Than Teaching and Research: (Include
administrative duties and committee work.)
Professional Activities Outside the University: (Include offices in
professional organizations, services to government agencies or industry,
editorship of journals, invited presentations, and outside adminstrative or
public service.)
Honors and Awards:
Describe below any activities or make any comments that do not fit under
previous categories.
-------
-------
∂14-Mar-86 0740 CLT
don't forget get edwina's number and invite her for Mon
∂14-Mar-86 0802 bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@Cs.Ucl.AC.UK Re: visit to Edinburgh
Received: from CS.UCL.AC.UK by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 08:02:22 PST
Received: from aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk by 44d.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id a001042; 14 Mar 86 13:41 GMT
From: Alan Bundy <bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 13:17:15 GMT
Message-Id: <4258.8603141317@aiva.ed.ac.uk>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa
Subject: Re: visit to Edinburgh
Cc: barry%epistemi.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
dts%cstvax.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
fjg%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
gideon%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
graeme%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
helen%dream.aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
howe%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
hthompso%eusip.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
john%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
mjs%epistemi.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
pat%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
peter%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
pj%eusip.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
pop%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
rbf%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk,
uschold%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk
John
Terrific! I imagine a lot of people would like to talk
to you, including me. I have circulated your message around
the dept. Would you be prepared to give a seminar?
Alan
∂14-Mar-86 0957 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 09:57:39 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 09:53:40-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190677888.18.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Pat Kammer a Reporter from Bay City News would like t ask you a few
question regarding AI. 522-8900.
Tina
-------
∂14-Mar-86 1134 RA letter to Zenon Pylyshyn
The letter from Zenon Pylyshyn is in your mail box. You did not answer it yet.
You sent a letter to Professor J.M. Varah which is in etheri.re1[let,jmc]
∂14-Mar-86 1245 PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA re: You first conjecture
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 12:45:08 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 09:41:53-PST
From: PHayes@SRI-KL
Subject: re: You first conjecture
To: JMC%SU-AI@SRI-KL
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 13 Mar 86 13:22:00-PST
Here is one: consider a modality ING (from the English continuous present
construction ) where INGp is true at a point p just when p is true throughout
some open interval containing p. ING is axiomatisable ( though I confess
cant remember the formalisation ) but the translation which makes explicit
the Kripkean semantics has to say something like EXISTS S ALL t in S. p(t),
and this cant be reduced to first-order ( without sets ). This example
due to Dana Scott.
If there was a list of people who attended the talk, I would send them a
letter pointing out how wrong I was.....
Pat
-------
∂14-Mar-86 1357 PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA re: a partial answer
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 13:56:56 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 11:48:57-PST
From: PHayes@SRI-KL
Subject: re: a partial answer
To: JMC%SU-AI@SRI-KL
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 13 Mar 86 21:48:00-PST
But this suposes that the point theory ( using <= (That realy is a bitch
with a case shift in the middle ) ) is expressive enough to translate
the interval theoruy into, and it isnt. Well, it depends which interval
and point theories one is talking about. Its certainly not if the interval
theory is rich enough to allow intersections of intervals, etc., unless
of course one introduces sets of points to be the intervals, which begs the
question, right?
Pat
-------
∂14-Mar-86 1512 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 15:11:52 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA03540; Fri, 14 Mar 86 15:10:10 PST
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 15:10:10 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8603142310.AA03540@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: SPapert@mit-multics, bobrow@xerox.com, ec%brown.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa,
jmc@su-ai.arpa
Hi,
As a member of Group 2, you will have to do nothing until we
pass you the papers from Group 1. Then you can comment/respond
where you see fit. We should have them for you by March 24.
-VR, RA, JS, DB.
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt of this message -- Thanks.
∂14-Mar-86 1544 RA
John,
A msg. from the receptionist desk:
Dr. Hurd phoned, and said to cancel the meeting with Dr. Vrolik on
March 24, Dr. Vrolik will be gone.
∂14-Mar-86 1552 RA telefax to Italy
I sent a telefax to Mario Boseli, Fiera Milano this afternoon. I will also
send a hard copy.
∂14-Mar-86 1644 rar@kestrel.ARPA An example, and an assessment of the discussion so far
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 16:44:20 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA01622; Fri, 14 Mar 86 16:44:56 pst
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 16:44:56 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603150044.AA01622@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl
Subject: An example, and an assessment of the discussion so far
Cc: rar@kestrel.ARPA
Recall that L"ob's axiom is
H(Hp -> p) -> Hp ,
where
<T, <, V>, t |= Hf iff for all t' < t, <T, <, V>, t' |= f .
I'm not especially inclined to defend this axiom, but other people (Thomason)
have. At any rate, it seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to want to
express. Nevertheless, I recognize that a more easily defended axiom would
make the case stronger, but I don't know of another that is so easily shown
to have no first order equivalent.
thm: <T, < > |= H(Hp -> p) -> Hp iff <T, < > is transitive and well-founded
pf: ( => ) Suppose t0 > t1 > t2 but not t0 > t2. Define a valuation V by
by V(p) = T - {t1, t2}. Then L"ob's axiom is false in <T, <, V>
at t0--clearly Hp is false at t0, since p is false at t1; Hp is
false at t1, because p is false at t2, so Hp -> p is true at t1;
Hp -> p is true at predecessors of t0 other than t1, since p is true
everywhere other than t1 and t2 and t2 is not a predecessor of t0;
therefore, Hp -> p is therefore true at every predecessor of t0
and H(Hp -> p) is true at t0; ergo H(Hp -> p) -> Hp is false at t0.
Suppose t0 > t1 > t2 > ... . Define valuation V by V(p) =
T - {t0, t1, t2, ... } . The L"ob's axiom is false in <T, <, V>
at t0--clearly Hp is false at t0, since p is false at t1; Hp -> p
is true at t1, t2, t3, ... , since Hp is false at t1, t2, t3, ... ,
since p is false at t2, t3, t4, ... ; Hp -> p is true at all other
predecessors of t0, since p is true in all other predecessors;
therefore, Hp -> p is true at every predecessors of t0 and
H(Hp -> p) -> p is true at t0; ergo H(Hp -> p) -> Hp is false at
t0.
( => ) Suppose that H(Hp -> p) -> Hp is false in <T, <, V> at t0, and that
<T, < > is transitive. Then H(Hp -> p) is true at t0 and Hp is false
at t0. Since Hp is false at t0, there is a t1 < t0 such that p is
false at t1. Since H(Hp -> p) is true at t0, Hp -> p is true at t1.
But p is false at t1, so Hp must be false as well. So, there is a
t2 < t1 such that p is false at t2. By transitivity, t2 < t0, so
since H(Hp -> p) is true at t0, Hp -> p is true at t2. But p is
false at t2, so Hp must be false as well. So there is a t3 < t2 ...
Ergo <T, < > is not well-founded.
(The reason for the *gory* detail of this proof is that too many people have
made mistakes in this field as a result of not carefully checking the details
of proofs. More comments on this subject will be found below.)
cor: There is no first order equivalent of L"ob's axiom.
pf: Well-foundedness is not first order definable, by compactness.
What I think has (and has not) been shown by the argument(s) to this point:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the only thing that has been conclusively demonstrated is that one
must do a little model theory to make the claim that tense logic is less
expressive that first order theories of time plausible. I don't think that
anyone has shown the claim to be false--after all, maybe we're only
*really* interested in a much narrower class of models (maybe even only
those of order type omega) and *for this class* tense logics are weaker.
But given the notorious unreliability of intuitions regarding the equivalence
of tense logical and first order formulae--consider, e.g., Hamblin's axiom,
((p & Hp) -> FHp)&((p & Gp) -> PGp)), which apparently defines discreteness,
though discreteness is not preserved under p-morphisms and hence is not
tense logically definable; non-discrete models of this axiom are complicated
enough that you just don't consider them in attempting to figure out what
the axiom is saying--only fairly careful equivalence or inequivalence proofs
should be given much credence, and no "proof by example" should be
taken very seriously.
Where should we go from here?
-----------------------------
jmc's request for an example of a "proper" tense logical axiom that we'd need
for, say, planning seems quite reasonable, given the present state of the
discussion. I'll certainly try to think of one. Maybe the "indefinability
of `and next'" will lead somewhere, but the tie between the model theoretic
result and it's application hasn't been made nearly explicit enough for me--
besides, handling intervals as sets of points is problematic in general
(e.g., the medieval puzzle of the "dividing instant" for Dedekind continuous
<T, < > ). I'd rather find an example of a strutural property of time that
holds in some, but only some, "possible worlds"--or perhaps some and only some
of the models of time used in various domains/disciplines--that we want to
assert holds in the actual world--or domain of interest (viz. planning). If
such a property were shown to be definable in tense logic, but not in the
first order theory of the temporal ordering relation, then we'd really have
something.
-- rar
∂14-Mar-86 1857 LES RT ethernet card
It arrived today. Tom D. will try to install it and rig the cables
on Monday morning.
∂15-Mar-86 1036 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Ramin Zabih
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 86 10:36:25 PST
Date: Sat 15 Mar 86 10:35:19-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Ramin Zabih
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, yao@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190947612.16.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, Andy Yao tells me that the policy of the admissions committee
this year leaned toward admitting a student highly recommended by
one of our faculty if that faculty member also guaranteed to be the
student's mentor (accepting responsibility for him/her) while here.
On that basis, it would seem possible to admit Zabih even at this late
date if someone wants to be that mentor. His interests appear to be
in what we would call systems, therefore I would think he would have
to have a champion among the CSL professors if he were to get in this
coming academic year. It's fine with me if you want to explore the
possibility of that interest. Otherwise, he is of course free to
apply for the '87/'88 year. -Nils
-------
∂15-Mar-86 1238 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 86 12:38:45 PST
Date: Sat 15 Mar 86 12:37:39-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190969883.16.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have now received several applications for "the AI
faculty position." We should have a mtg early in April to see
if we are ready to identify the top few candidates, seek letters
on them, have them visit, etc.
Anne Richardson has the applications. You might like to stop by
and look over the file of applications rcvd so far.
I'll ask Anne to help us arrange a mtg date sometime during the
first two weeks of April.
-Nils
-------
∂15-Mar-86 1332 DEK sabbatical work
I had a note from an MIT student who is thinking of transferring to
Stanford; he said you had suggested that I might meet with him, since
I'm in the Boston area.
Actually I haven't been making my presence in Boston known; I haven't
been to MIT yet (although I do use the Harvard libraries a lot).
So I would prefer not to meet with anyone unless it's a real
emergency of some sort.
∂16-Mar-86 0100 JMC
kowalski
∂16-Mar-86 0218 ME xgpsyn
∂15-Mar-86 1927 JMC
Should xgpsyn still work? What display channel if so?
ME - What you can do is type C to have it use your own channel (and low
resolution).
For the old high resolution, it needs the video synthesizer, which is not
connected, although we got it back after Robotics left (it was in their
PDP 11/45).
∂16-Mar-86 1456 RPG Alliant versus Encore
John, could you explain your reasoning behind preferring
the Encore over the Alliant?
-rpg-
∂16-Mar-86 1529 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Szolovitz Letter Missing
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 86 15:29:26 PST
Date: Sun 16 Mar 86 15:28:18-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Szolovitz Letter Missing
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191263093.18.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John, the Szolovitz recommendation letter for Genesereth is missing, and Rutie
can't find it. I will appreciate your looking around for it.
Betty
-------
∂16-Mar-86 2224 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa some interesting info on MIT...
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 86 22:24:52 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 16 Mar 86 22:23:43 pst
Date: 16 Mar 1986 2223-PST (Sunday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: phdcom@sail
Cc: sysphd@su-gregorio.arpa
Subject: some interesting info on MIT...
------- Forwarded Message
Return-Path: <barb@su-isl.ARPA>
Received: from su-isl.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Mar 86 15:56:51-PST
Received: by su-isl.arpa with TCP; Mon, 10 Mar 86 15:59:09 pst
To: pmbanks@su-sierra.ARPA, franklin@su-isl.ARPA, gray@su-isl.ARPA,
jlh@su-shasta.ARPA, meindl@su-sierra.ARPA, nilsson@su-score.ARPA,
johnston@su-sierra.ARPA
Cc: barb@su-isl.ARPA, char@su-isl.ARPA, cloutier@su-sierra.ARPA,
fajardo@su-sierra.ARPA, mann@su-sierra.ARPA, margaret@su-mojave.ARPA,
dutton@su-sierra.ARPA, gibbons@su-sierra.ARPA, harris@su-sierra.ARPA,
kino@su-sierra.ARPA, quate@su-sierra.ARPA, siegman@su-sierra.ARPA,
white@su-sierra.ARPA, strahm@su-star.ARPA
Date: 10 Mar 86 15:59:05 PST (Mon)
From: barb@su-isl.ARPA
...
... Their Ph.D. quals involve written examinations and oral exams (3
faculty for 2-3 hours). They also have a graduate area exam, for which the
candidate has to prepare a report on an area different from that of his
thesis; he is then questioned on this by 3 faculty for 2-3 hours. Finally,
they also have a thesis defence examination.
...
------- End of Forwarded Message
∂17-Mar-86 0617 nttlab!NTT-20!Goto@su-shasta.arpa A message from Prof.Nagao at Kyoto University
Received: from SU-SHASTA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 06:10:33 PST
Received: by su-shasta.arpa with TCP; Mon, 17 Mar 86 06:10:44 pst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA28626; Mon, 17 Mar 86 20:08:11 jst
Message-Id: <8603171108.AA28626@ntt.junet>
Date: 17 Mar 1986 2006
From: Shigeki Goto <nttlab!NTT-20!Goto@su-shasta.arpa>
Subject: A message from Prof.Nagao at Kyoto University
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet, nttlab!NTT-20!goto@su-shasta.arpa
John:
Nice to send a mail to you again from Japan.
I have a message from Prof.Nagao at Kyoto University. He asked me to send
the following to you.
If you will have any trouble with replying to him, I am willing to forward
your message to him at Kyoto. My old username on SAIL automatically forwards
E-mails to my current address. And I can easily reach Prof.Nagao.
sg@sail ====> "nttlab!goto"@Shasta.ARPA (automatic forwarding)
You can simply send me a mail at SG@SAIL as before. I greatly appreciate
the SAIL account. It is very valuable for me. Thank you again.
-- Shigeki, sg@sail as before.
> March 16, 1986.
>
> Dear Prof. McCarthy:
>
> I made a phone call to you last December about the subject of IWANAMI
> Software Science Series. You promised me to write a book on what you
> think important in the software science. IWANAMI sent a letter to you
> twice to make sure of your acceptance. Let us have your confirmation
> of writing a book. The detailed contents can be given afterwards, but
> we want to have your affirmative reply.
>
> You can send me your answer by electronic mail. My return address is
> "nttlab!kurims!kuee!nagao"@Shasta.ARPA. Looking forward to having your
> answer soon.
>
> Prof. Makoto Nagao
> Dept. EE.
> Kyoto University
> Sakyo, Kyoto, Japan
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1000 RA Roxie France, Time-Life Books
France from Time-Life Books has been trying to reach you re a book on
computer languages. Can I give her your home number next time she calls?
Her tel. is (703) 838 7015.
∂17-Mar-86 1005 RA msg. from Zohar
Zohar asked me to tell you that he is about to release the qual syllbus.
If you want to suggest any changes, you must do so in the next few days.
∂17-Mar-86 1013 RA John Nafeh, MAD
Nafeh called; he will try to reach you at home; if he reached you, ignore
this msg., if not, please call him (408) 943 1711.
∂17-Mar-86 1014 RA Talk at Fermi Lab
Claudia from Fermi Lab called. She needs to know the title of your talk next
week. Her tel. (312) 840 2155.
∂17-Mar-86 1101 VAL Dynamic logic and situation calculus
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA, pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
It seems that motivation behind both systems is essentially the same. Has any
work been done on formally relating them to each other? It should be possible
to embed dynamic logic in situation calculus, except that we should take the
version of situation calculus which allows nondeterministic actions and has
"Kleenian" operations for building "strategies".
Vladimir
∂17-Mar-86 1110 VAL
I've borrowed "Logic and Data Bases" from you bookshelf.
∂17-Mar-86 1129 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Info
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 11:29:01 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 11:18:32-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gray Tuesday Info
To: "Faculty Advisors": ;
cc: cheadle@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12191479770.24.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
> Date: Sat 15 Mar 86 19:37:48-PST
> From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
> Subject: Gray Tues.
> To: reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA
>
> Gray Tuesday is scheduled for March 20. I want to be sure that
> all information on each of your advisees is current. Listed in
> the next message will see a copy of what we have on file for them
> in the database. Please note any changes/corrections and send
> them back to me as soon as possible. I will update the records
> accordingly. Also, if there are any special circumstances that I
> should be aware of before the meeting, please let me know. You
> may notice that there is no record of any TAing done by students
> who entered Autumn Quarter of 1984 or later. We are currently
> making changes in the existing program, and hope they will be
> completed shortly. Separate records are being kept and students
> will be notified if they fall beind in meeting the requirement.
> Also note that (most) dates are recorded in quarters, not months
> (1-85 means Autumn Qtr. of the 1985-86 academic year, not January
> of 1985). I appreciate your help in making Gray Tuesday run as
> smoothly and efficiently as possible.
Note: Please reply to CHEADLE@SCORE. Thanks!
-John Reuling
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1140 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Info
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 11:39:41 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 11:25:07-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gray Tuesday Info
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Office: 246 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12191480967.24.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Information for McCarthy:
Kaelbling, Leslie P. Advisor: McCarthy PhD Entry: 1-84
Comp Writ: Pass Comp Prog: Not Taken Quarter: 4
Qual: Not Taken Honors Coop: SRI
Teach (%): 50 Cand Begin: Not Filed
COMP 3-82 MS PASS
COMP 2-84 MS PASS WRITTEN
COMP 3-84 PHD PASS WRITTEN
Weening, Joseph S. Advisor: McCarthy PhD Entry: 1-80
Comp Writ: Pass Comp Prog: Pass Quarter: 17
Qual: MTC, Pass Qual Qtr.: 1-82
Teach (%): 50 Cand Begin: 1-82 Cand End: 1-87
G81: 3-83 Seminar: 1-85
Dissertation: Parallel Execution of LISP Programs
Readers: Gabriel Ullman
COMP 2-80 PHD PASS WRITTEN
COMP 1-82 PHD PASS PROG
EVAL 2/01/1982 Programming project.
EVAL 6/01/1982 Needs programming project by summer.
EVAL 2/01/1983 Needs G81 by 11/83
QUAL 1-81 FAIL MTC
QUAL 1-82 PASS MTC
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1300 LES Ebos review
To: greep@CAMELOT, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
OK, it is at 11:30am on Tuesday 3/18 in JMC's office.
∂17-Mar-86 1316 LES Moses' Thesis
Yoram Moses would like to publish his thesis as a CSD report and needs
a sponsor. I understand that you provided a substantial part of his
support. Would it be appropriate to use your current DARPA account?
∂17-Mar-86 1518 CLT call
Rick Becker at Delfin Systems re invoice. 408-295-1818
∂17-Mar-86 1622 VAL
Arkady Rabinov would like to come on Thursday, March 27, at 2pm.
∂17-Mar-86 1702 rar@kestrel.ARPA Responses to earlier comments and queries
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 17:02:07 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA16896; Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603180102.AA16896@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl
Subject: Responses to earlier comments and queries
Cc: rar@kestrel.ARPA
I reread the discussion to this point over the weekend, and realized that there
were a couple of points that I wanted to comment on at the time, but didn't.
"Better late ... "
Re: Peter's argument that Craig's theorem couldn't provide an argument
against the possibility of factoring out temporal knowledge as
a "time expert"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
He wrote "Craig's theorem can tell nothing about how information is passed
between algebraic theories, since there are no relation symbols."
I don't get it. Craig's theorem says
Let \phi, \psi be sentences such that \phi |= \psi. Then there
exists a sentence \theta such that:
(i) \phi |= \theta and \theta |= \psi.
(ii) Every relation, function, or constant symbol (excluding
identity) which occurs in \theta occurs in both \phi and
\psi.
(I quote from everyone's favorite reference, Chang and Keisler.) Lyndon's
sharpened version ("... every relation symbol (excluding identity) which occurs
positively in \theta occurs positively in both \phi and \psi, and similarly
with `negatively' in place of `positively' ...") requires no relation symbols,
but not Craig's original. Was that a source of confusion, or am I missing
something? (If \phi and \psi are equations, then clearly \theta must be as
well, so that can't be it.)
Re: Ladkin's response to my comment that his first conjecture ("Horn = closed
under ultrapowers") was implausible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your complaint that I said `ultraproducts' and that the modal result in
van Benthem said `ultrapowers' is, of course, correct. But my point was
that closure under reduced products is, prima facie, stronger than closure
under ultraproducts, and your conjecture is, therefore, implausible. Since
closure under ultrapowers is, prima facie, weaker still, that would seem to
provide an even stronger implausibility argument.
It's easy to show that, in this case, closure under ultraproducts is equivalent
to basic elementary--I sketched the argument in my note. The "closure under
ultrapowers" version seems to be harder. (Recall that a class of models
is elementary iff it is closed under ultraproducts and elementary equivalence.
But two structures are elementary equivalent iff they have isomorphic
ultrapowers. So, a class is elementary iff it is closed under ultraproducts
and isomorphism and its complement is closed under ultrapowers. However, a
class is basic elementary iff both it and its complement are elementary. So,
as I mentioned earlier, a class K is basic elementary iff both K and ~K
are closed under isomorphism and ultraproducts-the result I used earlier.
Looking at things the other way around gives K is basic elementary only if K
and ~K are closed under ultrapowers--K basic elementary => K elementary and
~K elementary => ~K closed under ultrapowers and ~~K=K closed under
ultrapowers. The converse doesn't seem to follow in general, but "pi-1-1"
gives it in a fairly direct way. Suppose K is pi-1-1 but not basic elementary.
Then ~K is sigma-1-1 but not elementary. Hence, either ~K is not closed under
ultraproducts or ~K is not closed under isomorphism or ~~K=K is not closed
under ultrapowers. But sigma-1-1 classes are closed under ultrapowers and
isomorphism--as I pointed out in my original argument--and so K must not be
closed under ultrapowers. Combining the two results, we have that a pi-1-1
K is basic elementary iff it is closed under ultrapowers--as desired.)
Re: Pat's "Why variables rather than parameters?" question
-----------------------------------------------------------
Actually, since point structures treat p's as variables "by definition", I
think the question that needs answering is: Why the emphasis on defining
classes of structures <T, < >--van Benthem's point structures--rather than
classos of structures <T, <, V>? Well, maybe the explanation should be in
terms of inertia rather than reasons, but I'll give it a try.
First, let's ask: What should tense logic formulae be thought of as
defining? The options are (1) f defines { <T, <, V> : <T, <, V> |= f }
and (2) f defines { <T, < > : for every V, <T, <, V> |= f }. Now, if
you're simply using tense logic as a way to talk about the structure of
time, the latter perspective is clearly right--you don't want to distinguish
structures that have the same time structure, but that differ in that p
happens to be true at some point t in one but not at that same point in the
other. This is exactly the sense in which S4 defines the class of reflexive
and transitive frames. Option (1) just doesn't seem too useful, since formulae
can wind up being true "for the wrong reason". (Does the modal axiom p -> <>p
"say" that what is true is possible? Not on definability option (1)--all sorts
of structures that violate this principle are admitted, all the ones in which
V(p) is false. Not even a schema will let you say the accessibility relation
is reflexive--consider the structure < {w1, w2}, { <w1, w2>, <w2, w1> },
lambda p. true >.) You really have to quantify either over valuations or
over propositions to be able to say anything interesting about the structure.
Next, how do you use first order theories to talk about time structures? Well,
this is pretty straightforward: you write axioms in the language { < }. If
you want other predicates or functors in your language, that's fine, as long
as you don't use them in the axioms--because then <T, <, P, Q, ..., f, g, ... >
will be a model of the axioms iff <T, < > is, and the problem of being able
to define "the structure of time" in the presence of non-logical axioms seen
in the propositional case won't arise.
Now, the translation trans from tense logic to quantificational logic can be
viewed as yielding a first order formula in a language { < , P0, P1, ... },
where the Pi are monadic predicate parameters corresponding to the
propositional letters occurring in the tense logic formula or as yielding a
second order formula in the language { < } where the monadic predicates are
universally quantified variables. Call the first translation `trans1' and the
second `trans2'. trans1 establishes a correspondence such that for any
structure <T, <, V> and any tense logic formula f, <T, <, V> |= f iff
<T, <, V> |= trans1(f). But this is rather unattractive for the reasons
given above--essentially, you can't define a class of structures based on
properties of <, and you *have* to be able to do this. On the other hand,
trans2 establishes a correspondence such that for any <T, < > and f,
<T, < > |= f iff <T, < > |= trans2(f)--you can define classes of structures
bases on properties of <, ... .
"tense logic > first order theories of time"?
---------------------------------------------
Here's a new topic for discussion. Everyone seems to be concerned with
whether there are classes definable in tense logic that aren't definable
in a first order theory of time. But how about the converse: Are there
classes definable in first order theories that aren't definable in tense
logics? Kamp's theorem is relevant: if you restrict yourself to, say,
Dedekind continuous strict linear orders (Kamp's original restriction, which
has since been loosened by Gabbay, among others), then for any first order
formula in the language { <, P0, P1, ... } mentioned above, one can
effectively find a tense logic formula (in the language with binary "tenses"
SINCE and UNTIL) that has the same class of models <T, <, V> . So, if you
can factor temporal knowledge in the right way (a "big if"), it looks like
one could argue that first order theories are no more expressive than tenses.
P.S.
----
An exercise in non-monotonic reasoning: "If he had the example he was looking
for, he would have given it, so ... "
-- rar
∂17-Mar-86 1731 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rutie
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 17:31:32 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 16:27:56-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rutie
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191536093.49.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I will much appreciate your talking with Rutie about her performance as soon
as possible, John.
Also, any luck in locating the original Szolovits letter?
Betty
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1917 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA example
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 19:17:31 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA18423; Mon, 17 Mar 86 19:17:53 pst
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 86 19:17:53 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603180317.AA18423@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@su-ai
Subject: example
Cc: israel@su-csli, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA, val@su-ai
I'm only getting copies of mail from rar and jmc, so if
someone is keeping any others, please could you forward
me a set?
Suppose we have a distributed processing system in which
are kept local copies of relevant fragments of the global
system state. Such systems are being studied at ibm san jose,
as well as elsewhere. For modelling time in such systems,
it is reasonable to assume that only a finite number of
events occurred in the past (Lamport, On Interprocess
Communication; Distributed Computing 1985 or 1986).
A processor which has to reason about the global state
from its own local knowledge will have to allow all
past states consistent with its current local knowledge,
subject only to the restriction that the collection of
events on each possible backwards chain is finite.
Time is thus backwards-branching.
This leads to using the Loeb axiom for the past time
operator, since the only condition common to all processors
in the system is that the backwards chain of events be
well-founded.
I realise this is not a common-sense reasoning example
of the usual kind, but it is a plausible practical
example.
Peter Ladkin
Oh, for quantifiers on the keyboard!
Invectives without connectives is so hard!
∂17-Mar-86 2023 veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Request for lit.
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 20:22:50 PST
Received: from ukans by csnet-relay.csnet id aj08333; 17 Mar 86 23:08 EST
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 86 16:28:47 CST
From: Glenn Veach <veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: JMC%SU-AI.ARPA@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Request for lit.
Dr. McCarthy:
I am working with Dr. Frank M. Brown, conducting research
in the extension of his modal logic as a logic for epistemic
reasoning. I have reference to a paper of yours titled
"On the model theory of knowledge" a tech. report STAN-CS-78-657.
Could you provide me with information as to how I might obtain
this paper?
Thanks for your time.
Glenn O. Veach
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
Department of Computer Science
University of Kansas
Lawrence, KS 66045-2192
(913) 864-4482
veach%ukans.csnet@csnet-relay
∂17-Mar-86 2120 RPG Welcome
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
...to the world of international standarization. This mailing list
is the forum for private discussions regarding the strategic aspects
of the standardization effort. The contents of the messages transmitted
on this list are archived in a private, non-accessible file at SAIL.
If you choose to also archive these messages, please guard their
privacy.
The members of this list are:
rpg,
gls%Think.COM
jmc
squires@isi
Mathis@isif
ohlander@isie
fahlman@cmuc
bobrow.pa@xerox
CL-Steering-from-SU-AI@Stony-Brook.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
(= Moon and Weinreb)
bawden@mc
rees@mc
griss@hplabs
which includes the members of the technical committee as well as those
of the steering committee. The steering committee members are:
rpg,
gls%Think.COM
jmc
squires@isi
Mathis@isif
ohlander@isie
-rpg-
∂18-Mar-86 0318 UMA@IBM-SJ.ARPA connection
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 03:17:57 PST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 12:08:53 SET
Sender: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
From: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
To: John McCarthy <mccarthy@su-ai.arpa>
Message-ID: <860318.120853.uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa>
Subject: connection
Hi John,
I'm still trying to reach you,
Ursula
---------------------------copy of returned message------------------------
Received: from csnet-relay.arpa by IBM-SJ.ARPA on 03/18/86 at 02:29:40 PST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 4:18:49 EST
From: CSNET-RELAY Memo Service (MMDF) <mmdf@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Failed mail (msg.a010246)
Sender: mmdf@csnet-relay.arpa
To: UMA@ibm-sj.ARPA
Your message could not be delivered to
'jmc@sail.ARPA (host: su-ai.arpa) (queue: smtp)' for the following
reason: ' I'm not host "SAIL.ARPA", in "RCPT TO:<jmc@sail.ARPA>"'
Your message follows:
Received: from ibm-sj.arpa by CSNET-RELAY.ARPA id a010246; 18 Mar 86 3:58 EST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:43:37 SET
Sender: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
From: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
To: John McCarthy <jmc%sail.arpa@Csnet-Relay.arpa>
Message-ID: <860318.094337.uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa>
Subject: congratulations
Dear John,
Congratulations to your 'new' son!! Fran had sent me a message a
month ago, but did not have your electronic mail address. So finally
have it and with delight send you these congratulations. Are you
enjoying him and what is his name?
I'm at the IBM Zurich lab. for my sabbatical - have been here since
September and my contract ends at the end of April. However, I shall
remain in Europe until the beginning of August and will keep my Swiss
apt. until the end of July. In June my aunt and I are planning to visit
Leningrad, Novgorod, Riga (the highlight) and Reval, now called Tallin
I think. Have you been to Riga? I'm sure you have been to Leningrad
on your trips to Russia. If you have any pointers of what to do or not
to do,please let me know. Is there a guide on Leningrad that is
particularly good?
Well, all the best and I hope all three of you are in great spirits.
Do let me know if this reaches you.
Best regards
Ursula (Maydell)
∂18-Mar-86 0329 UMA@IBM-SJ.ARPA trying connection still
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 03:29:37 PST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 12:22:45 SET
Sender: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
From: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
To: John McCarthy <mccarthy%sail@su-ai.arpa>
Message-ID: <860318.122245.uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa>
Subject: trying connection still
-------------------------------------copy--------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 12:08:53 SET
Sender: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
From: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
To: John McCarthy <mccarthy@su-ai.arpa>
Message-ID: <860318.120853.uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa>
Subject: connection
Hi John,
I'm still trying to reach you,
Ursula
---------------------------copy of returned message------------------------
Received: from csnet-relay.arpa by IBM-SJ.ARPA on 03/18/86 at 02:29:40 PST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 4:18:49 EST
From: CSNET-RELAY Memo Service (MMDF) <mmdf@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Failed mail (msg.a010246)
Sender: mmdf@csnet-relay.arpa
To: UMA@ibm-sj.ARPA
Your message could not be delivered to
'jmc@sail.ARPA (host: su-ai.arpa) (queue: smtp)' for the following
reason: ' I'm not host "SAIL.ARPA", in "RCPT TO:<jmc@sail.ARPA>"'
Your message follows:
Received: from ibm-sj.arpa by CSNET-RELAY.ARPA id a010246; 18 Mar 86 3:58 EST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:43:37 SET
Sender: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
From: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
To: John McCarthy <jmc%sail.arpa@Csnet-Relay.arpa>
Message-ID: <860318.094337.uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa>
Subject: congratulations
Dear John,
Congratulations to your 'new' son!! Fran had sent me a message a
month ago, but did not have your electronic mail address. So finally
have it and with delight send you these congratulations. Are you
enjoying him and what is his name?
I'm at the IBM Zurich lab. for my sabbatical - have been here since
September and my contract ends at the end of April. However, I shall
remain in Europe until the beginning of August and will keep my Swiss
apt. until the end of July. In June my aunt and I are planning to visit
Leningrad, Novgorod, Riga (the highlight) and Reval, now called Tallin
I think. Have you been to Riga? I'm sure you have been to Leningrad
on your trips to Russia. If you have any pointers of what to do or not
to do,please let me know. Is there a guide on Leningrad that is
particularly good?
Well, all the best and I hope all three of you are in great spirits.
Do let me know if this reaches you.
Best regards
Ursula (Maydell)
∂18-Mar-86 0720 HST bibel's phone
the home-number is: 6015794
the uni-number is: 2105-2031
of course, it's always interesting to see you. however your trip
to munich seems to be busy. we can clear our business by mail at present.
(you intended to respond concerning the 30-yeras LISP conference.)
still i would be interested to hear how you came to frankfurt last september.
my impression was that it was not nice because you ignored my questions con-
cerning that matter. a good trip then!
i work on a book presenting ai-programming styles.there will be a chapter
on pattern matching, functional programming, problem solving, gps, advice
taker, planner, prolog, constraints, relations, simple rules, production
systems, associative networks, object-oriented programming, frames, plans
and atn's. for every chapter i write an example program - always the same
problem: solving krypto-arithmetic puzzles. i hope to finish it in summer.
∂18-Mar-86 0900 JMC
check for Sarah
∂18-Mar-86 0900 JMC
sarah's check and form
∂18-Mar-86 0946 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa PC/RT
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 09:45:58 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:48:20 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:48:20 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: PC/RT
To: jjw@sail, jmc@sail
I understand you have an RT hooked up to the ethernet.
They've just given me four, but without ethernet boards.
How did you come by yours?
---jeff
∂18-Mar-86 0957 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: PC/RT
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 09:57:23 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:59:46 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:59:46 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: re: PC/RT
To: JMC@Sail
thanks
∂18-Mar-86 1019 RA Re: Talk at Fermi Lab
[Reply to message recvd: 17 Mar 86 10:20 Pacific Time]
Talked to Claudia yesterday and informed her of the cancellation
∂18-Mar-86 1040 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: PC/RT
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 10:40:08 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 18 Mar 86 10:42:31 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 10:42:31 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: re: PC/RT
To: JMC@Sail
I may do that, but since IBM is the owner of "my" machines,
I might be able to hit them up for the boards directly.
∂18-Mar-86 1045 VAL tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, rar@KESTREL.ARPA, ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA,
phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA
The main point of the discussion is apparently explaining the discrepancy
between two facts:
(A) Axioms of tense logic correspond, generally, to pi-1-1 second-order formulas,
not to first-order formulas;
(B) The practice of formalizing commonsense reaasoning about time doesn't seem to
require second-order formulas.
Perhaps the discrepancy can be explained as follows: pi-1-1 axioms important in
mathematical practice are known to have "first-order approximations" which are
good substitutes for the purpose of proving first-order theorems. The best
example is induction, which is a pi-1-1 formula; the first-order induction
schema is such a good approximation for it that constructing a counterexample
showing their non-equivalence was a major discovery and required a highly
unnatural construction (the arithmetization of syntax).
Mathematics is full of such cases. Zermelo's axiom of subsets (every "property"
defines a subset) is best formalized as a pi-1-1 axiom; in the familiar first-order
formalizations of Zermelo set theory it is represented by a first-order schema,
and we get a system which gives more than necessary for formalizing conventional
mathematics. The completeness axiom for real numbers is pi-1-1; we replace it by
a schema and get a powerful formal theory of real numbers.
Judging from these examples, we can expect that the difference between pi-1-1
and first-order in reasoning about time, though interesting theoretically, will
hardly be essential for the practice of formalizing commonsense knowledge.
Vladimir
∂18-Mar-86 1112 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa re: PC/RT
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 11:11:43 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 18 Mar 86 11:14:05 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 11:14:05 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: re: PC/RT
To: JMC@Sail
Brent Hailpern is funding the NAIL! work and provides the
equipment.
∂18-Mar-86 1113 RA [Reply to message recvd: 17 Mar 86 15:20 Pacific Time]
I sent a msg. to Slagle with bibel's address.
∂18-Mar-86 1229 SJM essays
I have revised the bit on robot stores, following your suggestions.
See produc[1,sjm]. I also did a little on clothing stores and book
stores. See bookst[1,sjm] and clothe[1,sjm]. I am now departing to
fight city hall.
Susie
∂18-Mar-86 1329 RA Airfare prices
Here are the prices you requested:
1st class roundtrip to Frankfurt $4,120
Tourist class, roundtrip to Austin $500
1st class roundtrip London - Milan $786
trip to Europe is $5,968.
RT Edinburgh-Milan 1st class is $1,052.22 (at today's exchange rate)
∂18-Mar-86 1429 lantz@su-gregorio.arpa yet another revision ...
Received: from SU-GREGORIO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 14:13:43 PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 18 Mar 86 14:12:21 pst
Date: 18 Mar 1986 1412-PST (Tuesday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: phdcom@sail, csl-faculty@sierra
Cc: sysphd@su-gregorio.arpa
Subject: yet another revision ...
of the Report of the Systems PhD Program Committee will be arriving in
your (real) mailboxes shortly. Extra hardcopies, primarily for EE
students, will also be made available in CIS, ERL, etc. in the same
time frame.
In the meantime I am posting a copy to phd-program@score.
Keith
∂18-Mar-86 1501 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA Re: tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 15:01:02 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA22743; Tue, 18 Mar 86 15:01:39 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 15:01:39 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603182301.AA22743@kestrel.ARPA>
To: VAL@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
Cc: israel@su-csli, jmc@su-ai, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl,
rar@kestrel.ARPA
There are properties which are most naturally expressed in
second order formulas. This is to my mind a strong
incentive for embracing second-order expressibility.
In particular, the argument that the model theory is
less important for common-sense reasoning is an argument
*for*, not *against* second-order expressibility.
*Well-founding* is a property naturally expressible
in second-order terms. How would you construct a suitable
series of first-order approximants to the example that
I sent to John yesterday?
Peter
∂18-Mar-86 1539 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 15:33:55 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 15:32:29-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191788143.27.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Franklin phoned, please call. 329-0950.
Tina
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1553 greep@camelot Re: need part of the book
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 15:42:34 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Tue, 18 Mar 86 15:38:41 pst
Date: 18 Mar 1986 1538-PST (Tuesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: need part of the book
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 18 Mar 86 1409 PST.
Fausto just came by and said he's in no hurry to look at the manual
and will be occupied with the microvax KCL port for a couple of days.
Do you want me to bring the manual back, or just the "installing and
operating" section?
∂18-Mar-86 1546 VAL Trip to Monterey
I am taking Victor Kuo to Monterey tomorrow. Would you like to go with us?
I can't promise you a ride back, because Elena is thinking about joining me
there for Saturday and Sunday, but I'm sure there will be many people going
in this direction.
∂18-Mar-86 1600 PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA re: Responses to earlier comments and queries
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 15:36:38 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 13:52:36-PST
From: PHayes@SRI-KL
Subject: re: Responses to earlier comments and queries
To: JMC%SU-AI@SRI-KL
cc: PHayes@SRI-KL
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 17 Mar 86 17:36:00-PST
Hm, Im all wet, I think, but I do feel that at least a priori we
need to take discussions like this seriosly. Not to do because commonsense
reasoniong doesnt involve all this hard metamathematics is to make
the same fallacy that is made by those who decry the use of FOL as
a representational language because people can think even when they cant
pass logic 101.
More technical remarks later
Pat
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1603 RA Msg. from Frank at Dina Bolla
Frank said that your intuition about the price was right; the price of the
trip to Europe is $5,968.
Also, you were wait-listed on the flight from Hanover to London
on April 11, 7:30pm. It has been cleared and you can now have either the
4/11 or the 4/12 flight, which one do you want?
∂18-Mar-86 1623 VAL re: tense logic < first-order theory of time ?
To: ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA
CC: israel@SU-CSLI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA,
phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA, rar@KESTREL.ARPA
[In reply to message from ladkin@kestrel.ARPA sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 15:01:39 pst.]
I agree that there are properties which are most naturally expressed in
second-order formulas. Another important example: we need second-order formulas
for formalizing commonsense reasoning if we want to use circumscription.
John's PLANLUNCH remarks which started the discussion were directed, as
I understood them, not against second-order formulas, but against modal
operators (used as primitives rather than abbreviations for first- or
second-order formulas).
Concerning first-order approximations to your last example: we want to
express there that properties of instants of time can be proved by induction,
and I would do the same thing we do with induction in first-order arithmetic,
i.e., replace it by the schema for the properties expressed by first-order
formulas. For the intended applications, even quantifier-free instances of the
schema may be sufficient. (But I agree that this is unnatural. Second-order
arithmetic is better than first-order arithmetic: it doesn't have non-standard
models!)
Vladimir
∂18-Mar-86 1659 CLT package
there is a package for me at the reception desk. Could you bring it home?
thanks
∂18-Mar-86 1727 CLT shopping
could you get some Rice cereal (Gerbers) and Similac on your
way home? The supply is getting low.
∂18-Mar-86 1735 CLT
I think there is no choice for the gerbers.
There is a choice with similac and I got the iron fortified.
∂18-Mar-86 1755 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA time and expressibility
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 17:54:33 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA23828; Tue, 18 Mar 86 17:54:20 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 17:54:20 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603190154.AA23828@kestrel.ARPA>
To: val@su-ai
Subject: time and expressibility
Cc: israel@su-csli, jmc@su-ai, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
I understood John's remarks to be about the expressive capacity
of the various formalisms. To compare them, one needs to
translate into a common language, and second-order logic is
appropriate if one needs to claim that in some respects
tense logic is more expressive than first-order logic.
Using tense logic to express non-first-order properties
is appropriate if one wants to limit the extra inference
rules needed.
Your point about first-order approximation is
well-taken, provided one has enough arithmetic,
since any pi-1-1 formula may then be regarded as an existential
first-order formula with a free predicate variable. Unless
there are extra second-order deduction rules, you only need
to instantiate the schema with your favorite predicates to
use it in inference. However, this depends crucially on there
being enough arithmetic. There isn't any in a time theory,
unless we put everything in one pot, which I take John
to be suggesting in addition, and I currently disagree
with the reasons he gave.
It is however the case that the necessitation rule is mimicked
adequately in first-order time - one can prove a property with
a free time variable, take the universal closure and then
restrict the quantifier to times greater than now.
You have to be right about my example. A general
structural-induction schema should suffice. However, I
tend to think in terms of interacting theories, where
terms in one may correlate with predicates in another
and so forth. It's not clear to me that in this environment
you can actually do the first-order approximation routine
across theory boundaries without losing inferential power,
since one needs to use second-order inference rules here.
It seems to me that we are formulating syntactic
theories to talk about the actual intended model. In this
scenario, non-standard models are unimportant,
expressibility is very important, high-powered inferences
are very important. Is this correct?
Peter
∂19-Mar-86 0303 kddlab!nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet
Received: from SEISMO.CSS.GOV by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 03:03:24 PST
Return-Path: <kddlab!nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet>
Received: from kddlab.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV with UUCP; Wed, 19 Mar 86 05:59:04 EST
Received: by kddlabs.junet (4.12/4.7)
id AA29538; Wed, 19 Mar 86 15:38:01 jst
Received: by kddlabs.junet (4.12/4.7)
id AA29447; Wed, 19 Mar 86 15:37:47 jst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA22310; Wed, 19 Mar 86 15:30:50 jst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA22183; Wed, 19 Mar 86 15:27:20 jst
Received: by kurims.kyoto-u.junet (4.24/4.7)
id AA00374; Wed, 19 Mar 86 13:25:23+0900
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA18845; Wed, 19 Mar 86 12:38:50 jst
Received: by kurims.kyoto-u.junet (4.24/4.7)
id AA00189; Wed, 19 Mar 86 10:41:47+0900
Message-Id: <8603190141.AA00189@kurims.kyoto-u.junet>
Received: by kuee.kyoto-u.junet (systemV.kyoto-u)
id AA21454; Tue, 18 Mar 86 19:09:47 JST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 19:09:47 JST
From: kddlab!nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet (Makoto NAGAO)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Dear Prof. McCarthy: I sent an electronic mail to you by the help of
Dr. Goto. I hope you read it, and give a reply to me soon. M. Nagao,
Kyoto Univ.
∂19-Mar-86 0627 somewhere!nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet
Received: from SU-SHASTA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 06:25:14 PST
Received: by su-shasta.arpa with TCP; Wed, 19 Mar 86 06:25:29 pst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA22321; Wed, 19 Mar 86 15:31:52 jst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA22202; Wed, 19 Mar 86 15:27:42 jst
Received: by kurims.kyoto-u.junet (4.24/4.7)
id AA00384; Wed, 19 Mar 86 13:25:58+0900
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA18939; Wed, 19 Mar 86 12:39:54 jst
Received: by kurims.kyoto-u.junet (4.24/4.7)
id AA00198; Wed, 19 Mar 86 10:42:15+0900
Message-Id: <8603190142.AA00198@kurims.kyoto-u.junet>
Received: by kuee.kyoto-u.junet (systemV.kyoto-u)
id AA21454; Tue, 18 Mar 86 19:09:47 JST
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 86 19:09:47 JST
From: nagao@kuee.kyoto-u.junet (Makoto NAGAO)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Dear Prof. McCarthy: I sent an electronic mail to you by the help of
Dr. Goto. I hope you read it, and give a reply to me soon. M. Nagao,
Kyoto Univ.
∂19-Mar-86 0923 RA Roxie France, Time-Life
France from Time-Life called. She asked me to tell you that they are interested
in more pictures from you. They would like to have pictures from the "LISP period".
They talked to John Backus and he does not have any pictures. Do you have
a picture of John Backus alone? If yes, they would like to see it.
France is going on maternity leave at the end of the week, her replacement
is Esther Ferington who will be following up on this. Ferington tel. is
(703) 838 7308. France's tel. is (703) 838 7015.
∂19-Mar-86 1054 CLT mat
says he has no passenger so is taking his own luggage and thanks
∂19-Mar-86 1103 SJG trip to Monterey
I have no passenger! So, I'll be taking my own luggage, belting it
carefully into the back seat, and I'll see you down there.
Thanks much for offering --
Matt
P.S. I've left a check for the surplus from the DAI workshop with
Rutie. I hope you aren't expecting Sridharan to run so efficiently!
∂19-Mar-86 1301 VAL re: time and expressibility
To: ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA
CC: israel@SU-CSLI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA,
rar@KESTREL.ARPA
[In reply to message from ladkin@kestrel.ARPA sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 17:54:20 pst.]
I can't agree with your assertion that it is essential to have enough arithmetic
in the theory to be able to approximate a pi-1-1 axiom by a first-order schema.
Without arithmetic, we can't assume that the first-order part of the pi-1-1
formula is existential, but this is not necessary for constructing approximations.
A remarkable example of approximating a pi-1-1 schema without arithmetic is
Tarski's "elementary algebra". He approximated the completeness axiom by the
schema which represents the intermediate value theorem for *polynomials*, and
he was extremely successful: the theory is complete! Elementary algebra is, of
course, much weaker than arithmetic.
I don't quite understand your last remark about what is and what is not
important. But let me give an analogy which, it seems to me, illustrates
the difference between the concerns of different participants of this
discussion. The invention of complex numbers was a revolution in
mathematics. But compare a formal theory of real numbers with a similar
formal theory of complex numbers. It is so easy to model one in another
that to us, logicians, there is essentially no difference between them. A
mathematical theory of anything, including commonsense reasoning, is not
only a formal object studied by logicians but also a complex of vague
ideas about how to use it. So when we try to test JMC's claims about what
is good and what is bad for formalizing commonsense knowledge by applying
precise results from logic, maybe *sometimes* we don't do the right thing.
Vladimir
∂19-Mar-86 1311 LES let.pub fixup
Your let.pub[let,jmc] file is write-protected, but the fix is simple:
on line 45 change the value of "height" from 55 to 52. That should do it.
∂19-Mar-86 1659 rar@kestrel.ARPA The subject of the discussion
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 16:58:20 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA27881; Wed, 19 Mar 86 16:58:25 pst
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 86 16:58:25 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603200058.AA27881@kestrel.ARPA>
To: israel@csli, jmc@sail, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl, val@sail
Subject: The subject of the discussion
Cc: rar@kestrel.ARPA
After a couple of days of *real* work, I took the time to catch up on the
discussion this afternoon. It seems to me that the subject has changed,
although no one has explicitly noted it. What started all this was jmc
writing something like
tense logic < first order theory of time
on the board at SRI. I understood this to mean that he belived, as a result
of some examples Shoham cooked up, that the first order theory was more
expressive than tense logic. I, among others, questioned this. Surely
no one disagrees that doing model theory is the right way to settle whether
one language is more expressive than another--the way to "disprove" the
inequality is to find an example of something you'd like to express,
prove that it is expressible in tense logic, and prove that is is not
expressible in a first order theory of time. All of my contributions have
been intended to contribute to finding such an example, my first step
being to investigate the expressive powers of tense logic vis a vis first
order logic.
The question now before this august body seems to be: Is first order logic
better for expressing what we want to express about time than tense logic
(or maybe `second order' rather than `first order')? This is a *VERY*
different question, to be attacked by very different methods. Personally,
I strongly favor using (a complete) omega order, infinitary, intensional
logic, with a virtual set theory (in Quine's sense) grafted on, a la
←Principia←Mathematica←, for formalizing this (and most other) theories.
If everyone is bored with the original question, I'd be just as happy to
talk about this--but I'd be happier doing so if everyone were conscious that
a change has been made.
-- rar
∂19-Mar-86 1721 RPG Grey Thursday
Does anything need to be done about JJW for grey thursday?
I can write something about his progress if needed.
-rpg-
∂19-Mar-86 1955 greep@camelot Talk: A Data-Flow Environment for an Interactive Graphics
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 19:55:02 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 19 Mar 86 19:51:10 pst
Date: 19 Mar 1986 1951-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: JMC@sail, LES@sail
Subject: Talk: A Data-Flow Environment for an Interactive Graphics
The following notice from the CSLI newsletter sounds like it may be of
interest:
PIXELS AND PREDICATES MEETING
A Data-Flow Environment for an Interactive Graphics
Paul Haeberli, Silicon Graphics Inc.
1:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 26, Ventura trailers
Multiple windows are a common feature of contemporary interactive
programming and application environments, but facilities for
communicating data between windows have been limited. Operating
system extensions are described that allow programs to be combined in
a flexible way. A data-flow manager is introduced to control the flow
of data between concurrent processes. This system allows the
interconnection of processes to be changed interactively, and places
no limitations on the structure of process interconnection. As a
result, this environment encourages creation of simple, modular
graphics tools that work well together.
A video tape of the system will be shown during the talk; there will
be a demo afterwards on an IRIS workstation.
∂20-Mar-86 0000 JMC
spoof for April 1 on men nursing babies, Sweden
∂20-Mar-86 0613 nttlab!masahiko@su-shasta.arpa our visit to Stanford
Received: from SU-SHASTA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 06:13:43 PST
Received: by su-shasta.arpa with TCP; Thu, 20 Mar 86 06:13:56 pst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA09862; Thu, 20 Mar 86 12:13:28 jst
Date: 20 Mar 1986 11:45-JST
From: Masahiko Sato <nttlab!masahiko@su-shasta.arpa>
Subject: our visit to Stanford
To: Carolyn Talcott <clt@su-ai.ARPA>
Cc: a1458@su-shasta.arpa, John McCarthy <jmc@su-ai.ARPA>
Message-Id: <511670745/masahiko@nttlab>
How is your baby doing? I believe that he is doing well.
This year we would like to visit Stanford again in July and August.
Will this period be convenient for you? As we wish to apply for the
Summer Only Housing provided by Escondido Village [because, otherwise
it is very difficult to find a suitable short term accommodation in and
around Palo Alto], for us this is the best time. We will get application
forms from Escondido in early April, and we wish to apply for it if you
could agree with this period.
More precisely, accoding to our plan, Mr. Hayao Nakahara and
Mr. Masami Hagiya will visit Stanford from the begining of July to the
end of August, and I will probably be there from mid July to the
end of August.
Have any of you decided on your plan to come to Japan? As my
affiliation will change to Tohoku University in Sedai from April,
you can stay in Sendai, Tokyo or Kyoto when you come to Japan.
Please send your reply to MS at SAIL. The mail will be forwarded to me
in Japan.
** masahiko **
∂20-Mar-86 0614 nttlab!masahiko@su-shasta.arpa change of address
Received: from SU-SHASTA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 06:14:42 PST
Received: by su-shasta.arpa with TCP; Thu, 20 Mar 86 06:14:56 pst
Received: by ntt.junet (4.12/4.7JC-7) CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL
id AA16509; Thu, 20 Mar 86 19:13:20 jst
Date: 20 Mar 1986 18:47-JST
From: Masahiko Sato <nttlab!masahiko@su-shasta.arpa>
Subject: change of address
To: Carolyn Talcott <clt@su-ai.ARPA>, John McCarthy <jmc@su-ai.ARPA>,
Richard Weyhrauch <rww@su-ai.ARPA>, Zohar Manna <zm@su-ai.ARPA>,
Richard Waldinger <waldinger@sri-ai.ARPA>
Cc: a1458@su-shasta.arpa
Message-Id: <511696072/masahiko@nttlab>
I will be promoted to Professor at Tohoku Univerisity from this April.
So please note the following new postal address.
Masahiko Sato
Research Institute of Electrical Communication
Tohoku University
2-1-1 Katahira, Sendai 980
Japan
The city of Sendai is located to the North-East of Tokyo and can be
reached from Tokyo by a 2-hour Shikansen ride. Professor Takayasu Ito
is Professor at the Department of Information Science, Tohoku
University.
My e-mail address is:
MS@SAIL
** masahiko **
∂20-Mar-86 0821 UMA@IBM-SJ.ARPA stay at IBM
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 08:21:39 PST
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 86 09:51:08 SET
Sender: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
From: uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa
To: John McCarthy <jmc@su-ai.arpa>
Message-ID: <860320.095108.uma.zurlvm1@ibm-sj.arpa>
Subject: stay at IBM
Hi John,
Great that the connection works! I can be reached at this address
until April 30 and will not be back at my Alberta address
(maydell@alberta via uucp) until mid August. Interesting contacts
in Leningrad would be super, as long as there are no negative
repercussions for the Russians. In Riga apparently there is no problem
in contacting people there. I am looking forward to the trip - we go
by boat to Helsinki and by bus to Leningrad and Novgorod.
Good to hear all is well with you! Timothy must be a joy.
All the best and take care
Ursula
∂20-Mar-86 0846 CLT calendar item
mon 24-mar 14:45 Timothy to Dr.Ginter
∂20-Mar-86 1058 RTC Old course notes
Clearing out my papers, I found some old paper copies of handouts from
Lisp: Programming and Proving courses. Do you want to keep them, or
should I throw them out?
Ross
∂20-Mar-86 1433 S.SOOD@LOTS-A vtss class
Received: from LOTS-A by SU-AI with PUP; 20-Mar-86 14:32 PST
Date: Thu 20 Mar 86 14:34:20-PST
From: Vidur Sood <S.SOOD@LOTS-A>
Subject: vtss class
To: j.jmc@LOTS-A
Message-ID: <12192301844.10.S.SOOD@LOTS-A>
Prof,
I enjoyed taking the class--thanks for offering it...
-------
∂20-Mar-86 1635 BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS 309 schedule
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 16:31:13 PST
Date: Thu 20 Mar 86 16:30:07-PST
From: Kathy Berg <BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS 309 schedule
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-4776
Message-ID: <12192322922.33.BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John:
I have arranged the quarters for the Industrial Lectureship next year:
Nelson: Fall quarter
Strong: Winter quarter
Smith: Spring
Kathy
-------
∂21-Mar-86 0908 SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM Distributed AI Workshop
Received: from BBNG.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 09:07:41 PST
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 12:07:54-EST
From: SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
Subject: Distributed AI Workshop
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
At the last DAI workshop (Dec85) at Sea Ranch, I volunteered to organize
the next of this series, most likely somewhere in the vicinity of Boston
around October 86 when the leaves turn pretty around here.
It seems just the right time to start planning for it now. Matt Ginsberg
and I had a phone conversation about it. Before I go farther with my
planning, I would like to know if AAAI will, once again, provide initial
funds for arranging the workshop.
I dont know what kind of information you need and in what form. Here is
what I know so far. I will plan on inviting about 35 people which seemed
to be a comfortable number last year. The registration fees of $150
per person may be sufficient to cover actual costs at the workshop site
including meals/lodging/meeting-rooms. If AAAI will provide an approximate
sum of $5000 to cover costs initially, I expect that after taking out
expenses such as duplicating, local transportation for participants,
and some mailing, whatever is left over will revert to AAAI at the end.
Please let me know if AAAI will once again sponsor this event. Also, if
you need any other details, I shallbe glad to supply them.
Regards, Sridharan
-------
∂21-Mar-86 1022 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 10:22:44 PST
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 10:21:39-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, hirsh@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA, haunga@SU-SCORE.ARPA, waleson@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
gsmith@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192517989.10.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I am presently trying to set up a meeting of the AI Search Committee during
the first two weeks of April. What I am looking at is a meeting to last one
hour (with the hope that everyone has read through the applications prior
to the meeting).
Please let me know your unavailable times during that time.
Thanks!
-Anne
P.S. Feel free to stop by my office to look through the applications
we have received so far.
-------
∂21-Mar-86 1158 KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA uucp
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 11:55:46 PST
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 11:50:54-PST
From: Kim W. Tracy <KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: uucp
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192534237.26.KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Sorry it took me so long to reply to your question about uucp
traffic being direct, but I am not sure how direct uucp has to
be. I do know that it is very limited in its routing capability.
The route for the message has to be specified in full from the
originating node, so I suspect that the communication is direct
in some sense. I do not think that the message can be packetized
and mixed with other messages. Rather, it is my impression that
uucp transfers the message to the next node and that node then
queues a job to retransmit the message to the next link in the
address. If this is correct, the message travels from node to
node in its entirety and does not break into separate packets.
Certainly, the communcation between uucp nodes does not have to be
direct in the sense that the entire communications link from
destination to source is allocated at the same time and the
intermediate nodes just relay packets of information. That is, it
does not have to have a complete circuit.
I know that this information is scant, but I am not a
uucp expert and this is just my impression of how it works.
Kim
-------
∂21-Mar-86 1215 RA air fare Edinburgh-Milan
RT Edinburgh-Milan 1st class is $1,052.22 (at today's exchange rate)
∂21-Mar-86 1300 SJM essays
To see where the different essays are, see my file done[1,sjm].
Also, I have combined the bits on clothing and bookstores into a file
called retail[1,sjm]. I'll probably put the bit on robot stores here,
too, rather than in the essay on productivity.
Note: by `where the essays are', I mean where they stand in
the editing process.
Susie
∂21-Mar-86 1702 RTC Desk space
No doubt you will wonder why I have not vacated MJH360. The reason is that
I have not yet been assigned a desk to move to.
Here are some details: On Monday afternoon, I contacted Anil Gangolli,
who is responsible for assigning desk space. He replied that he had no
free desks at all, nor did he expect to have any until the end of spring
quarter. On Tuesday, I spoke with Vaughan Pratt, who agreed to help with
the situation. I understand that Prof. Pratt and Anil have conferred on
the subject, but I have not yet heard the outcome. Prof Pratt has not
been here, nor has he read his electronic mail since Tuesday afternoon.
I ask for your patience,
Ross
∂21-Mar-86 1842 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Getting things rolling
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 18:38:46 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 21 Mar 86 21:40:07-EST
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1986 21:40 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12192608724.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Getting things rolling
I'm sending this to the steering committee because that mailing list has
the technical people on it as well. And these issues of how to get
started involve all of us.
Here are some things that we need to do, in more or less the order in
which I think we need to deal with them. The list is probably not
complete, so feel free to propose additions to it. Entires are marked
with S (steering), T (technical), S&T (both) and S,T (each committee
separately).
Get the two committees organized. Probably we don't need much
organization, but some sort of chairman or moderator is needed for each
-- someone who will feel responsible for goosing the agenda along. (S,T)
Make a list of formal things that the steering committee needs to do as
part of the ANSI and ISO formalities. Is some sort of a kick-off
meeting necessary? (S)
Conduct a poll on the Common Lisp mailing list (and maybe by other
channels) to identify what companies have people participating in
this process, even if they are content merely to observe. Prepare
a list of such participating companies, along with the name and address
of a contact person at each. This will be used for formal X3J13
notifications, etc. It will also make it clear to everyone that many
companies are participants in this process, even if they don't have
someone on the Technical committee. (S)
Determine if there are any companies (or other implementation groups)
that need arpanet access but don't have it. Try to get them accounts
somewhere. (S)
Try to establish reliable netmail contact with Japan. Once this is in
place, select a Japanese member for the technical committee. (Masayuki
Ida was discussed earlier, but we couldn't get mail to him, though mail
from him has reached me.) (S)
Send an embassy to the Eulisp people and see if they have any interest
at all in participating in this process, given our unreasonable desire
to standardize something like the current Common Lisp and not start
over as they are doing. If they want to participate, invite one or more
European members to join the committee. Netmail seems not to be a
problem. (S)
Decide on how we are going to run the technical decision-making process,
how we are going to record and communicate the results, and what sort of
form the standard document will take. (S&T). I'll describe some
thoughts I have on this issue in a later message.
Decide what major areas we are going to try to fix and/or extend in this
first version of the standard. Make for ourselves some guidelines on
how deeply we want to change things. Set ourselves a realistic schedule
for completing the first spec. (T)
Provide some guidance to the ISI folks about what services are most
needed, and what their priorities should be. (S&T)
Create an inventory of issues that have been raised. Guy made a start
at this, but it needs to be kept up to date. Divide these issues into
three classes: issues where we think there is (or could easily be)
agreement on the right solution, isolated issues that are controversial,
and issues that are all tangled together in rotten areas of the current
spec (e.g. that part about what the compiler does). (T)
For the issues where there is or could be agreement, confirm this on the
mailing list and then record the decisions so that they don't unravel
again. (T)
Debate the isolated but controversial issues in public, then make the
decisions and record them. (T)
For areas where many interrelated things need work, choose someone in
each case to put together a comprehensive proposal. Then debate the
result and nail it down. (T)
As coherent proposals for extensions appear (error, objects, whatever),
run these through the process. If there are areas where progress is
needed but no proposals exist, find someone willing to take a crack at
it. (T)
Make a final pass over the completed specification document (T) and try
to get it through ISO and ANSI (S).
Get to work on Common Lisp 2001. (Whoever survives.)
-- Scott
∂21-Mar-86 1907 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA expressibility
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 19:03:44 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA08889; Fri, 21 Mar 86 19:04:16 pst
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 19:04:16 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603220304.AA08889@kestrel.ARPA>
To: val@su-ai
Subject: expressibility
Cc: israel@su-csli, jmc@su-ai, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
To address your comment on expressibility and arithmetic:
I still claim that *some* arithmetic is needed,
else how do you show that e.g.
(forall y)(exists x)(forall S)(exists z)(forall P)(blah)
can be written as first-order with free predicate
variables (caps are predvars and lower case are object vars)?
Your example was indeed a fragment of arithmetic, as is
Tarski's high school algebra axiomatisation with Wilkie's
extra axiom, which is also complete (I don't necessarily
distinguish integers from naturals, since it's easy to
obtain them).
I suggested that non-standard models are
unimportant to you because the difference between
a first-order and a second-order theory of a second-order
definable structure is precisely the non-standard models.
If you don't care about the difference, it must be
because you don't care about the non-standard models.
An argument is needed for not caring about non-standard models.
e.g. in my example of the well-founded history
axiom in tense logic:
The difference between the second-order tense logic
axiom and the first-order general induction schema
is that there are models which aren't well-founded,
in the latter case. These models will have consistent
states which do not appear in well-founded models, and
these states therefore cannot arise from any finite
execution sequence.
Allowing such states means that it may be
impossible to verify a true safety property, since these
non-atndard states may contradict that property,
while no states in a finite execution sequence can contradict it.
So, in order to claim that a first-order approximation
is acceptable, one needs to demonstrate that such situations
cannot arise, and I don't see an argument for this.
It seems to me that you don't want to argue that second-order
notions are always dispensable, even for pi-1-1,
since you gave the
circumscription example, and John stressed that
*first-order time with sets of time points*
is stronger than *first-order logic of time points*.
I don't know what theory he had in mind for the former,
but I assume it's second-order in the sense that sets
are objects.
You do, however, want to argue that second-order notions
are dispensable in the theory of time, if those notions
happen to be tense logical.
And this still seems ad hoc to me.
Peter
∂21-Mar-86 2038 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 20:38:46 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 21 Mar 86 23:40:10-EST
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1986 23:40 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12192630575.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Documenting our decisions
It seems to me that we want to focus on the production of a coherent,
complete document for ANSI Common Lisp (maybe later to be ISO Common
Lisp). We can't really expect the community to rally around the
existing Digital Press book plus a long list of corrections and a couple
of new chapters. Nor are we likely to find as many of the problems and
inconsistencies if we just handle each problem as an isolated issue.
Our most productive periods in developing this language were when we
were trying to hammer out large sections of the book to meet a deadline.
I don't think that a new edition of the Steele book will do the job.
Digital Press has been reasonably cooperative so far, but I doubt that
they will give up their copyright, and we just cannot produce a document
for the Common Lisp standard that says "Copyright Digital Press" on it.
If that book were in the public domain, we could use its actual text as
a starting point, but I don't see this happening. So it looks like we
have to develop a new document. Of course, the Common Lisp it describes
will be very similar to the Common Lisp described in Steele.
Ideally, there should be two documents, both kept online in some form
that most people can easily FTP and print (TeX?), and both kept up to
date as each decision is made. One of these documents would be the
manual documenting the proposed standard; the other would be a list of
all the deliberate incompatible changes that we have made to the
language as described in the original silver book. When we're done, the
former is our report to ANSI; the latter is a guide for all the
companies that need to update their implementations and all the users
who need to fix things in their code. The standard document needs to be
as clear and unambiguous as we can make it; it does NOT necessarily need
to be organized a a tutorial or as a convenient manual for the working
programmer, nor does it need to be subtly witty. There will presumably
be a lively market for other Common Lisp books, including the
second edition of Steele, that will fill those needs, but the new
document should become the definitive language standard.
These documents should either be public-domain or they should be
copyrighted by someone not associated with a manufacturer. If
copyrighted, there should be explicit blanket permission for anyone to
reproduce the document without charge, as long as the text is reproduced
in its entirety and any additions to the text are clearly marked as
such. [Question: is a public-domain document acceptable to ANSI and
ISO, or do they require the ability to copyright the thing for
themselves? After being burned once, I'm not too keen on working on
this thing and yielding up the copyright to ANYONE.]
Several times in the last few months I have come close to volunteering
to write a new, public-domain manual meeting the above conditions and to
keep it online here at CMU. This impulse arose out of frustration at
seeing issues be almost settled and then unravel again. Each time I've
thought about this, I've come to my senses. Writing a new manual from
scratch is more work than I am prepared to do in the next year. But
Gabriel tells me that Lucid has written a new manual, equivalent in
content but not in form to the Steele book, and therefore free of the
Digital Press copyright. He also says that Lucid might be willing to
put the sources for this document in the public domain to serve as a
starting point for the new specification.
I haven't seen this new manual yet, but if it's in good shape and if we
can indeed arrange to use it without awkward restrictions, I will
probably volunteer to hammer it into a spec and to keep it up to date
(with a little help from my friends at CMU and, I hope, from all of
you). It would be kept online and freely FTP'able at CMU. We will not
get into the hardcopy business, but maybe ISI can do that, charging
enough for copies to recoup the costs or maybe some company will decide
to crank these out quickly and cheaply.
The model would be that I get this into some initial kind of shape while
the rest of you debate the issues currently on the table. Maybe some of
the rest of you can work on particular sections. Once the document is
presentable and in line with current truth, we make a few passes through
it, chapter by chapter, debating and fixing problems and ambiguities as
we find them. Once we're happy, we ship it up to X3J13.
If anyone has a different model of how to do this, please speak up. If
there's anyone else out there who would like to do this, I'd be happy to
step aside or would be willing to help carry some part of the load. But
please don't volunteer unless you're really serious about doing this.
If we end up with a big backlog of changes to go in, things rot quickly.
Please note: I said I MIGHT volunteer for this, and that sentence had a
couple of "if's" in it.
-- Scott
∂25-Mar-86 0302 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 at a workshop on Knowledge from Wednesday afternoon till
Friday night and possibly Saturday.
∂25-Mar-86 0313 gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA Documenting our decisions
Received: from GODOT.THINK.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:12:57 PST
Received: from wenceslas by GODOT.THINK.COM via CHAOS; Mon, 24 Mar 86 14:35:16 est
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 86 14:37 EST
From: Guy Steele <gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>
Subject: Documenting our decisions
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU, cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12192630575.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-Id: <860324143710.8.GLS@THINK-WENCESLAS.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1986 23:40 EST
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
...
I don't think that a new edition of the Steele book will do the job.
Digital Press has been reasonably cooperative so far, but I doubt that
they will give up their copyright, and we just cannot produce a document
for the Common Lisp standard that says "Copyright Digital Press" on it.
If that book were in the public domain, we could use its actual text as
a starting point, but I don't see this happening. So it looks like we
have to develop a new document. Of course, the Common Lisp it describes
will be very similar to the Common Lisp described in Steele.
...
The standard document needs to be
as clear and unambiguous as we can make it; it does NOT necessarily need
to be organized a a tutorial or as a convenient manual for the working
programmer, nor does it need to be subtly witty. There will presumably
be a lively market for other Common Lisp books, including the
second edition of Steele, that will fill those needs, but the new
document should become the definitive language standard.
It seems to me that there are two issues that are somewhat orthogonal:
(a) Can the ANSI effort begin with some form of the Digital press book,
or must a new document begin from scratch?
(b) Should we plan to bring out an interim edition to tide us over to the
point where something officially ANSI comes out (even in draft form)?
If the answer to (b) is yes, then a subissue is whether it should be a
second edition with Digital Press or published through some other mechanism,
such as agreeing that the Lucid document is the right thing from now on.
If the answer to (a) is no, then I would be leery of having a "competing"
new edition out of Digital press coming out at roughly the same time as the
ANSI standard, because that would only create confusion as to which is the
"real" standard, and I would rather avoid such confusion. Better to let the
Digital press book die a natural death and put my efforts into the ANSI
version.(*)
On the other hand, I worked pretty hard on the book to get a lot of subtle
things right. It is certainly not deathless prose, but it has been polished
a lot, and it would be a pity for the ANSI committee not to be able to take
advantage of that. Then again, maybe it would be a good exercise to chuck
the whole thing and start over and really get it right; more work, but
potentially bigger payoff in accuracy and clarity at the end. There is also
the possibility that the Lucid document (which I have not yet seen) is
exactly the right thing. I would be happy if it were so.
--Guy
(*) I decided to dig up my contract with Digital Press and scan it for
loopholes and traps, and found this clause, a potential pitfall for the
"natural death" theory: "The Author agrees to revise the Work for
subsequent editions if the Publisher considers it in the best interests of
the Work. [I have no idea how a Work can have "interests". --GLS] ...
Should the Author be unable or unwilling to provide such a revision... the
Publisher may have the revised edition prepared... and may display in the
revised Work and in advertising, the name of the person, or persons, who
prepared said revisions." What do I make of this? Barf.
∂25-Mar-86 0319 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA AI comp
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:13:55 PST
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 10:11:27-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: AI comp
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, genesereth@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA,
buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
As you may know, the PhD program committee has proposed a reorganization
of the the comprehensive. The idea is to have broader "theory,"
"software," and "hardware" sections, which include material that has
previously been included in specific topic areas. For example, PROLOG
belongs in software, and theoretical work on deduction belongs in
theory.
There is a fourth area that will include material that deals with
specialized application areas, and that does not naturally fall under
the broader headings. I am trying to put together a sample syllabus
that would show what goes here. I ask you to provide input on what
would be in an AI section.
What I need is items for a reading list. General statements of topic
can't count, since the students will expect to be questioned on material
they were explicitly told to study. Also, remember this is a comp, not
a qual, so the material is to be read by every student.
What should we put in?
--t
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0320 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:20:44 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Tue 25 Mar 86 05:39:04-EST
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1986 01:31 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193437323.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Documenting our decisions
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1986 15:26-EST from OHLANDER at USC-ISIB.ARPA
Ron,
Thanks for your offer of help on the standards document. If we go for
this way of documenting our decisions, ISI will probably turn out to be
the right organization to do the distribution.
On the copyright issue, it seems a lot of work to set up some sort of
"Common Lisp Users Group" corportion just to hold onto the copyright.
We can do something like this if we have to, but unless there's some
clear need for a copyright it would be easier to just produce a
public-domain document that we can all use freely.
-- Scott
∂25-Mar-86 0321 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU [yuasa: forwarded]
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:17:53 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Tue 25 Mar 86 05:36:21-EST
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1986 23:12 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193149846.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: [yuasa: forwarded]
Our original discussions of who should be on the technical and steering
committees took place on a smaller mailing list, but as we begin to
consider adding foreign members to these committees, I think that the
full steering and technical committees ought to be involved.
Unlike the situation in Europe, Common Lisp seems to be enthusiastically
accepted in Japan as the future standard for Lisp work. Of course,
there's also great interest in Prolog, but a lot of the companies are
quietly working on Lisp, leaving Prolog to ICOT. Anyway, it has been
our intention to add a Japanese member to the technical committee as
soon as possible.
Unfortunately, while the Japanese have occasionally sent netmail to me,
I seem to be unable to answer, and I gather that others in the U.S. have
been no more successful. The ability to stay in touch with the rest of
us by netmail and to read the Common Lisp mailing list is critical for
any prospective member of the technical committee. Have any of you had
success in sending mail over there? The message included below took
three days to reach me, and I have no idea if my attempt to reply will
work.
In our earlier discussions, the leading Japanese candidate for the
technical committee was Dr. Masayuki Ida, an assistant professor at
Aoyama Gakuin University. He is the one who translated the Common Lisp
manual into Japanese, and seems to be very active in setting up
communication among the Japanese Common Lisp community. Of course, we
want to consult with as many of the Japanese as possible before choosing
someone.
Mr. Yuasa and Mr. Hagiya of Kyoto University were also discussed. They
are technically very proficient, having implemented Kyoto Common Lisp
from scratch, with no direct help from the U.S. However, the feeling
was that they are perhaps too junior -- I think that they are the
equivalent of Research Associates in the U.S., and neither yet has his
Ph.D. The Japanese are very status conscious, so selecting a junior
person as the Japanese representative might be awkward.
Anyway, I just received the following message from Yuasa, and replied
with a test message that may or may not get through. I'll let you know
if I am able to establish contact (which would probably indicate that we
can reach Ida and some others as well). If my message doesn't make it
after a reasonable time, I'll send Yuasa some snailmail explaining that
we want to cooperate closely with them, but need reliable netmail first.
In any event, Yuasa and Hagiya should be added to the official X3J13
physical mailing list.
-- Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 86 20:56:40+0900
From: yuasa at kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.junet
To: fahlman at cmu-cs-c.ARPA
Dear Prof. Fahlman,
Someone passed me your EMAIL on the Subject "Committee Membership for
ANSI/ISO" addressed to common-lisp@su-ai.arpa.
I am very much interested in joining the X3 Committees.
I strongly believe that we (Masami Hagiya and I) can contribute to the
standardization efforts of the US Common Lisp community.
As you may have already heard, our Common Lisp system KCL is running at more
than 150 sites in Japan on many different machines, including VAX, SUN,
Apollo Domain, and AT&T 3B2. In a sense, KCL itself is becoming the standard
in Japan. Many comments are coming to us about the language specification of
Common Lisp, and we ourselves have already got enough experiences with Common
Lisp. Indeed, half of the software produced in our institute is written in
Common Lisp now a days. We will publish an introduction book on Common Lisp
in this spring (in Japanese first, then hopefully translated into English).
Now that a wide-ranged computer network is available throughout Japan, we can
also play the role of the gateway between the US community and Japanese
community.
Could you please send me more information about the X3 Committees?
We are very happy if we can work for the world-wide cooperation of the
Lisp standardization.
Sincerely,
Taiichi Yuasa
Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences,
Kyoto University, Japan
nttlab!kurims!yuasa@Shasta.arpa
∂25-Mar-86 0330 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA [Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>: AI comp]
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:14:14 PST
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 10:18:43-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: [Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>: AI comp]
To: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA, phd-program@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The following were sent to elicit faculty input. Student input is
welcome too. --t
-------------------
---------------
1) 24-Mar To: nilsson@SU-SCORE AI comp
2) 24-Mar To: oliger@SU-SCORE. AI comp
3) 24-Mar To: faculty@SU-SCORE AI comp
Message 1 -- ************************
Mail-From: WINOGRAD created at 24-Mar-86 10:11:27
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 10:11:27-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: AI comp
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, genesereth@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA,
buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
As you may know, the PhD program committee has proposed a reorganization
of the the comprehensive. The idea is to have broader "theory,"
"software," and "hardware" sections, which include material that has
previously been included in specific topic areas. For example, PROLOG
belongs in software, and theoretical work on deduction belongs in
theory.
There is a fourth area that will include material that deals with
specialized application areas, and that does not naturally fall under
the broader headings. I am trying to put together a sample syllabus
that would show what goes here. I ask you to provide input on what
would be in an AI section.
What I need is items for a reading list. General statements of topic
can't count, since the students will expect to be questioned on material
they were explicitly told to study. Also, remember this is a comp, not
a qual, so the material is to be read by every student.
What should we put in?
--t
-------
Message 2 -- ************************
Mail-From: WINOGRAD created at 24-Mar-86 10:13:03
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 10:13:03-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: AI comp
To: oliger@SU-SCORE.ARPA, golub@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
As you may know, the PhD program committee has proposed a reorganization
of the the comprehensive. The idea is to have broader "theory,"
"software," and "hardware" sections, which include material that has
previously been included in specific topic areas. For example,
programming languages designed for vector and parallel computations
belong in software, and theoretical work on scientific algorithms might
go in theory.
There is a fourth area that will include material that deals with
specialized application areas, and that does not naturally fall under
the broader headings. I am trying to put together a sample syllabus
that would show what goes here. I ask you to provide input on what
would be in an NA section.
What I need is items for a reading list. General statements of topic
can't count, since the students will expect to be questioned on material
they were explicitly told to study. Also, remember this is a comp, not
a qual, so the material is to be read by every student.
What should we put in?
--t
-------
Message 3 -- ************************
Mail-From: WINOGRAD created at 24-Mar-86 10:17:16
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 10:17:16-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: AI comp
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-faculty@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: Winograd@SU-CSLI.ARPA
As you may know, the CSD PhD program committee has proposed a
reorganization of the the comprehensive. The idea is to have broader
"theory," "software," and "hardware" sections, which include material
that has previously been included in specific topic areas
There is a fourth area that will include material that deals with
specialized application areas, and that does not naturally fall under
the broader headings. I am trying to put together a sample syllabus
that would show what goes here. It has been proposed at various times
that this might include material from data-base design, graphics, and
other such topics.
I am open to any suggestions of material that should be included. What I
need is proposed items for a reading list. General statements of topic
can't count, since the students will expect to be questioned on material
they were explicitly told to study. Also, remember this is a comp, not
a qual, so the material is to be read by every student.
If there doesn't seem to be sufficient material or concensus on it, this
section of the comp may be reorganized or eliminated. Suggestions on
other organizations are welcome too.
Thanks for your help.
--t
-------
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0333 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:21:11 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Tue 25 Mar 86 05:39:05-EST
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1986 01:59 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193442413.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: Guy Steele <gls@AQUINAS.THINK.COM>
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Documenting our decisions
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1986 14:37-EST from Guy Steele <gls at THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>
It seems to me that there are two issues that are somewhat orthogonal:
(a) Can the ANSI effort begin with some form of the Digital press book,
or must a new document begin from scratch?
(b) Should we plan to bring out an interim edition to tide us over to the
point where something officially ANSI comes out (even in draft form)?
If the answer to (a) were yes, that would make everyone's life easier,
but only if we get the manual completely out from under the Digital Press
copyright. I'm assuming that this won't happen. I'd rather spend time
writing a new version than hassling with Digital's lawyers.
On issue (b), I don't think we necessarily need an interim version in
the form of a book. The community of language implementors can track
the emerging standard. For users, the existing book will match the
existing implementations well enough, modulo some ambiguities and minor
fixes. Somewhere along the line we could produce a pamphlet that
documents these disambiguations, to be used with the existing book.
Once the new spec document is ready, according to us, we could find a
way to do a mass printing of it -- we don't need to wait till ANSI and
ISO do their thing.
If the Digital Press book were not the basis for the new standard
document, any second edition of that would be a private matter between
you and Digital Press. My thought was that an updated version of the
Digital Press book could appear just after the proposed standard is
finished. It would explictly point to the standard document as
definitive, but would try to describe the contents of that document in a
form more useful to the average Common Lisp user. The ANSI/ISO document
would be for implementors, language lawyers, and nit pickers.
-- Scott
∂25-Mar-86 0336 jlh@su-sonoma.arpa meet to discuss sequent, encore, etc.
Received: from SU-SONOMA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:36:42 PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Mon, 24 Mar 86 08:55:41 pst
Date: 24 Mar 1986 0855-PST (Monday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: les@sail, dcl@sail, jmc@sail, clt@sail
Subject: meet to discuss sequent, encore, etc.
When can we arrange something?
John
∂25-Mar-86 0338 OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA Re: Documenting our decisions
Received: from USC-ISIB.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:37:59 PST
Date: 24 Mar 1986 12:26-PST
Sender: OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
Subject: Re: Documenting our decisions
From: OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[USC-ISIB.ARPA]24-Mar-86 12:26:10.OHLANDER>
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12192630575.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Scott,
I think that your concept of what has to be done to develop
a standard, public domain Common Lisp specification is exactly right.
I don't think copyrights should be assigned to ANSI or ISO or anyone
else that could lay some later claim to them. On the other hand,
it might be important to have a copyright. To do that, perhaps
it should be assigned to a "Common Lisp Users Group",
yet to be established. ISI would be happy to work with you on
developing the documents, to the extent that it is within our
competence to do so. We could certainly take care of
distribution, corrections, updates, etc., once the major writing
work was done.
Ron Ohlander
∂25-Mar-86 0648 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 06:48:17 PST
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 09:29:30-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search Committee
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
hirsh@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193294927.14.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please let me know if you would be able to attend an AI Search Committee
meeting on Monday, April 7 from 2:30 - 3:30.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0905 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA 1986 Publisher's Prize
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 09:03:26 PST
Date: Tue 25 Mar 86 09:04:41-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: 1986 Publisher's Prize
To: Nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: aaai-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12193552554.41.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I just finished talking with Ron Brachman and Woody about who agreed to
give the Publisher's Prize this year. We were all under the assumption
it was Addison-Wesley, but, after talking to Mike Morgan, he doesn't
remember any committment by A-W.
Do you have any recollection about who agreed to give the prize this year?
If you don't remember anything, I think I will approach Danny about getting
Elsevier to be the sponsor.
Claudia
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0926 CLT japan
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, sf@SU-CSLI.ARPA, RWW@SU-AI.ARPA, JK@SU-AI.ARPA,
CG@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
Masahiko Sato says they would like to visit Stanford during
July and Ausgust this year and asks if this is a convenient time.
This seems fine with me.
He also asks if anyone has decided on a plan to visit Japan.
As of April Sato will be at Tohoku University in Sendai
thus there is a choice of staying in Sendai, Tokyo or Kyoto.
You can send electronic mail to MS@SU-AI and it will be forwarded.
∂25-Mar-86 0936 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 09:36:44 PST
Date: Tue 25 Mar 86 09:38:05-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193558634.17.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lori Oechslin of ACM in New York City phoned regarding the AMC touring
award. 212 869-7440.
Tina
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0939 CLT okner
says if you are out of the country we get an automatic extension
to June 15 for filing tax form and suggests we come in after
you return. That seems fine with me. (There will be
interest to pay on anything we owe.)
∂25-Mar-86 0953 VAL re: expressibility
To: ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA
CC: israel@SU-CSLI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA,
rar@KESTREL.ARPA
[In reply to message from ladkin@kestrel.ARPA sent Fri, 21 Mar 86 19:04:16 pst.]
Do we ever need anything like your example
(forall y)(exists x)(forall S)(exists z)(forall P)(blah)
when axioms of tense logic are translated into second-order logic? My impression
was that we only need formulas of the form (forall P,S,...) <first-order formula>.
Vladimir
∂25-Mar-86 1005 gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA Documenting our decisions
Received: from AQUINAS.THINK.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 10:03:56 PST
Received: from THINK-KATHERINE.ARPA by THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 17264; Tue 25-Mar-86 13:06:28-EST
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 86 13:06 EST
From: Guy Steele <gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>
Subject: Documenting our decisions
To: Fahlman@CMU-CS-C.ARPA
cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA, gls@THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12193442413.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <860325130615.7.GLS@THINK-KATHERINE.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1986 01:59 EST
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
...
Once the new spec document is ready, according to us, we could find a
way to do a mass printing of it -- we don't need to wait till ANSI and
ISO do their thing.
Well, there is $5000 sitting in an escrow account at Digital Press that
can be tapped for such a purpose if we only form a legal entity to
receive it.
If the Digital Press book were not the basis for the new standard
document, any second edition of that would be a private matter between
you and Digital Press. My thought was that an updated version of the
Digital Press book could appear just after the proposed standard is
finished. It would explictly point to the standard document as
definitive, but would try to describe the contents of that document in a
form more useful to the average Common Lisp user. The ANSI/ISO document
would be for implementors, language lawyers, and nit pickers.
If you really think that the ANSI document really would be so incredibly
turgid and opaque that people would rather read the silver book, then
perhaps a second edition would make sense. :-) However, I would rather
see a readable ANSI document plus a good tutorial.
-- Scott
--Guy
∂25-Mar-86 1122 VAL meeting with Rabinov
I'll bring him at 2 on Thursday, not 3, if you don't mind. (We have a seminar
at 3).
∂25-Mar-86 1134 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
PROCESSES, EVENTS, AND THE FRAME PROBLEM
Michael Georgeff
Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International
and
Center for the Study of Language and Information
Stanford University
Thursday, March 27, 3pm (NB: New time!)
MJH 252
In this talk we will consider various models of actions and events
suited to reasoning about multiple agents situated in dynamic
environments. We will also show how the notion of process is
essential in multiagent domains, and contrast this with most
approaches in AI that are based solely on the allowable behaviors of
agents. We will then consider how we might go about specifying the
properties of events and processes, and whether or not such
specifications require nonmonotonicity or circumscription. Finally,
we will examine various views of the frame problem and see to what
extent some of the major difficulties can be overcome.
∂25-Mar-86 1154 VAL question
I couldn't figure out from your CAL file whether you're going to be in town
on April 3. (I wanted to schedule Waldinger's seminar on that day).
∂25-Mar-86 1654 RA Dave Rodgers, Squent
Rodgers (503) 626 5700 called re their second generation system.
∂25-Mar-86 1936 LES Parallel Computer
To: Squires@USC-ISI.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
John McCarthy and I have been trying to reach you the last couple of
days to discuss our plans for a parallel machine procurement but have
missed you. I will describe where I think we are headed and invite
comments.
As you know, we were giving serious consideration to the Sequent, Encore,
and Alliant machines. We had received a proposal from Sequent that was
quite attractive and had received assurances from their management
(Dave Rogers, V.P.) of their support for the Qlisp project. We knew from
customer references and the trade press that they are currently the
industry leader in commercial parallel computer systems.
Following your suggestion, I talked to Ike Nassi at Encore and he arranged
for a rather generous proposal to be sent to us, amounting to a 55%
discount from list prices for an 8-processor system. I checked out their
customer references and became convinced that Encore is "real." We
subsquently received a visit by Encore President James Pompa and two of
his people, who assured us of their interest in the Qlisp project.
We understand that Encore may offer different, higher performance
processors at some time in the future. Indeed, Sequent also plans such a
step, though they will probably use a different processor (68020). Such
advances are inevitably a mixed blessing in that they would entail some
reworking of the software that will have been developed.
We also had been talking with Alliant and were attracted both by the
relatively high performance of their processors and by the fact that they
use the 68020 instruction set, which would save about 3 months in
development time to port the Common Lisp system relative to the other two
machines. Multiplying by the Qlisp project burn rate, the implementation
savings would amount to $200-300k.
Alliant has a systems wizard (Jack Test) who is very interested in, and
knowledgeable about, Qlisp and offers to make whatever changes may be
needed in their operating system to optimize performance. Yesterday we
received a visit from Test and a Vice President who expressed strong
management support for our program. They offer to provide a 4-processor
system that fits within our available funds by virtue of a 61% discount.
They also offer to provide an additional four processors on extended loan
at no cost for our testing program once the basic system has been
developed.
We are attracted to Alliant by the combination of a shorter implementation
time, the offer of technical support by a highly motivated and
knowledgeable staff member and a sale price that fits within available
funds. We would like to know if this sounds sensible to you or whether
there are any other issues that we should take into account.
Les Earnest
∂25-Mar-86 2119 CLT nafey
will call tomorrow between 10 and 10:30 to see when you will be
in your office -- wants to come by around 10:30
∂25-Mar-86 2149 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 21:48:57 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 26 Mar 86 00:49:47-EST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1986 00:49 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193691828.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: Guy Steele <gls@AQUINAS.THINK.COM>
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Documenting our decisions
In-reply-to: Msg of 25 Mar 1986 13:06-EST from Guy Steele <gls at THINK-AQUINAS.ARPA>
Well, there is $5000 sitting in an escrow account at Digital Press that
can be tapped for such a purpose if we only form a legal entity to
receive it.
Hmmm... maybe we should create some little noop corporation after all,
to hold the copyright and to handle the cash. It might be useful in
other ways, too. I wonder if a nonprofit corportion that included (for
now) just the steering and technical committee members would be
feasible, and if it would further irritate the rest of the community.
Has anyone had experience in setting up minimal corporations? How hairy
does it get?
If you really think that the ANSI document really would be so incredibly
turgid and opaque that people would rather read the silver book, then
perhaps a second edition would make sense. :-) However, I would rather
see a readable ANSI document plus a good tutorial.
Well, we wouldn't make the ANSI document turgid on purpose, but whenever
a choice had to be made between standards-level clarity and user
friendliness, we would want to go with the former. Maybe such choices
wouldn't arise if we do it right. If you prefer not to work on a second
edition of the silver book and instead to spend the time helping to
polish parts of the ANSI document and/or working on a tutorial, that
would be fine. I suppose then Digital Press would have the right to
hire some random to update the silver book, which certainly has the
potential to confuse things. But probably they wouldn't bother.
-- Scott
∂26-Mar-86 0615 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 06:15:39 PST
Received: ID <THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 26 Mar 86 09:16:27-EST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 09:16:25-EST
From: Rich.Thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, halpern@IBM-SJ.ARPA, shoham%yale-ring@YALE.ARPA,
israel@SRI-AI.ARPA, val@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Message-ID: <12193784066.7.THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Folks,
I spoke to all of you in Asilomar about a special issue of the
JPL that I am hoping to get out, having to do with AI and philosophical
logic. The purpose of this is just to put it in writing.
I would be happy to have either research papers or
survey/position papers; the main thing is to have enough perspective and
motivation so that logicians who are not computer scientists can get an
idea from the papers of the kinds of logical theories that researchers
in AI need and/or are developing. I am hoping that the issue will help
to foster better communication between philosophical logicians and
logically-minded people in AI.
The papers won't be refereed in the usual way; I will read them,
and may suggest revisions. I've never had any problems with this method
in previous special issues.
I've suggested 20 March 1987 as a deadline for finishing
manuscripts. Papers that come in so late that the issue would really be
help up could always be published separately in later JPL issues.
You all seemed interested, but I'd like confirmation at some
point of your intention to contribute a paper. Let me know what you
think.
--Rich Thomason
-------
∂26-Mar-86 0739 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 07:39:33 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 07:40:52-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search Committee
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
hirsh@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193799441.14.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
As not all of you are available on April 7 at 2:30, I will make another
stab at it. Would you be able to attend a meeting on April 3 at 2:30?
-Anne
-------
∂26-Mar-86 0833 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU FYI
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 08:32:50 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 26 Mar 86 11:33:36-EST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1986 11:33 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193809028.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: FYI
Apparently my mail to the address below is now reaching Yuasa, with
about 1 day delay in most cases. I've tried to contact Ida, but haven't
heard from him yet. Let's see what we can learn about Common Lisp
politics in Japan, and then discuss what to do about technical committee
membership, etc. Yuasa and Hagiya are knowledgeable, energetic, and
speak pretty good English. Ida is mroe senior and seems to be running
various bureaucratic Common Lisp coordination functions over there. Ida
translated the silver book to Japanese. It may be that we'll want to
invite both Yuasa and Ida to join the technical committee, or just one,
or have them set up a committee over there to mirror what we are doing.
-- Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 26 March 1986 11:01-EST
From: Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman>
To: nttlab!kurims!yuasa at SU-SHASTA.ARPA
cc: fahlman
Re: Common Lisp standardization
Dear Mr. Yuasa:
Now that we have established netmail contact, we would very much like to
get the input of you and Mr. Hagiya on the Common Lisp issues we have
been discussing. The first step, if you haven't done this already, is
to send mail to Dick Gabriel "RPG@SU-AI.ARPA" and ask him to add your
name to the Common Lisp mailing list. That is where all the discussions
take palce, and by sending mail to "Common-Lisp@SU-AI" you can respond
to anything you see there or raise your own questions and issues. If
your computer is able to forward messages on this list to others in
Japan, that would be useful, but at least you and Mr. Hagiya should be on
it. Of course, since most people on the list are in the U.S., all the
discussion is in English.
The technical committee that we announced for X3J13 is rather small
(only eight members so far), and this group will be preparing the new
Common Lisp standards document that we will propose for ANSI and ISO
approval. We expect to discuss all the issues on the public
Common-Lisp mailing list, so being on the technical committee is not
important for participating in the debate. The committee members will
vote on what goes into the document if there is not a clear consensus in
the larger community, but I expect this to be very rare. The main job
of the technical committee is to participate in creating the actual
specification document.
We will need to find out more about the situation in Japan before we can
decide how to proceed in adding Japanese menbers to the technical
committee. We may add just one person, who would be responsible for
collecting and representing the views of others in Japan. I'm not sure
whether this should be the person with the most Lisp experience, or if
it is important to choose someone with a high academic rank. We might
add more than one Japanese member to the committee, though we must be
careful not to let the committee get too large and slow-moving. Or
maybe there should be a Japanese committee that would correspond to the
U.S. committee, with close contacts between the two. But until we
decide what to do, we would very much like to get your participation
through the Common Lisp mailing list.
Aside from yourself, Mr. Hagiya, and Professor Ida, are there other
leaders in the Japanese Common Lisp community with whom we should be in
contact? Anything you could tell us about what sorts of Common Lisp
activities have been going on in Japan would be valuable.
Best regards,
Scott Fahlman
∂26-Mar-86 0911 roy@su-aimvax.arpa Prospective PhD student.
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 09:08:57 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with TCP; Wed, 26 Mar 86 09:10:10 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 09:10:10 pst
From: Shaibal Roy <roy@diablo>
Subject: Prospective PhD student.
To: guibas@decwrl, jmc@sail, rwf@sail
Cc: roy@diablo
I am hosting a prospective PhD student. He is interested in mathematical
aspects of computer science, and has a PhD in mathematics. Would you be
interested in talking to him about your research? He lives in Palo Alto.
So the meeting time is quite flexible. His name is Carlos Subi.
-shaibal
∂26-Mar-86 0939 squires@ipto.ARPA Re: Parallel Computer
Received: from IPTO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 09:39:06 PST
Received: by ipto.ARPA (4.12/4.7)
id AA02346; Wed, 26 Mar 86 12:39:29 est
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 12:39:18-EST
From: Stephen Squires <SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Parallel Computer
To: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Cc: Squires@USC-ISI.ARPA, JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA, SQUIRES@IPTO.ARPA
Message-Id: <VAX-MM(171)+TOPSLIB(113) 26-Mar-86 12:39:18.IPTO.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>" of 25 Mar 86 1936 PST
The QLISP project needs to work in the context of the Stragetic Computing
Program Strategy. Part of this strategy involves working with architectures
that are part of the program and will be on development paths compatible
with our software and systems standards. We intend to move very strongly
to exploint the MIPS and MIPS-X (with byte addressing) microprocessors and
caused the initiation of a compatible family of such processors from
normal CMOS of about 10 mips to VHSIC of about 40 mips to GaAs of 100 mips
per processor. In addition, there will be compatible floating point
coprocessors for 32 and 64 bit IEEE (effectively 80 bits wide) and
additonal coprocessors for handling tagging acceleration, error recovery,
and certain fault tolerance issues.
I am trying to put together a very coherent technology base which will
enable rapid software and systems development including rapid transition
to improved implementation technologies as fast as they become available.
We have already started the process of bring VHSIC and GaAs into the MOSIS
fountary facility the ability to get high quality parts. Work on wafer
scale is also starting.
These are the other important considerations that I have in mind!
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1009 RPG Document
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
I don't want people to get the impression that I'm pushing the
Lucid document. We had to prepare it for 2 reasons:
1. A tricky negotiation made it mandatory to include it as
a deliverable for a contract, even though we and others
tried to dissuade the party in question
2. We needed to have a non-generic Common Lisp reference manual.
Because of point 2, this document might not be suitable. Its format
might be nicer for our purposes - 1 function, macro, etc per page,
standard descriptive format. Possibly some clearer prose in places,
possibly worse prose in others. There are legal problems I need to
solve to allow the CL group to muck with the document while Lucid
can continue its rights to the original. I imagine forking the
document somehow, with Lucid keeping rights to the original, but not
to the CL-committee-derived work. I believe Lucid should have no
rights to the ANSI/ISO document.
The book is in Tex format. I have sent a copy to Fahlman to see whether he
believes it's suitable at all before sending it out further.
-rpg-
∂26-Mar-86 1052 RA Nafeh
Tina, the receptionist says that Nafeh called that he'd be here at 10:30.
∂26-Mar-86 1124 JJW PC-RT is in the host table
To: JMC, LES
IBMPCRT1 is now in the Stanford host table with Internet address
36.8.0.111. We probably need to make it aware of its own Internet
address, and the addresses of gateways, and give it an up-to-date
host table, and then it can talk to the rest of the world.
∂26-Mar-86 1258 greep@camelot
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 12:58:01 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 26 Mar 86 12:59:00 pst
Date: 26 Mar 1986 1258-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: LES@sail
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 26 Mar 86 1228 PST.
You probably want the following line:
/etc/ifconfig un0 36.8.0.111 arp -trailers > /dev/console
in /etc/rc.local, or some other file that will be run at startup time.
Also make sure /dev/un0 exists.
The IBM manual has information on setting up the routing. It may already
be set up. I'll bring the manual over.
∂26-Mar-86 1357 RA leaving
I have a staff meeting at 2:00 after which I will leave for my class.
∂26-Mar-86 1405 greep@camelot Re: terminal type
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 14:05:44 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 26 Mar 86 14:06:43 pst
Date: 26 Mar 1986 1406-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: terminal type
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 26 Mar 86 1347 PST.
I don't know if the console looks like anything that SCORE would know
about. I'll see if I can find any well-known terminal type that's close
enough that it might work.
∂26-Mar-86 1502 CLT
call cuthbert if he hasn't already reached you
∂26-Mar-86 1812 RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Symbolics Maintenance
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 18:12:37 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 18:14:01-PST
From: T. C. Rindfleisch <Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolics Maintenance
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, TOB@SU-AI.ARPA, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Bosack@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Yeager@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Veizades@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Marria@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Timothy@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193914702.21.RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Friends, as you all know, the question of maintenance for our Symbolics
machines has been pending for some time with a resolution frustrated by the
high prices Symbolics is charging for support services. I am proposing sending
the following letter to Russell Noftsker to try to get Symbolics to be more
reasonable but would like your inputs: a) in terms of the content of the
letter, and b) as to whether you support the letter and would want to be a
cosigner.
Thanks, Tom R.
------------
@Greeting(Dear Dr. Noftsker:)
I am writing to convey the serious dissatisfaction of the Stanford community of
Symbolics users with your current pricing policies for software and hardware
maintenance. Based on our experience with various kinds of mainframe and
workstation computing equipment for artificial intelligence research, we
believe these policies result in an excessively high cost of ownership for
Symbolics systems. This has been a matter of major concern for many in the
ARPANET community of Symbolics users, but it is especially so for academic
users such as here at Stanford. We have been attempting to find a resolution
to these problems through the sales and maintenance groups to no avail, hence
this letter directly to you as Chief Executive Officer.
As background, there are three major AI groups at Stanford, each using diverse
computing resources for their research:
@Begin(Itemize)
The @b[Knowledge Systems Laboratory] under Professors Ed Feigenbaum, Bruce
Buchanan, Mike Genesereth, and Ted Shortliffe and me. The KSL now uses 10
Symbolics systems, 20 Texas Instruments Explorers, 50 Xerox systems, 5 SUN
workstations, and other mainframe systems (DEC 2060 and VAX's).
The @b[Formal Reasoning Project] under Professor John McCarthy and Les Earnest.
The FR Project uses 3 Symbolics systems and the SAIL PDP-20.
The @b[Robotics Project] under Professor Tom Binford. Robotics uses 3
Symbolics systems and DEC VAX mainframes.
@End(Itemize)
Symbolics equipment has played an important role in configuring these AI
research facilities, primarily in providing an early standard for
high-performance Lisp workstations but also in providing a programming
environment preferred by a portion of our research community. We are now faced
with a serious dilemma, however, in planning the future development of our AI
computing resources.
After long discussions with the Palo Alto sales office and our DARPA colleagues
at the University of Southern California Information Sciences Institute, we
estimate the annual cost for hardware maintenance for our existing 16 Symbolics
systems to be just over $100,000. Minimal software maintenance would cost
another $10,000 per year. These totals take into account a variety of
discounts that have been offered to Stanford, including bulk DARPA prices for
our government furnished equipment and educational, prepayment, and volume
discounts on the rest. Still this cost is exceptionally high -- by a factor of
two or three -- when compared to equivalent costs of maintenance for
workstations from other vendors and scaled by relative processing performance
figures. And even at such high prices, the quality of Symbolics maintenance as
seen in the field is poor compared to that from other vendors.
It should be noted that these price comparisons do not involve maintenance
contracts for all vendors. Several are based on an in-house maintenance mode
with locally stocked spares, local fault diagnosis and part replacement, and
vendor repair of faulty parts. This mode is not realistically available from
Symbolics because of very high parts repair costs (on the order of 1/4 to 1/3
of the part purchase price for repair and 1/2 for replacement) and the lack of
hardware diagnostics, drawings, and training.
Our goal is simply to ensure the cost-effective and reliable operation of our
machines in the various research settings in which they are used here,
including their being kept current with on-going engineering changes and
software releases. But the cost of this support for Symbolics machines is
beyond what we can sustain. If your existing price structure really represents
the cost of ownership for installations with significant numbers of your
machines, then there is a deep, long-term problem for Symbolics that will argue
strongly for alternative workstation designs (as are already becoming
competitive in performance and most certainly in cost from other vendors) or
for a return to more cost-effective shared central machine designs.
What we would like to see is a revision to your maintenance policies that
accommodates the needs of academic institutions such as Stanford which have
large installed machine bases. We believe the most effective approach to be a
cooperative maintenance arrangement between Symbolics and Stanford where most
of the day-to-day responsibility for keeping the machines running would fall on
our personnel. For such a program, we would need reasonable prices from
Symbolics for hardware documentation and training, system diagnostics,
realistic parts repair and spares stocking, and timely access to engineering
changes. For software support, since we customarily centralize release and
documentation distribution and bug reporting, we would like a "site license"
arrangement such as we have with many other software vendors. This should
entail a reasonable initial charge (comparable to the cost for a single
machine) and small per machine increments. The current Symbolics policy takes
no significant account of site savings until after 6 machines.
Attempts to resolve these issues have dragged on for a long time now and there
is substantial urgency to getting them settled. We do not have any routine
maintenance arrangement in place for the Stanford Symbolics machines and run a
risk of serious failure without acceptable recourse for repair. Our
frustration over current Symbolics pricing policies and attempts to find relief
have caused us to put a hold on the purchase of anymore Symbolics machines and
to divert our on-going purchases to other vendors.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We sincerely hope we can reach
an agreeable solution soon.
@Begin(Signature)
Sincerely,
TCR
@End(Signature)
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1819 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 18:16:32 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA08426; Wed, 26 Mar 86 18:17:11 PST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 18:17:11 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8603270217.AA08426@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Message originally sent 3/24/86- not acknowledged, thus resending 3/26/86.
Hello,
We have given Group1 and the Middle members one more week - due
to the necessity of a few members to get changed versions of their
original position papers in.
We will therefore send the Group1 papers out on 3/31/86.
Comments/Problems to vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
- VR, RA, JS, DB
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt of this message.
∂26-Mar-86 1841 CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA Additional sponsor for the Workshop on High Level Tools
Received: from OHIO-STATE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 18:41:16 PST
Return-Path: <CHANDRA%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Received: from OSU-20 (osu-20.ARPA) by ohio-state.ARPA (4.12/6.1.OSU-CIS)
id AA06660; Wed, 26 Mar 86 21:40:08 est
Message-Id: <8603270240.AA06660@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 21:41:20-EST
From: B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
Subject: Additional sponsor for the Workshop on High Level Tools
To: JMC@SU-AI.arpa
Cc: Lerman@SRI-KL.arpa, Fikes@USC-ECL.arpa, Clancey@Sumex-aim.arpa,
Josephson%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA, Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA
John,
Allen Sears of DARPA is quite excited by the proposed workshop.
The darpa grant that we have at OSU (and monitored by him) will be
paying for most of the OSU people's time in organizing it. In addition,
he is suggesting that he could arrange for another $5K for
taking care of further expenses, including preparing a Workshop
report, etc. My expectation is that such workshops run into
about $15K (exclusing of organizer time) so I am planning to eagerly
accept his 5K. The point of this message is that, as original
sposnor of the Workshop, we are agreed that AAAI should be told of
this additional sponsor.
We also plan to identify Darpa as a sponsor of this. I expect that
there will be no objection from AAAI for all this, but if there
is any, please let me know. Thanks.
Chandra
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1903 LES Revised Alliant Proposal
I put a copy of the 3rd version of the Alliant proposal in your mailbox.
It would provide a system with 4 CE's, 3 IP's and 16 MBytes for $173k,
which is what we have. I had rejected the 2nd proposal on the grounds
that it had too many conditions (that we sign a contract with Lucid and
install a microwave link). It also neglected to mention the prospective
loan of four additional processors.
The new one calls for a "best effort" to sign a contract with Lucid and
install a link. It also specifies that we will provide "sufficient
computer access to Lucid, Inc. for them to
a.) complete a port of Common LISP to the Alliant System,
b.) conduct the Q-Lambda development work if associated grant is approved,
and
c.) support Lucid products on Alliant for a period of two (2) years."
Instead of a straight offer to lend us an additional four processors
as needed for testing, which I had asked for, they offer to provide them
on a "Low Cost Rental or Short Term Loaner basis."
I figure there is no point in dotting all the "i"s until we sort things
out with Squires.
∂26-Mar-86 2000 JMC
Sarah check and form.
∂26-Mar-86 2006 LES DARPA Equipment Update
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
This note is to inform the committee of the current state of planning
for equipment purchases out of a $582k departmental allocation under
a DARPA contract that is about to expire. Comments are invited.
The principal things that have happened since our last meeting are as
follows.
1. When Alliant heard that McCarthy wanted to have his own machine for
the Qlisp project they informed us that the favorable terms they had offered
were contingent on Qlisp being a user of the machine and would not apply
to a machine that did not include this project. As agreed earlier, given
that the original Alliant deal fell through, $75k of the $150k that was
allocated to the parallel processor has been reallocated to the Qlisp
project and the other $75k has been applied to additional workstations for
various projects. The allocations shown below reflect these changes.
2. Given that McCarthy has a new Symbolics 3640 that he can give up and that
Binford was planning to buy one out of the DARPA funds, a cash-for-hardware
swap was negotiated, giving McCarthy an additional $45k. Symbolics has
agreed to sell a single Symbolics 3600 to Binford as ordered earlier using
separate funds.
3. Alliant has made an even more attractive offer to McCarthy that fits
within his available funds. He currently favors this proposal, though not
all the dust has settled yet. Alliant also tentativly offers to loan a
lean second machine to Oliger, Golub and friends, which could be augmented
with additional hardware if they desire.
4. Bosack alleges that a new ARPAnet gateway constructed from existing
hardware will be completed by this summer and that the $15k allocated for
purchasing such a system should be deleted from the budget.
5. Pricing for a number of items has been refined, usually resulting in
savings.
6. Given that the cost of some of Cheriton's hardware had declined, he
concocted a scam to purchase a fancy oscilloscope while staying at about
the same total dollar amount. Unless there are objections, I plan to
accept this request.
The net effect of these changes is to increase the "Miscellaneous" line
item, which is to cover only freight and installation, from $13.8 k to
$49.6 k, which is almost certainly more than we need. Assuming that
I have made no blunders, it appears that we can make a few more small
committments. Hustles are invited.
BUDGET
DEPARTMENTAL WORKSTATIONS $110.1 k (was $106.5 k)
The following equipment is to be purchased to upgrade the
performance of Sun workstations in the department.
Description
1 Fileserver (Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles)
1 Sun 3/180S-8-R1 processor, 8 MB memory $18.13 k
1 Emulex disk controller 2.5
2 Fujitsu Eagles 16.2
1 Sun 3/180S-675-R1 6250 Tape Drive 11.83
--------
$ 38.7 k
10 Sun2/50 2MB memory addition @ $2100 21 k
48 Sun2/120 1MB memory addition @ $1050 50.4
--------
$ 71.4 k
SPARES AND TEST EQUIPMENT $79.4 k (still)
The following spare parts and test equipment are to be purchased
so as to reduce the cost and repair time for maintaining departmental
equipment already purchased.
Description
750 & peripheral spares $32 k
780 spares 18
Sun 3/50 spares 6.4
2 Oscilloscopes 12
Microprocessor/logic analyzer 11
-----
$79.4 k
PROJECT-SPECIFIC ACQUISITIONS $342.885 k (was $232.3 k)
A number of devices are to be purchased with departmental funds
and administratively assigned to various research projects and are to be
treated like other equipment belonging to projects. Projects that use
them will be responsible for their maintenance. However, the department
administration reserves the right to reassign or reallocate this
equipment, including storage allocations in fileservers.
Cheriton
2 Multicast Agents (Sun hardware) $ 11.06 k
2 Fileserver upgrades 38.98
1 Sun 3 Gateway 19.635
1 Tektronix 485 Oscilloscope with probes 10.02
--------
$ 79.695 k
Lantz
2 Sun 3/160 color workstation @ $ 24.43 k $ 48.86 k
Manna
2 Sun 3/75 with 4 MB, Ether @ $ 11.5 k $ 23 k
McCarthy
Allocation for parallel computer $ 75 k
Swap Symbolics 3640 to Binford for cash 45
------
$120 k
Rindfleisch
1 Fileserver (Sun 3/180 & 2 Eagles)
1 Sun 3/180S-8-R1 processor, 8 MB memory $18.13 k
1 Emulex disk controller 2.5
2 Fujitsu Eagles 16.2
3 Sun 3/75 with 4 MB, Ether @ $ 11.5 k 34.5
-------
$ 71.33 k
MISCELLANEOUS $49.615 k
Freight and installation expenses.
-------
-------
TOTAL $582 k
∂26-Mar-86 2021 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU AI Workshop
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 20:21:17 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 17:34-EST
From: kirsh
Sender: David Kirsh <KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: AI Workshop
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: kirsh%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, hewitt%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
John,
You asked me to write down our plans for a conference on AI
foundations. Our intent is to have a small workshop of around 55
people discuss what seem to us the major approaches in AI today. The
conference would be called AI PARADIGMS and would be held in Jan 87 at
Endicott House, near Boston.
What do you think of these topics and speakers?
I Logic
chair McCarthy
main Hayes
comm Winograd
II Connectionism
chair Hopfield
main Hinton
comm Rumelhart/ Feldman/ ?
III Methodology (Marr approach)
chair Poggio
main Ullman
comm Kirsh/ ?
IV Organization (parallel Hewitt style)
chair Nilson
main Hewitt
comm Simon/ McCarthy
V Analogical Reasoning
chair Schank
main Winston
comm Gentner
VI Society Of Mind (Minsky's theory)
chair Papert
main Minsky
comm Newell
VII Production Systems
chair Simon
main Newell/ Feigenbaum
comm Norman/ ?
FORMAT 45 min Main presentation
15 min questions of clarification
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
15-30 min break
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
20 min commentary
10 min questions of clarification
30 min general discussion
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
2 1/2 hour total
MAJOR SPEAKER 45 min
1 State the basic thesis. Eg Logic plus extensions can do it all.
Explain the principles, the natural type of problems and tasks where
these principles win.
2 Show an exemplary application of theory. Use simple example
carefully chosen to highlight different aspects of method.
3 Explain where power resides.
4 Discuss scope and limitations of approach. Eg current hard
problems that can be overcome and why. Problems that are not likely to
succumb to this approach and why.
COMMENTATOR 20 min
1 Evaluate the source of power and explain why it works.
2 Comment on 3 and 4 above.
Drafts of major speakers' papers must be submitted to us by mid Aug so
that we can return them by early Sept with our comments about
adherence to format and clarity. We would like finished drafts of
major speakers' essays by Nov 1 and finished drafts of commentators'
by Dec 1.
We also request that each participant suggest 2 other people to invite
and 1 graduate student. We then will invite a subset of suggestions and
all grad students.
The workshop will last 3 full days. Fri will have 3 sessions. Sat 2
sessions plus a banquet. Sunday will have 2 sessions. Everything
will take place in Endicott House and will be timed to keep everyone
around, rather than eating off on their own.
All presentations and discussions will be taped, which then will be
made available for distribution at a cheap rate. NSF will help us
cover the costs of videoing and publishing the proceedings.
We're very excited about our format. If the topics are covered
competently we think this workshop will be a genuine service to the
field. Look forward to your comments.
-- David
617 253-6569
∂26-Mar-86 2116 binford@su-whitney.arpa Symbolics Maintenance
Received: from SU-WHITNEY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 21:16:23 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Mar 86 21:11:17 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 21:11:17 pst
From: Tom Binford <binford@su-whitney.ARPA>
To: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Cc: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, TOB@SU-AI.ARPA, Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Bosack@SU-SCORE.ARPA, Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Yeager@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
Veizades@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Marria@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Timothy@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: T. C. Rindfleisch's message of Wed 26 Mar 86 18:14:01-PST
Subject: Symbolics Maintenance
Tom
I expect to have 5 symbolics machines soon. Since 3600s are
expensive to maintain, it appears to be about $1000 per month
less 23% or $770 per machine times 5 machines, i.e. $3850 per month
or $46000 per year, with overhead of 73% or $79000 per year.
This is non-trivial to us.
In comparative terms, it costs us 4 SUN 3 systems per year.
Tom
∂26-Mar-86 2127 RPG Squires
To: LES
CC: JMC, CLT
I'm puzzled by his message, too. I guess he means we should postpone
the project until there is a MIPS-based multiprocessor. The way
the funding is (not) proceeding, perhaps we should delay buying
a machine until the funding arrives and let the problem solve
itself.
-rpg-
∂26-Mar-86 2231 jmc@
Received: from IBMPCRT1 by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 22:31:04 PST
Received: by with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Mar 86 22:31:22 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 22:31:22 pst
From: John McCarthy <jmc@@>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
foo
∂26-Mar-86 2240 greep@camelot Re: terminal type
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 22:40:08 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 26 Mar 86 22:41:05 pst
Date: 26 Mar 1986 2241-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: terminal type
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 26 Mar 86 1347 PST.
It looks like bad news. I checked a couple of the common entries listed in
/etc/termcap for the AED display (that's what you have, isn't it?) against
the Vax /etc/termcap file, and out of the 398 different terminal types
listed in the latter, not a single one matched. I don't know what terminal
types SCORE knows about but I doubt it has very much that the Vax/Unix
termcap file doesn't, since on tops-20 the information has to be in the
operating system itself so there is reason to keep the number of terminal
types down.
That doesn't necessarily mean that there isn't any terminal type known
to SCORE that will work, since it's possible that the IBM display actually
responds to some more common codes in addition to those listed in termcap.
However, there's no way of knowing unless the manual says somewhere. I
didn't see any mention in the on-line documentation of this.
∂26-Mar-86 2342 LES re: Symbolics Maintenance
To: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
CC: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, TOB@SU-AI.ARPA,
Genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Bosack@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message from Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA sent Wed 26 Mar 86 18:14:01-PST.]
Your message is accurately and forcefully stated. Go get 'em. -Les
∂26-Mar-86 2348 greep@camelot Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 23:48:07 PST
Received: by camelot with TCP; Wed, 26 Mar 86 23:49:00 pst
Date: 26 Mar 1986 2348-PST (Wednesday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: DAN@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 26 Mar 86 2238 PST.
I see that someone copied sendmail.cf from a Vax to the IBM. This may
cause problems since sendmail has been modified at Stanford and the
sendmail.cf file probably depends on these changes. However, it does seem
to have caused some improvement. Now instead of complaining about the host
name being unknown, it does send the message but gets things garbled. Here
is what Camelot saw when I sent myself a message there:
from=<greep@>, size=143, class=0
to=<M.greep@camelot>, delay=00:00:12, stat=Host unknown
to=<greep@>, delay=00:00:13, stat=User unknown
It seems to have left off the hostname (apparently SAIL accepted this,
even though it's invalid) and stuck in a gratuitous "M." in one place.
There is a rewriting rule that could possibly be interpreted to mean
something like that; I've never delved into sendmail enough to know all
its arcana.
I can suggest the following routes:
1. Go back to the original sendmail.cf file and figure out why it doesn't
work, possibly with help from Mr. IBM
2. Stick with the Stanford-Vax/Unix sendmail.cf file and figure out how
to make it work
3. Same as #2 but try compiling the Stanford-Vax/Unix version of sendmail
on the IBM and running it
None of these is ideal.
∂27-Mar-86 0017 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 00:17:22 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 23:18:42-PST
From: Dan Kolkowitz <KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 26 Mar 86 22:38:00-PST
Message-ID: <12193970167.13.KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
What I did this afternoon was to copy the mail configuration file (sendmail.cf)
from Carmel to ibmpcrt1. This allowed mail to get out of the system, in fact
succeeding in transmitting mail to the remote system but with the user name
garbled. The reason is the rules in sendmail.cf for generating the "To:"
field is undoubtedly wrong. Other rules, as your example demonstrates, are
also wrong. What this would seem to say is that the grammar for IBM's
sendmail differs from UCB's. Hopefully the IBM manuals will reveal this.
I think we'll be able to crack this with a little work.
Dan
-------
∂27-Mar-86 0541 THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU re: JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 05:41:36 PST
Received: ID <THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Thu 27 Mar 86 08:42:26-EST
Date: Thu 27 Mar 86 08:42:25-EST
From: Rich.Thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: re: JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 26 Mar 86 09:22:00-EST
Message-ID: <12194040020.29.THOMASON@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
John,
Great! I'm very pleased.
--Rich
-------
∂27-Mar-86 0905 SJG
did you ever send me that round table stuff? Thanks.
∂27-Mar-86 1104 RPG Squires letter
To: JMC
CC: LES, CLT
I think it looks good. He tried to call me this
am, but I wasn't here. I'll call him shortly.
-rpg-
∂27-Mar-86 1108 CLT Alliant rationalization
You might add to 4 or the following paragraph that
going from QLISP on current Alliant to QLISP on RISC machine
is no harder than going from QLISP on current Encore
or other similar machine.
Also, RISC and MIPS in particular addresses the sequential instruction
set and concurrent instructions are an addon.
Thus it should be important to get going and have feedback on
the concurrency primitives needed for parallel lisp.
∂27-Mar-86 1121 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: advocating postdoctoral fellowships
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 11:20:07 PST
Date: Thu 27 Mar 86 11:21:20-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: advocating postdoctoral fellowships
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 27 Mar 86 10:52:00-PST
Message-ID: <12194101719.45.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Great idea! I would change "young men" to "young men and women"
-------
∂27-Mar-86 1120 RPG Lisp Conference
Scherlis also would like you to speak on Lisp history at the
conference. Would you be willing to speak at the banquet as
an after-dinner speaker?
-rpg-
∂27-Mar-86 1122 CLT Revised Alliant Proposal
It seems to me that if Alliant wants a Common Lisp product out of
Lucid that should be between them and Lucid - we don't want to be
in the middle.
Does Lucid buy, borrow, or beg the machines they use to do product
development?
∂27-Mar-86 1148 RPG
∂27-Mar-86 1146 JMC re: Lisp Conference
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Mar-86 11:20-PT.]
What are the dates?
August 4-6, MIT.
∂27-Mar-86 1351 RA Dave Rodgers, Sequent
Rodgers called, (503) 626 5700, re second generation systems
∂27-Mar-86 1354 ME forwarded inquiry about AI
∂27-Mar-86 0931 DAAR100%BGUNOS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU INFORMATION ABOUT CAD/CAM AND AI AT YOUR SITE.
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 09:31:08 PST
Received: from (DAAR100)BGUNOS.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 03/27/86 at
11:30:05 CST
Received: by BGUNOS (Mailer); Thu, 27 Mar 86 19:30:59 +0200
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 86 19:30:25 +0200
From: <DAAR100%BGUNOS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
To: POSTMASTER@MIT-AI.ARPA ,
POSTMASTER@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: INFORMATION ABOUT CAD/CAM AND AI AT YOUR SITE.
HELLO,
MY NAME IS EUGENE BERMAN,HEAD OF CAD/CAM/A.I GROUP
OF COMPUTATIONAL CENTER AT BEN-GURION UNIVERSITY,
BEER-SHEVA,ISRAEL .
I AM INTERESTED IN THE FIELDS OF CAD/CAM AND A.I.
I BE GREATFULL IF YOU WILL SEND ME THE NAME AND
USER-ID OF THE PERSONS WHO DEALS WITH THOSE FIELDS,
TO CONNECT WITH THEM .
THANKS,
EUGENE BERMAN
∂27-Mar-86 1411 SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM DAI'86
Received: from BBNG.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 14:10:26 PST
Date: Thu 27 Mar 86 17:10:36-EST
From: SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
Subject: DAI'86
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Dear Professor McCarthy,
About a week ago I sent you this note about the possibility of funding
DAI'86. Please acknowledge that you saw this note - I can then be
patient about waiting for a reply. As you can understand I am most
eager to get started in planning this workshop.
Thank you for your attention,
Sridharan
------------------
21-Mar-86 12:07:56-EST,1413;000000000001
Mail-From: SRIDHARAN created at 21-Mar-86 12:07:55
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 12:07:54-EST
From: SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
Subject: Distributed AI Workshop
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
At the last DAI workshop (Dec85) at Sea Ranch, I volunteered to organize
the next of this series, most likely somewhere in the vicinity of Boston
around October 86 when the leaves turn pretty around here.
It seems just the right time to start planning for it now. Matt Ginsberg
and I had a phone conversation about it. Before I go farther with my
planning, I would like to know if AAAI will, once again, provide initial
funds for arranging the workshop.
I dont know what kind of information you need and in what form. Here is
what I know so far. I will plan on inviting about 35 people which seemed
to be a comfortable number last year. The registration fees of $150
per person may be sufficient to cover actual costs at the workshop site
including meals/lodging/meeting-rooms. If AAAI will provide an approximate
sum of $5000 to cover costs initially, I expect that after taking out
expenses such as duplicating, local transportation for participants,
and some mailing, whatever is left over will revert to AAAI at the end.
Please let me know if AAAI will once again sponsor this event. Also, if
you need any other details, I shallbe glad to supply them.
Regards, Sridharan
-------
-------
∂27-Mar-86 1421 RA Re: Dave Rodgers, Sequent
[Reply to message recvd: 27 Mar 86 14:02 Pacific Time]
No, I did not refer Rodgers to Les. Would you like me to do so next
time he calls?
∂27-Mar-86 1426 greep@camelot IBM proposal
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 14:26:10 PST
Received: by camelot with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Mar 86 14:26:56 pst
Date: 27 Mar 1986 1426-PST (Thursday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: JMC@sail
Cc: LES@sail
Subject: IBM proposal
At Ralph's instigation, I talked to Les about helping to write part of the
proposal to IBM. The following, which I intended as a possible introduction
to your writeup, is what I've done so far.
Operating systems which allow direct user interaction (as opposed to
earlier batch systems) have now been commercially available for over 20
years, yet the user interface on most general-purpose computer systems
found today is not markedly different from the earliest ones. While there
is some benefit to long-term stability, the experience gained in two
decades of using these systems points out a number of limitations in the
design of current user interfaces. Furthermore, early systems were
designed for configurations with small memories and hardcopy terminals,
thus restricting the possibilities for creating more reasonable user
interfaces.
Almost all CRT terminals built in the last several years have the
capability of rewriting arbitrary parts of the screen, thus making it
possible to have a user interface which allows considerably greater
flexibility than the simple prompt/command model currently enployed. In
addition, the trend is towards workstations such as the IBM RT which
provide graphics facilities. The dramatic decline in memory prices over
the last decade means that even a workstation intended for a single user
has enough memory that the system designers no longer need to spend the
bulk of their effort in keeping the code down to a minimum.
Unfortunately, systems for workstations do not exploit these capabilities.
In fact the system running on most general-purpose workstations is Unix,
which was designed for computers with very small memories and hardcopy
terminals. [*** I think Apollo has their own operating system but don't
know anything about it ***]. Some vendors have multi-window systems. These
are useful but do not provide any major increase in functionality. On
Digital's latest version of their system, for example, each window acts
exactly like a terminal on a conventional Unix system, so the only
advantage is having the window system simulate multiple terminals. Sun
Microsysems has a somewhat more advanced system, in which some editing
functions can be performed on the data in the window. (There is a version
of emacs which also provides this capability on Unix.) However, these
systems are still basically designed around the teletype model of interaction.
Although individual programs, in particular text editors, have long been
available which are not teletype-oriented, there is no standard model of
interaction on which these programs are based, and such programs are
a distinct minority. A typical program thus has no provisions for
correcting or re-entering any data, other than the primitive backspace
and line-delete characters.
Another feature lacking or not cleanly provided in existing systems is the
ability to combine several programs. Experience with pipes in Unix has shown
that having a number of utility programs and a simple way to interconnect
them greatly simplifies many everyday tasks by obviating the need to write
a program in a low-level programming language. The pipe mechanism in Unix
is restricted in practice to a single input stream and a single output
stream per process. This limitation is not inherent in Unix, but there is
no standard convention for the use of streams other than standard input,
standard output, and standard error, and the shell does not even have a
good way of dealing with standard error.
Most systems either do not provide programmability at the command level
or do so in an idiosyncratic way. This means that a new language must be
learned and that facilities which are available in conventional programming
languages, e.g. debuggers, compilers, and syntax-directed editors, are
generally nonexistent for command level programs.
A further problem with existing systems is that all character handling
procedures are based on a limited character set, usually ASCII. This is
marginally adequate for normal English prose but does not meet the needs of
technical writing (e.g. math and logic symbols) or even of prose in most
other languages. On a system based around a bitmap display, there is no
reason to impose this limitation. The ability to incorporate a variety of
symbols and general graphical data would be very useful both in
constructing programs which provide graphics functions and in composing
textual materials that use special symbols.
We propose to design and implement a new system which will rectify the
shortcomings described in the preceding paragraphs. In particular, it
will have the following characteristics.
(insert EBOS[W86,JMC] here)
∂27-Mar-86 1607 RA Rich McAndrew, Alliant
McAndrew called; he will call again later.
∂27-Mar-86 1956 LLW@S1-A.ARPA Ramin Zabih
Received: from S1-A.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 19:56:23 PST
Date: 27 Mar 86 1948 PST
From: Lowell Wood <LLW@S1-A.ARPA>
Subject: Ramin Zabih
To: clt@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: LLW@S1-A.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
∂21-Mar-86 0826 CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Ramin Zabih
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by S1-A.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 08:26:41 PST
Date: 21 Mar 86 0829 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Ramin Zabih
To: LLW@S1-A.ARPA
John has asked be to look at the material you sent him on
Ramin Zabih. The application looks good and it seems like
he might fit well into our group. However, I haven't seen
the other applications so I have no good basis for comparison.
It would seem best to talk to him in person before deciding.
Your note suggested John was to meet him. Has he already
come to Stanford, or is he planning to? Did you award him
a Hertz fellowship? Did you get to know him when he was
at Livermore?
Thanks,
Carolyn
[Dear Carolyn: Ramin is in the Bay Area at present, and I believe that
he's planning to visit Stanford tomorrow. I'll tell him to look up both
you and John. Yes, he was awarded a Hertz Fellowship. Yes, I know him
both from Livermore and from meeting him previously at MIT. Lowell]
∂28-Mar-86 0940 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Visiting prospective student
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 09:40:28 PST
Date: Fri 28 Mar 86 09:40:09-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Visiting prospective student
To: PIEPER@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA, phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Karen L. Pieper <PIEPER@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>" of Thu 27 Mar 86 14:13:51-PST
I would love to have you continue on the committee, in whatever
fashion you can (are you getting a horizontal workstation?). As
you may remember, we originally planned to have two students on
the committee, and given that Eric and Peter are hardly shrinking
violets, I don't think we need to worry about a replacement.
Do get some rest and fix up those floppy discs (or vertebrae or whatever).
--t
-------
∂28-Mar-86 0943 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Whoops
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 09:43:43 PST
Date: Fri 28 Mar 86 09:43:28-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Whoops
To: scholz@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: phdcom@SU-AI.ARPA, WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Due to a wrong "Answer" number in MM, that last message got sent
as a reply to the previous one in my file. By coincidence, it happened
to be from another student named Karen (must be some significance there!)
Anyway, it was obviously intended for Karen Scholz, in response to her
letting me know that she was taken leave to recover from her back
injury. --t
-------
∂28-Mar-86 1007 RA Zabih, Ramin David
I called his work number (617) 253 8827 and was told that he is now in California.
His local telephone is (415) 376 1773.
∂28-Mar-86 1206 SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM re: DAI'86
Received: from BBNG.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 12:04:22 PST
Date: Fri 28 Mar 86 15:04:23-EST
From: SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
Subject: re: DAI'86
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: aaai-office@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, SRIDHARAN@G.BBN.COM
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Thu 27 Mar 86 17:33:00-EST
Thank you for the prompt reply. I will proceed to talk with Claudia.
Cheers, Sri
-------
∂28-Mar-86 1236 RA leave early
I have to leave early today, around 1:30.
∂28-Mar-86 1319 VAL seminar
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Pat Hayes says 3pm is much worse for him as a permanent time, so let's go back
to 4pm.
Vladimir
∂28-Mar-86 1323 VAL Rabinov
He'll come Monday at 10.
∂28-Mar-86 1324 VAL Reiter
He can't change the date of his visit. He's sorry he'll miss you and sends you
his regards.
∂28-Mar-86 2036 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA example
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 20:29:20 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA04377; Fri, 28 Mar 86 17:23:05 pst
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 86 17:23:05 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603290123.AA04377@kestrel.ARPA>
To: val@su-ai
Subject: example
Cc: israel@su-csli, jmc@su-ai, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
For an example of a natural non-pi-1-1 statement
which has only universal second-order quantifiers,
consider
(exists t)(forall S)(t in S implies P not true on S)
where t is a time point, S is a set of time points,
P is a proposition, and we evaluate truth on
intervals (for the purposes of the discussion here,
represented as sets of time points).
This would be the natural way of saying that P
is not persistent, namely that sometimes
P may be falsified by what happens at an instant.
(Persistent probably means something like:
if true anywhere, true on an interval about there).
Peter
∂28-Mar-86 2211 greep@camelot
Received: from CAMELOT by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 22:11:35 PST
Received: by camelot with Sendmail; Fri, 28 Mar 86 22:12:28 pst
Date: 28 Mar 1986 2212-PST (Friday)
From: Steven Tepper <greep@camelot>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA> / 28 Mar 86 2203 PST.
I'm not sure I understand the question. Do you mean what kind of
terminal-like features (such as reverse video) will it probably expect?
Or what kind of terminals will it know about? (you can call me at 3-2014
if you want)
∂29-Mar-86 0806 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Japanese representative
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 86 08:06:43 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Sat 29 Mar 86 11:07:27-EST
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1986 11:07 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12194590697.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Japanese representative
In-reply-to: Msg of 29 Mar 1986 00:57-EST from John McCarthy <JMC at SU-AI.ARPA>
That sounds like a good idea. Do you have any such high-level contacts
in Japan? I could probably get some names from Herb Simon and others
around here, but having a personal contact would probably be best.
-- Scott
∂29-Mar-86 1255 yossi@su-shasta.arpa Prospective Applicant Visit
Received: from SU-SHASTA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 86 12:55:02 PST
Received: by su-shasta.arpa with TCP; Sat, 29 Mar 86 12:54:47 pst
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 86 12:54:47 pst
From: Joseph Friedman <yossi@su-shasta.arpa>
Subject: Prospective Applicant Visit
To: jmc@sail
Cc: ra@sail
Hi,
I am a member of the Student Recruitment Committee, and I have
a prospective applicant coming for a visit. She will arrive at Stanford
on Thursday, April 3, and would stay the whole day (she is from
Berkeley). She is interested in AI, and said she wants to talk to you.
Could you see her on Thursday?
Thanks in advance,
Yossi Friedman (yossi@shasta)
∂29-Mar-86 1528 yossi@su-shasta.arpa re: Prospective Applicant Visit
Received: from SU-SHASTA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 86 15:28:33 PST
Received: by su-shasta.arpa with TCP; Sat, 29 Mar 86 15:28:19 pst
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 86 15:28:19 pst
From: Joseph Friedman <yossi@su-shasta.arpa>
Subject: re: Prospective Applicant Visit
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Thank you. Her name is Elisabeth S. Wolf. She was accepted at Stanford
and is interested in AI.
Could we make it a little bit later than 1:30? She already has a meeting
at 1:15.
Yossi
∂29-Mar-86 2300 JMC
Bibel
∂30-Mar-86 1229 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 12:29:18 PST
Date: Sun 30 Mar 86 12:30:36-PST
From: Dan Kolkowitz <KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 28 Mar 86 22:04:00-PST
Message-ID: <12194900759.18.KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "display options" but I think that
in the best case they will have provided some kind of standard terminal
emulations so you can use the display editors effectively. I'm going to
need to see the documentation that IBM provided to straighten out the
mail problem so I'll look into that while I'm at it.
Dan
-------
∂30-Mar-86 1320 JJW IBM RT
To: JMC, CLT
Dan Kolkowitz has changed the name of the machine to IBMRTPC1 with
IBMPCRT1 as an alias. SAIL and other hosts should know the new name by
tomorrow.
Would it be worthwhile to ask Marty to fix WAITS so that it knows the
display type of the RT? That way one could run E and other display
programs when Telnetted from the RT to SAIL.
∂30-Mar-86 1551 JJW Re: IBM RT
To: JMC, CLT
∂30-Mar-86 1501 JMC re: IBM RT
To: JJW, CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Mar-86 13:20-PT.]
That would be worthwhile, but our more immediate problem is to arrange to
be able to use the RT by telnet. We would like to be able to use it both
from Datadiscs and from Datamedias working through SAIL. Glass TTY usage
offers no problem, but we would like to be able to use the vi editor.
Carolyn had the impression that SAIL had some problem that makes it
difficult. Is this correct, and if so, can something be done about it?
JJW - From a Datadisc, you should be able to use DTN and give Unix the
command "set term=DD" (uppercase matters, of course). The <control> key
in DTN acts like an Ascii CTRL key. Actually, we might have to modify
the /etc/termcap file to know about DD since it's not part of the standard
Unix set of terminals. In the meantime, "set term=dm2500" should work.
However, I tried it just now and DTN isn't working for unknown reasons
that I'll investigate.
From a Datamedia, it's best to use ordinary Telnet, not DTN, and give the
<meta>T command to enter transparent mode. Then type "set term=dm2500".
With a DMWAITS you then release the SAIL LOCK key and the <control> key
will be an Ascii CTRL key.
∂30-Mar-86 2029 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU I will send you a draft
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 20:29:35 PST
Received: from (ELLIOTT)SLACVM.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 03/30/86 at
22:28:37 CST
Date: 30 March 86 20:30-PST
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: I will send you a draft
Date: 30 March 1986, 20:25:41 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SU-AI.ARPA, JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: I will send you a draft
Dear John,
I may have a rough draft ready by tonight, but I will send you a draft by
tomorrow at the latest. I will be gone skiing until Wed. evening, leaving
tomorrow afternoon. Please have comments to me by thursday morning as my deadli
ne is Friday.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂30-Mar-86 2030 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@Lindy I will send you a draft
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 20:30:01 PST
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 86 20:32:58 PST
From: <ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@Lindy>
Reply-To: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@SU-Forsythe.ARPA
To: JMC@SAIL
Subject: I will send you a draft
Date: 30 March 86 20:30-PST
From: ELLIOTT@SLACVM
To: JMC@SAIL
Subject: I will send you a draft
Date: 30 March 1986, 20:25:41 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SU-AI.ARPA, JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: I will send you a draft
Dear John,
I may have a rough draft ready by tonight, but I will send you a draft by
tomorrow at the latest. I will be gone skiing until Wed. evening, leaving
tomorrow afternoon. Please have comments to me by thursday morning as my deadli
ne is Friday.
Greetings,
Elliott
∂30-Mar-86 2209 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 22:09:43 PST
Date: Sun 30 Mar 86 22:11:34-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Fri 28 Mar 86 16:16:00-PST
Message-ID: <12195006522.23.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
John, I myself have been wondering about that (Gordon Bell's phone).
First try a company named Dana Group (somewhere in silicon valley).
Next try the office of the Director of NSF.
Ed
-------
∂31-Mar-86 0825 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 08:25:53 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 08:27:08-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search Committee
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ra@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195118581.16.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please let me know if you would be able to attend an AI Search Committee
meeting this Thursday, April 3 from 2:30 - 3:30.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂31-Mar-86 0916 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 09:16:10 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 09:17:21-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search Committee
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
hirsh@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, grosof@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195127724.16.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to confirm that there will be an AI Search Committee Meeting this
Thursday, April 3 at 2:30 in MJH 220. Please feel free to drop by my office
anytime prior to this to check out the applications we have received thus far.
-Anne
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1136 RA visitor from Peking
Margaritt Shaw called from Suppes' office caaled (3-3111).
There is a visitor from Peking
which Suppes would like you to meet. Can you see him this afternoon or
Wed or Thurs?
∂31-Mar-86 1211 RA going out for lunch
I am going out for lunch; will be back around 1:30.
∂31-Mar-86 1320 LES DARPA $ Update
To: facil@SU-AI.ARPA, "@XTRA.DIS[1,LES]"@SU-AI.ARPA
The revised budget that I distributed last week had a $10k arithmetic
error on the departmental file server. This means that we actually
have $39.6k in miscellaneous funds rather than $49.6k as I claimed.
You guys get a "D" grade in critical review. I don't trust me, so why
should you?
Dave Cheriton says that he thinks we need:
(a) an additional 3 rackmount cabinets for the fileservers;
(b) ethernet transceivers and cables for the new Suns;
(c) unspecified software licenses and manuals for the Suns.
Dave also suggested getting the necessary hardware and software to bring
the various Symbolics machines up to version 6.2. It seems likely that
Tom Rindfleisch's negotiations with Symbolics will lead to lower
pricing for this, but this probably won't happen within the life of the
DARPA equipment contract. Should we spend some money on this anyway?
Tom Rindfleisch suggests that we:
(a) get a Unix kernal source license from Sun (~ $1k);
(b) buy a Laserwriter for Macintosh output at KSL (~ $5k);
(c) buy spares for inhouse maintenance of TI workstations
($9.6k / processor board, $23.6k / 8 MB memory board).
Jeff Mogul is not convinced that it is either sensible or safe to depend
on the planned inhouse development to replace the obsolescent Golden
gateway. He again suggests that we consider buying one from Proteon.
I do not understand why we (or rather EE) are developing this device if we
can buy one at a reasonable price. I note also that we have nothing in
writing from the project leader about comittments to milestones and dates.
These should be obtained at the very least.
John McCarthy still has not decided which parallel machine to buy,
the principal alternatives being Alliant and Encore. We probably should
proceed with obtaining permission to buy the rest of this stuff anyway so
as to not jeopardize the funds.
I invite comments on the assorted recommendations given above.
Les
∂31-Mar-86 1333 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 13:33:40 PST
Received: from (ELLIOTT)SLACVM.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 03/31/86 at
15:32:37 CST
Date: 31 March 86 13:33-PST
From: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Date: 31 March 1986, 13:29:25 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SU-AI.ARPA, JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Dear John,
Included below is my draft for the "What is the Question?" piece for the
Stanford Magazine. Please have your comments back to me by mid Thursday
at the latest as my deadline is on Friday. Thanks, Elliott
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nowadays practitioners of the basic sciences have big plans,
exciting ideas that can certainly stimulate the imagination and
creativity of our society. These ideas run the gamut from the space
telescope to the Superconducting Supercollider (SSC), or functionally,
from the exploration of the farthest reaches of the universe to the
probing of the nature of the quarks and leptons, the smallest known
constituents of matter, and perhaps the very nature of matter itself.
Since I am a particle physicist I am naturally predisposed to
expand upon the goals of the SSC, particularly given the brevity of
this article (for more detail see J.D.Jackson, et. al., Scientific
American, March 1986). However, one should be aware of the large
number of equally fascinating projects emanating from many areas of
the basic sciences. Beside their fascinating aspects many of these
projects have another commonality, they are expensive.
The time is the late 1990s. A pastoral landscape gives almost no
hint that a tunnel, large enough to walk through and curved into a
ring some 85 km around, lies buried well below the surface. Inside
the tunnel there is a small tramway for maintaining two cryogenic
pipelines, each about two feet in diameter. Within each pipeline is a
much smaller, highly evacuated tube that carries a beam of protons,
which are kept on course by powerful superconducting magnets
surrounding the tube. The two beams of protons are
counter-circulating, the current in each beam being on the order of
0.1 amp. The energy of the protons will be the highest manmade in the
world, since the protons of each beam will have been accelerated
through about 20 trillion volts.
After the acceleration process, which takes about 15 minutes, the
beam paths are made to cross. Pairs of opposite going protons
collide, and some of the energy of the collision can be transferred at
a rate that far exceeds the instantaneous output of all the power
plants on the earth into a region whose diameter is 100,000 times
smaller than the diameter of a proton. There, for a brief instant, we
shall have a glimpse of the universe at the moment of creation; such
energy concentration was the prevailing state of the universe in the
first 10-16 second after the big bang.
It is enervating that such a vision is within the reach of
20th-century technology. The tunnel, superconducting magnets,
beamlines, the attendant operating systems and an initial complement
of particle detectors and computers can be built entirely with
accessible technology, albeit an a scale never before attempted,←at a
cost of about $4 billion in constant 1986 dollars. Indeed, the basic
design of the instrument is already being tested at an energy scale of
about 1/20: the scale model is the particle accelerator known as the
Tevatron, at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab).
The scaled-up version, the SSC, would make it possible to study
energetic processes that are not accessible to any other accelerator
now in operation or seriously contemplated anywhere in the world.
Why pursue such exotic goals. I am convinced that the collective
curiosity of humanity demands it. One takes up fundamental science
out of a sense of pure excitement, out of joy at enhancing human
culture, out of awe at the heritage handed down by generations of
masters, and, most importantly, because we want to know what's there.
When the cost of pursuing this enterprise is high, it is fair to
ask why society should support it. The answer is simple: the support
of fundamental science-mathematics, astronomy, the physical and the
biological sciences-yields profoundly significant benefits, both
cultural and practical. The generous support of basic science has
served our society well in the past, and contributes to a quality and
diversity of American research in science and technology which remains
unmatched by any other nation. Shall we continue on our enlightened
path?
∂31-Mar-86 1338 ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@Lindy Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 13:38:04 PST
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 86 13:40:17 PST
From: <ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@Lindy>
Reply-To: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@SU-Forsythe.ARPA
To: JMC@SAIL
Subject: Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Date: 31 March 86 13:33-PST
From: ELLIOTT@SLACVM
To: JMC@SAIL
Subject: Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Date: 31 March 1986, 13:29:25 PST
From: Bloom, Elliott ELLIOTT at SLACVM
To: JMC at SU-AI.ARPA, JMC at SAIL.STANFORD
Subject: Draft of my piece for the Stanford Magazine.
Dear John,
Included below is my draft for the "What is the Question?" piece for the
Stanford Magazine. Please have your comments back to me by mid Thursday
at the latest as my deadline is on Friday. Thanks, Elliott
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nowadays practitioners of the basic sciences have big plans,
exciting ideas that can certainly stimulate the imagination and
creativity of our society. These ideas run the gamut from the space
telescope to the Superconducting Supercollider (SSC), or functionally,
from the exploration of the farthest reaches of the universe to the
probing of the nature of the quarks and leptons, the smallest known
constituents of matter, and perhaps the very nature of matter itself.
Since I am a particle physicist I am naturally predisposed to
expand upon the goals of the SSC, particularly given the brevity of
this article (for more detail see J.D.Jackson, et. al., Scientific
American, March 1986). However, one should be aware of the large
number of equally fascinating projects emanating from many areas of
the basic sciences. Beside their fascinating aspects many of these
projects have another commonality, they are expensive.
The time is the late 1990s. A pastoral landscape gives almost no
hint that a tunnel, large enough to walk through and curved into a
ring some 85 km around, lies buried well below the surface. Inside
the tunnel there is a small tramway for maintaining two cryogenic
pipelines, each about two feet in diameter. Within each pipeline is a
much smaller, highly evacuated tube that carries a beam of protons,
which are kept on course by powerful superconducting magnets
surrounding the tube. The two beams of protons are
counter-circulating, the current in each beam being on the order of
0.1 amp. The energy of the protons will be the highest manmade in the
world, since the protons of each beam will have been accelerated
through about 20 trillion volts.
After the acceleration process, which takes about 15 minutes, the
beam paths are made to cross. Pairs of opposite going protons
collide, and some of the energy of the collision can be transferred at
a rate that far exceeds the instantaneous output of all the power
plants on the earth into a region whose diameter is 100,000 times
smaller than the diameter of a proton. There, for a brief instant, we
shall have a glimpse of the universe at the moment of creation; such
energy concentration was the prevailing state of the universe in the
first 10-16 second after the big bang.
It is enervating that such a vision is within the reach of
20th-century technology. The tunnel, superconducting magnets,
beamlines, the attendant operating systems and an initial complement
of particle detectors and computers can be built entirely with
accessible technology, albeit an a scale never before attempted,←at a
cost of about $4 billion in constant 1986 dollars. Indeed, the basic
design of the instrument is already being tested at an energy scale of
about 1/20: the scale model is the particle accelerator known as the
Tevatron, at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab).
The scaled-up version, the SSC, would make it possible to study
energetic processes that are not accessible to any other accelerator
now in operation or seriously contemplated anywhere in the world.
Why pursue such exotic goals. I am convinced that the collective
curiosity of humanity demands it. One takes up fundamental science
out of a sense of pure excitement, out of joy at enhancing human
culture, out of awe at the heritage handed down by generations of
masters, and, most importantly, because we want to know what's there.
When the cost of pursuing this enterprise is high, it is fair to
ask why society should support it. The answer is simple: the support
of fundamental science-mathematics, astronomy, the physical and the
biological sciences-yields profoundly significant benefits, both
cultural and practical. The generous support of basic science has
served our society well in the past, and contributes to a quality and
diversity of American research in science and technology which remains
unmatched by any other nation. Shall we continue on our enlightened
path?
∂31-Mar-86 1454 ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA re: Math problem
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 14:52:41 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 14:54:26-PST
From: Lee Altenberg <ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: re: Math problem
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Mon 31 Mar 86 02:17:00-PST
Message-ID: <12195189088.33.ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Thanks for your example.
-Lee Altenberg
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1607 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA AI Search
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 16:05:31 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 15:40:40-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: AI Search
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA, buchanan@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, hirsh@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195197505.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have some outstanding candidates included among those applying for
an AI position at Stanford. (I attach a list of those who have applied
so far.) Our AI Search Committee meets for the first time this Thursday,
April 3 at 2:30 pm. I hope that we will be able to narrow the list at
that time to a small number (3-ish) whom we would invite to come and visit
us and get letters on. We are late for making offers for next year, but
if we move with good speed, we might be able to persuade our leading candidates
to delay any decision about going anywhere else until they hear from us.
Please look over the file (Anne Richardson has it) of applicants so we
will be able to use the time on Thursday to best advantage.
Here's the list so far:
James K. Peckol, Tom M. Mitchell, Kurt Konolige, David G. Lowe, John
Batali, Alan M. Frisch, Kristian Hammond, Leo Bachmair, David
Etherington, Alan Van Gelder, R. E. Cooley, Matthew L. Ginsberg,
Alberto Maria Segre, Paul O'Rorke, Yoav Shoham, Natarajan Shankar
-Nils
-------
∂31-Mar-86 2007 RPG Lisp Conferene
Any further thoughts on speaking?
-rpg-
∂31-Mar-86 2101 veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Thank you.
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 21:01:32 PST
Received: from ukans by csnet-relay.csnet id a014840; 31 Mar 86 23:50 EST
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 86 11:27:20 CST
From: Glenn Veach <veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: JMC%SU-AI.ARPA@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Thank you.
Dr. McCarthy:
Thank you for your prompt response in sending "On the Model
Theory of Knowledge." We appreciate it very much.
Glenn
∂01-Apr-86 0414 wachsmuth%gvaic2.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM Situation Calculus Planning in blocks & related worlds.
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 04:14:21 PST
Received: from DEC-RHEA.ARPA (dec-rhea) by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.03/4.7.34)
id AA16202; Tue, 1 Apr 86 03:35:32 pst
Message-Id: <8604011135.AA16202@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Date: Tuesday, 1 Apr 1986 03:31:11-PST
From: wachsmuth%gvaic2.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM (Markus L. Wachsmuth)
To: JMC@su-ai.ARPA, wachsmuth%gvaic2.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM
Subject: Situation Calculus Planning in blocks & related worlds.
Dr. McCarthy,
Could you please have the following papers sent to me:
* SITUATION CALCULUS PLANNING IN BLOCKS AND RELATED WORLDS.
* COMMON SENSE AND NON-MONOTONIC REASONING
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Markus Wachsmuth
Digital Equipment Corp. (Europe)
43 rte de Prevessin
CH-1217 GENEVA
SWITZERLAND
P.S. The papers' titles may be incorrect, but the topics are what matters.
∂01-Apr-86 1320 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu AI DISC: DREYFUS
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 13:20:32 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA27558; Tue, 1 Apr 86 13:20:57 PST
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 86 13:20:57 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8604012120.AA27558@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Subject: AI DISC: DREYFUS
Hello Dr. McCarthy,
You might have seen a version of the following given by Dreyfus,
however, both Stuart and Hubert Dreyfus say that as a starting
point - it articulates their ideas most clearly.
------------------------------------------------------------------
CONVENTIONAL AI: A DEGENERATING RESEARCH PROGRAM
Looking back over 30 years, the field of conventional
rule-based AI appears more and more to be a perfect example
of what Imre Lakatos has called a degenerating research pro-
gram.[1] AI began auspiciously with Newell and Simon's work
at RAND. In retrospect, we see we failed to appreciate the
importance of this early work. Newell and Simon proved that
computers could do more than calculations. They demonstrated
that the symbols computers manipulate could stand for any-
thing, including features of the real world, and programs
could be used as rules for relating these features, so that
computers acting as logic machines could be used to simulate
certain important aspects of intelligence. Thus the
information-processing model of the mind was born. By 1970
AI, using symbolic representations, had turned into a flour-
ishing research program. Marvin Minsky, head of the M.I.T.
program, predicted that "within a generation the problem of
creating `artificial intelligence' will be substantially
solved."[2]
Then, rather suddenly, the field ran into unexpected
difficulties. The trouble started, as far as we can tell,
with the failure of attempts to program children's story
understanding. It turned out to be much harder than one
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
$9 [1] Imre Lakatos, Philosophical Papers, ed. John Wor-
rall, Cambridge University Press, 1978.
$9 [2] Marvin Minsky, Computation: Finite and Infinite
Machines, Prentice Hall, 1967, p. 2.
- 2 -
expected to formulate the required theory of common sense.
It was not, as Minsky had hoped, just a question of catalo-
guing a few hundred thousand facts. The common sense
knowledge problem became the center of concern. Minsky's
mood changed completely in the course of fifteen years. He
told a reporter: "the AI problem is one of the hardest sci-
ence has ever undertaken."[3]
Related problems were also noted although not often
seen as related. Cognitivists discovered the importance of
images and prototypes in human understanding and logic
machines turned out to be very poor at dealing with either
of them. Gradually most researchers have become convinced
that human beings form images and compare them by means of
holistic processes quite different from the logical opera-
tions computers perform on descriptions.[4] Some AI workers
hope for help from parallel processors, machines that can do
many things at once and hence can make millions of infer-
ences per second, but if human image processing operates on
holistic representations that are not descriptions and
relates these representations in other than rule-like ways,
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
$9 [3] Gina Kolata, "How Can Computers Get Common
Sense?", Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1237.
$9 [4] For an account of the experiments which show that
human beings can actually rotate, scan, and otherwise
use images, and the unsuccessful attempts to understand
these capacities in terms of programs which use
features and rules, see Imagery, Ned Block, ed., M.I.T.
Press/Bradford Books, 1981. Also Ned Block, "Mental
Pictures and Cognitive Science," The Philosophical Re-
view, Oct. 1983, pp. 499-541.
- 3 -
this appeal to parallel processing misses the point. The
point is that human beings are able to form and compare
their images in a way that cannot be captured by any number
of procedures that operate on symbolic descriptions.
Another human capacity which computers functioning as
analytic engines cannot copy is the ability to recognize the
similarity between whole images. Recognizing two patterns as
similar, which seems to be a direct process for human
beings, is for a logic machine a complicated process of
first defining each pattern in terms of objective features
and then determining whether, by some objective criterion,
the set of features defining one pattern match the features
defining the other pattern.
As we see it, all AI's problems are versions of one
basic problem. Current AI is based on the idea which has
been around in philosophy since Descartes, that all under-
standing consists in forming and using appropriate represen-
tations. In conventional AI these have been assumed to be
symbolic descriptions. So common sense understanding has to
be understood as some vast body of propositions, beliefs,
rules, facts and procedures. AI's failure to come up with
the appropriate symbolic descriptions is called the common
sense knowledge problem. As thus formulated this problem
has so far turned out to be insoluble, and we predict it
will never be solved.
What hides this impasse is the conviction that the
- 4 -
common sense knowledge problem must be solvable since human
beings have obviously solved it. But human beings may not
normally use common sense knowledge at all. What common
sense understanding amounts to might well be everyday know-
how. By know-how we do not mean procedural rules, but know-
ing what to do in a vast number of special cases. For exam-
ple, common sense physics has turned out to be extremely
hard to spell out in a set of facts and rules. When one
tries, one either requires more common sense to understand
the facts and rules one finds or else one produces formulas
of such complexity that it seems highly unlikely they are in
a child's mind.
Theoretical physics also requires background skills
which may not be formalizable, but the domain itself can be
described by abstract laws that make no reference to
specific cases. AI researchers conclude that common sense
physics too must be expressible as a set of abstract princi-
ples. But it just may be that the problem of finding a
theory of common sense physics is insoluble. By playing
almost endlessly with all sorts of liquids and solids for
several years the child may simply have built up a repertory
of prototypical cases of solids, liquids, etc. and typical
skilled response to their typical behavior in typical cir-
cumstances. There may be no theory of common sense physics
more simple than a list of all such typical cases and even
such a list is useless without a similarity-recognition
ability. If this is indeed the case, and only further
- 5 -
research will give us an answer, we could understand the
initial success and eventual failure of AI. It would seem
that AI techniques should work in isolated domains but fail
in areas such as natural language understanding, speech
recognition, story understanding, and learning where the
structure of the problem mirrors the structure of our every-
day physical and social world.
In 1979 we predicted stagnation for AI, but also
predicted the success of programs called expert systems
which attempted to produce intelligent behavior in domains
such as medical diagnosis and spectrograph analysis which
are completely cut off from everyday common sense. Now we
think we were uncharacteristically over-optimistic concern-
ing the future of intelligent logic machines. It has turned
out that, except in certain structured domains where what
constitutes the relevant facts and how these facts are
changed by decisions is known objectively, no expert system
based on rules extracted by questioning experts does as well
as the experts themselves, even though the computer is pro-
cessing with incredible speed and unerring accuracy what are
supposed to be the experts' rules.
In our just published book Mind Over Machine we attempt
to explain this surprising development. We argue that
beginners in a domain are given principles to follow, but
most domains in which human beings acquire skills and
achieve expertise are, like everyday physics, domains which
- 6 -
do not lend themselves to being understood at an expert
level in terms of principles.[5] Therefore experts, as even
Edward Feigenbaum has noted, are never satisfied with gen-
eral principles but prefer to think of their field of exper-
tise as a huge set of special cases.[6] No wonder expert
systems based on principles abstracted from experts do not,
in unstructured domains, capture those experts' expertise
and so never do as well as the experts themselves.
We still think, as we did in 1965, that someday comput-
ers may be intelligent just as one day the alchemists' dream
of transmuting lead into gold came true. AI may be
achieved, however, only after researchers give up the idea
of finding a local symbolic representation of high-order
macrostructural features describing the world and turn
instead to some sort of microstructural distributed, holis-
tic representation that is directly amenable to association,
generalization and completion. If this is, indeed, the
direction AI should go, it will be aided by the massively
parallel machines on the horizon, but not because parallel
machines can make millions of inferences per second, but
because faster, more parallel architecture can better imple-
ment the kind of neurally inspired processing that does not
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
$9 [5] Hubert L. Dreyfus and Stuart E. Dreyfus, Mind
over Machine, Free Press/Macmillan (1986).
$9 [6] Edward A. Feigenbaum and Pamela McCorduck, The
Fifth Generation, Artificial Intelligence and Japan's
Computer Challenge to the World, Addison-Wesley Pub-
lishing Company, 1983, p. 82.
- 7 -
use macrostructural representations of rules and features at
all.[7]
Hubert L. Dreyfus and Stuart E. Dreyfus
University of California, Berkeley
$9←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
$9 [7] See for example D. Rumelhart and J. McClelland,
Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the
Microstructure of Cognition, MIT Press/ Bradford Books,
1986.
P.S. Please acknowlege receipt of this mail.
∂01-Apr-86 1325 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu AI DISC: Winograd Position
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 13:25:24 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA27764; Tue, 1 Apr 86 13:25:53 PST
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 86 13:25:53 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8604012125.AA27764@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Subject: AI DISC: Winograd Position
The best thing to do in a short position paper is to put forth some
clear and probably controversial assertions, without giving elaborate
motivations and justifications contrasting them with other ways of
understanding. These fuller discussions appear at length in my recent
book with Fernando Flores, Understanding Computers and Cognition.
1. In characterizing AI, there are two very different starting points.
We can take it as the general enterprise of developing intelligent
artifacts (by any physical means whatsoever), or as the expression of a
coherent methodology and theory.
2. To the extent that AI means "anything anyone might invent that shows
intelligence," discussion belongs in the realm of science fiction, since
there is little concrete to be said. To the extent we are talking about
what people have really done in AI, there is a strong coherent ideology,
variously labelled the "computational paradigm," "cognitive paradigm,"
"physical symbol system hypothesis," etc. Most of the existing AI
enterprise operates within it (including, though to a somewhat lesser
extent, the current work on connectionism).
3. The cognitive symbol-processing approach will have useful
applications, but these will not be as widespread or significant as
proponents claim. In general, those tasks that are closer to
"puzzle-solving" will be best covered, and those closer to "common
sense" and "ordinary understanding" will remain unmechanized. This
applies not only to existing technology, but to any of the foreseeable
improvements following in the general scientific direction that is being
pursued (including "massively" parallel machines, nonmonotonic
reasoning, etc., etc.).
4. I am not so concerned with the danger that attempts to fully
duplicate human intelligence will fail (as long as people don't bank to
heavily on optimistic predictions), but rather that the enterprise has
an effect of redefining intelligence---of shaping human understanding of
what is to count as "intelligent." In particular, AI is based on a
"rationalistic" account of human thought and language, which focusses on
systematic reasoning based on symbolic representations within an
explicitly articulated domain of features. This approach has important
uses, but systematically undervalues other aspects of intelligent human
action, both in the individual and within a tradition. Emphasis on
rationalism is not new to AI, having a long history in Western thought
(beginning with Plato, expressed more thoroughly by Descartes).
Computers (and AI in particular) give it a powerful operational form.
5. A healthy skepticism about AI (and the rationalistic orientation in
general) is needed as a guide for design of computer systems that make
sense. We are easily seduced by the image of the "thinking machine"
into claiming that the problems of designing and working with computer
technology will be solved when the machines get smart enough. The Fifth
Generation hoopla (both the Japanese original report and later books and
responses) is an egregious example of this fallacy. The phenomena of
"computerization" (in its pejorative sense) derive from the
reorganization of social systems to fit the properties of particular
computer implementations. It will not be prevented by having "smart"
machines, and in fact is accelerated by advocating the use of computers
in less structured areas of human life and society.
6. My major interest lies in research (both theoretical and applied)
that will support the development of technology to provide the
advantages of using computers while anticipating and avoiding negative
effects on people's work and lives. The rationalistic tradition does
not provide a sufficient basis for this design, since it takes as its
starting point an impoverished account of what people do. A new
starting point will come from an understanding of the phenomenology of
human communication and use of technology. We can draw on the
philosophical tradition of phenomenology, and its insights can be given
concrete operational meaning in the context of design.
7. It is often claimed that concerns of "social impact" should be left
to the political process, or perhaps to engineers who are directly
developing products, but should be ignored in pursuing "pure science."
These (often self-serving) claims are based on a rationalistic (and
narrow) understanding of science as a human enterprise. They might be
true for some idealized scientist living self-sufficiently and
incommunicado on an isolated island, but are irrelevant to the real
world. The continuing enterprise of any science depends on a public
consensus that supports the allocation of resources to it. This
consensus is maintained by a process of publication and "education" in
which the ideology of the science is promulgated and justified. As
members of the "AI community" we all participate in this, through
writing, talking, and teaching.
8. AI scientists and engineers have a responsibility to take their work
seriously---to recognize that both their inventions and their words have
a serious effect and to consider the effects consciously. The issue
isn't censorship, but positive action. It is useless to try to label
work that "shouldn't be done," but instead we can use our knowledge and
status to advance the things that "should be done," rather than just
those that "can be done." I anticipate a gradual shift of effort and
emphasis within the field as we go beyond the the early science-fiction
dreams that motivated the field, and look at directions for new research
(including theoretical research) that better deals with the realities of
human society. In particular, computers (using AI techniques) will be
understood in terms of the complex and productive ways in which they can
serve as a medium for human-to-human communication, rather than being
personified as surrogate people.
-TERRY WINOGRAD
-------
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt of this mail --- Thanks.
∂01-Apr-86 1539 VAL Common Sense and Non-Monotonic Reasoning Seminar
To: "@CS.DIS[1,VAL]"@SU-AI.ARPA
The Monkey, the Banana, and the Bomb:
Information-Gathering in a Situational Logic
Richard Waldinger
SRI International
Thursday, April 3, 4pm
MJH 252
Abstract
In formulating a plan, certain actions are of value only
to increase the agent's knowledge about the environment.
We consider how such plans can be constructed within a
situational logic.
∂01-Apr-86 1604 ME Prancing Pony Bill
Prancing Pony bill of JMC John McCarthy 1 April 1986
Previous Balance 14.57
Payment(s) 14.57 (check 3/16/86)
-------
Current Charges 6.00 (bicycle lockers)
0.30 (vending machine)
-------
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 6.30
Please deliver payments to Debbie Woodward, room 040, Jacks Hall.
Make checks payable to: STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
To ensure proper crediting, please include your Pony account name on your check.
Note: Payment recordation takes up to three weeks after delivery of a payment
(but not beyond the next billing date).
Bills are payable upon presentation. Interest of 1.5% per month will be
charged on balances remaining unpaid 25 days after bill date above.
∂02-Apr-86 1108 RA fellowship letter
I put a hard copy of the list I got from Claudia on your desk. Do you
want me to write a personal letter to every one on the list, or do you want
a general letter addressed to Dear Colleagues. If the latter, what should
the address say, or do you want it simply to start with Dear Colleagues with
no addressee.
∂02-Apr-86 1413 LES Qlisp and Parallel Processors
To: JMC, CLT, RPG, JJW
I reached Steve Squires on Monday afternoon and got confirmation that
release of the DARPA Order for Qlisp is imminent and that they need
another brief task description with milestones and another budget (sigh).
The latter will have to go through the Stanford mill. I am preparing
them.
I also pressed him on the machine selection question. He again reviewed
his grand plan and added a few embellishments: after the Multimax gets
MIPS-X and Mach-1 added to it, it will be repackaged and put into
satellites, providing computational support for S.D.I. No problem.
I too occasionally smoke dope.
Squires went on to say that he understood that there is local interest in
getting three kinds of machines: Sequent, Encore and Alliant and that as
long as there was at least one Encore locally, to permit later transplants
as seems appropriate, that it looks OK to him. He suggested I recheck
Hennessy's plans.
I reached Hennessy on Tuesday and learned that he had turned around and
decided to buy a Multimax and that Luckham is definitely getting a Sequent
system. (This was after Hennessy flamed at me earlier for even
considering Encore.) It is clear, then, that we are free to choose
whichever machine we wish. Based on earlier discussions, it appears to me
that we should go ahead with the Alliant purchase. I am preparing
documentation in support of that plan.
Comments?
∂02-Apr-86 2024 CLT
To: JMC, CLT
how about meeting with joe 3pm sat?