perm filename W86[JNK,JMC] blob
sn#814409 filedate 1986-04-02 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002
C00003 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂02-Jan-86 0946 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Qualifying Exams
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 09:46:33 PST
Date: Thu 2 Jan 86 09:41:40-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Qualifying Exams
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sec@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12172063479.30.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
In the interests of efficiency and in order to streamline procedures,
I'd like to have all of the qualifying exams organized and coordinated
through my office. In the past, I have asked only for the results of
each qual. It will be helpful for me to know who is attempting one
before it is taken. I would appreciate the faculty member in charge
of any area qual to please let me know of scheduled exams so that I
can send out an announcement, arrange a signup list, reserve a room,
etc. I'd also like to encourage you to set the exam dates as far in
advance as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter,
please feel free to contact me.
Thank you.
Victoria
-------
∂02-Jan-86 1138 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA update course announcement
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Jan 86 11:38:28 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 2 Jan 86 11:22:24-PST
Date: 02 Jan 86 1115 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: update course announcement
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
CS350 (MTC) Winter 1986
Programming and proving with functional and control abstractions.
Carolyn Talcott
Time: Tu-Th 11:00-12:15
Place: Bldg 50 room 51B (inner quad to just to the left of MemChu)
Course description: (as in previous announcement)
This course combines ideas from semantics of programming languages,
mathematical theory of computation, and program transformations to develop
a semantic foundation for symbolic (Lisp-type) computation. The goals
are: to develop a context in which both intensional and extensinal
aspects of computation can be treated; to provide mathematical tools for
obtaining a better understanding of current practice in symbolic
computation and for representing and proving properties of programs; and
to provide operations on programs with meanings to transform and meanings
to preserve.
The main idea is to treat computation as a process of generating
computation structures such as trees and sequences and to treat more
abstract interpretations of programs as derived notions. The language for
describing computations is that of the lambda calculus extended by
conditional, sequence formation, and context noting primitives.
Additional mathematical tools for reasoning about computation are provided
by a class of approximation and equivalence relations on programs. These
relations are a means forgetting selected details of computations while
preserving evaluation and application relations. There is a maximum
approximation and a maximum equivalence. These maximum relations are
extensional. The recursion operator (Y-combinator analog) computes the
least fixed point with respect to the maximum approximation.
Use of the mathematical tools developed will be illustrated by a variety
of applications. The applications include: proving properties of
programs that use streams, escape mechanisms and co-routines; a
correspondence between streams and co-routines; the use of functionals to
construct and prove properties of programs; program transformations
involving introduction of function and control abstractions; a general
method for converting intensional properties of programs into extensional
properties of ``derived'' programs; and using derived programs to analyze
the effects of program transformations.
Much of the material will be based on a model of computation developed by
Talcott. As background, work in semantics and theory of computation will
be reviewed including work of McCarthy, Landin, Morris, and Wegner. Work
based on alternate semantic models will also be discussed, including work
of Scott, Plotkin, Mosses, and Moschovakis.
Suggested prerequisites: CS306 or equivalent background in logic and Lisp
∂03-Jan-86 0635 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLB
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 06:34:57 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 06:31:02-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172290919.9.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here's the abstract for the first AFLB of the quarter. For the
benefit of those who attended David's orals: There will be little
overlap with that talk.
***************************************
9-Jan-86 : David Foulser (Stanford)
Asymptotic Bounds for Longest Common Subsequence (LCS) Comparisons
The length of the Longest Common Subsequence L(S,T) of two strings S
and T is a popular measure of their similarity. If the strings have
length N, we conveniently refer to the LCS match fraction L(S,T)/N.
Suppose the strings are made up of letters selected at random from an
alphabet having k elements. We will state lower and upper bounds on
the expected value lim(N --> infinity) EX[ L(S,T)/N ] as a function of
alphabet size k.
An important generalization of the LCS is the Longest Monotone Path
(LMP) through a square lattice of independent random variables. The
LMP is very much like the LCS and it is more amenable to study. We
give lower and upper bounds on the expected value
lim(N --> infinity) EX[ LMP(lattice)/N ] as a function of the chance
of a match at a single lattice point.
Consider now the LCS comparison of r sequences or the LMP through an
r-dimensional lattice of independent Bernoulli random variables. We
will prove bounds for the asymptotic match fractions of these
multi-dimensional path lengths.
The lower bounds depend on any approximating algorithm that undercounts
the length of the LCS or LMP. We will mention several such algorithms
and analyze the best. The upper bounds depend on a procedure for
overcounting the number of long common subsequences or monotone paths.
We will close with some new ways of examining the LCS and LMP match fractions
and with a few open problems.
***** Time and place: January 9, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂03-Jan-86 0647 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Analysis of Algorithms course announcement
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 06:47:22 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 06:41:22-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Analysis of Algorithms course announcement
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172292800.9.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
I will be teaching CS 360 this quarter; the title is "Mathematical Analysis
of Algorithms". The course was accidentally left out in the last Winter
Quarter Time Table. It will be held on MW 11-12:15, at BIOT-151.
One of the textbooks, the one by Greene and Knuth, was out of stock and could
not arrive in time. There may be a few copies in the Stanford Bookstore
in the non-textbook area. I will make copies of the book as handouts for
those that don't have it.
--Andrew Yao
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1151 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA PLANLUNCH RESTARTS! -- next Wednesday -- 11AM
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 11:51:46 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 11:47:36-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: PLANLUNCH RESTARTS! -- next Wednesday -- 11AM
To: planlunch.dis: ;
FORMAL APPROACHES TO PLAN REASONING
James Allen (JAMES@ROCHESTER)
University of Rochester
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, January 8
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
This will be an informal "work in progress" talk discussing two
current research projects. The first involves specifying
a formal model of plan reasoning based on a limited form of
counterfactuals in a temporal logic. The second is investigating
the relationship between traditional planning and plan recognition systems.
A formal theory of plan recognition is derived from a simple theory
of planning using some techniques based on circumscription.
This theory is being used in our recent work in which
planning and plan recognition must both be used to reason
in a world with multiple agents.
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1318 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [JJW: WORKSHOP on PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 13:18:31 PST
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1986 13:17 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12172364936.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: [JJW: WORKSHOP on PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS]
Date: Friday, 3 January 1986 12:53-PST
From: Joe Weening <JJW at SU-AI.ARPA>
To: paco at SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Re: WORKSHOP on PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 11:58:16-PST
From: Gene Golub (415/497-3124) <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: WORKSHOP on PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: na-seminar@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172350489.20.GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
You are cordially invited to the
ARO WORKSHOP
on
PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
6-8 January, 1986.
The meeting takes place in CERAS LGI.
Monday, 6 January
SESSION I
0850-0900 Opening Remarks
Arthur Wouk, Army Research Office
0900-1000 Debugging Multi-Task Programs
W. Morven Gentleman* and Darlene A. Stewart, National Research
Council, Ottowa, Canada
1000-1100 Matrix Computations and Game Playing
David Scott* and Cleve Moler, Intel Corporation
1100-1130 BREAK
1130-1230 DOMINO A Transportable Operating System For Parallel Computation
Dianne P. O'Leary, G. W. Stewart* and Robert van de
Geijn, University of Maryland
1230-1400 LUNCH
SESSION II
1400-1500 Applied quantum chemistry on a parallel computer.
George F. Adams, Ballistic Research Laboratory
1500-1600 Scheduling Recurrences and Recursion across Multiple Processors
Dennis B. Gannon, Indiana University and CSRD
1600-1630 BREAK
1630-1730 Decision Making in Executing Scientific Algorithms on
Multiprocessors
Joel Saltz, ICASE
1800-1900 RECEPTION
1930-2145 BANQUET
Tuesday, 7 January
SESSION III
0845-0945 Sparse Matrix Computations on a Hypercube Multiprocessor
Michael Heath, Oak Ridge National Laboratories
0945-1045 Concurrent Algorithms for Global Optimization on a Network of
Computers
Robert B. Schnabel*, Richard Byrd, Cees Dert and Alexander
Rinnooy Kan, University of Colorado, Boulder
1045-1115 BREAK
1115-1215 Heterogeneous Processes on a Homogeneous Multi-Processor
George Cybenko, Tufts University
1215-1345 LUNCH
SESSION IV
1345-1445 "Fast" linear algebra routines on boolean cubes
Lennart Johnsson, Yale University
1445-1545 The Force on the Flex: Global Parallelism and Portability
Harry Jordan, University of Colorado, Boulder
1545-1615 BREAK
1615-1715 SCHEDULE - An aid to writing explicitly parallel programs in
Fortran
Danny Sorensen and Jack Dongarra, Argonne National Laboratories
and CEDAR
Wednesday, 8 January
SESSION V
0845-0945 Dynamic Grid Manipulation for PDE's on hypercube parallel
processors
William Gropp, Yale University
0945-1045 Architectural and Software Issues for Large-scale
Multiprocessors
Oliver A. McBryan, Courant Institute
1045-1115 BREAK
1115-1215 Solving a Hydrodynamics Problem on a Hypercube Simulator
Jung Pyo Hong* and Bob Tomlinson, Oak Ridge National
Laboratories, and Nisheeth Patel, Ballistic Research Laboratory
1215-1245 Closing remarks
Arthur Wouk, Army Research Office
∂03-Jan-86 1401 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Socrates: Update on TELNET
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 14:01:22 PST
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 13:53:14-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Socrates: Update on TELNET
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172371420.36.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The response time when one TELNETS to Socrates has been improved. Let
me know if you have any comments about this improvement.
Harry
(If for some reason you don't know what Socrates is let me know. Those
who don't have a Socrates account and would like one, we have forms in
the Math/CS Library that when you fill out we issue you an account.)
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1415 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:JMC@SU-AI.ARPA department plans and basic research in computer science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 14:14:59 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 3 Jan 86 14:09:53-PST
Date: 03 Jan 86 1412 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: department plans and basic research in computer science
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
CC: gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
I am concerned that the Department's plans are being pushed in
the direction of orientation towards presently visible applications
of computer science rather than towards basic research. The issue
isn't theory vs. experiment, because there is experimental basic
research. I think we should discuss the issue at the retreat.
∂04-Jan-86 1540 CAROL@SU-CSLI.ARPA New whereabouts
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Jan 86 15:40:08 PST
Date: Sat 4 Jan 86 15:37:30-PST
From: Carol Kiparsky <CAROL@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New whereabouts
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
*********************************************************************
**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DL
3 Jan 85
Your itinerant dandelion consultant has yet another new office.
I'm now in trailer room E-5. My phone numbers here are
723-1712 and 497-3561.
Feel free to call or drop in. I'm usually here between 9:30 and
3:30.
-Carol
ION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION**NEWS**DLION*
*********************************************************************
-------
∂05-Jan-86 1649 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA BS vs MS
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Jan 86 16:49:43 PST
Date: Sun 5 Jan 86 16:46:05-PST
From: Gene Golub (415/497-3124) <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: BS vs MS
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12172927173.13.GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
At the end of the retreat on Saturday, I brought up a point that Bruce
Buchanan discussed with me earlier in the day. Some of us worry about
the additional work that will be required if the Department offers an
undergraduate degree. Even if we did not have an undergraduate degree
but had six new faculty members we would still be suffering
from administrative overload. Thus it might be sensiible to curtail
our MS degree. We might use a formula like
<number of undergraduates> + <number of MS students> = 150.
That could have an impact on the department finances , our teaching
program and research program. Nils has asked me to gather some facts
and make a recommendation. Let me know how you feel about this.
GENE
-------
∂05-Jan-86 2002 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: BS vs MS
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Jan 86 20:02:16 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 5 Jan 86 19:58:18-PST
Date: Sun 5 Jan 86 20:01:15-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: BS vs MS
To: GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA, faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12172927173.13.GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12172962701.49.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The number of MS/AI candidates is 8-10 per year. I wqould prefer not to
cut back that (small number). I do not feel strongly about the number
of MS/CS Masters students.
Ed
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1015 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 10:15:15 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 09:59:30-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173115300.44.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The CSD Tuesday Lunch series will begin again this week. Tomorrow, Jan 7
at 12:15 in MJH 146, Gordon Bell will be a guest at the lunch and there
will be general discussion.
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1019 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 10:18:17 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 10:04:16-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173116168.44.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a CSD General Faculty Meeting tomorrow (Jan. 7) at 2:30 in
MJH 146. The agenda will include:
Conferral of Degrees
Reports
Consideration of the Undergraduate Major
Other Business as may arise
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1020 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 10:20:48 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 10:04:57-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173116293.44.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a sr. faculty meeting tomorrow (Jan. 7) following the
general faculty meeting in MJH 146.
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1106 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA BATS at Stanford, January 17, 1986
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 11:06:29 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 10:59:05-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: BATS at Stanford, January 17, 1986
To: ragde%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, traub%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
amiram%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, propp%ucbbrahms@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA, broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM, klawe.ibm-sj@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA,
allen.ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: warmuth.uscs@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173126148.10.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
There will be a Bay Area Theory Seminar at Stanford on Friday, January 17.
The talks will be
C. Dwork or L. Stockmeyer from IBM-SJ: ``A Parallel Algorithm for Term
Matching''
V. Rutenburg from Stanford: ``Complexity of Generalized Coloring Problems''
V. Pratt from Stanford: ``The Composition of Processes''
M. Warmuth from UCSC: ``Classifying Learnable Geometric Concepts with the
Vapnik-Chervonenkis Dimension''
Coordinators:
Please distribute this announcement to your mailing lists and let me know
approximately how many people will be here.
Stanford people:
Please let me know whether you will attend.
Thanks,
Joan (jf@su-sushi.arpa)
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1125 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 11:25:51 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 11:22:31-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173130414.44.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Contrary to my previous message, there will NOT be a sr. faculty meeting
subsequent to the general faculty meeting on Jan. 7. My apologies.
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1250 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu EATCS
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 12:50:10 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jan 86 12:43:53-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jan 86 12:44:18-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 6 Jan 86 14:17:34 CST
Message-Id: <8601061952.AA13782@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 6 Jan 86 13:52:08 CST
Received: from (ROZENBER)HLERUL5.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 01/06/86
at 13:51:35 CST
Date: 6 JAN 86 10:55-N
From: ROZENBER%HLERUL5.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
To: THEORY@WISC-RSCH.ARPA
Subject: EATCS
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 06 Jan 86 14:16:57 CST (Mon)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Dear collegue,
I am taking advantage of this excellent communication
medium, the "Theory Net", to send you information (actually
the information leaflet) about the EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION FOR
THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE (EATCS). Although our associa-
tion is based in Europe, its membership is "intercontinental"
- about 40% of our members comes from outside Europe.
In our experience the only reason that a computer
scientist who is either actively engaged or interested in
theoretical computer science is not a member of EATCS is
that she/he does not know about our organisation - just
see how much we offer for so little!!! Hence, I hope that
after reading this information you will become an EATCS
member (or prolong your EATCS membership for a number of
years).
If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact
either myself (electronic address: ROZENBER@HLERUL5.BITNET)
or the secretary of the association Th. Ottmann (electronic
address: OTTMANN@GERMANY.CSNET).
I take this opportunity to wish you the very best
New Year.
G. Rozenberg
EATCS President
===============================================================================
EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION FOR THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE (EATCS)
COUNCIL OF EATCS
BOARD
President: G. Rozenberg, Leiden
Vice President: W. Brauer, Munich
Treasurer: J. Paredaens, Antwerp
Secretary: Th. Ottmann, Karlsruhe
Bulletin Editor: G. Rozenberg, Leiden
TCS Editor: M. Nivat, Paris
Past Presidents: M. Nivat, Paris (1972-1977)
M. Paterson, Warwick (1977-1979)
A. Salomaa, Turku (1979-1985)
FURTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS
G. Ausiello Rome
J. De Bakker Amsterdam
J. Diaz Barcelona
F. Gecseg Szeged
J. Gruska Bratislava
Z. Manna Rehovot & Stanford
H. Maurer Graz
Ch.H. Papadimitriou Athens & Stanford
A. Paz Haifa
D. Perrin Paris
E. Schmidt Aarhus
D. Wood Waterloo
EATCS
HISTORY AND ORGANISATION
EATCS is an international organisation founded in 1972. Its aim is to
facilitate the exchange of ideas and results among theoretical computer
scientists as well as to stimulate cooperation between the theoretical
and the practical community in computer science.
Its activities are coordinated by the Council of EATCS, out of which a
President, a Vice President, a Treasurer and a Secretary are elected.
Policy guidelines are determined by the Council and the General Assembly
of EATCS. This assembly is scheduled to take place during the annual
International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP),
the conference of EATCS.
MAJOR ACTIVITIES OF EATCS
- Organization of ICALP's
- Publication of the "Bulletin of the EATCS"
- Publication of the "EATCS Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science"
- Publication of the journal "Theoretical Computer Science"
- Other activities of EATCS include the sponsorship of various more
specialized meetings in theoretical computer science. Among such
meetings are: CAAP (Colloquium on Trees in Algebra and Programming),
TAPSOFT (Conference on Theory and Practice of Software Development),
STACS (Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science),
Workshop on Graph Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, European
Workshop on Applications and Theory of Petri Nets, Workshop on Graph
Grammars and their Applications in Computer Science.
BENEFITS
Benefits offered by EATCS include:
- Receiving the "Bulletin of the EATCS" (about 600 pages per year)
- Reduced registration fees at various conferences
- Reciprocity agreements with other organisations
- 25% discount in purchasing ICALP proceedings
- 25% discount in purchasing books from "EATCS Monographs on Theoretical
Computer Science"
- About 70% (equals about 1000 Dutch guilders) discount per annual
subscription to "Theoretical Computer Science".
(1) THE ICALP CONFERENCE
ICALP is an international conference covering all aspects of theoretical
computer science and now customarily taking place during the third week of
July.
Typical topics discussed during recent ICALP conferences are: computability,
automata theory, formal language theory, analysis of algorithms, computa-
tional complexity, mathematical aspects of programming language definition,
logic and semantics of programming languages, foundations of logic programming,
theorem proving, software specification, computational geometry, data types and
data structures, theory of data bases and knowledge based systems, cryptography,
VLSI structures, parallel and distributed computing, models of concurrency
and robotics.
Sites of ICALP meetings:
- Paris, France (1972) - Haifa, Israel (1981)
- Saarbrucken, Germany (1974) - Aarhus, Denmark (1982)
- Edinburgh, Great Britain (1976) - Barcelona, Spain (1983)
- Turku, Finland (1977) - Antwerp, Belgium (1984)
- Udine, Italy (1978) - Nafplion, Greece (1985)
- Graz, Austria (1979) - Rennes, France (1986)
- Noordwijkerhout, Holland (1980) - Karlsruhe, Germany (1987)
(2) THE BULLETIN OF THE EATCS
Three issues of the Bulletin are published annually appearing in
February, June and October respectively. The Bulletin is a medium for
rapid publication and wide distribution of material such as:
- EATCS matters
- Information about the current ICALP
- Technical contributions
- Surveys and tutorials
- Reports on conferences
- Calendar of events
- Reports on computer science departments and institutes
- Listings of technical reports and publications
- Book reviews
- Open problems and solutions
- Abstracts of Ph.D. Theses
- Information on visitors at various institutions
- Entertaining contributions and pictures related to computer science.
Contributions to any of the above areas are solicited. All written
contributions should be sent to the Bulletin Editor:
Prof.dr. G. Rozenberg
Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Leiden
P.O. Box 9512
2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
Deadlines for submissions to reach the Bulletin Editor are: January 15,
May 15 and September 15 for the February, June and October issue respec-
tively.
All pictures (preferably black and white) including text of what they
are showing should be sent to the Picture Editor:
Dr. P. van Emde-Boas
University of Amsterdam
Roeterstraat 15
1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Deadlines are 2 weeks before those for written contributions, indicated
above.
(3) EATCS MONOGRAPHS ON THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
This is a series of monographs published by Springer-Verlag and launched
during ICALP 1984; within the first year six volumes appeared. The series
includes monographs as well as innovative textbooks in all areas of theo-
retical computer science, such as the areas listed above in connection
with the ICALP conference. The volumes are hard-cover and ordinarily
produced by type-setting. To ensure attractive prices other production
methods are possible.
The editors of the series are W. Brauer (Munich), G. Rozenberg (Leiden),
and A. Salomaa (Turku). Potential authors should contact one of the editors.
The advisory board consists of G. Ausiello (Rome), S. Even (Haifa), M. Nivat
(Paris), C. Papadimitriou (Athens & Stanford), A. Rosenberg (Durham), and
D. Scott (Pittsburgh).
Updated information about the series can be obtained from the publisher,
Springer-Verlag.
(4) THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
The aim of the "Theoretical Computer Science" journal is to publish
papers in the fast envolving field of theoretical computer science.
The volume of research on theoretical aspects of computer science
has increased enormously in the past. The classical theories of
automata and formal languages still offer problems and results,
while considerable attention is now being given to newer areas, such
as the formal semantics of programming languages and the study of algorithms
and their complexity. Behind all this lie the major problems of under-
standing the nature of computation and its relation to computing
methodology. While "Theoretical Computer Science" remains mathematical
and abstract in spirit, it derives its motivation from the problems of
practical computation. The editors intend that the domain covered
by "Theoretical Computer Science" will increase and evolve with the
growth of the science itself. The editor-in-chief of "Theoretical
Computer Science" is:
Prof. M. Nivat
162, Boulevard Malesherbes
75017 Paris, France.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Please contact the Secretary of EATCS:
Prof.dr. Th. Ottmann
Institut fur Angewandte Informatik und Formale
Beschreibungsverfahren
Universitat Karlsruhe
Postfach 6380
D-7500 Karlsruhe 1
West Germany
DUES
The dues are US $ 10.- for a period of one year. If the initial
membership payment is received in the period December 21 - April 20,
April 21 - August 20, August 21 - December 20, then the first
membership year will start on June 1, October 1, February 1,
respectively. Every continuation payment continues the membership
for the same time period.
An additional fee is required for ensuring the air mail delivery
of the EATCS Bulletin outside Europe. The amounts are $ 7.- for USA,
Canada, Israel, $ 10.- for Japan and $ 12.- for Australia per year.
For information additonal fees for other destinations contact either
the Secretary or the Treasurer.
HOW TO JOIN EATCS
To join send the annual dues, or a multiple thereof (to cover a
number of years), to the Treasurer of EATCS:
Prof.dr. J. Paredaens
University of Antwerp, U.I.A.
Department of Mathematics
Universiteitsplein 1
B-2610 Wilrijk, Belgium
The dues can be paid (in order of preference) by US $ bank cheques,
other currency bank cheques, US $ cash, other currency cash. It cannot
be paid by International Post Money Order. When submitting payment,
please make sure to indicate complete name and address. For this purpose
you may want to use the form below. You may also pay the membership fee
via the following account:
General Bank Antwerp
Antwerp, Belgium
Account number: 220-0596350-30
If a transfer is in US $ then the annual membership payment equals
US $ 10.-. If a transfer (covering the membership for any number of years
and/or addtitional air mail delivery for any number of years) is in a
currency other than US $, then additional US $ 2.- for the transfer must
be paid (the difference is used to cover the bank charges). Please remember
to indicate your address clearly (since the Bulletin is send to the address
you give).
===============================================================================
I would like to join EATCS and enclose $..... as membership for .....
years (and $..... for air mail delivery).
Name:
Address:
Date: Signature:
===============================================================================
--------------
TN Message #14
--------------
∂06-Jan-86 1308 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Seminar Tuesday
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 13:08:09 PST
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1986 13:04 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12173149050.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Seminar Tuesday
Multis: A New Class of Multiprocessor Computers
C. Gordon Bell
Encore Computer Corporation
Abstract: Multis are a new class of computers based on multiple
microprocessors. The small size, low cost, and high performance of
microprocessors allow the design and construction of computer
structures that offer significant advantages in manufacture,
price-performance ratio, and reliability over traditional computer
families. Currently, commercial multis consist of 4 to 28 modules,
which include multiprocessors, common memories, and input-output
devices, all of which communicate through a bus. Multis are likely to
be the basis for the next, the fifth, generation of computers -- a
generation based on parallel processing.
Tuesday, January 7, 1986
4:15 pm
Skilling Auditorium
∂06-Jan-86 1352 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Meeting this Wednesday
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 13:52:08 PST
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1986 13:51 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12173157500.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Meeting this Wednesday
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
The first Winter Term meeting of the Advanced Architectures Project
will be held this Wednesday, at the unusual time of 10 am. Topic
uncertain at press time, but all are encouraged to attend.
-- Byron
∂06-Jan-86 1445 JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Thursday Events
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 14:45:30 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 14:43:01-PST
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Thursday Events
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
We do not have the use of Redwood G-19 on Thursdays this winter
because of regularly scheduled classes being held there. So far, I
have not found another room, but hope to do so soon. Check your
mail for the location of this Thursday's events.
-- Jamie
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1518 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library: Asbestos Removal Project In The Attic Area Completed
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 15:18:05 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 15:12:48-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library: Asbestos Removal Project In The Attic Area Completed
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, msgs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173172336.16.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The asbestos removal project in the attic area of the Math/CS Library has
been completed. All the journals and technical reports are now accessible
in the attic area. Technical reports 1 through 9999 are located in this
area. Serials/journals listed as storage are also in this area. We have
moved Stanford dissertations to the small room across from the main
circulation desk. We will keep the photocopy machine in the room off of
the terrace where we also shelve the videotapes.
I am happy the attic area has now been cleaned up and apologize for any
inconvenience it may have caused when some materials were not accessible.
Harry Llull
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1534 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Concurrency Modelling Course
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 15:34:00 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 6 Jan 86 15:31:17-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 15:23:53 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 15:19:58-PST
From: Vaughan Pratt <PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Concurrency Modelling Course
To: "@dis.dis[1,clt]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173173640.49.PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
CS459: Research in Concurrency Modelling
Professor: Vaughan Pratt
Time: MW 1:15-2:45
Room: First meeting in MJ 352, Wed. Jan. 8 at 1:15
Units: 3
Goals:
* an understanding of existing models of concurrency
* an assessment of their relative merits
* attempts at simplification and unification where feasible
The following list of models and languages is suggested for starters.
Milner's SCCS; Pnueli's temporal logic; Hoare's CSP; Petri nets;
Mazurkiewicz's trace theory; Winskel's event structures;
Pratt's partially ordered multisets; Hewitt's actors.
Format: The class will be divided into research teams of 2-3 each.
Each team will study and report on one or two models. Teams will
also collaborate on unification efforts as appropriate. The first
two weeks will consist of a brief overview of all models.
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1842 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Update on BATS, January 17
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 18:42:31 PST
Date: Mon 6 Jan 86 18:35:33-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Update on BATS, January 17
To: ragde%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, traub%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
amiram%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, propp%ucbbrahms@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA, broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM, klawe.ibm-sj@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA,
allen.ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173209246.20.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here is some more information that you may want before making the decision
about coming to BATS next friday. (By the way, it will take place in the
CERAS LGI.)
Speaker: Vaughan Pratt (Stanford)
Title: On the Composition of Processes
Abstract: In the early 70's Gilles Kahn elegantly generalized the
familiar notion of composition of functions to composition of processes
in a net, namely as the least fixpoint of a system of n equations {x←i
= f←i(x←1,...,x←n)|i in 1..n} where the x←i's range over the set of
finite and infinite strings on some alphabet and the f←i's are
continuous functions in the c.p.o. of strings under the usual prefix
ordering. The f←i's model deterministic processes and the x←i's model
a net of channels between them. We give an alternative definition
having a comparable (i.e. very small) quantity of mathematical baggage,
that dispenses with fixpoints and prefix ordering, is equivalent (under
the appropriate translations) to Kahn's model for deterministic nets,
but unlike Kahn's system also correctly models the behavior of nets of
nondeterministic processes.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Speaker: Manfred Warmuth (UCSC)
Title: ``Classifying Learnable Geometric Concepts with the Vapnik-Chervonenkis
Dimension''
Abstract:
We extend Valiant's learnability model to learning classes of concepts
defined by regions in Euclidean space E↑r. Our methods lead to a
unified treatment of some of Valiant's results, along with previous
results of Pearl and Devroye and Wagner on distribution-free
convergence of certain pattern recognition algorithms.
We show that the essential characteristic for distribution-free learnability
is the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, a simple combinatorial parameter
of the class of concepts to be learned. Using this dimension we analyze
the complexity and closure properties of learnable classes.
This is joint research with Anselm Blumer, Andrzej Ehrenfeucht, and
David Haussler.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Speaker: Vlad Rutenburg (Stanford)
Title: ``Complexity of Generalized Coloring Problems''
Abstract:
We consider the class of generalized coloring problems, denoted GCP(G, k):
Given an input graph H, can we color the nodes of H with k colors so that none
of the color-induced subgraphs of H contains G as a subgraph? Notice that
GCP(K←2, k) is the usual graph-coloring problem. We characterize how the
complexity of these problems depends on the parameters G and k:
1) GCP(G, k) is NP-Complete for k >= 3, for any nontrivial G;
2) GCP(G, 2) is NP-Complete for any G with max. degree at least 2;
3) GCP(G, 2) is polynomial, in fact is in NC, if G contains no node of
degree at least 2;
4) If G is part of the input, the new problem, GCP(k), is complete for
Sigma←2↑P.
Similar results hold when we replace the single graph G by any finite family
of graphs.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
I will send the fourth abstract around as soon as I get it.
Joan
-------
∂06-Jan-86 1938 keller@utah-cs.ARPA Symposium on Logic Programming
Received: from UTAH-CS.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Jan 86 19:38:45 PST
Received: by utah-cs.ARPA (5.5/4.40.2)
id AA27795; Mon, 6 Jan 86 20:33:58 MST
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 86 20:33:58 MST
From: keller@utah-cs.arpa (Bob Keller)
Message-Id: <8601070333.AA27795@utah-cs.ARPA>
To: 86-slp-mailing@utah-cs.ARPA
Subject: Symposium on Logic Programming
'86 SLP
Call for Papers
Third Symposium on Logic Programming
Sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society
September 21-25, 1986
Westin Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, UT
The conference solicits papers on all areas of logic programming, including,
but not confined to:
Applications of logic programming
Computer architectures for logic programming
Databases and logic programming
Logic programming and other language forms
New language features
Logic programming systems and implementation
Parallel logic programming models
Performance
Theory
Please submit full papers, indicating accomplishments of substance and novelty,
and including appropriate citations of related work. The suggested page limit
is 25 double-spaced pages. Send eight copies of your manuscript no later than
15 March 1986 to:
Robert M. Keller
SLP '86 Program Chairperson
Department of Computer Science
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
Acceptances will be mailed by 30 April 1986. Camera-ready copy will be due by
30 June 1986.
Conference Chairperson Exhibits Chairperson
Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Tutorials Chairperson Local Arrangements Chairperson
George Luger, University of New Mexico Thomas C. Henderson, University of Utah
Program Committee
Francois Bancilhon, MCC William Kornfeld, Quintus Systems
John Conery, University of Oregon Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah
Al Despain, U.C. Berkeley George Luger, University of New Mexico
Herve Gallaire, ECRC, Munich Rikio Onai, ICOT/NTT, Tokyo
Seif Haridi, SICS, Sweden Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Lynette Hirschman, SDC, Paoli Mark Stickel, SRI International
Peter Kogge, IBM, Owego Sten Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala University
∂07-Jan-86 0831 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #1
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 08:31:21 PST
Date: 6 Jan 86 2025-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #1
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 7 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 1
Today's Topics:
Happy New Year
Summary of topics -- Volume 1
Possible topics for PARSYM surveys
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1986 20:11 PST
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Happy New Year
New Year's Message
Happy New Year from PARSYM, the netwide mailing list for parallel
symbolic computing.
PARSYM has been very quiet for nearly a month. I am reluctant to
attribute this to a decline in interest in parallel symbolic
computing. Rather, I suspect it's due to the usual end-of-year
slowdown which overcomes the U.S. As a wise person once said, nothing
really happens between Thanksgiving and New Year's.
Overall, I am very pleased with PARSYM's progress. The quality of
contributions has been very high, and positive reader feedback
convinces me that the contributions are much appreciated.
To close out PARSYM's Volume 1 and to initiate Volume 2, I have
created a pocket summary of topics that were discussed in Volume 2.
This summary appears as the second message in this digest. In
addition, I have put together a list of possible topics for PARSYM
surveys, which will continue this year as a PARSYM feature. The list
of survey topics appears as the third message in this digest.
I welcome readers to become contributors, on any of the topics from
Volume 1, or on any new topic having to do with parallel symbolic
computing. PARSYM needs you!
-- Byron
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1986 20:16 PST
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Summary of topics -- Volume 1
Summary of PARSYM Topics -- Volume 1
The following is a summary of topics from Volume 1 of PARSYM. They
are broken down into five categories:
1. Project summaries
2. PARSYM Surveys
3. Seminars, Conferences, Workshops, Journals
4. Available Software and bibliographis
5. General discussions, stimulated by questions or by messages in the
other categories
Along with each topic, I have listed the numbers of the Volume 1
digests where the topic was discussed:
Project Summaries
1. Weizmann Institute: Systolic Programming [1]
2. CISRO: Concurrent Inference Machine [1]
3. Illinois: Supercompiler for Lisp [2]
4. BBN/MIT: Multilisp and Parallel Scheme [3,22]
5. Berkeley: SPUR [19,28,44]
6. CMU: Boltzmann Machines [23]
7. Maryland: Parallel Logic Programming [25]
8. Yale: Para-functional Programming [26]
9. Stanford: Partially Ordered Multisets [35]
10. Berkeley: Aquarius [40]
11. MIT: Tagged Token Dataflow [40]
12. MIT: Multiprocessor Emulation Facility [40]
13. BBN: Butterfly [40]
14. King's College London: COBWEB [41]
15. University College London: GRIP [41]
16. Illinois: CEDAR [42]
17. ICOT/Japan: several projects reported by Charles R. Watson [18]
a. Oki: PSI, SIMPOS, parallel inference
b. ETL: dataflow, dataflow Lisp machine
c. NTT: parallel logic programming, dataflow machines
d. U. Tokyo: relational DB machine (GRACE),
parallel inference engine (PIE)
e. Tokyo Institute of Technology: fault tolerant multiprocessor
f. Osaka U.: multiprocessor Lisp machine (EVALIS)
g. Kyoto U.: microprogramable microprocessor, parallel Prolog
h. Fujitsu: Lisp/Prolog machine, OR-parallel pure Prolog machine
PARSYM Surveys
1. Goals for Parallel Symbolic Computing [9,10,11,19]
2. Data Abstractions for Parallel Programming [20,21,23,24,26,27,28,35]
3. Hardware for Parallel Symbolic Computing [33,40,41,42,44]
Seminars, Conferences, Workshops, Journals
1. Fault tolerant computing conference [5]
2. Functional programming and architectures conference [6]
3. Parallelism in logic programs [12]
4. International Journal of Parallel Programming [14]
5. (Concurrent) programming language theory [14]
6. IJCAI-85 abstracts [16,17,18]
7. Parallel form perception [21]
8. Recognition algorithms for the Connection Machine [21]
9. Randomized routing on FAT-trees [22]
10. Connectionist parallel distributed processing [22]
11. SPUR -- Symbolic Processing Using RISCs [28]
12. BFCP and GHC: Alternatives to Concurrent PROLOG [30]
13. Multilisp [35]
14. Connectionist Summer School [36]
15. Principles of Distributed Computing Conference [39]
16. Limits on the Power of Concurrent-Write Parallel Machines [43]
17. Massively Parallel Networks that Learn Representations [45]
Available Software and Bibliographies
1. Flat Concurrent Prolog [10]
2. Connectionist learning/teaching tool [17]
3. Reading list for course on "Connectionism and Parallel
distributed computing [22]
4. SEAI Parallel Computing Survey [42]
General Discussions
1. What is symbolic computing? [1,4,5,6,7,8,9,13,15]
2. Distributed data structures [3,4,5]
3. Applicative/functional programming [3]
4. Parallel computer start-up companies [8]
5. Benchmarks for parallel symbolic computing [10,15]
6. Parallel processing and economics and theorem proving [12]
7. Parallel algorithms for linear programming [12,13]
8. IBM GF11 [13]
9. Quickly computing quarks [15]
10. Parallel computing bibliography [17]
11. Parallel rule execution examples [17]
12. Parallel symbolic processing in Japan [18]
13. Parallel Lisp environments [19]
14. Hypercube simulator [19]
15. Actors = Smalltalk? [28,29,30,31,32,34,35]
16. Symbolic processing on CRAY [28,29,30,37]
17. Lisp vectorizable? [30,31,32]
18. MIMD vs. SIMD challenge [34,35,36,37,38]
19. SISAL [39]
20. Connection Machine programming [39]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1986 20:19 PST
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Possible topics for PARSYM surveys
Early in the new year, I will put together a new survey on one of the
topics listed below. If you are particularly interested in any topic,
please let me know.
Possible Topics for Future PARSYM Surveys
Languages for parallelism
Control mechanisms for expressing concurrency
Software development environments for parallel symbolic computing
Parallelism in knowledge representation
Structured parallelism: pipelines, systolic arrays
Performance results
Negative results in parallel symbolic computing
Anomalous results: e.g., speedup of 89x with 25 processors
Graphics for parallelism: how do you watch your programs run?
Debugging parallel programs
Resource allocation and reclamation
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂07-Jan-86 0851 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #2
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 08:49:15 PST
Date: 7 Jan 86 0826-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #2
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 7 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 2
Today's Topics:
Seminars: Teaching a Massively-Parallel Network to Talk
& Parallel Architecture for IU
Workshop on Parallel Processing and Medium Scale Multiprocessors
[This digest clears the message queue. -- BD]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 15 December 1985 21:13-PST
From: Fred Lakin <LAKIN at SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: TEACHING A MASSIVELY-PARALLEL NETWORK TO TALK
[Forwarded from Pixels-and-Predicates]
A special seminar in place of Pixels and Predicates:
NETTALK: Teaching a Massively-Parallel Network to Talk
Who: Terrence J. Sejnowski, Johns Hopkins
Where: CSLI trailers
When: 1:00pm - Wednesday, December 18, 1985
Abstract:
Text to speech is a difficult problem for rule-based systems
because English pronunciation is highly context dependent and there
are many exceptions to phonological rules. An alternative knowledge
representation for correspondences between letters and phonemes will
be described in which rules and exceptions are treated uniformly and
can be determined with a learning algorithm in a connectionist model.
The architecture is a layered network of 400 simple processing units
with 9,000 weights on the connections between the units. The training
corpus is continuous informal speech transcribed from tape recordings.
Following training on 1000 words from this corpus the network can
generalize to novel text. Even though this network was not designed
to mimic human learning, the development of the network in some
respects resembles the early stages in human language acquisition.
Following damage of the network by either removal of units or addition
of random values to the weights the performance of the network
degraded gracefully. Issues which will be addressed include scaling
of the learning algorithm with the size of the problem, robustness of
learning to predicate order of the problem, and universality of
learning in connectionist models.
------------------------------
Subject: Seminar on Parallel Architecture for IU
Date: 16 Dec 85 17:42:01 GMT
[Forwarded from Vision-List]
IBM San Jose Research Lab
5600 Cottle Road
San Jose, CA 95193
Computer AN INTELLIGENT OPERATING SYSTEM FOR EXECUTING IMAGE
Science UNDERSTANDING TASKS ON A RECONFIGURABLE PARALLEL
Seminar ARCHITECTURE
L. H. Jamieson, School of Electrical Engineering,
Purdue University and Computer Science Laboratory,
SRI International
Tue., Dec. 17 The PASM project at Purdue University is an ongoing effort
2:00 P.M. to develop a flexible parallel processing system for image
B2-307 understanding applications. The architecture can support
Almaden both synchronous (SIMD) and asynchronous (MIMD) processing,
and can be partitioned dynamically into submachines of
differing sizes. One of the critical factors in
achieving high performance on such a system is
the matching of the architecture configuration
to the algorithm to be executed. In this talk,
we present preliminary work on the design of an
Intelligent Operating System which will use a
database of parallel image understanding
algorithms, knowledge about the state of the
system and information about performance
requirements in order to select architecture
configurations for execution of an image
understanding task. The Intelligent Operating
System design uses expert systems to perform the
configuration selection. The talk will also
describe related work on the design of the
Algorithm Database, including analysis of the
algorithm features needed to characterize the
parallel algorithms.
Host: D. Petkovic
------------------------------
Date: Fri 3 Jan 86 11:58:16-PST
From: Gene Golub (415/497-3124) <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: WORKSHOP on PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS
[Forwarded from the SU-BBoard]
ARO WORKSHOP
on
PARALLEL PROCESSING AND MEDIUM SCALE MULTIPROCESSORS
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
6-8 January, 1986.
The meeting takes place in CERAS LGI.
Monday, 6 January
SESSION I
0850-0900 Opening Remarks
Arthur Wouk, Army Research Office
0900-1000 Debugging Multi-Task Programs
W. Morven Gentleman* and Darlene A. Stewart, National
Research Council, Ottawa, Canada
1000-1100 Matrix Computations and Game Playing
David Scott* and Cleve Moler, Intel Corporation
1130-1230 DOMINO A Transportable Operating System For Parallel Computation
Dianne P. O'Leary, G. W. Stewart* and Robert van de
Geijn, University of Maryland
SESSION II
1400-1500 Applied quantum chemistry on a parallel computer.
George F. Adams, Ballistic Research Laboratory
1500-1600 Scheduling Recurrences and Recursion across Multiple Processors
Dennis B. Gannon, Indiana University and CSRD
1630-1730 Decision Making in Executing Scientific Algorithms on
Multiprocessors
Joel Saltz, ICASE
Tuesday, 7 January
SESSION III
0845-0945 Sparse Matrix Computations on a Hypercube Multiprocessor
Michael Heath, Oak Ridge National Laboratories
0945-1045 Concurrent Algorithms for Global Optimization on a Network of
Computers
Robert B. Schnabel*, Richard Byrd, Cees Dert and
Alexander Rinnooy Kan, University of Colorado, Boulder
1115-1215 Heterogeneous Processes on a Homogeneous Multi-Processor
George Cybenko, Tufts University
SESSION IV
1345-1445 "Fast" linear algebra routines on boolean cubes
Lennart Johnsson, Yale University
1445-1545 The Force on the Flex: Global Parallelism and Portability
Harry Jordan, University of Colorado, Boulder
1615-1715 SCHEDULE - An aid to writing explicitly parallel programs in
Fortran
Danny Sorensen and Jack Dongarra, Argonne National
Laboratories and CEDAR
Wednesday, 8 January
SESSION V
0845-0945 Dynamic Grid Manipulation for PDE's on hypercube parallel
processors
William Gropp, Yale University
0945-1045 Architectural and Software Issues for Large-scale
Multiprocessors
Oliver A. McBryan, Courant Institute
1115-1215 Solving a Hydrodynamics Problem on a Hypercube Simulator
Jung Pyo Hong* and Bob Tomlinson, Oak Ridge National
Laboratories, and Nisheeth Patel, Ballistic Research
Laboratory
1215-1245 Closing remarks
Arthur Wouk, Army Research Office
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂07-Jan-86 1012 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA John Hopcroft Visit
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 10:12:38 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 10:07:47-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: John Hopcroft Visit
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173378952.24.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
John Hopcroft, Professor of Computer Science at Cornell, will be visiting
the Stanford CSD on Wednesday, Jan. 15 from 9:30 on. Anyone who would
like to talk to him can let Anne Richardson (Richardson@score) know.
Also, would anyone out there like to volunteer to take him to lunch?
(I'll be teaching a class.) Someone might also want to volunteer to
take him to dinner. (I have a previous engagement.) -Nils
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1038 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 10:38:03 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 10:27:27-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173382534.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Don't forget! Today is the first of the Winter Quarter lunches.
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1042 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA General Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 10:42:17 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 10:28:53-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: General Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173382793.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Today is the General Faculty Meeting for the Winter Quarter at 2:30
in MJH 146!
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1220 GAWRON@SU-CSLI.ARPA Levin and Rappaport
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 12:20:12 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 12:16:01-PST
From: Mark Gawron <GAWRON@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Levin and Rappaport
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I have a copy of the revised (and I think final) version of
"The Formation of Adjectival Passives" by Levin and Rappaport,
to appear in LI. An earlier draft was discussed in a TINLunch some
time back, and some of the points raised then appeared to be addressed
here.
mark
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1225 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Forwarded Call for Papers
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 12:22:40 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 7 Jan 86 12:17:56 pst
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 86 12:17:56 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Forwarded Call for Papers
To: nail@diablo
Received: from utah-cs.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 7 Jan 86 11:58:35 pst
Received: by utah-cs.ARPA (5.5/4.40.2)
id AA27795; Mon, 6 Jan 86 20:33:58 MST
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 86 20:33:58 MST
From: keller@utah-cs.ARPA (Bob Keller)
Message-Id: <8601070333.AA27795@utah-cs.ARPA>
To: 86-slp-mailing@utah-cs.ARPA
Subject: Symposium on Logic Programming
'86 SLP
Call for Papers
Third Symposium on Logic Programming
Sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society
September 21-25, 1986
Westin Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, UT
The conference solicits papers on all areas of logic programming, including,
but not confined to:
Applications of logic programming
Computer architectures for logic programming
Databases and logic programming
Logic programming and other language forms
New language features
Logic programming systems and implementation
Parallel logic programming models
Performance
Theory
Please submit full papers, indicating accomplishments of substance and novelty,
and including appropriate citations of related work. The suggested page limit
is 25 double-spaced pages. Send eight copies of your manuscript no later than
15 March 1986 to:
Robert M. Keller
SLP '86 Program Chairperson
Department of Computer Science
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
Acceptances will be mailed by 30 April 1986. Camera-ready copy will be due by
30 June 1986.
Conference Chairperson Exhibits Chairperson
Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Tutorials Chairperson Local Arrangements Chairperson
George Luger, University of New Mexico Thomas C. Henderson, University of Utah
Program Committee
Francois Bancilhon, MCC William Kornfeld, Quintus Systems
John Conery, University of Oregon Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah
Al Despain, U.C. Berkeley George Luger, University of New Mexico
Herve Gallaire, ECRC, Munich Rikio Onai, ICOT/NTT, Tokyo
Seif Haridi, SICS, Sweden Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Lynette Hirschman, SDC, Paoli Mark Stickel, SRI International
Peter Kogge, IBM, Owego Sten Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala University
∂07-Jan-86 1237 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa next meeting
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 12:37:15 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 7 Jan 86 12:20:04 pst
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 86 12:20:04 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: next meeting
To: nail@diablo
I have to be involved in the GMD proposal all day tomorrow, so
I will not be able to attend the nail meeting.
You folks don't generally need me anyway, and I know that some
progress has been made over the holidays, so I suggest that
those who wish show up in 301 at 11AM as usual.
I hope next week (the 15th) to be able to tell you about what I
did over the holiday.
---Jeff
∂07-Jan-86 1300 LUNCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA NEW LUNCH SERVICE BEGINS TOMORROW!!
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 12:56:51 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 12:52:37-PST
From: CSLI Lunch <LUNCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: NEW LUNCH SERVICE BEGINS TOMORROW!!
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
NEW LUNCH SERVICE TOMORROW
A new lunch service begins Wednesday, 8 January 1986! An assortment of
fresh sandwiches, bagels, salads, fruit, yogurt, milk, juice, chips,
cookies, and soup will be available each day at lunchtime. You no
longer need to order in advance -- just drop by, pick what you like
from the selection on the table in the lounge or in the lunch
refrigerator, and pay at the front desk. You can get things from the
receptionist later in the day if you don't make it to lunch.
We will do everything possible to balance low costs with keeping the
selection interesting. If you have recommendations or complaints,
send them to LUNCH@SU-CSLI and a staff member will try to respond
within the week.
Costs?
Sandwiches $1.25 (big half-sandwich)
Salads .75
Soup .75
Yogurt .75
Chips .50
Cookies .25
Fruit .25
Milk .50
Juice .50
After 1:30, sandwiches, soup, and salad will be 1/2-price. Leftovers
will be donated to the Palo Alto Food Closet.
Once again, send comments to LUNCH@SU-CSLI and you'll never have
to bring left-overs for lunch again!!!
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1317 JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Thursday's Seminar
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 13:17:31 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 13:14:09-PST
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Thursday's Seminar
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
This Thursday's seminar, "Whither CSLI? II" by John Perry will
be held at 2:15 in Turing Auditorium.
(Turing Auditorium is at one end of Polya Hall, just behind Redwood.)
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1626 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Final BATS abstract
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 16:26:40 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 16:18:54-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Final BATS abstract
To: ragde%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, traub%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
amiram%ucbernie@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU, propp%ucbbrahms@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU,
yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA, broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM, ely@IBM-SJ.ARPA,
allen.ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173446512.10.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here is the fourth abstract for next friday's BATS. Please contact me
(jf@su-sushi.arpa) if you want copies of the other three.
Speaker: Cynthia Dwork (IBM-SJ)
Title: ``A Parallel Algorithm for Term Matching''
Abstract:
Unification of terms is a well-known problem with applications
to a variety of symbolic computation problems. Two terms s and t,
involving function symbols and variables, are unifiable if there is a
substitution for the variables under which s and t become syntactically
identical. For example, f(x,x) and f(g(y), g(g(c))) are unified by
substituting g(c) for y and g(g(c)) for x. A special case of unification
is term matching, where one of the terms contains no variables. Previous
work on parallel algorithms for unification by Dwork, Kanellakis, and Mitchell
[DKM] showed that unification is P-complete in general, even if terms are
represented as trees so that common subexpressions must be repeated.
However, DKM give an NC↑2 algorithm for term-matching using M(n↑2) processors,
where M(m) is the number of operations needed to multiply m by m matrices.
This algorithm allows a compact DAG representation of terms. These results
have been tightened in two ways. First, the processor bound for term
matching of DAGs has been improved to M(n), while retaining the
O((log n)↑2) running time, using a randomized algorithm. We simplify the
problem by reducing it to testing syntactic equivalence of two terms
represented by labelled DAGs. There is also some evidence that improving
the processor bound further will be difficult, because there is an efficient
parallel reduction from the graph-accessibility problem to the term-matching
problem for DAGs. The second improvement is a sharper P-completeness
result that shows that unification of tree terms is P-complete even for
linear terms, where each variable can appear at most once in each term.
This is joint work with Larry Stockmeyer.
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1747 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Correction to BATS abstracts
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 17:44:14 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 17:36:52-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Correction to BATS abstracts
To: ragde@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU, traub@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU,
propp@BRAHMS.BERKELEY.EDU, yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA, broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM,
ely@IBM-SJ.ARPA, manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173460706.10.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Alas, we are not going to hear about Valiant's learnability model and
the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension.
Here is the correct abstract for Warmuth's talk:
Speaker: Manfred Warmuth (Santa Cruz)
Title: ``Gap Theorems for Distributed Computation''
Abstract:
Consider a ring of n anonymous processors, i.e. the processors have no
id's. Each processor receives an input bit and the ring is to compute a
function of the circular input configuration in the asynchronous bidirectional
model of computation. The complexity of an algorithm is the number of bits
or the number of messages sent in the worst case.
The complexity of a function is the lowest complexity of any algorithm
that computes that function.
If the function value is constant for all input configurations,
the processors do not need to send any messages (complexity zero).
On the other hand, we prove that any
non-constant function has bit complexity
OMEGA (n log n) for anonymous rings.
There are non-constant functions that reach the upper end of the gap,
i.e. we exhibit a non-constant function of bit complexity O(nlogn).
The same gap for the bit complexity of non-constant functions
remains, if the processors have id's from a large enough domain.
For the case of using the number of messages sent rather than the number of
bits as the complexity measure, we present a non-constant function
that can be computed with O(n log↑* n) messages on an anonymous ring.
This is joint work with Shlomo Moran.
-------
∂07-Jan-86 1854 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Planlunch reminder: 11am tomorrow -- James Allen
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Jan 86 18:54:15 PST
Date: Tue 7 Jan 86 18:52:47-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Planlunch reminder: 11am tomorrow -- James Allen
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
FORMAL APPROACHES TO PLAN REASONING
James Allen (JAMES@ROCHESTER)
University of Rochester
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, January 8
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
This will be an informal "work in progress" talk discussing two
current research projects. The first involves specifying
a formal model of plan reasoning based on a limited form of
counterfactuals in a temporal logic. The second is investigating
the relationship between traditional planning and plan recognition systems.
A formal theory of plan recognition is derived from a simple theory
of planning using some techniques based on circumscription.
This theory is being used in our recent work in which
planning and plan recognition must both be used to reason
in a world with multiple agents.
-------
∂08-Jan-86 0853 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA registration
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 08:52:57 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 08:48:39-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: registration
To: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA, tas@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA, fl%LOTS-A@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173626692.32.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!!!!
If your class is going to use LOTS this quarter, you must log onto LOTS
and run the REGISTRATION program as soon as possible. Instructors or tas
can do this, but it should only run once per class, so please let each other
know or talk about it before you go ahead and run REGISTRATION.
Students have been trying to enter your classes using the UPDATE program,
but this will not work until the class is registered with LOTS. Please try
to get to this today or tomorrow...students have been complaining to the
LOTS people who cannot do anything about it.
To run REGISTRATION:
-log on
-@registration
-answer the questions
Thank you.
-Gina
-------
∂08-Jan-86 0858 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA office hours
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 08:57:53 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 08:51:48-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: office hours
To: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173627264.32.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please let me know what time(s) you would like to reserve in rooms
004 & 006 to hold office hours. I need this by noon Friday, so I
can offer the TAs the time slots left over.
If you will be holding office hours elsewhere, let me know where and
when, please.
Thank You.
-Gina
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1109 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:gana@su-sonoma.arpa Re: office hours
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 11:09:09 PST
Received: from su-sonoma.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 8 Jan 86 11:05:19-PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Wed, 8 Jan 86 11:06:40 pst
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 86 11:06:40 pst
From: Mahadevan Ganapathi <gana@su-sonoma.arpa>
Subject: Re: office hours
To: MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA, instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
my office hours are Tuesdays and Thursdays 10.00 to 11.00
ERL 447
∂08-Jan-86 1117 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New meeting time
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 11:16:18 PST
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1986 11:14 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12173653233.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: New meeting time
To make it possible for the graduate students to attend the weekly
meeting, the time has been changed.
The new meeting time is 10:45 to 11:45 on Wednesday.
-- Byron
∂08-Jan-86 1137 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Hand Cart
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 11:37:10 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 11:27:13-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Hand Cart
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173655556.41.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Will whoever "borrowed" the handcart that was in the Margaret Jacks Hall
lobby yesterday just before lunch please return it to me in MJH 214. No
questions asked.
-Anne
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1223 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Explorers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 12:20:20 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 12:18:37-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Explorers
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173664914.53.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
If anyone sees the problem wherein characters appear at random on a
Explorer, or one character repeats until another key is pressed, please
be sure to let me know. As of now, we assume this problem is fixed.
-- Rich
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1313 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA This week's TINLunch
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 13:13:47 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 13:10:47-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: This week's TINLunch
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Some Remarks on How Words Mean
by Georgia Green
Green (in her 1983 paper ``Some remarks on how words mean'') makes
the claim that a large class of common nouns nouns such as `cat' and
`pencil' in English are best viewed as not having meaning, that is, as
not having senses or intensions. Instead, she argues, such common
nouns are used to refer ``as names for kinds of objects or properties
(or events, or whatever)''. However, what is most interesting about
her point of view is not the claim about the name-like character of
common nouns, but rather that her analysis relies on a three-way
distinction between the language, the language-user and the world.
For instance, the ambiguity between kind-level and object-level uses
of nouns is not, as in Carlson's (l977) analysis, based on differences
in the language, but, rather, on differences in the use of language,
or, in differences in how people refer. She tells linguists that it
is nonsensical to do a semantic analysis of the word `clock' because
what is really the object of study is the kind that the word `clock'
names. Typically, discussions about the language/world relation and
discussions about the language/people relation are carried on
separately by different groups of people. This paper will serve us
well, I think, as a springboard for discussion of just how, on the
tri-partite view, we are going to separate out facts about language
from facts about people, and both of those from facts about the world.
--Susan Stucky
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1451 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 14:50:58 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 14:46:38-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173691860.33.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
New Systems And Architectures For Automatic Speech Recognition And Synthesis.
NATO ASI Series. ed. by De Mori and Suen. TK7895.S65.N375 1984.
Introduction To Computer Systems: A User-View. Cambridge Computer Science
Texts 21. by Molinari. QA76.5.M546 1985.
Graph Theory With Applications To Algorithms And Computer Science. ed. by
Alavi, Chartrand, Lesniak, Lick, and Wall. QA166.G733 1985.
IEEE Computer Society. International Symposium On New Directions In
Computing. August, 1985. Proceedings. QA75.5.I635 1985.
CODASYL Data Base Management Systems: Design Fundamentals. QED Information
Sciences Inc. by Robert Perron. QA76.9.D3P48.
Machine Intelligence and Pattern Recognition 1. Progress In Patter
Recognition 2. edited by Kanal and Rosenfeld. Q327.P76 v.2
IEEE Computer Society. Third International Workshop On Software Specification
And Design, August 1985. Proceedings. QA76.751.I57 1985.
Designing Intelligent Systems: An Introduction. by Igor Aleksander.
Q335.A442 1984 c.3
Introduction To Artificial Intelligence. 2nd enlarged edition. by
Philip Jackson Jr. Q335.J27 1985.
Algorithmically Specialized Parallel Computers. edited by Snyder,
Jamieson, Gannon, and Siegel. QA76.5.A374 1985.
Machine-Independent Organic Software Tools (MINT) Second Revised edition.
by Godfrey, Hendry, Hermans, and Hessenberg. QA76.6.M319 1985.
Software Engineering Handbook. Prepared by General Electric Co.
Corporate Information Systems. QA76.755.S63 1986.
First Intercontinental Maritime Simulaltion Symposium and Mathematical
Modelling Workshop. Proceedings. Munich, June 1985. ed.by M.R. Heller.
VK5.I73 1985
Applied Database Logic. Vol. 1 Fundamental Database Issues. by
Barry Jacobs. QA76.9.D3A66 v.1
Computer Applications In Finite Mathematics and Calculus. 2nd ed.
by Meitler and Ziegler. QA76.M395 1984.
Digital's Networks: An Architecture With A Future. TK5105.5D54 1984.
Macintosh Notebook MacWrite. by John Heilborn. Z52.5.M32M3 1985.
8088 IBM PC Assembly Language Programming by Shade. QA76.8.I2594.S45
1985.
H. Llull
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1538 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA BATS Schedule, January 17, 1986
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 15:38:10 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 15:29:41-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: BATS Schedule, January 17, 1986
To: ragde@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU, traub@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU,
propp@BRAHMS.BERKELEY.EDU, yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA, broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM,
ely@IBM-SJ.ARPA, manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, morris@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173699697.34.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
The schedule for BATS next friday is:
10: V. Pratt, ``Composition of Processes''
11: C. Dwork, ``A Parallel Algorithm for Term Matching''
12: Lunch
1: Open Problems (If any. Also, solutions to past open problems, if any.)
1:15 V. Rutenburg, ``The Complexity of Generalized Coloring''
2:15 M. Warmuth, ``Gap Theorems in Distributed Computation''
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1739 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA PLANLUNCH CANCELLED NEXT WEEK
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 17:38:38 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 17:36:25-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: PLANLUNCH CANCELLED NEXT WEEK
To: planlunch.dis: ;
There will be no PLANLUNCH next week. We will resume, however,
on Monday, January 20, with a talk by Dave Smith.
-Amy Lansky
-------
∂08-Jan-86 1758 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Newsletter January 9, No. 7
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Jan 86 17:58:14 PST
Date: Wed 8 Jan 86 16:53:32-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Newsletter January 9, No. 7
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
!
C S L I N E W S L E T T E R
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
January 9, 1986 Stanford Vol. 3, No. 7
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, January 9, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Some Remarks on How Words Mean
Conference Room by Georgia Green
Discussion led by Susan Stucky (Stucky@csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Turing Aud. Whither CSLI? II
Polya Hall John Perry, CSLI Director
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, January 16, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Generalized Quantifiers and Plurals
Conference Room by Godehard Link
Discussion led by Mats Rooth (Rooth@csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
To be announced
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
None planned
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Please note that the seminar and colloquium are no longer in
Redwood Hall room G-19. We are trying to get a new place; however,
the university will not schedule a room until the second week of the
quarter. This week's seminar is in Turing Auditorium which is at one
end of Polya Hall, just behind Redwood.
This newsletter is available and the CSLI computers (CSLI and
Russell) are working this week due largely to the effort of Joe
Zingheim in installing temporary chillers in the computer room on
schedule. He and the others who also put in extra hours or
extraordinary effort receive our thanks.
!
Page 2 CSLI Newsletter January 9, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
THIS WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Some Remarks on How Words Mean
by Georgia Green
Green (in her 1983 paper ``Some remarks on how words mean'') makes
the claim that a large class of common nouns such as `cat' and
`pencil' in English are best viewed as not having meaning, that is, as
not having senses or intensions. Instead, she argues, such common
nouns are used to refer ``as names for kinds of objects or properties
(or events, or whatever)''. However, what is most interesting about
her point of view is not the claim about the name-like character of
common nouns, but rather that her analysis relies on a three-way
distinction between the language, the language-user and the world.
For instance, the ambiguity between kind-level and object-level uses
of nouns is not, as in Carlson's (l977) analysis, based on differences
in the language, but, rather, on differences in the use of language,
or, in differences in how people refer. She tells linguists that it
is nonsensical to do a semantic analysis of the word `clock' because
what is really the object of study is the kind that the word `clock'
names. Typically, discussions about the language/world relation and
discussions about the language/people relation are carried on
separately by different groups of people. This paper will serve us
well, I think, as a springboard for discussion of just how, on the
tri-partite view, we are going to separate out facts about language
from facts about people, and both of those from facts about the world.
--Susan Stucky
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Generalized Quantifiers and Plurals
by Godehard Link
This paper reviews part of Link's logic of plurals and mass terms
and applies it to a variety of quantificational constructions. Link
argues that some but not all complex plural NPs express genuine plural
quantification. An example of genuine plural quantification is ``any
two men'', which can denote a generalized quantifier, the elements of
which are properties of groups. Other issues discussed include
floated quantifiers, numerals, and the German particle ``je''.
--Mats Rooth
--------------
FOUNDATIONS OF GRAMMAR
On Phrase Structure
Alexis Manaster-Ramer
Thursday, January 9, 4:15 p.m., Ventura Conference Room
As a special FOG event, we will take advantage of Alexis
Manaster-Ramer's brief return to the Bay Area. All are invited, but
the talk should be of special interest to members of the FOG project.
!
Page 3 CSLI Newsletter January 9, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF SPOKEN LANGUAGE
Exploiting Equivalence Sets to Recognize Speech: The NEXUS Project
Gary Bradshaw, Ph.D.
Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado
Thursday, January 9, 10 a.m., Ventura Conference Room
Theoretical accounts of the speech perception process must explain
``the invariance problem,'' where human listeners assign the same
label to a large set of different stimuli. Although many specific
proposals have been advanced, they can all be categorized into a small
set of classes. The talk will begin with a discussion of the various
classes of processes to accommodate variability. Next, an
isolated-word speech recognition system, NEXUS, will be described.
Although NEXUS is not intended as a detailed model of human speech
perception, the system bears many similarities to human linguistic
performance. Learning heuristics in NEXUS analyze the vocabulary into
an inventory of sub-word units, roughly corresponding to phonetic
segments. NEXUS can recognize that different words share
subsequences, and build word models that reflect this sharing. These
capabilities permit NEXUS to function effectively with a difficult
recognition vocabulary; the error rate was found to be only one-third
that of a state-of-the-art template-based recognition system.
Confusion matrices strongly resemble human perceptual confusions.
Time permitting, planned generalizations of NEXUS to begin on the
difficult problems of multiple speakers and connected speech will be
described.
--------------
LEXICAL PROJECT
Lexical Meaning and Valence
Mark Gawron (gawron@csli)
Monday, January 13, 10 a.m., Ventura Conference Room
The talk will focus on one version of a semantic account of
valence. Given a verb meaning, the account gives a set of possible
valences: each valence selects a subject and object from among the
verb's arguments (if any), and specifies the marking (such as a
particular preposition) for any obliques. I will then turn to some
consequences of such an account for a theory of lexical rules, and
some problems in the valence of nouns.
(This is the first meeting of the Lexical project for this quarter.
Future meetings will be on Mondays at 10 a.m. every other week.)
--------------
FIRST AFT PROJECT MEETING
Julius Moravcsik
Tuesday, January 14, 11 a.m., Ventura Conference Room
The regular meetings of the AFT (Aitiational Frame Theory) project
on lexical representation are on Tuesdays at 11 in the Ventura
Conference Room starting on January 14. For further information see
the December 5 CSLI newsletter (old newsletters are stored on CSLI in
<csli.newsletter>newsletters.txt). Please contact Julius Moravcsik
(julius@csli or (415)497-2130), if you are interested in joining the
group.
!
Page 4 CSLI Newsletter January 9, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGES GROUP
Last quarter the System Development Languages Group organized a
weekly meeting at CSLI on ``environments''. This quarter it will be
replaced by a meeting on ``System description languages meet the real
world'' (hopefully a snappier name will emerge). We will look at
research in which formal description languages have been applied in
the system development process for large-scale systems (both computer
and organizational).
The emphasis will be on what has been learned about the relation
between idealized formal structures (of the kind used in
specification) and the exigencies of building, understanding and
modifying real systems. A system description language that is
actually applied is clearly a ``situated language'', in that the
correspondence between language and world is generated and enforced by
the real flow of events. Much of the failure of program specification
(both in attempted applications and in convincing the world to try)
has come from taking an overly idealized view of this correspondence,
rather than dealing in a principled way with the very real contextual
issues and lack of pre-omniscience of the specifier.
There are also complex interactions with natural language. A
person reading a specification in any language (no matter how formal)
makes use of natural language understanding as a background. As a
simple illustration, many of the identifiers are words in a natural
language (imagine reading a program or specification in which all
identifiers have been systematically replaced with meaningless
character sequences). An idealized view ignores this, concentrating
on the meaning as developed through the formal structure of
definitions. A realistic view must recognize and deal with questions
about how terms come to be used and understood within a community (the
system developers, users, etc.), and how this relates to theories of
natural language semantics.
One major focus will be the work done in Scandinavia (originated by
Nygaard) as reflected in a series of languages (Simula, Delta,
Epsilon, Florence, Beta, ...) and a series of system development
projects (DUE, UTOPIA, MARS, SYDPOL, ...). We are fortunate to have
several visitors from the universities of Oslo (Norway) and Aarhus
(Denmark) who have participated in this work. Other topics may
include work by Holt and by DeCindio et al. (using Petri-net-based
formalisms) and more popular system development methodologies (e.g.,
Jackson's) that make some use of precise descriptive languages. Once
again, we are eager to have people from the local/regional research
community attend and present relevant work.
The meetings will not start immediately, since some of the relevant
people have not yet arrived. There will be another announcement when
they are scheduled. If you have comments or suggestions for topics,
please send them to WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA.
!
Page 5 CSLI Newsletter January 9, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
RATIONAL AGENCY GROUP
Summary of Fall 1985 Work
The fall-quarter meetings of the Rational Agency Group (alias
RatAg) have focused on the question: what must the architecture of a
rational agent with serious resource limitations look like? Our
attempts to get at answers to this question have been of two kinds.
One approach has been to consider problems in providing a coherent
account of human rationality. Specifically, we have discussed a
number of philosophically motivated puzzles, such as the case of the
Double Pinball Machine, and the problem of the Strategic Bomber,
presented in a series of papers by Michael Bratman. The second
approach we have taken has been to do so-called robot psychology.
Here, we have examined existing AI planning systems, such as the PRS
system of Mike Georgeff and Amy Lansky, in an attempt to determine
whether, and, if so, how these systems embody principles of rationality.
Both approaches have led to the consideration of similar issues:
1) What primitive components must there be in an account of
rationality? From a philosophical perspective, this is
equivalent to asking what the set of primitive mental states
must be to describe human rationality; from an AI perspective,
this is equivalent to asking what the set of primitive mental
operators must be to build an artificial agent who behaves
rationally. We have agreed that the philospher's traditional
2-parameter model, containing just ``beliefs'' and ``desires'',
is insufficient; we have further agreed that adding just a third
parameter, say ``intentions'', is still not enough. We are
still considering whether a 4-parameter model, which includes a
parameter we have sometimes called ``operant desires'', is
sufficient. These so-called operant desires are medial between
intentions and desires in that, like the former (but not the
latter) they control behavior in a rational agent, but like the
latter (and not the former) they need not be mutually consistent
to satisfy the demands of rationality. The term ``goal'', we
discovered in passing, has been used at times to mean
intentions, at times desires, at times operant desires, and at
times other things; we have consequently banished it from our
collective lexicon.
2) What are ``plans'', and how do they fit into a theory of
rationality? Can they be reduced to some configuration of
other, primitive mental states, or must they also be introduced
as a primitive?
!
Page 6 CSLI Newsletter January 9, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
3) What are the combinatorial properties of these primitive
components within a theory of rationality, i.e., how are they
interrelated and how do they affect or control action? We have
considered, e.g., whether a rational agent can intend something
without believing it will happen, or not intend something she
believes will inevitably happen. One set of answers to these
questions that we have considered has come from the theory of
plans and action being developed by Michael Bratman. Another
set has come come from work that Phil Cohen has been doing with
Hector Levesque, which involves explaining speech acts as a
consequence of rationality. These two theories diverge on many
points: Cohen and Levesque, for instance, are committed to the
view that if a rational agent believes something to be inevitable,
he also intends it; Bratman takes the opposite view. In recent
meetings, interesting questions have arisen about whether there
can be beliefs about the future that are `not' beliefs that
something will inevitably happen, and, if so, whether
concomitant intentions are guaranteed in a rational agent.
The RatAg group intends to begin the new quarter by considering how
Cohen and Levesque's theory can handle the philosphical problems
discussed in Bratman's work. We will also be discussing the work of
Hector-Neri Castaneda in part to explore the utility of Castaneda's
distinction between propositions and practitions for our work on
intention, belief and practical rationality. Professor Castaneda will
be giving a CSLI colloquium in the spring.
RatAg participants this quarter have been Michael Bratman (project
leader), Phil Cohen, Todd Davies, Mike Georgeff, David Israel, Kurt
Konolige, Amy Lansky, and Martha Pollack. --Martha Pollack
←←←←←←←←←←←←
COURSE UNIFICATION ANNOUNCEMENT:
Linguistics 221: Syntactic Theory II (Winter)
and
Linguistics 230: Semantics and Pragmatics (Spring)
These two courses will be taught this year as an integrated
two-quarter introduction to unification-based approaches to the
analysis of fundamental issues in natural language syntax and
semantics. The course will be concerned with developing precise
syntactic and semantic treatments of numerous theoretically important
issues, such as governed and unbounded dependency constructions,
``controlled'' complements, anaphora, quantifiers, and a variety of
agreement phenomena. The theoretical orientation will be that of
Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, currently being developed by
researchers at CSLI and elsewhere, and closely related work in PATR-II
being conducted primarily at SRI International.
The course is intended primarily for first-year graduate students
in Linguistics. However, because of the emphasis on situation-based
semantics and the florescence of ongoing computational work based on
HPSG/PATR-II-style linguistic analyses, the course may be of interest
to philosophers and computational linguists as well.
Second-year graduate students in Linguistics who, because of
changes in the department's curriculum, were unable to take an
introduction to HPSG last year, may enroll for just L221 by
arrangement.
!
Page 7 CSLI Newsletter January 9, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Instructors: Carl Pollard, Mats Rooth, Ivan Sag (sag@csli)
Time: MWF: 8:45-9:55 AM
Place: 60-62L
Prerequisites: 1. Linguistics 220 or permission of the instructors
2. Knowledge of elementary set theory and predicate
logic (review sections will be offered during the
first three weeks of the course.)
←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEW CSLI REPORTS
Report No. CSLI-85-41, ``Possible-world Semantics for Autoepistemic
Logic'' by Robert C. Moore and Report No. CSLI-85-42, ``Deduction
with Many-Sorted Rewrite'' by Jose Meseguer and Joseph A. Goguen, have
just been published. These reports may be obtained by writing to
Trudy Vizmanos, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305 or
Trudy@SU-CSLI.
-------
∂09-Jan-86 0834 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA This week's AFLB
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 08:31:51 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 08:25:31-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: This week's AFLB
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173884624.8.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here's the abstract for this week's AFLB. Next week's speaker hasn't
been determined yet.
***************************************
9-Jan-86 : David Foulser (Stanford)
Asymptotic Bounds for Longest Common Subsequence (LCS) Comparisons
The length of the Longest Common Subsequence L(S,T) of two strings S
and T is a popular measure of their similarity. If the strings have
length N, we conveniently refer to the LCS match fraction L(S,T)/N.
Suppose the strings are made up of letters selected at random from an
alphabet having k elements. We will state lower and upper bounds on
the expected value lim(N --> infinity) EX[ L(S,T)/N ] as a function of
alphabet size k.
An important generalization of the LCS is the Longest Monotone Path
(LMP) through a square lattice of independent random variables. The
LMP is very much like the LCS and it is more amenable to study. We
give lower and upper bounds on the expected value
lim(N --> infinity) EX[ LMP(lattice)/N ] as a function of the chance
of a match at a single lattice point.
Consider now the LCS comparison of r sequences or the LMP through an
r-dimensional lattice of independent Bernoulli random variables. We
will prove bounds for the asymptotic match fractions of these
multi-dimensional path lengths.
The lower bounds depend on any approximating algorithm that undercounts
the length of the LCS or LMP. We will mention several such algorithms
and analyze the best. The upper bounds depend on a procedure for
overcounting the number of long common subsequences or monotone paths.
We will close with some new ways of examining the LCS and LMP match fractions
and with a few open problems.
***** Time and place: January 9, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1335 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:reid@glacier Re: [James F. Gibbons <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: BIG DEAL]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 12:12:52 PST
Received: from glacier by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 9 Jan 86 12:09:36-PST
Received: by glacier with Sendmail; Thu, 9 Jan 86 12:11:28 pst
Date: 9 Jan 1986 1211-PST (Thursday)
From: Brian Reid <reid@glacier>
To: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Cc: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Subject: Re: [James F. Gibbons <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: BIG DEAL]
In-Reply-To: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA> /
Thu 9 Jan 86 11:54:08-PST.
<12173922602.29.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Nils,
Based on Ed Feigenbaum's comments at Tuesday's faculty meeting
("all talk and no action...") I'm guessing that what Gibbons wants to
do is to take the money that we would normally get for TA's and use it
to buy Big Spin lottery tickets. The numbers just about work
out--remote chance, big payoff........
Brian
∂09-Jan-86 1335 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: BIG DEAL]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 11:55:47 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 11:52:32-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Re: BIG DEAL]
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173922310.29.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'll be composing a response to the attached msg during tomorrow and
early Saturday am. Any suggestions? -Nils
---------------
Mail-From: NILSSON created at 9-Jan-86 08:49:36
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 08:49:36-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: BIG DEAL
To: GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "James F. Gibbons <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>" of Thu 9 Jan 86 08:12:55-PST
Message-ID: <12173889007.29.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Sounds great! I'll work away on something--maybe I won't get something
until Saturday. Is that ok? -Nils
-------
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1356 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [James F. Gibbons <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: BIG DEAL]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 11:57:57 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 11:54:08-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [James F. Gibbons <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>: BIG DEAL]
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173922602.29.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I forwarded the wrong msg.
---------------
Return-Path: <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 9 Jan 86 08:12:53-PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 08:14:49-PST
From: James F. Gibbons <GIBBONS@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: BIG DEAL
To: nilsson@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: cloutier@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Nils:
There is a remote possibility that we could get between 50 and 150
million dollars for an imaginative proposal that would have as one of its
conditions an interest in innovation and renewal. If we were to take the
full needs of the Computer Science department for buildings, professorships,
interactions with other departments across the University, etc., we could
probably use the better part of 50 million at least. For example:
5 endowed chairs @ 2 million...............10 million
New building for department with
30 faculty @ 4000sq ft per @$200...........24 million
Computer resources for undergraduate
program.................................... ?
computer resources for research............ ?
AI center.................................. ?
other...................................... ?
I would need a rationale for these expenditures based on the implications
of CS for both academia and industry. Plenty of outreach to other departments,
including medicine, engineering, psychology, languages, etc.....
Basically, using CSD as the core, can you give me a two page or so
draft of how you would spend 50 million to the best advantage of the University
and society? If you can just dash off a draft it would be helpful. I need
to polish it up and have it ready by next Wednesday. Shoot me something on
the electronic mail when you get a chance. Thanks! Maybe we can solve the
CSD financial problem for all time to come in one stroke?!
-------
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1028 BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Computer User Committee
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 10:03:09 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 09:59:55-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Computer User Committee
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Rich asked that we set up a Computer User Committee to meet with him
once a month about CSLI's computing environment; the committee would
serve an advisory role, keeping Rich informed about problems,
requests, new ideas, information to be distributed, etc. The
committee needs to be representative of the various groups that use
our computer facilities, the different kinds of use, and the different
institutional connections.
The following have agreed to be members, but everyone is open to
suggestions for additions or substitutions, and there is (at least)
one slot not yet filled. Please advise me about the trade-offs
between an almost-too-large committee and making sure all views are
represented. Have we included enough people from each site? Does the
committee represent all points of view, kinds of use, etc.?
John Etchemendy (representing SU faculty with offices on the quad)
Lauri Karttunen (representing users at SRI)
Curtis Abbott (representing users at Xerox and links to Stanford)
Kris Halvorsen (representing users at Xerox)
Tom Wasow (representing Linguistics and Philosophy)
?? (representing Artificial Intelligence)
Terry Winograd (representing Computer Science)
Bill Poser (representing Phonetics)
Mark Gawron (representing postdocs)
Leora Weitzman and Mark Johnson (representing graduate students)
Leslie Batema (representing the secretarial staff)
Carol Kiparsky (representing Dandelion users)
Dikran Karagueuzian (representing Publications)
Emma Pease (representing users of all sorts)
Thanks.
Betsy
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1147 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa CS545
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 11:47:07 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 10 Jan 86 11:40:34 pst
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 86 11:40:34 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: CS545
To: nail@diablo
Don't forget the CS545 seminar, 3:15PM today (352 MJH, I assume).
Gio, Mike, and I are each going to give a short overview for
the KBMS, MRS, and NAIL projects.
Sounds like fun.
---Jeff
∂10-Jan-86 1441 CCUC%UMCVMB.BITNET%WISCVM.WISC.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Subscription
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 14:41:04 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 10 Jan 86 17:31-EST
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 10 Jan 86 17:29:58 EST
Received: from (MAILER)UMCVMB.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 01/10/86 at
16:30:46 CST
Return-path: CCUC%UMCVMB.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Received: by UMCVMB (Mailer X1.21) id 7761; Fri, 10 Jan 86 15:36:32 CST
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 86 15:34:54 CST
From: CCUC%UMCVMB.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU (UMC File Server)
To: PHILOSOPHY-OF-SCIENCE@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Subscription
Please add CCUC@UMCVMB.BITNET to your mailing list.
Thanks,
Rich Winkel
UMC Computing Services
(CCRJW@UMCVMB.BITNET)
∂10-Jan-86 1444 BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Possible Advertisement
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 14:44:02 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 14:42:50-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Possible Advertisement
To: researchers@SU-CSLI.ARPA
We have been invited to advertise any conference CSLI is involved with
in Mind and Language, the journal of The Centre for the Study of Mind
and Language at Birbeck College, University of London. Do any of
you have a conference you'd like me to tell them about?
Thanks.
Betsy
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1447 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tina.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 14:47:23 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 14:46:42-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tina.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, bhayes-roth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, henager@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174216159.11.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
There has been a certain amount of interest in a repetition of
my talk(s) concerning Tina or perhaps more of a tutorial
from those who either missed the first instance or who are
now contemplating implementing applications in Tina.
Could all of those who are interested in any of the above get
back to me with some details of what material you would like
me to cover and of convenient times for such an event?
Incidentally there is a new release of Tina, which supports a
number of interesting features for the user, particularly you
can now incrementally compile rules from within Zmacs and
Meta-. and other such edit options will now refer to the definition
in the original Tina source code. These are all a result of the
implementation of a Tina Zmacs major mode, which also supports new
behaviour for the Tab key.
As always any feedback concerning the existing documentation and
the previous talks would be gratefully accepted.
Rice.
-------
∂10-Jan-86 1556 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA SPO Processing Schedule, January
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 15:55:54 PST
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 15:52:41-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: SPO Processing Schedule, January
To: AC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Donoghue@SU-SCORE.ARPA, BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174228172.27.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
NIH proposals are due February 1, and SPO informs us that it will be extremely
difficult to get other agency proposals through SPO during the last week of
January. If you are planning proposal submissions, suggest you plan to have
them ready within the next week or so.
Betty
-------
∂10-Jan-86 2040 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu open positions - THE UNIVERSITY OF UTRECHT
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 20:39:54 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Jan 86 20:33:41-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Jan 86 20:34:14-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 10 Jan 86 22:25:35 CST
Received: from seismo.CSS.GOV by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 10 Jan 86 12:00:24 CST
Return-Path: <mcvax!ruuinfvax.UUCP!jan>
Received: from mcvax.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV with UUCP; Fri, 10 Jan 86 12:37:16 EST
From: mcvax!ruuinfvax.UUCP!jan@seismo.CSS.GOV
Received: by mcvax.UUCP; Fri, 10 Jan 86 18:25:29 +0100 (MET)
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 86 18:25:29 +0100
Message-Id: <8601101725.AA15898@mcvax.UUCP>
To: udi@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: open positions - THE UNIVERSITY OF UTRECHT
Status: RO
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 10 Jan 86 22:25:21 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
THE UNIVERSITY OF UTRECHT
Department of Computer Science
/Full Professorships/
The Department of Computer Science at the University of Utrecht
(the Netherlands) invites nominations and applications for two
tenured positions in the rank of Full Professor in the following
areas
(a) FULL PROFESSORSHIP IN PROGRAMMING TECHNOLOGY
(b) FULL PROFESSORSHIP IN DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS
For position (a) we are especially interested in candidates with
outstanding qualifications in areas like Formal Specification and
Program Verification, Programming Languages and Systems, or
Software Engineering. For position (b) we are especially
interested in candidates with outstanding qualifications in areas
like the Design and Implementation of Distributed Systems,
Systems Analysis and Design for distributed applications, or
Software Engineering for Distributed Systems. Other areas may be
considered as well. Duties will include
teaching graduate and undergraduate courses, strong engagement in
the Department's program of fundamental research, and normal
faculty activities.
Requirements:
Candidates should hold a Ph.D. in Computer Science or related
discipline, and must have an outstanding record of research
achievement and demonstrated competence in teaching as required
for appointment at the Professor level.
Applications:
To apply, send a detailed resume, a list of publications, and
the names of three references to the Chairman of the Search
Committee, Prof. Jan van Leeuwen, Dept. of Computer Science, the
University of Utrecht, P.O. Box 80.012, 3508 TA Utrecht, the
Netherlands. (Email: ...mcvax!ruuinfvax!jan, telex: fylut 40048,
telephone: +31-30-534001 or +31-30-531454). For further
information, use the same address. Applications close March 15,
1986.
--------------
TN Message #15
--------------
∂10-Jan-86 2052 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu change of address
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Jan 86 20:52:38 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Jan 86 20:40:24-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 10 Jan 86 20:41:15-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 10 Jan 86 22:30:16 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 10 Jan 86 07:34:58 CST
Received: from seismo.CSS.GOV by crys.wisc.edu; Fri, 10 Jan 86 07:34:54 CST
Return-Path: <mcvax!paulv>
Received: from mcvax.UUCP by seismo.CSS.GOV with UUCP; Fri, 10 Jan 86 08:20:23 EST
Received: from boring.UUCP by mcvax.UUCP; Fri, 10 Jan 86 13:42:47 +0100 (MET)
Received: by boring.UUCP; Fri, 10 Jan 86 13:33:25 +0100 (MET)
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 86 13:33:25 +0100
From: mcvax!paulv@seismo.CSS.GOV (Paul Vitanyi)
Message-Id: <8601101233.AA04966@boring.UUCP>
To: theory@wisc-crys.arpa
Subject: change of address
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 10 Jan 86 22:29:50 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Address from February 1 - August 1, 1986
Paul M.B. Vitanyi
MIT
Laboratory for Computer Science
Technology Square 545
Room NE43 520A
Cambridge, MA 02139
U.S.A.
Alternative Office: Room NE43 340
Tel. (617) 253 5905 (Room NE43 520A)
(617) 253 3231 (Room NE43 340)
(617) 253 5851 (Department)
ARPA/CSNET paulv@MIT-HEINEKEN
UUCP seismo!mit-heineken.arpa!paulv
287 Harvard Street, Appartment #49
Cambridge, MA 02139
U.S.A.
Tel. (617) 354 2519
--------------
TN Message #16
--------------
∂11-Jan-86 1750 EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA HELP - HELP : Common Lisp - SCL compiler
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Jan 86 17:50:21 PST
Date: Sat 11 Jan 86 17:47:08-PST
From: Eric Muller <EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: HELP - HELP : Common Lisp - SCL compiler
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA, mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA, ksl-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174511151.15.EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
HELP - HELP - HELP - HELP
I have some trouble when I try to compile the following Common Lisp
program on Symbolics machines. For me, it looks like a compiler bug,
but this kind of event is so unlikely that I am not really sure. If
anybody can point out a (standard) Common Lisp error, or a Symbolics
Common Lisp error in this program, it would be very helpfull.
thanks in advance,
eric.
-------------------------
First, the program :
(defun test ()
(tagbody
(let ((c #'(lambda ()
(unwind-protect
t
(go :a)))))
(funcall c))
(format t "after the let, but before :a")
:a
(format t "after :a")))
When I try to compile this program on Symbolics machines (yes, I did
select the Common Lisp syntax) I get an error; not a compiler error, a
runtime error :
>>Trap: The first argument given to the ZETALISP-SYSTEM:INTERNAL->
instruction, NIL, was not a number.
Error occurred while compiling (:INTERNAL TEST 0)
COMPILER:ACCESS-ENVIRONMENT-VARIABLE:
Arg 0 (FUN): #<INTERNAL-FUNCTION 37126117>
Arg 1 (OPCODE): COMPILER:VAR
Arg 2 (E): #<NORMAL-LEXICAL-VARIABLE COMPILER:.LEXICAL-ENVIRONMENT-POINTER.
37126726>
Arg 3 (VARIABLE): #<NORMAL-LEXICAL-VARIABLE .PFRAME-789-FP. 37126220>
...
When the (unwind-protect ...) form is replaced by (go :a), I can
compile the program and the execution produces what I expect, that is
only the second message is printed.
And of course, it looks OK from the Common Lisp manual, as well as
from the Symbolics Common Lisp manual ...
-------
∂12-Jan-86 1116 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA John Hopcroft visit
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Jan 86 11:14:20 PST
Date: Sun 12 Jan 86 11:10:35-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: John Hopcroft visit
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174701105.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Here's the situation regarding John Hopcroft. We are trying to schedule
a lunch for Hopcroft to meet Bob Cannon and Bill Reynolds of the
robotics search committee. (Other members of the committee who can attend
such a lunch please stay in touch with Anne Richardson who is trying
to make the arrangements.) If lunch with the search committee does not
work out, Cristos Papadimitriou has volunteered to host John at lunch.
(Perhaps a few people will want to join them--check with Cristos.)
If you sent a note to Anne wanting to set up an appt with John, please
get back in touch with her to establish a time. He will be here all
day--beginning at 9:30 am. That's Wednesday, Jan. 15.
Depending on how many people want to see John and if there is time,
John would be willing to give an informal talk. Would anyone like to
volunteer to organize that (keeping in touch with Anne to see if
it is going to happen)? The organizer would need to find a room, a time,
and publicize it.
Jeff Ullman has volunteered to take John to dinner. If anyone wants to
be part of that, please get in touch with Jeff. -Nils
-------
∂13-Jan-86 0147 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #1
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 01:47:49 PST
Date: Saturday, January 11, 1986 10:18AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #1
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 13 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 1
Today's Topics:
Administration,
Implementations - Utilities,
& Sequentiality of Unification vs. Parallel,
& C-PROLOG V1.5 and VAX/VMS C V2.1 compiler warnings,
LP Philosophy - Hewitt's Challenge
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat 11 Jan 86 10:11:32-PST
From: Chuck Restivo <Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Administration
Sorry for the delay between the last issue, I have been
consumed with bothersome, unpleasant minutia.
Volume Three of Prolog Digest has been archived on-line in
SU-SCORE:'s <Prolog> directory. It is available as
Archive←Volum3←I1-n.Txt
The current volume will be available as Archive.Txt in <Prolog>
Best,
-- Chuck
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 85 10:09:03 est
From: Catherine A. Meadows <Meadows@nrl-css.ARPA>
Subject: loops
I have recntly become interested in loop checking on Prolog.
Does anyone know of any papers or research done on this subject
(besides the recent papers published in the ACM Sigplan Notices).
-- Cathy Meadows
------------------------------
Date: 20 Nov 85 10:47:00 EDT
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: Prolog utilities
This is probably something "everybody knows", but I don't -
is there an accessible library somewhere of all the humdrum
Prolog routines found in Clocksin & Mellish, e.g. member, subst,
append, delete, is←integer, etc, etc (and maybe other goodies
besides)? Or do I have to key all that stuff in myself?
-- John Cugini
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 85 01:25:06 est
From: Bruce Smith <unc!bts%unc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Sequentiality of unification vs. parallel Prolog
I'm posting the following for someone in our department:
There are those who claim that since unification is
"inherently sequential" that "PROLOG would not be a
good candidate for a parallel programming language."
(Quote from D. Mizell's article in ZeroOne Supernet.)
Similar statements have been made on various mailing
lists and newsgroups.
If arithmetic operations were inherently sequential,
would anyone claim that any language using arithmetic
would not be good for parallel programming? I don't
recall anyone stating that a particular parallel
machine was good because it added n-bit integers in
time O(log n).
Comments?
-- Bruce T. Smith
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 85 10:35:01 PST
From: Ching-Tsun Chou <chou@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU>
Subject: Hewitt's message
I'd like to reply to the message by Hewitt in V3#44 of Prolog
Digest which said:
.... I argue that the above compiler [by Clocksin] is not a very
good test of Prolog because the code produced by the proposed
Prolog compiler for Common Lisp WILL NOT RUN on a standalone
Prolog system. Thus the proposed compiler does not address a
fundamental problem which is the LACK OF EXPRESSIVE CAPABILITY in
the Prolog language: there is large and growing amount of
software written in Common Lisp which will NEVER execute efficiently
on standalone Prolog systems. On the other hand Prolog programs
will ALREADY execute efficiently on Lisp systems. Thus the compiler
which Clocksin proposes does not address the fundamental problems of
Prolog.
←←←←←
Extending Hewitt's arguments, it seems to me that ASSEMBLY
LANGUAGES are the languages of the strongest expressive
capability: almost any language can be executed efficiently
on a assembly language machine! So, is the "lack of
expressive capability" one of the "fundamental problems of
Prolog"?
-- Ching-Tsun Chou
------------------------------
Date: 27 Nov 85 12:56:00 EDT
From: "Nunn, JOHN C." <Nunn@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Subject: C-PROLOG V1.5 and VAX/VMS C V2.1 compiler warnings
Version 2.1 of VAX C detects 2 possible errors when compiling
module main.c of C-PROLOG (V1.5). The warning messages are:
2352 2 y = MolP(k1)->Env; k1 = MolP(k1)->Fn;
%CC-I-NONSEQUITUR, "Fn" is not a member of the specified structure
or union.
2568 2 bn = &(SkelP(FunctorP(MolP(ARG1)->Sk)->
Fn)->flgsoffe);
%CC-I-NONSEQUITUR, "Fn" is not a member of the specified structure
or union.
%CC-I-NONSEQUITUR, "FInfo" is not a member of the specified structure
or union.
It appears that the type casting in both statements is incorrect.
Unless I'm mistaken, these lines sould read:
y = MolP(k1)->Env; k1 = SkelP(k1)->Fn;
and
bn = &(FunctorP(SkelP(MolP(ARG1)->Sk)->Fn)->flgsoffe);
Can anyone confirm that these 2 changes are correct, possibly
from a later version of C-PROLOG?
Thanks,
-- John
PS. This same module, main.c, won't compile at all under V2.0.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂13-Jan-86 0625 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 06:25:46 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 06:21:04-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174910544.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here are the abstracts for the next two AFLBs.
-------------------------------------
16-Jan-86 : Alejandro Schaffer (Stanford & Bell Labs)
Convex Hulls of Piecewise-Smooth Jordan Curves
Most algorithms in computational geometry for curves in two and three
dimensions assume that the figures have polygonal boundaries. However,
some real systems for graphics, vision, and other types of modelling
use more general curves, such as splines and conic sections, as pieces
of object boundaries. In this talk I will consider the problem of
computing the convex hull of a simple closed planar curve whose boundary
may contain some curved edges.
Andrew Yao has shown that computing the convex hull of n points in the
plane requires Omega(nlogn) time, even if quadratic comparisons are allowed.
However, if the n points are the vertices of a simple polygon in order, then
the convex hull of the points and the polygon are identical, and
there are many similar linear-time algorithms for computing the convex
hull. The best-known one was developed by Ronald Graham and Frances Yao.
I will discuss one way to generalize the Graham-Yao algorithm to a
linear-time algorithm for a more general class of figures that may
have curved edges on the boundary. I assume that certain geometric
operations on the curved edges can be computed in constant time.
This talk represents joint work with Chris Van Wyk.
***** Time and place: January 16, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
23-Jan-86 : Peter Sarnak (Stanford)
Explicit Construction of Expander Graphs
Using automorphic forms, we give explicit (and easily constructed)
regular k graphs on n vertices, where k = p+1 for a prime p, and
where n = q+1 for a prime q. These graphs have essentially optimal
expansion properties.
***** Time and place: January 23, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂13-Jan-86 1051 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 10:50:28 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 10:44:14-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174958453.39.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow's CSD lunch "topic" - general discussion - in MJH 146 at 12:15.
-------
∂13-Jan-86 1131 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Correction to BATS abstract for Jan. 17
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 11:30:53 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 11:23:04-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Correction to BATS abstract for Jan. 17
To: ragde@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU, traub@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU,
propp@BRAHMS.BERKELEY.EDU, yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA, broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM,
ely@IBM-SJ.ARPA, manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174965523.18.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
The last sentence of C. Dwork's abstract for this Friday's BATS should have
read ``This is joint work with Larry Stockmeyer and Paris Kanellakis''. This
was my error. Corrected abstract follows.
--Joan F.
``A Parallel Algorithm for Term Matching''
Unification of terms is a well-known problem with applications
to a variety of symbolic computation problems. Two terms s and t,
involving function symbols and variables, are unifiable if there is a
substitution for the variables under which s and t become syntactically
identical. For example, f(x,x) and f(g(y), g(g(c))) are unified by
substituting g(c) for y and g(g(c)) for x. A special case of unification
is term matching, where one of the terms contains no variables. Previous
work on parallel algorithms for unification by Dwork, Kanellakis, and Mitchell
[DKM] showed that unification is P-complete in general, even if terms are
represented as trees so that common subexpressions must be repeated.
However, DKM give an NC↑2 algorithm for term-matching using M(n↑2) processors,
where M(m) is the number of operations needed to multiply m by m matrices.
This algorithm allows a compact DAG representation of terms. These results
have been tightened in two ways. First, the processor bound for term
matching of DAGs has been improved to M(n), while retaining the
O((log n)↑2) running time, using a randomized algorithm. We simplify the
problem by reducing it to testing syntactic equivalence of two terms
represented by labelled DAGs. There is also some evidence that improving
the processor bound further will be difficult, because there is an efficient
parallel reduction from the graph-accessibility problem to the term-matching
problem for DAGs. The second improvement is a sharper P-completeness
result that shows that unification of tree terms is P-complete even for
linear terms, where each variable can appear at most once in each term.
This is joint work with Larry Stockmeyer and Paris Kanellakis.
-------
∂13-Jan-86 1301 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Concurrency Modelling class
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 13:01:01 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Jan 86 12:56:39-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 12:51:43 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 12:48:39-PST
From: Vaughan Pratt <PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Concurrency Modelling class
To: "@dis.dis[1,clt]"@SU-AI.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12174981102.37.PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
CS459 (Research in Concurrency Modelling) has converged on MJ352 as its
regular meeting place for the quarter. Times are 1:15-2:45 MW. There
will be no meeting this Wednesday due to the comp grades meeting.
-v
-------
∂13-Jan-86 1621 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa papers received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 16:14:19 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 13 Jan 86 16:10:19 pst
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 16:10:19 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@diablo
"Traversal recursion: a practical approach to supporting recursive
applications" Rosenthal, Heiler, Dayal, and Manola, CCA
"The design of POSTGRES" Stonebraker and Rowe, Berkeley
∂13-Jan-86 1625 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa about the received papers
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 16:25:12 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 13 Jan 86 16:20:48 pst
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 16:20:48 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: about the received papers
To: nail@diablo
I should have added that the "Traversal recursion" paper
is about a taxonomy of graph traversals, e.g., nonreconvergent,
sum-of-paths, min-of-paths...
The POSTGRES paper is, of course, about the successor
to INGRES, and the issue of primary relevance to NAIL! is how
recursions are introduced into the QUEL language and implemented.
---Jeff
∂13-Jan-86 1755 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SU-AI.ARPA ar.rtb@Forsythe, ; Rich Baldwin
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 17:55:13 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Jan 86 17:50:23-PST
Date: 13 Jan 86 1753 PST
From: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: ar.rtb@Forsythe, ; Rich Baldwin
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
GD.MPC@forsythe, ; Michael Carter
hk.pld@Forsythe, ; Pat Devaney
dickens@%SLACVM.BITNET, ; Chuck Dickens
Eustis@sierra, ; Bob Eustis
ferziger@navajo, ; Joel Ferziger
RG.JXG@forsythe, ; Joan Galle
john@csli, ; John Perry
mac@mazama, ; Mike McWilliams
%GSB-WHY f.patell, ; Jim Patell
Samoff@Score, ; Joel Samoff
S.Street@lotsa, ; Bob Street
Pat@imsss, ; Pat Suppes
gd.why@forsythe, ; Bill Yundt
RA.CAW@forsythe ; Catherine Williams
Announcing COMBUYN -- a Computer Buyers' Network
This is an invitation to join in an experimental information exchange
intended to get more out of our purchasing power for computer equipment
and software. 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 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 us 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 equipment and
software needs, plans and opportunities and as a medium for exchanging
price information. The primary purpose is to get better prices by
combining orders where feasible. It should also be useful to
disseminate information about surplus computer equipment and software
site licenses that are available at Stanford.
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.
4. Critical 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. You will not be included unless
you explicitly request it. If you know of other qualified people who
might be interested in participating, feel free to forward copies of this
message. I suggest that this invitation NOT be posted on electronic
bulletin boards, however.
Combuyn will become available on January 16. Messages sent to
Combuyn@Sail will be automatically redistributed to everyone on the list.
An archive of messages will be kept for at least six 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. If we get too much traffic, it will be
appropriate to subdivide the group along tighter interest lines.
Suggestions on how to improve the usefulness of this service are welcome
at any time.
Les Earnest
Mediator
Computer Buyers Network
∂13-Jan-86 1958 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS459 mailing list
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 19:58:19 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Jan 86 19:56:01-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 19:50:45 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 19:47:46-PST
From: Vaughan Pratt <PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS459 mailing list
To: "@dis.dis[1,clt]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175057399.15.PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
My class on research in concurrency modelling, CS459, can be mailed
to as conmod@navajo. Let me know if you wish to be added, either as a
participant or an observer (please indicate which). The participants
are those attending the lectures.
-------
∂13-Jan-86 2003 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS459 mailing list
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 20:03:48 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Jan 86 20:00:57-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 19:55:44 PST
Date: Mon 13 Jan 86 19:52:46-PST
From: Vaughan Pratt <PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS459 mailing list
To: "@dis.dis[1,clt]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175058309.15.PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
(Sorry about the previous message, the Score mailer took me by surprise.)
My class on research in concurrency modelling, CS459, can be mailed
to as conmod@navajo. Let me know if you wish to be added, either as a
participant or an observer (please indicate which). The participants
are those attending the lectures. This will be the last CS459 message
sent to dis.dis[1,clt], with any luck.
-v
-------
∂13-Jan-86 2136 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #3
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 21:36:22 PST
Date: 13 Jan 86 2132-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #3
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 14 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 3
Today's Topic:
Symposium on Logic Programming
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 9 January 1986 08:04-PST
From: Robert M. Keller <Keller at UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: Symposium on Logic Programming
'86 SLP
Call for Papers
Third Symposium on Logic Programming
Sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society
September 21-25, 1986
Westin Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, UT
The conference solicits papers on all areas of logic programming, including,
but not confined to:
Applications of logic programming
Computer architectures for logic programming
Databases and logic programming
Logic programming and other language forms
New language features
Logic programming systems and implementation
Parallel logic programming models
Performance
Theory
Please submit full papers, indicating accomplishments of substance and novelty,
and including appropriate citations of related work. The suggested page limit
is 25 double-spaced pages. Send eight copies of your manuscript no later than
15 March 1986 to:
Robert M. Keller
SLP '86 Program Chairperson
Department of Computer Science
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
Acceptances will be mailed by 30 April 1986. Camera-ready copy will be due by
30 June 1986.
Conference Chairperson Exhibits Chairperson
Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Tutorials Chairperson Local Arrangements Chairperson
George Luger, University of New Mexico Thomas C. Henderson, University of Utah
Program Committee
Francois Bancilhon, MCC William Kornfeld, Quintus Systems
John Conery, University of Oregon Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah
Al Despain, U.C. Berkeley George Luger, University of New Mexico
Herve Gallaire, ECRC, Munich Rikio Onai, ICOT/NTT, Tokyo
Seif Haridi, SICS, Sweden Ross Overbeek, Argonne National Lab.
Lynette Hirschman, SDC, Paoli Mark Stickel, SRI International
Peter Kogge, IBM, Owego Sten Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala University
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂13-Jan-86 2351 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:Hewitt%XX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU CS459 mailing list
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 23:51:31 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 13 Jan 86 23:49:58-PST
Received: from MIT-MC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Jan 86 23:39:43 PST
Received: from DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 Jan 86 02:39-EST
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 86 02:44 EST
From: Carl Hewitt <Hewitt@MIT-XX.ARPA>
Subject: CS459 mailing list
To: Vaughan Pratt <PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
cc: "@dis.dis[1,clt]"@SU-AI.ARPA, Hewitt@MIT-XX.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12175057399.15.PRATT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Message-ID: <860114024405.6.HEWITT@DUE-PROCESS.AI.MIT.EDU>
Vaughan,
Please add me as an "observer".
Best wishes for the course,
Carl
∂14-Jan-86 0157 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #2
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 01:57:21 PST
Date: Monday, January 13, 1986 8:47AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #2
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 14 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 2
Today's Topics:
Announcements - '86 SLP & OOPSLA86
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed 11 Dec 85 11:42:33-MST
From: "Robert M. Keller" <Keller@UTAH-20.ARPA>
Subject: '86 SLP notice
'86 SLP
Call for Papers
Third Symposium on Logic Programming
Sponsored by the IEEE Computer Society
September 21-25, 1986
Westin Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, UT
The conference solicits papers on all areas of logic
programming,including, but not confined to:
Applications of logic programming
Computer architectures for logic programming
Relationships between logic programming and other language forms
New language features
Logic programming systems and implementation
Parallel logic programming models
Performance
Theory
Please submit full papers, indicating accomplishments of substance
and novelty, and including appropriate citations of related work.
The suggested page limit is 25 double-spaced pages. Send eight
copies of your manuscript no later than 15 March 1986 to:
Robert M. Keller
SLP '86 Program Chairperson
Department of Computer Science
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
Acceptances will be mailed by 30 April 1986. Camera-ready copy
will be due by 30 June 1986.
Conference Chairperson Exhibits Chairperson
Gary Lindstrom, University of Utah Ross Overbeek, Argonne NL
Tutorials Chairperson Local Arrangements Chair
George Luger, University of New Mexico Thomas C. Henderson, UTAH
Program Committee
Francois Bancilhon, MCC Peter Kogge, IBM
John Conery, University of Oregon William Kornfeld, Quintus
Al Despain, U.C. Berkeley Gary Lindstrom, UTAH
Seif Haridi, Royal Institute, Stockholm George Luger, Univ. N.Mexico
Herve Gallaire, ECRC, Munich Ross Overbeek, Argonne NL
Lynette Hirschman, SDC Mark Stickel, SRI
Robert Keller, University of Utah Sten Ake Tarnlund, Uppsala
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 85 15:48:07 PST
From: Bay.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Call for Papers OOPSLA86
Call For Papers and Participation
ACM Conference on
Object Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications
September 29 - October 2, 1986, Portland, Oregon
OOPSLA-86 is a new ACM-sponsored conference that brings together
users and implementors of object oriented systems. Through
tutorials, papers, panel discussions and workshops, as well as
demonstrations, exhibits and videotapes, OOPSLA-86 will provide a
forum for sharing experience and knowledge among experts and
novices alike.
We invite technical papers, case studies, and surveys in the
following areas:
Theory: Including core definition of object oriented
programming, semantic models and methodology.
Languages: Existing object oriented languages, extensions to
conventional languages, and new languages.
Implementation: Including architectural support, compilation and
interpretation, and special techniques.
Tools and Including user interfaces, utilities and operating
Environments system support.
Applications: Commercial, educational, and scientific applications
that exploit object oriented programming.
Related Work: The object oriented paradigm in other fields such as
databases and operating systems.
Papers on other relevant topics are welcome, as are proposals for
workshops and panel discussions.
All papers will be refereed prior to selection and inclusion in the
conference proceedings. Technical papers will be selected on the
basis of originality and contribution to the state of the art of
design, implementation, methodology, or practice. Survey papers
will be selected on the basis of how well they crystallize and
integrate, in a way not previously presented, knowledge about one
or more aspects of the field.
Papers must be submitted in English, and should be no longer than
25 double-spaced pages. The cover page should include a title, an
abstract of not more than 100 words, and author's name, affiliation,
address and phone number.
Five copies must be received by the Program Chairman at the address
below, no later than April 1, 1986. Authors will be notified of
acceptance by May 1, 1986, and final versions of accepted papers
will be due by June 15, 1986. As the proceedings of this conference
will be widely disseminated, publication of more than an abstract of
a submitted paper is likely to inhibit republication in ACM's
refereed publications.
A room at the conference will be reserved for video presentations
that illustrate or supplement the concepts conveyed in other
presentations. Submissions must run no longer than 15 minutes,
and should be on 3/4-inch U-Matic format tape. Tapes must be
received by the Video Chairman at the address below, no later
than July 1, 1986.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Conference Chairmen Daniel Bobrow (Xerox PARC)
Alan Purdy (Servio Logic Development)
Program Chairman Daniel Ingalls, MS 22-Y
Apple Computer
20525 Mariani Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Video Chairman David Robson
Xerox PARC
3333 Coyote Hill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂14-Jan-86 0907 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 09:07:19 PST
Date: Tue 14 Jan 86 09:01:03-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175201812.31.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lunch today in MJH 146 at 12:15!
-------
∂14-Jan-86 1201 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA No meeting this week
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 12:00:50 PST
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1986 11:59 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12175234273.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: No meeting this week
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
There will be no AAP meeting this week. There is a possibility that
James Rice will talk about TINA in the meeting timeslot. Ask him, if
you're interested in a TINA tutorial.
Next week's meeting will be a presentation by Byron Davies on
"CAREL: A Visible Distributed Lisp".
-- Byron
∂14-Jan-86 1205 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tina Meeting.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 12:04:58 PST
Date: Tue 14 Jan 86 12:03:50-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tina Meeting.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, bhayes-roth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, hewett@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
henager@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175235087.23.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The long awaited Tina meeting is now scheduled for as soom after
2pm on Friday as it can be.
The subject matter is as yet undefined, since it rather depends on the
audience but it is likely to be a beginners intro and or tutorial
session, though the audience is expected to be quite small so
it should be fairly interactive.
Reading the manuals before-hand would probably be a good idea if you
can find the time. I have some hard copy versions on my desk. Please
feel free to grab a couple.
Rice
-------
∂14-Jan-86 1216 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Parallel Computing in Israel
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 12:16:17 PST
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1986 12:15 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12175237193.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Parallel Computing in Israel
PARSYM just recently enrolled its first subscriber in Israel. Here is
his response to my request for a description of parallel computing
activities in Israel:
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 10:01:02 -0200
From: Jacob Levy <jaakov%wisdom.bitnet at WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
To: davies at WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Re: Welcome
As I've said before, thanks for the welcome and the last two digests.
We are Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel. The WISDOM computer
is a VAX11/750 dedicated to the Dept. of Math, and WISDOM stands for the
capital letters of Weizmann Inst of Science, Dept Of Math.
I'm a Ph.D. student with Dr. E. Shapiro, and we have here a group of
20 people working on parallel LP languages. We've recently announced the
availability of the language Flat Concurrent Prolog (a subset of Concurrent
Prolog) to the net, and I believe your digest has carried this announcement
also. My own thesis is compilation of Or-parallel LP languages - FCP is just
the And-parallel subset of Concurrent Prolog.
In Israel, as far as I'm aware, there are the following efforts ongoing-
1. Our own work (contact udi%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa)
2. The MOS project - a distributed UN*X on microprocessors. This
is being done at the Hebrew U in Jerusalem, under Prof. Amnon
Barak (contact amnon%hujics.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa).
3. Some hardware design work is being done at the Technion in Haifa
and as far as I know (vaguely) they are building a staged-shared
memory system with 128 processors. I'll try to find out more about
it and let you know.
4. Many individual professors at various Universities are interested
in parallel algorithms. Among these are D. Harel at Weizmann, who
is working on Dynamic Logic and the And-Or computation-tree model
(contact harel%wisdom.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa), E. Shamir and M. Rabin
at the Hebrew U (rabin%hujics.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa and shamir%...),
N. Francez at the Technion (francez%techsel.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa),
and probably many others.
As far as the list readership goes, I will take care to redistribute
it to all people who are interested. Right now, I'm sending it out to the
news systems on TAURUS, TECHSEL, HUJICS, WISDOM, WEIZMANN and TECHNION. These
are all local bboards, so the readership cannot be determined with any
accuracy. However, I assume that right now, about 500-600 people are able to
read your digest and send submissions from Israel. As the list becomes more
popular, I'm sure this number will increase. You realize, therefore, the
extreme importance of not accepting any more subscriptions from Israel..
Please do not use the material enclosed herein for any announcement
on the list to say that such and such a number of people in Israel are
reading the list - if you are interested in such information, I can make a
more accurate and concerted effort to findout exact details for you.
J
∂14-Jan-86 1329 WEIN@SU-CSLI.ARPA HOLIDAY
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 13:24:10 PST
Date: Tue 14 Jan 86 13:20:23-PST
From: Gina Wein <WEIN@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: HOLIDAY
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
PEOPLE,
FYI,
Just a reminder that Monday January 20th is a legal holiday
THERE WILL BE NO CLASSES AND THE CAMPUS WILL BE CLOSED.
Have a nice three days!!!
Kelly
-------
∂14-Jan-86 1329 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA flying to a Logic Meeting at UCLA
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 13:29:27 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 14 Jan 86 13:27:37-PST
Date: 14 Jan 86 1316 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: flying to a Logic Meeting at UCLA
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
I'm thinking of attending the conference at the end of January,
although I'm not yet 100pc sure. I was wondering if anyone
is 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.
Peter Ladkin
ladkin@kestrel.ARPA
∂14-Jan-86 1348 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa tomorrow's meeting
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 13:48:16 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 14 Jan 86 13:45:08 pst
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 86 13:45:08 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: tomorrow's meeting
To: nail@diablo
We'll meet at our appointed time: 11AM 1/15/86, in 301 MJH.
I'll talk a bit about my implementation of the NAIL! ICODE,
---Jeff
∂14-Jan-86 1732 INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA Condominium for rent
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Jan 86 17:32:38 PST
Date: Tue 14 Jan 86 17:27:05-PST
From: Ingrid Deiwiks <INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Condominium for rent
To: SU-bboards@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
*********************************************************
CONDOMINIUM FOR RENT
*********************************************************
Condo in Mountain View, 2 bedrooms, 2 1/2 bath-
rooms. Washer/dryer, refrigerator. Unfurnished.
Yard. One covered car space.
SHORT-TERM RENTAL. $625 per month.
For details please call 948-6233 (evenings).
-------
∂15-Jan-86 0153 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #3
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 01:53:37 PST
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 1986 7:01AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #3
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Wednesday, 15 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 3
Today's Topics:
Puzzles - NL & Shoppers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 Dec 1985 1833-PST (Monday)
From: Kathy Morris <Morris@su-aimvax.arpa>
Subject: ``natural'' language and prolog
Subject: Re: Boodle Phil moiven?
This appears to be a programming exercise in Prolog.
> Lucy sod'n pho Abner, kips Abner sod'n pho Lucy.
person(lucy).
person(abner).
sodn←pho(X,Y) :- simple←sodn←pho(X,Y).
sodn←pho(X,Y) :- simple←sodn←pho(Y,X).
simple←sodn←pho(lucy,abner).
> Hubert bink ptui Phil, kips Hubert bink ptui Abner.
person(hubert).
person(phil).
bink←ptui(X,Y) :- person(X), person(Y), test←bink←ptui(X,Y).
test←bink←ptui(hubert,phil) :- !.
test←bink←ptui(X,Y) :- nonvar(Y), test←bink←ptui(X,←), !.
> Leonard sod'n pho Phil.
person(leonard).
simple←sodn←pho(leonard,phil).
> Lucy pock matoo Leonard myt Leonard pock matoo Myrtle, kips
> Myrtle moiven Lucy. Lucy sod'n pho Hubert myt Myrtle sod'n
> pho Hubert, kips Lucy pock matoo Myrtle. Leonard moiven
> Hubert myt Hubert bink ptui Phil, kips Leonard moiven Phil.
person(myrtle).
simple←sodn←pho(lucy,hubert).
simple←sodn←pho(myrtle,hubert).
pock←matoo(X,Y) :- person(X), person(Y), test←pock←matoo(X,Y).
test←pock←matoo(lucy,leonard) :- !.
test←pock←matoo(leonard,myrtle) :- !.
test←pock←matoo(X,Y) :- sodn←pho(X,Z), sodn←pho(Y,Z), !.
moiven(X,Y) :- person(X), person(Y), test←moiven(X,Y,[Y]).
test←moiven(leonard,hubert,←) :- !.
test←moiven(X,Y,←) :- pock←matoo(Y,Z), pock←matoo(Z,X), !.
test←moiven(X,Y,P) :- bink←ptui(Z,Y),
not(member(Z,P)),
test←moiven(X,Z,[Z|P]),
!.
member(X,[X|←]).
member(X,[←|Y]) :- member(X,Y).
> Kips, boodle Phil moiven?
?- moiven(phil,X).
X = phil ;
no
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kips, Phil moiven nar Phil. [The answer.]
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful
tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more
nor less."
The database, in somewhat cleaner form:
--------------------------------------------------------------
person(lucy).
person(abner).
person(hubert).
person(phil).
person(leonard).
person(myrtle).
sodn←pho(X,Y) :- simple←sodn←pho(X,Y).
sodn←pho(X,Y) :- simple←sodn←pho(Y,X).
simple←sodn←pho(lucy,abner).
simple←sodn←pho(leonard,phil).
simple←sodn←pho(lucy,hubert).
simple←sodn←pho(myrtle,hubert).
bink←ptui(X,Y) :- person(X), person(Y), test←bink←ptui(X,Y).
test←bink←ptui(hubert,phil) :- !.
test←bink←ptui(X,Y) :- nonvar(Y), test←bink←ptui(X,←), !.
pock←matoo(X,Y) :- person(X), person(Y), test←pock←matoo(X,Y).
test←pock←matoo(lucy,leonard) :- !.
test←pock←matoo(leonard,myrtle) :- !.
test←pock←matoo(X,Y) :- sodn←pho(X,Z), sodn←pho(Y,Z), !.
moiven(X,Y) :- person(X), person(Y), test←moiven(X,Y,[Y]).
test←moiven(leonard,hubert,←) :- !.
test←moiven(X,Y,←) :- pock←matoo(Y,Z), pock←matoo(Z,X), !.
test←moiven(X,Y,P) :- bink←ptui(Z,Y),
not(member(Z,P)),
test←moiven(X,Z,[Z|P]),
!.
member(X,[X|←]).
member(X,[←|Y]) :- member(X,Y).
-- Dave Seaman
------------------------------
Date: Fri 10 Jan 86 18:03:31-EST
From: Paul G. Weiss <PGW@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Puzzle
Dear Puzzle Fans:
The following puzzle appeared in a Filene's Department Store circular.
It was a contest whose deadline has unfortunately passed, but which
is still challenging. I tried to solve it in a ZEBRA-like fashion
and was not successful. Any takers?
Text of Puzzle:
Christmas was one short month away, and Filene's was crowded with
holiday shoppers. The throngs moved quickly, however, and the vivid
decorations and festivities added a cheerful air. Among the shoppers
on one snowy Saturday morning were members of December 25, a Christmas
shoppers' club of 12 married couples. A Sales Associate waited on all
12 couples consecutively, as they bought a total of 8 each of the
following items:
1. Aris Gloves
2. Airplane Book
3. COCO Perfume
4. Pearl Strands
5. A Football Sweater
6. A Handbag
Each husband and wife were waited on together. Each couple bought
4 items. No two couples bought the same combination of items, and
none of the couples bought two or more of the same item. Using the
following clues, can you determine:
1. The full name of each husband and wife.
2. What order they were waited on.
3. What items each couple bought.
CLUES:
Hint: One husband is Bob, one wife is Elizabeth, and one surname
is Stanton.
1. The Craigs, who bought a handbag, were waited on before the
Murphys, who were not waited on last.
2. The Collins bought Aris gloves, a sweater, and handbag, and
COCO.
3. The couples waited on 8th and 10th bought the Airplane Book.
4. These five couples were waited on consecutively: the Smiths;
Gary and his wife; a couple who bought the Airplane Book and a
handbag; the Swains; and Bill and his wife.
5. Geraldine and her husband did not buy either a handbag or a
sweater.
6. The couple who were waited on last did not buy pearls.
7. One of the items Tom and his wife bought was the Airplane Book.
8. The Marshalls did not buy COCO or pearls.
9. Evelyn and her husband bought Aris gloves but not COCO.
10. These five couples were waited on consecutively: Martha and
her husband; Jack and his wife; the couple who bought Aris gloves,
COCO, the Airplane Book, and a handbag; the couple who did not buy
either pearls or the Airplane Book; and Margaret and her husband.
11. The first five couples waited on all bought COCO.
12. Chuck and his wife did not buy Aris gloves.
13. The couples waited on first, second, and fourth did not buy
a sweater.
14. Eleanor and her husband did not buy COCO.
15. Neither Allen and his wife, who did not buy a handbag, nor
the Anthonys bought Aris gloves.
16. Cheryl and her husband, who were not waited on 10th or 12th,
and John and his wife are two couples who bought both a sweater
and a handbag.
17. The Douglases, who did not buy Aris gloves or a sweater, were
waited on 9th.
18. Adam and his wife, who did not buy a handbag, were waited on
immediately before the Days.
19. Steve and his wife bought pearls, the Airplane Book, a sweater,
and one other item.
20. The last three couples waited on did not buy Aris gloves.
21. The Joneses did not buy a sweater.
22. Susan and her husband bought pearls.
23. George and his wife bought a sweater.
24. The four couples who did not buy Aris gloves are (in no particular
order): Dorothy and her husband; the Craigs; Joe and his wife; and
Rosalyn and her husband (who did not buy a sweater).
25. The O'Connors bought both COCO and a sweater.
26. Sandra and her husband, who did not buy a sweater, were waited on
immediately before Cathleen and her husband.
Logic Problem courtesy of your friends at Dell ... the Puzzle People!
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂15-Jan-86 0903 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Potluck Jan 29 after Liskov reception
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 09:03:13 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 15 Jan 86 08:56:55-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 15 Jan 86 08:56:55 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA02356; Wed, 15 Jan 86 08:57:36 pst
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 86 08:57:36 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601151657.AA02356@coraki.uucp>
To: faculty@su-score.ARPA
Subject: Potluck Jan 29 after Liskov reception
You and your family are cordially invited to a potluck at our house
after the reception at the faculty club for Barbara Liskov on January
29 at 6:30. Let us know soon which of salad, main course, or dessert
you'd like to bring and we'll get back to you if there's an imbalance.
Margot and Vaughan
2215 Gerth Lane, off Old Page Mill Road
494-2545
∂15-Jan-86 1526 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA NEXT MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Dave Smith
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 15:25:58 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 15:22:41-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: NEXT MONDAY'S PLANLUNCH -- Dave Smith
To: planlunch.dis: ;
Just a note to those who have inquiries about planlunch talks:
Please direct requests for papers, further info, etc. about a
specific talk to the SPEAKER. I have provided the speaker's
net address in the talk abstract for this purpose.
-Amy Lansky
----------------------------------------------------------
CONTROLLING BACKWARD INFERENCE
Dave Smith (DE2SMITH@SUMEX-AIM)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 20
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
Effective control of inference is a critical problem in Artificial
Intelligence. Expert systems have made use of powerful
domain-dependent control information to beat the combinatorics of
inference. However, it is not always feasible or convenient to
provide all of the domain-dependent control that may be needed,
especially for systems that must handle a wide variety of inference
problems, or must function in a changing environment. In this talk a
powerful domain-independent means of controlling inference is
proposed. The basic approach is to compute expected cost and
probability of success for different backward inference strategies.
This information is used to select between inference steps and to
compute the best order for processing conjuncts. The necessary
expected cost and probability calculations rely on simple information
about the contents of the problem solvers database, such as the number
of facts of each given form and the domain sizes for the predicates
and relations involved.
-------
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1543 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 15:43:01 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 14:57:49-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
To: traub@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU, propp@BRAHMS.BERKELEY.EDU, yao.pa@XEROX.ARPA,
broder@DECWRL.DEC.COM, ely@IBM-SJ.ARPA, manfred%ucsc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA,
aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175528903.9.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Remember that BATS is this Friday in the CERAS LGI.
10: Pratt, ``On the Composition of Processes''
11: Dwork, ``A Parallel Algorithm for Term Matching''
12: Lunch
1: Open Problems
1:15 Rutenburg, ``Complexity of Generalized Coloring''
2:15 Warmuth, ``Gap Theorems in Distributed Computing''
For out of towners: Here are the parking directions. If you
need driving directions, let me know.
Go to the Campus Police Station in the morning and tell them
that you need a one-day parking permit, which costs $0.75. The Police
Station is at the intersection of Campus Drive and Serra Street (the
same building as the Fire Station).
After you have your permit, get back on Campus Drive and go west. Campus
Drive curves around, but the direction you'll be going at this point is
basically west, towards the hills. You should intersect Escondido Road
shortly after the intersection with Serra. If you don't, you are going in
the wrong direction. Continue on Campus Drive until you get to Cowell
Lane. Turn left on Cowell, and then you can make an immediate left into
a C parking lot, where you can park all day.
After you park, walk back on to Campus, and then turn right on Alvarado
Road. Pass the Law School on your left, and the next building on your left is
CERAS. Walk in, and go downstairs to the LGI.
You get to Campus Drive by driving on Palm Drive (the main approach to Stanford
from downtown Palo Alto), past first light (Arborteum) to the next stop sign
(which is Campus Drive) and turning left. If you need more detailed
directions, let me know.
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1626 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 16:25:55 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 15:28:00-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175534400.46.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
CAAP'83. Trees In Algebra And Programming. 8th Colloquium. L'Aquila,
March 1983. Proceedings. Lecutre Notes In Computer Science. 159.
edited by Ausiello and Protasi. (8517401)
EUROCAL '85. European Conference On Computer Algebra. Linz, Austria. April
1985. Proceedings Vol. 1: Invided Lectures. edited by Bruno Buchberger.
Lecture Notes In Computer Science 203. (8517402). Proceedings Vol. 2:
Research Contributions edited by Bob Caviness. Lecture Notes In Computer
Science 204. (8517402)
Seminar On Concurrency. Carnegie-Mellon University. July 1984. Lecture
Notes In Computer Science. 197. edited by Brookes, Roscoe and Winskel.
QA76.6.S4494 1984.
Second Conference On Foundations Of Software Technology and Theoretical
Computer Science. Bangalore,India. December 1982. Tata Institute.
QA76.6.C647 1982.
The 4th International Conference On Entity-Relationship Approach.
Proceedings. October 1985. Chicago. (8513601)
Human Factors In Computing Systems. CHI'83. edited by Ann Janda.
QA76.9.I58H8 1983.
Applied Numerical Methods For Digital Computation. Third Edition.
by James, Smith, and Wolford. QA297.J3 1985.
Numerical Mathematics And Computing. 2nd ed. by Cheney and Kincaid.
QA297.C426 1985 c. 2
An Introduction To ADA. 2nd revised edition. by S.J.Young.
QA76.73.A35.Y68 1984.
Advanced C:Fodd For The Educated Palate. by Gehani. QA76.73.C15G43 1985.
Understanding Language: Man Or Machine. by John Moyne. P37.M69 1985.
Reinventing Man: The Robot Becomes Reality. by Aleksander and Burnett.
TJ211.A43 1984. c.2
Computer Graphics--Computer Art. 2nd, revised and enlarged ed. by Herbert
W. Franke. T385.F6913. 1985.
Apple IIe Technical Reference Manual. (8511724)
Programming In VAX-Basic. by E. Joseph Guay. QA76.8.V37.G83 1986.
H. Llull
-------
∂15-Jan-86 1739 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Newsletter January 16, No. 8
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Jan 86 17:38:25 PST
Date: Wed 15 Jan 86 16:52:56-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Newsletter January 16, No. 8
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
!
C S L I N E W S L E T T E R
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
January 16, 1986 Stanford Vol. 3, No. 8
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, January 16, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Generalized Quantifiers and Plurals
Conference Room by Godehard Link
Discussion led by Mats Rooth (Rooth@csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
No Seminar
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No Colloquium
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, January 23, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall The Mind's New Science
Conference Room by Howard Gardner
Discussion led by Thomas Wasow (Wasow@csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Computer Problem Solving Languages, Programming
Languages and Mathematics
Curtis Abbott (Abbott@xerox)
(Abstract on page 2)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No Colloquium
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Please note that the seminar and colloquium are no longer in
Redwood Hall room G-19. We are trying to get a new place.
!
Page 2 CSLI Newsletter January 16, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
The Mind's New Science
by Howard Gardener
The first chapter of Howard Gardner's ``The Mind's New Science: A
History of the Cognitive Revolution'' lays out five assumptions that
he claims characterize work in Cognitive Science. Although Gardner
cites CSLI as part of the ``revolution'' he is chronicling, some of
his five assumptions would be quite controversial around here. The
questions I would like to discuss are: Is he wrong in claiming that
his assumptions are widely accepted by cognitive scientists, or is he
wrong to include CSLI in his book? If the former, what ``are'' the
shared assumptions of cognitive scientists? If the latter, what is
the relationship between cognitive science and the work we do at CSLI?
--Thomas Wasow
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Computer Problem Solving Languages,
Programming Languages and Mathematics
by the
Semantically Rational Computer Languages Group
Programming languages are constrained by the requirement that their
expressions must be capable of giving rise to behavior in an
effective, algorithmically specified way. Mathematical formalisms,
and in particular languages of logic, are not so constrained, but
their applicability is much broader than the class of problems anyone
would think of ``solving'' with computers. This suggests, and I
believe, that formal languages can be designed that are connected with
the concerns associated with solving problems with computers yet not
constrained by effectiveness in the way programming languages are. I
believe that such languages, which I call ``computer problem solving
languages,'' provide a more appropriate evolutionary path for
programming languages than the widely pursued strategy of designing
``very high level'' programming languages, and that they can be
integrated with legitimate programming concerns by use of a
transformation-oriented methodology. In this presentation, I will
give several examples of how this point of view impacts language
design, examples which arise in Membrane, a computer problem solving
language I am in the process of designing. --Curtis Abbot
!
Page 3 CSLI Newsletter January 16, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
TEA TIME DISCUSSION: CSLI WITHER?
led by Terry Winograd
Wednesday, January 22, 3:30, Ventura Lounge
To be simplistic, it is my view that the survival of CSLI as an
institution, beyond its having SDF money to disperse, depends on the
emergence of one person (or a small group) who wants to use it as
his/her/their vehicle for getting something done in the world. That
is, it has to be shaped by a particular vision that is much less
eclectic than the current institute. It cannot be a broad
interdisciplinary interaction. Decisions about what gets funded, who
gets hired, etc. have to be guided by a clear and somewhat
single-minded idea about what is important and what is worth doing.
All of the more immediate problems (people not talking to each other
enough, not enough commitment to describe their results to others,
etc.) are symptomatic of lacking a shared direction.
The obvious problem, of course, is that you can't simply wish
leadership into existence. Someone with sufficient power (both
intellectual and political) has to want to do it and be willing to put
in large amounts of time and effort toward building and developing
CSLI.
CSLI as now constituted is a rather unwieldy beast, and may be
quite difficult to shape into something more coherent. It will not be
easy, since it involves cutting out a lot of what is there now (or at
least providing benign neglect until it withers away), fighting the
post-SDF resource problem, etc.
(CSLI tea time discussions are informal talks about matters of
interest to the CSLI community.)
--------------
POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIPS
The Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) at
Stanford University is currently accepting applications for a small
number of one year postdoctoral fellowships commencing September 1,
1986. The awards are intended for people who have received their
Ph.D. degrees since June 1983.
Postdoctoral fellows will participate in an integrated program of
basic research on situated language---language as used by agents
situated in the world to exchange, store, and process information,
including both natural and computer languages.
For more information about CSLI's research programs and details of
postdoctoral fellowship appointments, write to:
Dr. Elizabeth Macken, Assistant Director
Center for the Study of Language and Information
Ventura Hall
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
APPLICATION DEADLINE: FEBRUARY 15, 1986
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1033 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Interim Directory
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 10:33:20 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 10:01:58-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Interim Directory
To: CSD@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175737191.19.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have just received the new interim phone directory. Tina will put
one in each mailbox. If you need more, please let her know.
LaDonna
-------
∂17-Jan-86 0846 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 86 08:46:26 PST
Date: Fri 17 Jan 86 08:22:43-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175981265.20.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Discussion at lunch on Tuesday, Jan. 21 will focus on "NSF Division of
Computer Research Advisory Panel Activities" with Ken Kennedy in MJH 146
at 12:15.
-------
∂17-Jan-86 0856 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA New Phones
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 86 08:56:13 PST
Date: Fri 17 Jan 86 08:32:05-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: New Phones
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175982972.21.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
New phones will be installed in MJH starting next week. When the new
phone is placed on your desk, a schedule of "how to use the phone" classes
will be placed by the phone. The new phones (excluding phones for student
use) have so many new features that I suggest you take one of the classes,
so that you are aware of what you really can do with the phone. (or, what
I can do with it if it doesn't work).
Your existing phone will remain on your desk for a month or two, so that
your old phone number can be used by those that are not aware of your new
phone number. Printed post cards to send your new phone number have been
provided, you can pick them up from the receptionist.
If you have questions or comments, please send E-mail Eppley@score, or
call 7-2266. After your phone is installed and you have new phone
questions the Help Line number is 5-HELP. (appropriate!)
Thanks,
LaDonna
-------
∂17-Jan-86 0940 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Day off
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 86 09:40:16 PST
Date: Fri 17 Jan 86 09:33:44-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Day off
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175994193.16.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Just a reminder that Monday is a Holiday. Happy day off!
LaDonna
-------
∂17-Jan-86 1732 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA IEEE Education Medal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Jan 86 17:32:22 PST
Date: Fri 17 Jan 86 17:27:55-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: IEEE Education Medal
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12176080517.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I have forms in my office (see Anne Richardson) for nominations for
the IEEE Education Medal (which also carries a $5000 prize). Computer
Scientists who have made major contributions to education are
eligible (as are EE's). I would be glad to discuss with anyone his/her
ideas about nominations and perhaps join as a cosponsor of a nomination.
-Nils
-------
∂19-Jan-86 0920 NEALE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Trailer Security
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Jan 86 09:20:29 PST
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1986 09:16 PST
Message-ID: <NEALE.12176515288.BABYL@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
From: NEALE@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Subject: Trailer Security
At 9:00 this morning I arrived at CSLI to find the door to trailer A-B
ajar! If you are working in the trailers after security hours make
sure you lock up when you leave. There are thousands of dollars worth
of stuff in the open work area: somebody has been extremely careless!
∂19-Jan-86 1507 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Patch and Compatibility systems for WR 36xx's
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Jan 86 15:07:18 PST
Date: Sun 19 Jan 86 14:43:18-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Patch and Compatibility systems for WR 36xx's
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12176574837.48.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Folks,
There is now a KSL-Patches system for 36xx's similar to that for
Explorers. It contains patches to Symbolics code that need to be
applied locally. Eventually, these patches will make it into the
world loads, and it will only be necessary to do (load-patches
'ksl-patches), but for now, eveyone should put the following into
his/her LISPM-INIT.LISP:
(make-system 'ksl-pathces :silent :noconfirm :nowarn)
Also, there is a compatibility package similar to 36xx-Explorer. To
load is, use (make-system 'Explorer-36xx :silent :noconfirm :nowarn).
-- Rich
-------
∂19-Jan-86 2235 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA MLK-day special: PLANLUNCH!
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Jan 86 22:33:54 PST
Date: Sun 19 Jan 86 22:30:55-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: MLK-day special: PLANLUNCH!
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
CONTROLLING BACKWARD INFERENCE
Dave Smith (DE2SMITH@SUMEX-AIM)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 20
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
Effective control of inference is a critical problem in Artificial
Intelligence. Expert systems have made use of powerful
domain-dependent control information to beat the combinatorics of
inference. However, it is not always feasible or convenient to
provide all of the domain-dependent control that may be needed,
especially for systems that must handle a wide variety of inference
problems, or must function in a changing environment. In this talk a
powerful domain-independent means of controlling inference is
proposed. The basic approach is to compute expected cost and
probability of success for different backward inference strategies.
This information is used to select between inference steps and to
compute the best order for processing conjuncts. The necessary
expected cost and probability calculations rely on simple information
about the contents of the problem solvers database, such as the number
of facts of each given form and the domain sizes for the predicates
and relations involved.
-------
-------
∂20-Jan-86 0143 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #4
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Jan 86 01:43:44 PST
Date: Saturday, January 18, 1986 4:06AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #4
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 20 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Call For Papers,
Implementation - C-Prolog 1.5 and VMS,
LP Philosophy - What is the expressive power of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 Jan 1986 12:54-EST
From: Peter Henderson <pbh%suny-sb.csnet@CSNET-RELAY>
Subject: Call For Papers
Call For Papers
ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN Symposium on
Practical Software Development Environments
December 9 - 11, 1986, Palo Alto, California
Practical Software Development Environments assist with the
development and maintenance of larger, better, and more reliable
software systems. The symposium will address issues fundamental
to the development of such practical environments.
The logic programming research community is invited to submit
papers relating to programming environments to improve software
development.
For more information please refer to the call for papers which
appears in:
Communication of the ACM, January 1986, page A-67
IEEE Computer, January 1986, page 74
or contact: Peter B. Henderson (pbh@sbcs.CSNet)
Department of Computer Science
SUNY at Stony Brook
Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 21:15:26 pst
From: Mike Newton <Newton@cit-vlsi.ARPA>
Subject: C-Prolog 1.5 and VMS
Yes, there is a bug in the CProlog source, which the Berkeley
compiler blindly ignores (Its okay, because both elements are
the first in the structure). We've been running with the
change you mentioned for a few months.
In a couple of weeks I'm going to post a small announcement
regarding an 'updated' version of CProlog. We used it a lot
(!!!!) in constructing our Prolog compiler for the IBM-370/
4341/308x/3090 series computers, and have made many changes
-- bug fixes, speed improvements, Dec-20 compatibility,
portability, .... .
I've talked to Fernando Pereira and Edinburgh about duplicating
it for people that already have CProlog licenses, and both
were agreeable. The only delay is fixing a bug in the IO
routines and testing.
- Mike
ps: Timings of our compiler as of Dec 31, 1985: (naive reverse)
IBM 4341-12 85 KLips
IBM 3081 480 KLips (one processor)
IBM 3090 750 KLips (one processor)
Figures are +/- about 5%, with naive reverse as the test case.
No mode declarations were used (partly due to the fact that the
would have made only a very minor difference). Speeds show go
up roughly 5-10 % on the faster models with a few changes.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 86 22:55 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: What is the expressive power of Prolog?
Ching-Tsun Chow raised a very good question in his message
to Prolog Digest: [see V3, issue no. 44 Prolog Digest]
Although your question appears to be rhetorical, I believe
that it deserves to be taken seriously. Do you completely
discount the importance of expressive capability for Prolog?
What do you think are the tradeoffs between the expressive
capablility of Prolog and other aspects of its design?
By definition machine languages have the strongest expressive
capability. We need languages of strong expressive capability
that are higher level than machine language. The evidence
shows that Prolog is NOT such a language.
-- Carl Hewitt
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂20-Jan-86 1241 JJW MJH LispM news
To: MJH-LispM@SU-AI.ARPA
A random collection of news about the MJH Symbolics machines:
1. Frivolous, the 3640 in the 4th floor machine room, was unable to use the
Ethernet for several days but is now back. Someone had disconnected its
transceiver cable from the transceiver box. This machine still has to be
moved to its permanent home on the 3rd floor of MJH.
2. Richard Treitel has acquired a DVI file previewer from Bob Kanefsky at
Schlumberger. Once a full set of the new CM fonts is installed and
everything is working, he'll send out a message with further details.
Note that you have to run TeX on some other machine and transfer the DVI
file to the Lisp Machine; this will be semi-automatic.
3. In the near future I would like to install a new world on all of the MJH
machines to accomplish the following things:
a. Change the Chaos address of Ignorant, the namespace server, so that
Chaos gatewaying may eventually work between here and other parts of
the campus.
b. Create a MJH-Patches system (similar to the KSL-Patches system that
Rich Acuff is putting on the Welch Road machines) to simplify
installing new code and bugfixes.
c. Install the Boise code.
d. Install some patches to the TCP code.
If you have any other code that you think would be useful to install as
part of the standard world loads, please tell me. Also, doing the above
may require the name server to be down for several hours, so if this will
cause you problems at certain times tell me and I'll schedule around it.
Joe
∂21-Jan-86 0630 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 06:30:45 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 06:25:16-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177008461.9.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here are abstracts for the next two AFLBs.
----------------------------------
23-Jan-86 : Peter Sarnak (Stanford)
Explicit Construction of Expander Graphs
A graph having n vertices and at most kn/2 edges is called an
(n,k,c)-expander if, for any subset A of at most n/2 vertices,
the set of neighbors of A (excluding vertices in A itself) has
size at least c|A|.
Using automorphic forms, we give explicit (and easily constructed)
k-regular graphs on n vertices, where k = p+1 for a prime p, and
where n = q+1 for a prime q. These graphs have essentially optimal
expansion properties.
***** Time and place: January 23, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
30-Jan-86 : Harry Mairson (Stanford)
Average Case Lower Bounds on the Construction
and Searching of Partial Orders
It is very well known in computer science that partially ordered files
are easier to search. In the worst case, for example, a totally
unordered file requires no preprocessing, but Omega(n) time to search,
while a totally ordered file requires Omega(n log n) preprocessing
time to sort, but can be searched in O(log n) time. Behind the casual
observation, then, lurks the notion of a computational tradeoff
between sorting and searching.
We analyze this tradeoff in the average case, using the decision tree
model. Let P be a preprocessing algorithm that produces partial
orders given a set U of n elements, and let S be a searching algorithm
for these partial orders. Assuming any of the n! permutations of the
elements of U are equally likely, and that we search for any y in U
with equal probability (in unsuccessful search, all "gaps" are
considered equally likely), the average costs P(n) of preprocessing
and S(n) of searching may be computed. We demonstrate a tradeoff of
the form
P(n) + n log S(n) = Omega (n log n),
for both successful and unsuccessful search. The bound is tight up to
a constant factor.
In proving this tradeoff, we show a lower bound on the average case of
searching a partial order. Let A be a partial order on n elements
consistent with Pi permutations. We show S(n) = Omega(Pi↑{3/n}/n↑2)
for successful search of A, and S'(n) = Omega(Pi↑{2/n}/n) for
unsuccessful search. These lower bounds show, for example, that heaps
require linear time to search on the average.
***** Time and place: January 30, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂21-Jan-86 0811 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Wednesday meeting: 10:45 am
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 08:10:52 PST
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1986 08:10 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12177027646.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Wednesday meeting: 10:45 am
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Note that our new meeting time is 10:45-11:45 on Wednesdays. This
Wednesday, I will be speaking on:
CAREL: A Visible Distributed Lisp
Abstract: CAREL (CARE Lisp) is a Lisp implementation specially
designed for distributed-memory multiprocessor architectures. CAREL
is unique in its accessibility and its transparency. CAREL is
←accessible← because it is an interpreted language, based on Lisp.
Concurrency is invoked by using a few new special forms and functions
added to Lisp. CAREL expressions may be entered directly from the
keyboard or read in from files. CAREL is ←transparent← by exploiting
the instrumentation capabilities of the underlying CARE simulator.
CAREL, through CARE, displays a graphical representation of the
processor utilization and the communication of the running program.
CAREL is a distributed-memory variant of QLISP. CAREL supports
futures (like Multilisp), truly parallel LET binding (like QLISP),
active objects with locality and state (like OIL), programmer or
automatic specification of locality of computations (like
para-functional programming or Flat Concurrent Prolog), and both
static assignment of process to processor and dynamic spread of
recursive computations through the network via remote function call
(like V).
∂21-Jan-86 0847 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 08:47:27 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 08:40:16-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177033038.16.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lunch today in MJH 146 at 12:15!!!
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1130 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Upcoming talks (from <BBOARD>CS-WEEK.TXT)
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 11:30:28 PST
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1986 11:25 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12177063064.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Upcoming talks (from <BBOARD>CS-WEEK.TXT)
Here are two talks that may be of interest to AAP members:
Date : 1/21/1986 Event : Computer Science Colloquium
Day : Tuesday Person: J. Beetem
Time : 4:15 From : IBM Yorktown
Place: Skilling Title : The GF11 Supercomputer
Auditorium
and
Date : 1/27/1986 Event : PH D Oral
Day : Monday Person: Michael S. Kenniston
Time : 2:15 From : Stanford
Place: Bldg 60 Rm 61G Title : Debugging the Communication Behavior of
Distributed Programs in a Message-Based
System
∂21-Jan-86 1158 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #4
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 11:57:58 PST
Date: 21 Jan 86 1129-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #4
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 21 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 4
Today's Topic:
PARSYM Survey on Debugging
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1986 11:20 PST
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Survey on Debugging
PARSYM Survey on Debugging Parallel Programs
(responses to PARSYM-Survey@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA)
Debugging of parallel programs was, by far, the most requested topic
for a PARSYM survey. So here goes.
To provide some food for thought, the survey will include a summary of
a recent presentation on debugging -- both sequential and parallel --
given by Morven Gentleman. Then, a number of questions will be posed
to the PARSYM readership to find out what others know about debugging
parallel programs.
Debugging is only one aspect of software development. While other
aspects of software development are more concerned with getting most
of the program right the first time, debugging is primarily concerned
with how to detect, recognize, understand, and fix errors in the
behavior of a (partially) running program. A later survey will deal
with software development tools, including interpreters, compilers,
graphics, editors, and so on.
Morven Gentleman recently presented at Stanford some work done with
Darlene Stewart at the National Research Council of Canada. The talk
was based on experience with Harmony, NRC's distributed operating
system running on a MIMD network of 68000-based processors. The talk
included a troubleshooting guide for parallel programs, with mention
of the most common bugs and discussion of general techniques for
analyzing bugs. In their experience, the most common bug symptom was
stack overflow on the uniprocessor (the 68000 does not offer hardware
support for stacks). Deadlock was very rare; "livelock" was more
common. (PARSYM would appreciate a good definition of deadlock and
livelock.)
Gentleman presented a survey of debugging techniques for sequential
programs, including breakpoints, planted code, single stepping, timing
between breakpoints, data structure display, expression evaluation,
and patching erroneous values. He then recommended a set of
techniques for parallel programs, including:
1. audit of system data structures
2. history buffers (it's more productive to analyze a selective
history of the execution of a program than to try to debug on one
processor while the others are still running)
3. bits to record use of functions, tasks, and data structures
4. recording of task operation including creation and destruction of
tasks and construction and sending of messages
5. processor load estimation (by counting idle cycles)
6. stimulating exception conditions
7. message monitoring and stream tapping
Gentleman maintained that debugging of parallel programs was not
significantly more difficult than debugging of sequential programs --
given the right tools. He recommended against trying to debug a
concurrent program on a uniprocessor -- he thought it was easier on a
multiprocessor, and faster. He pointed out that debugging in shared
memory systems is much more difficult than debugging in message
passing systems. Gentleman highly recommended having a "spy" program
that would continually observe the behavior of the computing network.
Gentleman's talk left me optimistic about the debuggability of
parallel programs. I'll be very interested to hear comments agreeing
or disagreeing with this conclusion.
Questions for the Experienced
(responses to PARSYM-Survey@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA)
The first group of questions is mainly for people or groups with
experience programming parallel computers. The questions are simple
and very general: I tried to reject any question I couldn't answer
myself for the serial programming I do. For example, I would find it
difficult to generate a histogram of the various categories of bugs
I've encountered in my Lisp machine programming lately.
For the computer architecture and the applications you are familiar
with:
1. Briefly describe the hardware architecture (MIMD/SIMD, number of
processors, distributed vs. shared memory), programming system
(language, interpreted vs. compiled), and application.
2. Are your bugs typically "serial" or "concurrent"; i.e., do they
occur in the midst of sequential code running on a single processor,
or do they have to do with communication, timing, or network resource
conflict?
3. What kind of output does your program have so that you can detect a
bug? How do bugs manifest themselves?
4. What kinds of debugging tools do you have?
5. What literature references, including your own, would you recommend
for learning about debugging parallel programs?
Questions for Speculation
Here are some questions to further stimulate your thinking about
debugging parallel programs. I don't expect anyone to answer all of
them, but I hope some of them will trigger discussion.
Is SIMD debugging easier than MIMD debugging?
How can graphics be used to help debug parallel programs? How can we
graphically represent the execution of parallel programs to help us
understand and debug them?
How best can multiple windows be managed to display the behavior of
parallel programs? Which is better: fixed windows or pop-up windows?
What programming language features would help?
What hardware features would help?
Are program verification techniques useful in preventing bugs in
parallel programs?
Should we immediately begin developing expert systems to detect bugs
in parallel programs, or should we wait until we have experts?
How do we debug complex parallel processes in the real world? For
example, how does a corporation or university recognize that one of
its departments is "faulty" or that communication between departments
is faulty? How does a football team recognize and repair its "bugs"?
What debugging techniques are common across architectures and what
techniques are unique to architectures such as the Connection Machine,
actors, or dataflow?
How do debugging techniques differ between "crystalline" problems
and irregularly structured problems?
Both operating systems and communications systems are complex systems
involving concurrency: is there a literature on troubleshooting such
systems and is it relevant to parallel symbolic computing?
In parallel systems, the presence of a debugging tool or a spy program
my induce a Heisenberg effect, causing the bug to disappear or a new
one to appear. How can this problem be minimized?
----------------
Thanks are due Andrew Comas (Columbia), Stewart M. Clamen (MIT),
Alexander Dupuy (Columbia), and Jacob Levy (Weizmann) for their
encouragement and comments on this PARSYM Survey.
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂21-Jan-86 1201 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA The great air-conditioning kludge
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 12:00:26 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 11:51:33-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: The great air-conditioning kludge
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA, bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
(Only a few of you are probably aware of the huge effort that went
into keeping the CSLI computers running these past two weeks while the
air conditioning in Pine Hall was being repaired. Joe Zingheim wrote
the article below to show some of the work that went into the project
and to thank those that helped out.)
It's too bad that Rich asked that you stay out of the machine room,
because there is what has to be the biggest kludge in the history of
kludges churning out the chilled air that is essential for our
computers to run. Pine Hall's air-conditioning system needed repairs,
and we were faced with having to shut down all the computers, ours and
SUMEX and the Robotics Group, while the heat exchanger coils were
being replaced. This was scheduled to be done over two weeks.
Through some incredibly good luck, but particularly through the
cooperation and efforts of a group of Stanford people and outside
companies, we have a temporary system in place and operating: The
water chiller system has been modified to run through a pair of two
inch fire hoses; these go through holes in the outside walls to four
fan-coil units spotted around the computer room. The system has two
chiller units that will also be serviced and repaired during this
time: This will be done by working on one at a time; the La Brea
Heating and and Air-Conditioning Company in Southern California has a
truck-bed mounted 30 ton chiller unit that can be here and installed
within 24 hours, should the existing units fail or be inadequate.
John Vier of ITS had the fan-coil units; he was going to send them
to salvage, where they might have been sold for the scrap value of the
metal. Jim Powell of Networking remembered that he had had them, and
send me there. Dick Milam of Operations and Maintenance orchestrated
the electricians, plumbers, carpenters, and the air-conditioning and
sheet metal workers through the installation and modification of the
chiller system. Bob Tucker of SUMEX brought in a pair of huge fans
that are circulating cold air into the Networking alcove and Robotics
room.
Pameco Aire of San Jose got two replacement blower units shipped to
us just in time, and the W.W. Grainger Company of San Jose got us the
motors and pulleys we needed to fix two of the fan-coil units.
Marjorie Maxwell shepherded my purchase orders through and Brad
Horak helped get things in, Trudy Vizmanos and Bach-Hong Tran and Suzi
Parker helped tie up the loose ends, and Tom Yamarone ran the errands.
My thanks to this winning Stanford team!
--Joe Zingheim
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1322 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:barwise.pa@Xerox.COM Logic Seminar
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 13:22:41 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Jan 86 13:13:33-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 21 JAN 86 13:16:14 PST
Date: 21 Jan 86 13:11 PST
From: barwise.pa@Xerox.ARPA
Subject: Logic Seminar
To: Folks@su-csli.ARPA, bboard@su-csli.ARPA, clt@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <860121-131614-1518@Xerox>
The logic seminar will resume next Monday, 4:15 to 5:30, in the Facutly
Lounge of the mathematics department. The speaker and topic to be
announced.
∂21-Jan-86 1406 mar.christoff%AMES-VMSB.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU request for addition
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 14:06:07 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 21 Jan 86 16:54-EST
Received: from ames-vmsb.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 21 Jan 86 16:54:14 EST
Date: 21 Jan 86 13:46:00 PST
From: mar.christoff@ames-vmsb.ARPA
Subject: request for addition
To: phil-sci@mit-mc
Reply-To: mar.christoff@ames-vmsb.ARPA
Could you please add me to the philosophy of science intrest group?
I have an intrest in philosophy and would be interested in seeing
what the current viewpoints of science philosophers are.
Bruce Christofferson
mar.christoff@ames-vmsb
------
∂21-Jan-86 1414 TREITEL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA DVI previewer
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 14:14:19 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 14:04:53-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: DVI previewer
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: treitel@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177092132.49.TREITEL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
The MJH Lisp Machines are now running a DVI file previewer, courtesy of Bob
Kanefsky (Kanef@SRI-KL). This displays DVI files on a LispM screen, with
various featurs like panning and zooming. If you're feeling intrepid, you can
just do :Load System DVI, type "Y" to the function-redefinition warning that
will occur, and then hit Select-\ followed (after suitable intervals) by Help
and Meta-Help. Or you can read my next message, which explains more
about this piece of software.
- Richard
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1432 TREITEL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA more on the DVI
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 14:31:54 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 14:28:28-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: more on the DVI
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: treitel@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177096425.49.TREITEL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here's an explanation of some of the features and problems the DVI
previewer now has.
Since our mainframes don't support CHAOS protocols (yet), it is impossible for
the previewer to work with a file that's on one of them. I've put in a
temporary fix whereby, if you ask it for a file that's not accessible via a
"good" protocol, it copies the file into your LispM home directory, without
really telling you about this. So after a while you may need to clean out
your directory. All the commands for handling files work normally, hiding
the local copy, except that if you delete it and then try to look at the file
again, you're in deep yogurt.
Kanef's code is fragile in certain ways. Do not mess around with window
sizes. Preferably, do not Select to another program while you are entering a
command to the DVI code. When (if) a window appears at the top of the screen
saying something like "press Function-0-S or click the mouse on this window"
and also saying "press any character to get rid of this window", **do not** get
rid of it. Do Function-0-S or the mouse click and find out what it wants.
Note that the code queues typed-ahead commands. If you get impatient and type
a command three times, you will have to be patient while it is executed three
times!
Some of the DVI windows are very mouse-sensitive, so that a double right click
(e.g. to help you unwedge something) may get sucked in and not be "heard" by
the LispM system. If this happens to you, try various different parts of the
screen. If you get really badly wedged, Control-Hyper-Function followed by
"start" seems to work.
If you get a long message about how some font was not available in the right
size, look at the "Magnifications" window, on the right. If it has any
numbers in it, click left on one of them. If not, you lose -- that page
cannot be displayed. As of now, the DVI has both the AM fonts which are in
use on SUMEX and the CM fonts which most everyone else has (I think), in
standard magnifications as used by TeX and LaTeX. Thanks to Joe Weening for
generating the new fonts.
Some time shortly Joe and I may add a command to send the file being viewed
directly to Boise. When (if) we do, it will appear in the Help listing.
Sending files to other printers is not easy.
Complaints, suggestions, etc.: if about fonts, mainly to JJW@SAIL, else to
Treitel@SUMEX with cc to Kanef@SRI-KL.
- Richard
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1557 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Phones
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 15:53:54 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 15:17:55-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Phones
To: CSD@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177105428.38.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I have extra User Guides for the new phones. If you would like to have
one, please stop in Room 210. Thanks
LaDonna
-------
∂21-Jan-86 1606 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Logic Seminar
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 16:04:31 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 21 Jan 86 15:59:50-PST
Date: 21 Jan 86 1540 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Logic Seminar
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
The logic seminar will resume next Monday, 4:15 to 5:30, in the Facutly
Lounge of the mathematics department. The speaker and topic to be
announced.
PS: If you are reading this on a bboard and would like to be on the
logic and theory of computation mailing list send a message to CLT@su-ai.
∂21-Jan-86 1637 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa meeting tomorrow
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 16:36:59 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 21 Jan 86 16:30:09 pst
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 86 16:30:09 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: meeting tomorrow
To: nail@diablo
I'm going to be out of town tomorrow, but Yannis Ioannidis is
going to talk informally about his recent work with Gene Wong.
---Jeff
∂21-Jan-86 1639 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa paper received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 16:38:48 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 21 Jan 86 16:33:08 pst
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 86 16:33:08 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo
"Parallel Evaluation of Recursive RUle Queries"
by Cosmodakis and Kanellakis (Yorktown/Brown).
∂21-Jan-86 1805 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA help Forum invitations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 18:05:05 PST
Date: Tue 21 Jan 86 17:46:08-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: help Forum invitations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177132410.44.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm going through PEDIT, find, and lookup and fingering, etc.,
trying to find the names of visitors we should invite to the Forum.
If you have a visitor who should be invited, please let me know so
I don't leave out anyone who is important to you (and your group).
Thanks,
Carolyn
-------
∂21-Jan-86 2217 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #5
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Jan 86 22:16:34 PST
Date: 21 Jan 86 2209-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #5
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Wednesday, 22 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 5
Today's Topic:
Course announcement (U. Penn.): Highly parallel architectures
for Artificial Intelligence
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lokendra Shastri <Shastri%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Course announcement
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 86 13:37 EST
COURSE ANNOUNCEMENT
Lokendra Shastri
Department of Computer and Information Science
University of Pennsylvania
Phildelphia, PA 19104
CIS704 Highly parallel architectures for Artificial Intelligence
Prerequisites
This is an advanced course in artificial intelligence. It will be
assumed that the participants are familiar with basic issues in AI.
Description
There is a growing interest in highly interconnected networks of very
simple processing elements. These networks are referred to as
Connectionist Networks and are playing an increasingly important role
in artificial intelligence and cognitive science.
This course is intended to discuss the motivation behind pursuing
"connectionism" and to survey the state of current research in this area.
We will review connectionist models of language understanding, parsing,
knowledge representation, limited inference, and learning, and
compare the connectionist approach to traditional AI approaches.
Texts
None. A reading list will be provided.
Assignments
Students will present a paper on the reading list. There will be two
assignments that will involve using a connectionist simulator and a
term paper.
READING LIST
I Introductory and background papers 15/20 Jan.
------------------------------------
Feldman, J. A., "Connectionist Models and Their Applications: Introduction,"
Cognitive Science, vol. 9, p. 1, 1985.
Feldman, J.A., "Connections: massive parallelism in natural and artificial
intelligence," BYTE Magazine, April 1985.
Feldman, J. A. and D. H. Ballard, "Connectionist models and their properties"
Cognitive Science 6, 205-254, 1982.
Hinton G.E., "Learning in parallel networks", The BYTE magazine, April 1985.
Ballard, D. H. and C.M. Brown, "Vision: biology challenges technology," BYTE
Magazine, April 1985.
Ballard, D. H., G. E. Hinton, and T. J. Sejnowski, "Parallel Visual
Computation," Nature, vol. 103, pp. 21-26, November 1983.
II Knowledge representation
---------------------------
Hinton, G.E."Implementing semantic networks in parallel hardware". In
G.E. Hinton and J.A. Anderson (Eds) Parallel models of associative
memory. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrance Erlbaum and Associates. 1981.
-----------------------
Shastri L., "A massively parallel encoding of semantic networks", Proc.
Distributed Artificial Intelligence Workshop 1985, Sea Ranch, CA,
December 1985.
Shastri L. and J.A. Feldman, "Evidential reasoning in semantic networks: a
formal theory," Proc. IJCAI-85, 465-474, Los Angeles, CA August 1985.
Shastri L., "Evidential reasoning in semantic networks: a formal theory and
its parallel implementation,", TR-166, Computer Science Department,
University of Rochester, September 1985.
------------------------
Feldman, J. A. and L. Shastri, "Evidential Inference in Activation Networks,"
Rochester Research Review, pp. 24-29, 1984.
Shastri L., and J.A. Feldman, "Semantic networks and neural nets," TR 131,
Computer Science Department, University of Rochester. June 1984.
-----------------------
III Learning
------------
Hopfield, J.J., "Neural Networks and Physical Systems with Emergent Collective
Computational Abilities," Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, vol. 79, pp. 2554-2558, 1982.
Ackley D.H., G.E. Hinton, and T.J. Sejnowski, "A learning algorithm for
Boltzmann Machines," Cognitive Science 9, 147-169 (1985).
--------------------------
Rumelhart D.E., G.E. Hinton, and R.J. Williams, "Learning internal
representations by error propagation. ICS Report 8506, UCSD,
La Jolla, CA. 1985.
---------------------------
Feldman, J. A., "Dynamic Connections in Neural Networks," Biological
Cybernetics, vol. 46, pp. 27-39, 1982.
Shastri, L., Section 7.4 of "Evidential reasoning in semantic networks: a
formal theory and its parallel implementation," TR 166,
U. of Rochester.
------------------------
Fukushima, K., "Cognitron: A Self-organizing Multilayered Neural Network,"
Biological Cybernetics, vol. 36, pp. 193-202, 1980.
--------------------------
Kohonen, T., "Self-Organized Formation of Topologically Correct Feature Maps,"
Biological Cybernetics, vol. 43, pp. 59-69, 1982.
Kohonen, T., "Analysis of a Simple Self-Organizing Process," Biological
Cybernetics, vol. 44, pp. 135-140, 1982.
--------------------------- 19 Feb.
Rumelhart, D. E. and D. Zipser, "Feature Discovery by Competitive Learning,"
Cognitive Science, vol. 9, pp. 75-112, 1985.
----------------------------
Sutton R.S., "The learning of world models by connectionist networks,"
Proc. Cognitive Science Conference, Irvine CA, 1985.
IV Natural Language
-------------------
McClelland, J. L. and D.E. Rumelhart, "An interactive activation model of
the effect of context in perception: Part I," Psychological Review,
88, 375-407. 1981.
Small, S.L., G.W. Cottrell, and L. Shastri, "Toward connectionist parsing,"
Proc., AAAI-82, Pittsburgh, PA August 1982.
Cottrell, G.W. and S.L. Small. "A connectionst scheme for modelling word
sense disambiguation," Cognition and Brain Theory 6, 1, 89-120. 1983.
Cottrell, G.W. "A model of lexical access of ambiguous words," AAAI-84,
Austin Texas, August 1984.
------------------
Waltz D.L., and J.B. Pollack, "Massively parallel parsing: A strongly
interactive model of natural language interpretation. Cognitive
Science 9, 51-74 (1985).
---------------------
Fanty, M. "Context-free parsing in connectionist networks, TR 174, Computer
Science Dept., Univ. of Rochester, November 1985.
Selman B., and G. Hirst. "A rule-based connectionist parsing system. TR
Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto. March 1985.
-------------------
Dell, G.S., "Positive feedback in hierarchical connectionist models:
applications to language production", Cognitive Science, 9, 147-169
(1985).
--------------------
V Vision
--------
Sabbah, D., "Computing with Connections in Visual Recognition of Origami
objects," Cognitive Science, vol 9, pp 25-50, 1985.
-----------------------
Feldman, J. A., "Four frames suffice: A provisional model of vision and space"
The Behavioral and Brain Sciences (1985) 8, 265-289. Also available as
University of Rochester Technical Report #99, September 1982.
Plaut, D.C., "Visual recognition of simple objects by a connection network,"
Senior thesis, and TR 143, Computer Science Dept. University of
Rochester, August 1984.
-------------------------
Ballard, D. H., "Cortical Connections: Structure and Function," University of
Rochester Technical Report #133 (revised) January 1985.
-------------------------
Hinton, G. E. and T. J. Sejnowski, "Optimal Perceptual Inference," Proceedings
of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on CV and PR, pp. 448-453,
June 1983. [May be]
VI Hardware/Simulation
-----------------------
Brown, C. M., C. S. Ellis, J. A. Feldman, T. J. LeBlanc, and G. L. Peterson,
"Research with the Butterfly Multicomputer," Rochester Research Review,
pp. 3-23, 1984.
Fanty, M. "A connectionist simulator for the Butterfly," TR 164, Computer
Science Department, University of Rochester, (to appear) January 1986.
-----------------------
Hillis W.D. "The connection machine: A computer architecture based on cellular
automata," Physica 10D (1984) 213-228, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Hillis W.D. "The connection machine," MIT Press, 1985.
--------------------------
VII Other papers to be discussed
--------------------------------
Feldman, J.A., "Energy and the behavior of connectionist models," TR 155,
Computer Science Department, University of Rochester. November 1985.
---------
Hopfield, J.J. and D.W. Tank, "'Neural' computation of decisions in
optimization problems. To appear in Biological Cybernetics, 1985.
(May have appeared by now.)
---------------
Kandel, E. R., "Small Systems of Neurons," Scientific American, vol. 241,
pp. 67-76, September 1979.
Along with some other material from neurosciences.
---------------
Block, H. D., "A Review of "Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational
Geometry"," Information and Control, vol. 17, pp. 501-522, 1970.
McClelland, J. L., "Putting Knowledge in its Place: A Scheme for Programming
Parallel Processing Structures on the Fly," Cognitive Science, vol. 9,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Books
-----
Anderson, John R, Architecture of Cognition, Harvard University Press. 1983.
Fahlman, S. E., NETL, a System for Representing and Using Real Knowledge ,
MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1979.
Hebb, D. O., The Organization of Behavior, Wiley, New York, 1949.
Hillis W.D. "The connection machine," MIT Press, 1985.
Hinton, G. E. and J. A. Anderson, Parallel Models of Associative Memory,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1981.
McCullough, W. S., Embodiments of Mind, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
1965.
Minsky, M. and S. Papert, Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational
Geometry, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1969.
Rosenblatt, F., Principles of Neurodynamics, Spartan Books, New York, 1962.
pp. 113-146, 1985.
----------------------------------------------
A few papers may be added as we go along.
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂22-Jan-86 0816 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Forsythe Lectures
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 08:16:46 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 08:05:41-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Forsythe Lectures
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177288886.23.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
****************************************************************************
DON'T MISS THE FORSYTHE LECTURES!
****************************************************************************
Computer Science Professor Barbara Liskov of the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology will deliver the George and Sandra Forsythe Memorial
Lectures on January 29 and 30, 1986. Professor Liskov was the first
woman to be awarded a PhD degree by the Stanford Computer Science
Department (in 1968).
Professor Liskov, at MIT since 1972, is an authority on
computer programming languages. Her most recent work is on a language
called ARGUS for programming an ensemble of several computing machines
that can survive the failure of individual members.
The first lecture, entitled "Implementation of Resilient, Atomic Data
Types," will suggest an approach by which distributed programs can
preserve the consistency of data in the presence of concurrency and
hardware failures. This lecture will take place in Terman Auditorium on
the Stanford Campus at 4:15 pm on January 29, 1986 and will be of
interest primarily to specialists in computer systems.
The second lecture, at 7:30 pm on January 30, 1986, is directed at a
more general audience and will be in the Fairchild Auditorium at
Stanford. Entitled "Specifications of Distributed Programs," this
lecture will discuss how to give user-oriented, informal specifications
of distributed programs embodying concurrency and requiring high
availability. There will be a reception in the Fairchild Auditorium
foyer immediately following the lecture.
The lectures honor the memory of computer science pioneers George and
Sandra Forsythe. George was the founder of Stanford's Computer Science
Department, and as its first chairman attracted a core of distinguished
faculty members. Sandra was an influential textbook writer and educator
in computer science. The Forsythes encouraged young people to pursue
academic careers and did much to support the educational process.
Computer Science Department Chairman Nils Nilsson notes: We are honored
that Professor Liskov accepted our invitation to give the Forsythe
Lectures this year. Her research is particularly important for helping
our understanding of distributed computer systems."
-------
∂22-Jan-86 0849 Shrager.pa%XEROX.COM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 08:49:26 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 22 Jan 86 11:28-EST
Received: from Xerox.COM by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 22 Jan 86 03:03:55 EST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 22 JAN 86 00:00:25 PST
Date: 22 Jan 86 00:00 PST
From: Shrager.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
To: Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <860122-000025-1206@Xerox>
(Yet Another Attempt to ReActivate Phil Sci.)
I claim to study the psychology of science. Unfortunately, I've come
to believe that this isn't a well-defined topic. In fact, I'm rapidly
convincing myself that people who talk about the mechanisms of discovery
(e.g., Darden, Thagart) and/or write "discovery" AI systems (e.g.,
Langley, Lenat) are using a term that has no independent meaning. They
do not intend to deceive; rather, they are taken in (as I was) by how
cool it would be to build a computer program that does "scientific
discovery". Is everyone else who thinks that there's something to gain
from this is similarly confused, or is it just me? Under this view it's
also vacuous to say: "Here's my new learning mechanism. I think it
accounts for scientific theory formation." as if there's one thing that
*is* scientific theory formation and one can have a science of it (e.g.,
Gentner, Holyoak).
Thus the question: Is "scientific discovery" something that you can have
a science of?
The only sense I can make of the term "scientific discovery" is that
it's the sort of reasoning that the people that we call scientists do.
Is this special to scientists? That is, what we call scientific
reasoning is some normal combination of learning mechanisms (e.g.,
analogy, induction, etc) just like those you'd find in a child learning
about a new toy, an adult learning about a new car, etc. Perhaps
scientists are motivated to test hypotheses a little bit more carefully
than the rest of us. Perhaps they also are better at creating theories.
I doubt this very much, although they certainly have a lot more domain
specific knowledge in their fields than we do. They are also more prone
to publish their results than I was when I figured out how my rear
windshield wiper worked.
Under this view there is no scientific force (in the sense of *our*
science of the mind) to studies of "science", per se, beyond what can be
learned by similar studies of ("non-scientific") learning. For
instance, BACON is a study in search (or whatever other mechanism you
wish to attribute to it), NOT a study in science.
What would count as a science of scientific reasoning? That is, what
would have to be the case for me to buy that there is something called
scientific reasoning that is different from non-scientific reasoning and
that I can get my head around? (The horrorible self-referential nature
of this whole argument is starting to confuse me.) There might be
something special in the task itself. How would we tell if the task of
the scientists isn't just like the task of the guy trying to figure out
how to put his new car into reverse, or the child trying to figure out
why gophers go into holes at one place and come out at another. or the
hacker trying to figure out his Lispm without reading the manual...?
Maybe there is something different in the processing that scientists use
to learn about these things. This is an empirical claim for which there
is no basis (is there?).
The claim is that we learn nothing about "science" by working on
scientific reasoning, since "science" isn't anything but learning
applied to natural domains. The cognitive psychology literature is
empty of studies of "discovery". I used to wonder why this was the
case. Under the present view, this lack of research is not because no
one cares about scientific reasoning, but because no one is confused
into thinking that it's something about which you can have a separate
topic.
Let me head off some obvious counters.
(1) Since scientists thinks about the structure of their learning
processes, these processes are somewhat different. That is, learning
about these complex systems is so hard (or doing it right is so hard...)
that scientists have to think about they way they are going about
learning about them, which substantially changes the learning processes.
This is one version of the rationalist philosopher-of-science view.
First, I *do* believe that it is possible to have something called the
"philosophy" of science which somehow rationalizes learning, but I don't
buy that that has anything to do with what scientists do. I would claim
that almost all of a scientist's real work (even if we just focus on the
work that the scientists themselves would call scientific) consists of
puzzle-solving (in a broad sense -- I don't just mean "problem solving"
in the AI sense), and is not different form similar "non-scientific"
learning/puzzle-solving which involves a large number of mechanisms.
Further, I think that most people engaged in puzzle solving also have
these meta-procedural intuitions, even if they aren't as careful at
reasoning about the implications of the meta constructions as the
scientist (sometimes) is.
(2) The form of theories that scientists devise is different than the
form of theories that other people derive. I think that this is wrong.
People make up a lot of different sorts of theories about why things
happen and/or laws to predict them. Some of these "lay theories" are
even mathematical in a simple way -- and some are not so simple (if you
consider the implicit computation being done).
(3) Studying scientific reasoning is more interesting. The theories are
more fun, and the scientific problems (*our* scientific problems)
involved are more difficult. I certainly sympathize with the "more fun"
argument...that's why I am in the field to begin with. (I really want
to be in about 7 different fields at once and cognitive science is a
good way to do this.) On the other hand, (a) it's damned difficult to
study scientists at work, (b) it's not as easy as you might think to
study non-scientist learning in a lay-scientific way, and (c) this
doesn't speak to the question of whether we can have a science of
scientific reasoning -- that is, whether there's a puzzle to be solved
in the structure of science, or if the name signifies nothing in-and-of
itself. Granted, it's fun to think about, but it seems that you're
making the problem so hard as to be intractable -- at least for
psychology. (Real data doesn't seem to bother philosophers or AI
researchers, and what real data there is is almost always historical or
retrospective at best. (I really think that the historical data hides a
great deal of processing. But this is another argument.))
(4) But this is all an empirical claim, and so it stands as a scientific
hypothesis (i.e., that scientific reasoning isn't anything different
than lay reasoning) and must be scientifically tested. This sounds like
an anthropological claim (looking at the tribe of scientists) rather
than a psychological one. Perhaps it's right, but it isn't psychology.
The relationship between psychology and anthropology seems too hairy to
take up right now, but perhaps there's something to be said here.
My concern for this is real in the sense that I have been trying to
figure out how to make a psychology of science that is NOT retrospective
(or historical). The question at hand is whether it's worth the
trouble, or should I just be looking more carefully at what I have been
looking at (how "normal" people learn about complex things).
At least it might make for an interesting discussion. If nothing else,
it'll break up the monotony of "Please add me to this list." messages.
-- Jeff
∂22-Jan-86 1210 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA two seminars
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 12:05:03 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Jan 86 12:00:12-PST
Date: 22 Jan 86 1143 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: two seminars
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
Professor Neil Jones of Copenhagen University will be visiting SRI, Stanford
and Xerox Parc January 29-31. He will give talks at Stanford and SRI
(see below for details).
If you are interested in talking to Professor Jones during his visit you
can make arrangements with him after one of the seminars,
or contact Carolyn Talcott (CLT@SU-AI) or Pepe Meseguer (Meseguer@SRI-CSL).
There may be a group going to dinner with Jones Friday night. Details
will be announced at the seminars.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stanford seminar
Speaker: Prof. Neil D. Jones, Institute of Datalogy
Copenhagen University, Denmark
Title: TOWARDS A THEORY OF COMPILER GENERATION
Time: Wednesday January 29, 3:15pm
Place: 352 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford
Abstract:
A semantics directed compiler generator is a system which
automatically transforms a formal semantic definition of a programming
language into a stand-alone compiler. Correctness of such a system
means that the produced compiler will transform an arbitrary source
language program into a target language program whose computational
effect is the same as that given to the source program by the semantic
definition.
The lecture will describe a general methodology for the construction
of compiler generators. A simple system called CERES was developed at
Aarhus and Copenhagen Universities on the basis of these principles.
Unusual features of the methodology include its applicability to a wide
variety of different language definition formalisms, and the fact that
the produced compiler generators can generate not only compilers for
user-defined languages, but also most of the compiler generator system's
own components.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SRI seminar
AN EXPERIMENT IN PARTIAL EVALUATION:
THE GENERATION OF A COMPILER GENERATOR
Prof. Neil D. Jones
DIKU (Dept. of Computer Science)
University of Copenhagen
WHEN: Thursday January 30th at 1:30 pm
WHERE: SRI, Building A, Conference Room B.
DIRECTIONS: SRI is at 333 Ravenswood Ave., three blocks East from El Camino.
Go to the Main Building (Building A) and sign in with the receptionist.
She will direct you to the B conference room, just a few paces away from
the entrance hall.
ABSTRACT
A partial evaluator is an algorithm which when given
- a program and
- known values for some (not necessarily all) of its input data
produces as output a so-called residual program which, when run on the
program's remaining input data, will yield the same ouput as the original
program would yield on all of its input data. Partial evaluation is thus
a special case of program transformation. Its theoretical possibility was
established many years ago in recursive function theory, by Kleene's "S-m-n
theorem."
Futamura realized in 1971 that if one is given an interpretive
definition of a programming language, one may use partial evaluation
both to compile and to generate compilers. Compiling is done
by partially evaluating an interpreter using the interpreted "source"
program as known data; this yields a target program written in the same
language as the interpreter itself. Compiler generation requires that
the partial evaluator is a program written in the same language as the
programs it processes, and is done by partially evaluating the partial
evaluator itself, with the interpreter as known data. The net effect
is to transform interpreters into stand-alone compilers.
Turchin discovered the same results independently a few years
later, and went one step further: to see that one may even use a
partial evaluator to generate a compiler generator (by means of
triple self-application!).
The talk concerns a successful experiment whose goal was to
transfer these promising results from theory into practice, and will
describe the ideas, structure and results produced by our
self-applicable partial evaluator.
∂22-Jan-86 1219 JOSHI@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 12:19:33 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 12:12:59-PST
From: Joshi Smita <JOSHI@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The Happy Hour returns to the halls of the Linguistics Department!
Come one, come all at 4:45 (or thereabouts) to the Greenberg Room,
Linguistics Department, this Friday afternoon.
-------
∂22-Jan-86 1223 JOSHI@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour $
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 12:23:40 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 12:17:23-PST
From: Joshi Smita <JOSHI@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour $
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA, linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Despite the generous contributions of the faculty toward the
happy hour budget, we find that we don't have enough funds
to maintain the happy hour every week in the manner to which
we have all grown accustomed. So, to those of you who haven't
contributed: if you're planning to come to the happy hour
regularly, we certainly would appreciate a donation of
$5 or so. If you're planning to attend less regularly, we'd
still appreciate it if you could donate a little something.
Gina Wein, Mary Dalrymple, Gary Holden, or Smita Joshi
will be more than happy to accept your contributions.
Remember, the survival of the happy hour as we know it
depends on you.
-------
∂22-Jan-86 1348 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Business Cards
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 13:46:34 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 13:38:26-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Business Cards
To: AC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177349462.30.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Would you be willing to pay for business cards for your secretaries from
your unrestricted funds? There is a saving of over half on orders placed
by March 1--$30 for 500. The department will pay for cards for administrative
staff.
Some secretaries may not want cards, but I think it would be a nice gesture
to offer them.
Betty
-------
∂22-Jan-86 1445 WECHSLER@SU-CSLI.ARPA XENONEX
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 14:45:07 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 14:37:56-PST
From: Stephen Wechsler <WECHSLER@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: XENONEX
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
PALINDROME DANCE COMPANY (from New York City) and Xenofile music
(including myself) will present 3 performances this weekend (Th-Fri-Sat):
Palindrome Dance Company
New Performance Gallery
3153 17th St. (btwn S.Van Ness & Shotwell)
San Francisco
Jan. 23, 24, 25. 8:00 pm
Info/reservations: 641-7045, 826-1347
$7/$5 students
The program will include works of systematic choreography (one based
on types of translational and rotational symmetry; one based on a
simple quadratic equation); a study of male macho; an expressionist
piece; "Xenonex" (three movements in 7/8 time); and more.
I encourage you to attend-- I'm sure you will enjoy it!
--Steve
-------
∂22-Jan-86 1544 gentner%P.CS.UIUC.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Re: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 15:44:01 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 22 Jan 86 18:36-EST
Received: from a.CS.UIUC.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 22 Jan 86 18:17:14 EST
Received: from p.CS.UIUC.EDU by a.CS.UIUC.EDU with SMTP (UIUC-5.31/9.4),
id AA15056; Wed, 22 Jan 86 17:15:39 CST
Received: by p.CS.UIUC.EDU (UIUC-5.5/9.4),
id AA10494; Wed, 22 Jan 86 17:15:59 CST
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 86 17:15:59 CST
From: gentner@p.CS.UIUC.EDU (Dedre Gentner)
Message-Id: <8601222315.AA10494@p.CS.UIUC.EDU>
To: Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Shrager.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Re: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
I have two reactions:
1. You're 100% right in suggesting that there is no real difference
betweescientific reasoning and reasoning. No unique process, no
special form of knowledge representation, no unique metaconceptions.
I also plead innocent to the charge (if you meant this) of saying
that scientists think qualitatively differently from the rest of humanity.
2. But, well, there may be some quantitative differences --- some
difference in the degree to which certain processes are engaged in,
the criteria for solution, etc. --- that, taken together, could make
a big difference in the kind of thnking that goes on. One humble
candidate is writing out ideas. I hate to be an advocate of pressure
to publish-- there's quite enough of that around. But I've noticed that
I learn a lot by writing, mainly becuase I notice inconsistencies
and places where I disagree with what I've written. So one candidate
for how scientific thinking differs from ordinary thinking is that
there is (a) a bigger premium on consistency and (b) a set of
mechanisms,such as writing, modelling, etc. that help promote
consistency.
There's another set of issues that might be called "implicit
aesthetics" that I think I see in use of analogy and metaphor.
Clarity and systematicity are valued in scientific uses; in
literary uses, a fuzzy, nonsystematic, internally inconsistent
metaphor can be dandy, if it's evocative. In fact, internal
paradox can even be part of the appeal. One thing I think
scientists have to learn is which kind of aesthetics to use when.
Dedre
∂22-Jan-86 1654 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Logic Seminar update
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 16:54:51 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Jan 86 16:47:18-PST
Date: 22 Jan 86 1634 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Logic Seminar update
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Speaker: Dag Westerstahl
Title: Branching generalized quantifiers
Time: Monday, January 27, 4:15 - 5:30 pm
Monday, February 3, 4:15 - 5:30 pm
Place: The Faculty lounge, 3rd floor, Math dept.
Abstract:
The idea that partially ordered prefixes (branchings) of the universal
and existential quantifiers occur in natural languages originates with
Hintikka, who in particular claimed that the Henkin quantifier occurs
essentially in English. In these talks, the notion of branching is extended
to (logics with) generalized quantifiers. It was Barwise who in "On
branching quantifiers in English" (J.Phil. Logic, 1979) observed that
certain non first-order quantifiers provide even more convincing examples
of proper branching in English - that paper is the point of departure of my
discussion. The first talk is concerned with finding a uniform truth de-
finition for sentences with branching generalized quantifiers, and related
issues such as monotonicity constraints on quantifiers which allow
branching. For example, a generalized Henkin prefix, with four arbitrary
quantifiers (of the appropriate types), is defined. The second talk gives
some simple facts about the logical expressive power of branching.
∂22-Jan-86 1809 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Jan. 28, (Andrea diSessa,UCB)
Received: from UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 18:09:08 PST
Received: by ucbvax.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.7)
id AA15848; Wed, 22 Jan 86 16:48:16 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/5.16)
id AA28861; Wed, 22 Jan 86 16:47:34 PST
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 86 16:47:34 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8601230047.AA28861@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Jan. 28, (Andrea diSessa,UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, January 28, 11:00 - 12:30
[NB. New Location] 2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 [location TBA]
``Knowledge in Pieces''
Andrea A. diSessa
Math Science and Technology, School of Education
Abstract
Naive Physics concerns expectations, descriptions and
explanations about the way the physical world works that people
seem spontaneously to develop through interaction with it. A
recent upswing in interest in this area, particularly concern-
ing the relation of naive physics to the learning of school
physics, has yielded significant interesting data, but little
in the way of a theoretical foundation. I would like to pro-
vide a sketch of a developing theoretical frame together with
many examples that illustrate it.
In broad strokes, one sees a rich but rather shallow (in a
sense I will define), loosely coupled knowledge system with
elements that originate often as minimal abstractions of common
phenomena. Rather than a "change of theory" or even a shift in
content of the knowledge system, it seems that developing
understanding of classroom physics may better be described in
terms of a change in structure that includes selection and
integration of naive knowledge elements into a system that is
much less data-driven, less context dependent, more capable of
"reliable" (in a technical sense) descriptions and explana-
tions. In addition I would like to discuss some hypothetical
changes at a systematic level that do look more like changes of
theory or belief. Finally, I would like to consider the poten-
tial application of this work to other domains of knowledge,
and the relation to other perspectives on the problem of
knowledge.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
EMST Faculty Candidate Presentation: Beth Adelson of the Artif-
icial Intelligence Lab at Yale University will speak on "Issues
in programming: a process model and some representations" on
Monday, January 27, from 1:30 to 3:00 in 2515 Tolman.
----------------------------------------------------------------
∂22-Jan-86 1811 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Jan. 28, (Andrea diSessa,UCB)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 18:11:14 PST
Received: from ucbvax.berkeley.edu by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 22 Jan 86 18:03:01-PST
Received: by ucbvax.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.7)
id AA15848; Wed, 22 Jan 86 16:48:16 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/5.16)
id AA28861; Wed, 22 Jan 86 16:47:34 PST
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 86 16:47:34 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8601230047.AA28861@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Jan. 28, (Andrea diSessa,UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, January 28, 11:00 - 12:30
[NB. New Location] 2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30 [location TBA]
``Knowledge in Pieces''
Andrea A. diSessa
Math Science and Technology, School of Education
Abstract
Naive Physics concerns expectations, descriptions and
explanations about the way the physical world works that people
seem spontaneously to develop through interaction with it. A
recent upswing in interest in this area, particularly concern-
ing the relation of naive physics to the learning of school
physics, has yielded significant interesting data, but little
in the way of a theoretical foundation. I would like to pro-
vide a sketch of a developing theoretical frame together with
many examples that illustrate it.
In broad strokes, one sees a rich but rather shallow (in a
sense I will define), loosely coupled knowledge system with
elements that originate often as minimal abstractions of common
phenomena. Rather than a "change of theory" or even a shift in
content of the knowledge system, it seems that developing
understanding of classroom physics may better be described in
terms of a change in structure that includes selection and
integration of naive knowledge elements into a system that is
much less data-driven, less context dependent, more capable of
"reliable" (in a technical sense) descriptions and explana-
tions. In addition I would like to discuss some hypothetical
changes at a systematic level that do look more like changes of
theory or belief. Finally, I would like to consider the poten-
tial application of this work to other domains of knowledge,
and the relation to other perspectives on the problem of
knowledge.
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
EMST Faculty Candidate Presentation: Beth Adelson of the Artif-
icial Intelligence Lab at Yale University will speak on "Issues
in programming: a process model and some representations" on
Monday, January 27, from 1:30 to 3:00 in 2515 Tolman.
----------------------------------------------------------------
∂22-Jan-86 1823 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Newsletter January 23, No. 9
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 18:23:40 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 17:32:26-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Newsletter January 23, No. 9
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I N E W S L E T T E R
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
January 23, 1986 Stanford Vol. 3, No. 9
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, January 23, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall The Mind's New Science
Conference Room by Howard Gardner
Discussion led by Thomas Wasow (Wasow@csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Computer Problem Solving Languages, Programming
Trailer Classroom Languages and Mathematics
Curtis Abbott (Abbott@xerox)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, January 30, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Pragmatics: An Overview
Conference Room Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson
Discussion led by Stephen Neale (Neale@csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Term Rewriting Systems and Application to Automated
Trailer Classroom Theorem Proving and Logic Programming
Helene Kirchner (Kirchner@sri-ai)
(Abstract on page 2)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Until further notice, seminars and colloquia will be held in the
Trailer Classroom.
!
Page 2 CSLI Newsletter January 23, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Pragmatics: An Overview
by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson
In this paper Sperber and Wilson outline a theory of utterance
interpretation based on what they call the ``Principle of Relevance''
(P.O.R.). Although in some ways an outgrowth of Grice's Co-operative
Principle and attendent maxims, the P.O.R. is freed from social and
moral underpinnings of Grice's theory and is billed as ``a brute fact
about human psychology''. Sperber and Wilson thus aim to provide a
full-blown theory of pragmatic competence with which to actually model
the derivation of pragmatic inferences rather than provide ex post
facto explanations. The paper provides a useful overview of their
forthcoming book ``Relevance: A Study in Verbal Understanding''
(Oxford: Blackwell, Feb. 1986) --Stephen Neale
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Term Rewriting Systems and Application to
Automated Theorem Proving and Logic Programming
Helene Kirchner
Term rewriting systems are sets of rules (i.e. directed equations)
used to compute equivalent terms in an equational theory. Term
rewriting systems are required to be terminating and confluent in
order to ensure that any computation terminates and does not depend on
the choice of applied rules. Completion of term rewriting systems
consists of building, from a set of non-directed equations, a
confluent and terminating set of rules that has the same deductive
power. After a brief description of these two notions, their
application in two different domains are illustrated:
- automated theorem proving in equational and first-order
logic,
- construction of interpretors for logic programming languages
mixing relational and functional features.
--------------
LOGIC SEMINARS
Branching Generalized Quantifiers
Dag Westerstahl
Monday, January 27 and February 3, 4:15-5:30
Faculty lounge (3rd floor Mathematics)
The idea that partially ordered prefixes (branchings) of the
universal and the existential quantifiers occur in natural languages
originates with Hintikka, who in particular claimed that the Henkin
quantifier occurs essentially in English. In these talks, the notion
of branching is extended to (logics with) generalized quantifiers. It
was Barwise who in ``On branching quantifiers in English'' (J. Phil.
Logic, 1979) observed that certain non first-order quantifiers provide
an even more convincing example of proper branching in English---that
paper is the point of departure of my discussion. The first talk is
concerned with finding a uniform truth definition for sentences with
branching generalized quantifiers, and related issues such as
monotonicity constraints on quantifiers which allow branching. For
example, a generalized Henkin prefix, with four arbitrary quantifiers
(of the appropriate types), is defined. The second talk gives some
simple facts about the logical expressive power of branching.
!
Page 3 CSLI Newsletter January 23, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
TEA SUMMARY
The Ventura Lounge was packed at 3:30 on Wednesday, January 22, as
Terry Winograd led a discussion on the future of CSLI as an
institution. Terry argued that, to remain viable, CSLI would need
some strong binding force to counteract the pulls created by its
geographical, institutional, and disciplinary diversity. This
function could be served, he suggested, by money or by a common
research project with a dynamic leader. John Perry and Tom Wasow
argued that the inter-institutional, multidisciplinary projects
currently underway are sufficiently robust to resist the pulls Terry
talked about. After a lively discussion, it was generally agreed that
CSLI could continue to thrive even if its primary role were to
facilitate interactions, rather than to fund them or direct them.
CSLI will need to provide some level of resources to the research
projects (in the form of meeting space, computational resources, staff
support, etc.). The value of various types of resources and what
would be required of the CSLI community to ensure their continued
availability was then discussed.
-----------
POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIPS
The Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI) at
Stanford University is currently accepting applications for a small
number of one year postdoctoral fellowships commencing September 1,
1986. The awards are intended for people who have received their
Ph.D. degrees since June 1983.
Postdoctoral fellows will participate in an integrated program of
basic research on situated language---language as used by agents
situated in the world to exchange, store, and process information,
including both natural and computer languages.
For more information about CSLI's research programs and details of
postdoctoral fellowship appointments, write to:
Dr. Elizabeth Macken, Assistant Director
Center for the Study of Language and Information
Ventura Hall
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
APPLICATION DEADLINE: FEBRUARY 15, 1986
-------
∂22-Jan-86 1923 forbus%P.CS.UIUC.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Why scientific discovery?
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 19:22:08 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 22 Jan 86 22:12-EST
Received: from a.CS.UIUC.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 22 Jan 86 22:10:43 EST
Received: from p.CS.UIUC.EDU by a.CS.UIUC.EDU with SMTP (UIUC-5.31/9.4),
id AA22894; Wed, 22 Jan 86 21:09:40 CST
Received: by p.CS.UIUC.EDU (UIUC-5.5/9.4),
id AA12739; Wed, 22 Jan 86 21:09:52 CST
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 86 21:09:52 CST
From: forbus@p.CS.UIUC.EDU (Kenneth Forbus)
Message-Id: <8601230309.AA12739@p.CS.UIUC.EDU>
To: phil-sci%mit-oz@mit-mc.ARPA
Subject: Why scientific discovery?
In addition to the factors Dedre mentioned, there are at least two other
reasons why "scientific discovery" is a useful topic in AI learning
research:
1. It is more clear when discoveries actually happen in science than in
many other domains. When one makes a "discovery" in daily life, you may
later find out that what you really did was adopt a technique that you had
ample opportunity to see someone else using. If minds are constructed from
complete TMS networks (v. unlikely), we sure can't introspect on them.
Priority battles aside, one can see (at least some) of what the scientist
started with and (in part) where they end up.
2. All the scientific discovery work I know of focuses on physics, chemistry,
or biology. In these areas we have better agreement on what the answers
should look like. Would a program which discovered Freud's theory be very
clever? How about primal scream therapy? Pick your science narrowly
enough and you can avoid spending all of your time in domain representation
problems -- at least that's the claim. I personally think doing science
right isn't as near a "microworld" as some might claim, at least if you
don't want to be ad hoc. But I think we have a better chance to make a
human-quality qualitative physics before we make a human-quality formal
theory of, say, friendship.
∂22-Jan-86 2242 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA AC fixes => more Explorers online
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 22:42:16 PST
Date: Wed 22 Jan 86 22:41:43-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: AC fixes => more Explorers online
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177448362.63.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Due to some repairs to the Welch Road A/C all of the Explorer consoles
in the lobby of the basement of building C should be alive. If this is
not the case, please let me know. They are all pool machines, and have
intro doc nearby. The real doc is upstairs, pending the arrival of shelves.
-- Rich
-------
∂22-Jan-86 2245 @MC.LCS.MIT.EDU:gregory@ARI-HQ1.ARPA Phil Sci is dead! Long live Metaphil!
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Jan 86 22:45:29 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 JAN 86 00:38:07 EST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 22 Jan 86 23:56-EST
Received: from ari-hq1.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 22 Jan 86 23:55:03 EST
Date: 22 Jan 86 09:48:00 EST
From: <gregory@ari-hq1>
Subject: Phil Sci is dead! Long live Metaphil!
To: mar.christoff <mar.christoff@ames-vmsb>
cc: phil-sci@mit-mc
Reply-To: <gregory@ari-hq1>
While the phil sci list appears to be dead (or at least, dormant),
the metaphilosophers list is very active. You can add your name by sending
mail to METAPHILOSOPHERS-REQUEST%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
I don't run the list - I'm just a "subscriber" --- Dik Gregory
------
∂23-Jan-86 1153 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 11:53:37 PST
Date: Thu 23 Jan 86 11:50:10-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Peter Ladkin
To: planlunch.dis: ;
THE ALGEBRA OF TIME INTERVALS
Peter Ladkin (LADKIN@KESTREL)
Kestrel Institute
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 27
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
We build on work of James Allen (Maintaining Knowledge about
Temporal Intervals, CACM Nov 1983), who suggested a calculus
of time intervals. Allen's intervals are all convex (no gaps).
We shall present a taxonomy of *natural* relations between
non-convex intervals, and illustrate the expressiveness of this
subclass, with examples from the domain of project management.
In collaboration with Roger Maddux, we have new mathematical
results concerning both Allen's calculus, and our own. We shall
present as many of these as time permits.
The talk represents work in progress. We are currently
designing and implementing a time expert for the Refine system
at Kestrel Institute, which will include the interval calculus.
-------
∂23-Jan-86 1427 BOTHNER@SU-SCORE.ARPA One day CSD will get sued...
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 14:27:32 PST
Date: Thu 23 Jan 86 13:55:08-PST
From: Per Bothner <BOTHNER@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: One day CSD will get sued...
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177614646.8.BOTHNER@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
... for backache induced by the terrible chairs in MJH, many of
which don't even fit properly under people's desks.
--Per Bothner
-------
∂23-Jan-86 1719 rhall%CIP.UCI.EDU.#Internet@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU scoping discovery
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 17:19:08 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Jan 86 20:14-EST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Jan 86 20:11-EST
Received: from CIP.UCI.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 23 Jan 86 20:09:36 EST
Received: from cip2.uci.edu by CIP.UCI.EDU id a000826; 23 Jan 86 17:03 PST
To: phil-sci%mit-oz@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: scoping discovery
Date: 23 Jan 86 17:01:01 PST (Thu)
From: Rogers Hall <rhall@CIP.UCI.EDU>
Hi,
I'm new to this net, having received forwarded copies of the
Shrager/Gentner/Forbus interchange from a friend. I was struck
by some of the questions Jeff asked, and by the replies which he,
Dedre and Ken gave.
A central line in the interchange was whether or not scientific
reasoning (puzzle-solving broadly defined) is different from more
mundane forms of reasoning that lay people undertake about their
surrounding environment. The answers seemed to be yes and no, but
primarily couched within the confines of an individual reasoner's
`head.' I'm wondering how a researcher in `scientific discovery'
goes about defining puzzle-solving within the confines of a single
reasoner, much less as something different from what lay people do?
In the same sense that Langley's BACON can be assessed as
BACON is a study in search (or whatever other mechanism you
wish to attribute to it), NOT a study in science. (Shrager)
I wonder whether studies of individual reasoning in scientific discovery
might not be attacked on grounds of ecological (or external) validity?
Although I am not a philosopher/historian/anthropologist/psychologist
of science, I do have some intuitions about claims that researchers
make concerning relations between their theoretical models and naturally
occuring phenomena. In the BACON case, it seems that Langley is choosing
one aspect of what may constitute scientific discovery, examination of
measured variables to determine relationships among them, and advancing
a computational mechanism for that constituent. Hence, Langley restricts
the scope of his definition of scientific discovery narrowly. As a
consumer of this work, any of us might ask why he doesn't include other
constituents which we might prefer. Pat feels (personal communication)
that one must start somewhere, and that his work on BACON represents one
point of departure.
My point is that there probably can be a `science of scientific discovery,'
but that this science will have to incorporate many views of what
scientific discovery is, including viewpoints which select and isolate
intra-individual constituent reasoning abilities (hypothesized) and
viewpoints which consider a larger, inter-individual scope. Advocates of
the former may well, as Jeff appears to do, dislike `real data' which
is `historical or retrospective at best' and feel that `looking at the
tribe of scientists' isn't psychology. What's really fun about the science
of scientific discovery or any other area is that its a pluralistic
enterprise - that's what makes it exciting for the participants (at least
me).
A final reflection on some of Ken's comments: I wonder why the inputs (?)
and outputs (discoveries) of scientific discovery are more easily
observed than those of any other cognitive endeavor? Historians/sociologists
of science seem to tell us that textbook presentations of the major tenets
of a field (e.g., biology, chemistry, physics) represent sanitized versions
of a rather complicated historical/social process that went on, again,
between individuals rather than within a single individual. While I agree
that a set of physical laws gives a clear set of results from a computational
point of view, I don't understand how these results inform us about the
process that one or more individuals go through when formulating the
results.
An interesting example is Zytkow's work on STAHL, discovering componential
models of chemical compounds (to appear soon in the new journal, Machine
Learning). Primitive reactions are taken as input; componential models
(possibly errorful) are given as output; and the intermediate processing is
in some way to correspond to what a group of 18th century chemists were up
to. Tracking down the points of correspondence between the theoretical
model (or the simulation) and the real process which chemists went through
is quite tricky, although Zytkow claims to do so.
The gist of what makes theories about scientific discovery difficult, in
my opinion, is precisely how the natural phenomenon to be explained is
cut up by an individual reasearcher. Is it reasonable to take a subset
of the probably infinite space of possible chemical reactions available in
the natural world as input to STAHL? Well, yes and no. Yes if the theory
of discovery being developed is clearly going to address data interpretation,
but not experimental design and data collection. No if what is being
advanced is a theory of discovery which is to encompass the latter
constituents.
The `peril' for computational approaches to scientific
discovery, in my opinion, is picking a subtly powerful partitioning of
the natural phenomena, representing the chosen constituents in a very
clever fashion, and advancing the results as a theory of what scientists
were or are up to. Perilous from the perspective of cognitive simulation;
perhaps commendable from the perspective of constructing powerful
computational artifacts.
A case in point might be Ken's example of discovering Freud's theory
of unconscious psychic forces. Given a properly abstracted representation
of hydraulics and some clever but naive observations of human utterances
during free association, I expect that a competent AI practitioner could
come up with a computational artifact which could be described as `Freud's
discovery of psychodynamics!' Moreover, this would serve as a simulation
of scientific discovery by analogical reasoning, perhaps embellished with
Dedre's theoretical notions of structure mapping or Keith Holyoak's notions
of pragmatic analogical reasoning. Reactions of consumers of such a
research report would vary by how those consumers cut up discovery and
analogical reasoning. For example, psychodynamically-oriented clinicians
would be horrified; a graduate student in AI might walk away with a thesis.
I'll close by recommending a monograph which I've started reading:
De May, M. (1982) The cognitive paradigm: Cognitive science, a newly
explored approach to the study of cognition applied in
an analysis of science and scientific knowledge. Sociology
of Sciences Monographs, D. Reidel Publishing Company: Boston.
De May tries to describe a science of science by applying notions from
cognitive science to the field of cognitive science. Jeff's self-
referential anguish is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak...
Rogers Hall
Dept. ICS
Univ.Cal.Irvine
Irvine, CA 92715
rhall@uci
∂23-Jan-86 1824 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:pratt@su-navajo.arpa Liskov dinner Wednesday
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 18:24:08 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 23 Jan 86 18:19:00-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 23 Jan 86 18:18:48 pst
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 18:18:48 pst
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@su-navajo.arpa>
Subject: Liskov dinner Wednesday
To: faculty@score
Please let me know on Friday if you plan to come to our potluck for Barbara
on Wednesday. So far I have no responses except a couple of no's. It may
just be that midweek is not a good time for a potluck. If this is
indeed the case we should plan instead on a restaurant dinner for
Barbara that evening.
-v
∂23-Jan-86 2011 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 20:08:18 PST
Date: Thu 23 Jan 86 20:01:20-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA, linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To one and all: Happy Hour resumes Friday at 4:45 in the
Greenberg Room. Come one, come all!
-------
∂23-Jan-86 2113 crummer%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Jan 86 21:12:48 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Jan 86 23:50-EST
Received: from aero.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 23 Jan 86 23:50:00 EST
Received: by aero.ARPA (4.12/6.0.GT)
id AA02815; Thu, 23 Jan 86 20:45:53 pst
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 20:45:53 pst
From: Charlie Crummer <crummer>
Posted-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 20:45:53 pst
Message-Id: <8601240445.AA02815@aero.ARPA>
To: Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
!
∂24-Jan-86 0123 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Tina release and Docs.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 01:23:26 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 01:22:53-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Tina release and Docs.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, bhayes-roth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177739847.62.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
This message heralds a new release of Tina and of the Tina documentation.
The new Tina manual (Version 3) is quite an improvement on the old one and
documents all of the new features in Tina, which have appeared since the last
manual. Amongst these are the following :-
i) Automatic DeFuturing and invisible use of futures.
ii) Automatic Timestamping of data and access to time ordered data.
iii) "Else" parts to rules.
iv) Clocks, clock triggered rules, Timeouts for Expectations.
v) Property Inheritance and Links
vi) A number of new operators to go with ii).
vii) More realistic simulation of Czar in the Serial version.
viii) An interface to Zmacs, Tina major mode and compilation within Zmacs.
ix) Interfacing to the window debugger.
The manual has changed so much that a list of the Deltas is meaningless,
especially as the section numbers in the original manual were wrong.
The system has changed quite a bit both in syntax and semantics since the
last release so you would be well advised to read the new documentation if
you are at all likely to be dealing with Tina.
Documentation, as always will be available in On-line form in
3602:>System-Software>Tina>Tina-System.Document
and in hard copy form (with the correct representation of all of the special
characters) from me.
A new L100 manual will appear soon.
Rice.
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1110 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA DOE Announcement
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 11:10:25 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 11:05:36-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: DOE Announcement
To: AC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177845927.25.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I have just received a Research and Development Announcement from the DOE
entitled "New and Innovative Concepts for the Strategic Defense Initiative."
The closing date for proposals is 2/28/86. If you want a copy of the
announcement, please send msg. to me.
Betty
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1157 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tina Manual.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 11:57:49 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 11:52:52-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tina Manual.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177854530.54.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Copies of the new Tina manual are now on my desk. Please help yourselves.
Rice.
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1339 aweinste%BBN-VAX.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU RE: solipsism
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 13:39:14 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 16:14-EST
Received: from BBN-VAX by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 24 Jan 86 16:13:06 EST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 86 15:08:49 EST
From: Anders Weinstein <aweinste@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
To: x.Gyro%mit-oz@mit-mc.ARPA
cc: metaphilosophers%mit-oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: RE: solipsism
> But I suggest another individuation: that there is only
> one consciousness and that each body holds a different *state* of that
> consciousness. Those states converse with one another (exchange
> information), but you can look at this either as a society or as the One
> Mind talking to itself.
This view IS antithetical to solipsism, since it doesn't enable you to draw
any invidious distinction between yourself and the other folks around (the
"zombies"). On your view, we are all equally mindful; this is not so for
Ron Cain's formulation of solipsism.
∂24-Jan-86 1415 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New L100 Manual.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 14:15:51 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 14:14:24-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New L100 Manual.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177880297.54.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The new L100 manual is now available. Hard copy will be on my desk and
the on-line version will be in
3602:>System-Software>L100>L100-Language-Manual.Document
Rice.
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1457 hollan%NPRDC.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Re: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 14:57:08 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 17:43-EST
Received: from nprdc.arpa by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 24 Jan 86 17:44:54 EST
Received: from sdics.CSL (sdics.ARPA) by nprdc.arpa (4.12/ 1.1)
id AA15582; Fri, 24 Jan 86 14:43:04 pst
Received: from molokini by sdics.CSL scf2.7vax; Fri, 24 Jan 86 14:43:21 PST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 86 14:46 PST
From: hollan@nprdc.arpa
Subject: Re: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
To: gentner@p.CS.UIUC.EDU, Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, Shrager.pa@Xerox.COM
Cc: hollan@nprdc.arpa
In-Reply-To: <8601222315.AA10494@p.CS.UIUC.EDU>
Message-Id: <860124144641.0.HOLLAN@MOLOKINI.ucsd>
I would like to comment on the claim that "there is no real
difference between scientific reasoning and reasoning." I think there
is a difference: not a fundamental psychological difference but one
engendered by technologies. A great deal of the reasoning that we do is
done via the medium of various technologies. In reasoning about
scientific matters we have typically employed different technologies or
made use of them in differing ways. For example the technology of
writing which Dedre alludes to often distinguishes scientific reasoning
from other reasoning in that we write differently about scientific
matters. We use different forms of argumentation and different types of
notational systems. Similarly one of the real fruits of computation is
the ability to debug one's reasoning via modeling. To a large extent it
is scientific reasoning which draws on these types of technologies.
There is, of course, no necessity here. My point is only that our
reasoning is influenced by the technologies that we employ.
∂24-Jan-86 1512 AI.DUFFY%R20.UTEXAS.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Phil Sci is dead! Long live Metaphil!
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 15:12:07 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 17:54-EST
Received: from R20.UTEXAS.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 24 Jan 86 17:55:05 EST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1986 16:50 CST
From: AI.DUFFY@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
To: <gregory@ari-hq1>
Cc: mar.christoff <mar.christoff@ames-vmsb>, phil-sci@mit-mc,
Meta-philosophers-request%OZ@MC
Subject: Phil Sci is dead! Long live Metaphil!
In-reply-to: Msg of 22 Jan 1986 08:48-CST from <gregory at ari-hq1>
Date: Wednesday, 22 January 1986 08:48-CST
From: <gregory at ari-hq1>
While the phil sci list appears to be dead (or at least, dormant),
the metaphilosophers list is very active. You can add your name by sending
mail to METAPHILOSOPHERS-REQUEST%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC
I don't run the list - I'm just a "subscriber" --- Dik Gregory
This is silly. Both PHIL-SCI and META-PHILOSOPHERS are maintained on
the same machine, MIT-OZ. Why doesn't some reasonably intelligent MIT
person (I understand that MIT has a few) simply merge the two lists,
making both names, PHIL-SCI and META-PHILOSOPHERS, coreferent.
Is that very difficult?
∂24-Jan-86 1655 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Load bands on pool Explorers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 16:55:03 PST
Date: Fri 24 Jan 86 16:53:23-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Load bands on pool Explorers
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12177909237.73.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
When dealing with a large software package it's convenient to load
it once, and save this system in such a way that it can be rapidly
recovered for the next session. On each pool KSL Explorer there is
room for one such "world". If you plan on using an Explorer a lot, and
would like to build a band, I encourage you to do so, with the
following constraints:
1) Only ever use LOD2, *never* LOD1.
2) Check (with print-disk-label) to see if someone else has a world in
LOD2 (ie. this is a person's name in the comment field for the
band). If someone else is using the partition, go talk to them and
work something out.
3) When you make the band, disk-save will ask you for a comment to
attach to the partition. Be sure you put your name in it. For
instance, "Rich Acuff's 2.82 with Magic 1.0".
I think that if everyone is responsible we can use the above rules
of thumb to get the most from our resources with a minimum of hassle.
Let me know if there are questions or problems.
-- Rich
-------
∂24-Jan-86 1943 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:pratt@su-navajo.arpa Liskov dinner
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 19:43:33 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 24 Jan 86 19:03:39-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 24 Jan 86 19:03:35 pst
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 86 19:03:35 pst
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@su-navajo.arpa>
Subject: Liskov dinner
To: faculty@score
Looks like we go back to Nils' original plan, dinner at a restaurant,
on the department, spouses invited. Let me know if you would like to come.
The program for Wednesday is as follows. At 4:15 Barbara will talk in
Terman Auditorium. At 5:30 there will a reception in the faculty club,
to which all are invited, then of course dinner.
-v
∂24-Jan-86 1949 Shrager.pa%XEROX.COM.#Internet@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 19:49:21 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 20:15-EST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 20:09-EST
Received: from Xerox.COM by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 24 Jan 86 20:10:12 EST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 24 JAN 86 17:01:35 PST
Date: 24 Jan 86 16:49 PST
From: Shrager.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
To: hollan@nprdc.arpa, gentner@p.CS.UIUC.EDU
cc: Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <860124-170135-1956@Xerox>
Since this seems to have started some discussion, let me try to make my
point more clearly. I seem to have made a different point, which maybe
I believe, but isn't what I meant.
I was *not* asking whether or not creative scientists use the same
mechanisms as everybody else, etc, although that may be a part of the
answer. What I wanted to know, as is reflected by the continuous header
of all these messages, is: What is the scientific force of saying any of
the following:
* Creative scientists use analogy a lot.
* Creative scientific reasoning is problem solving.
* Scientists use the same mechanisms as everyone else.
* Scientists use different mechanisms than everyone else
* Creativity is problem solving.
etc etc etc...you allk know at least ten papers that say something like
this, and at least five that try to show it, and at least one whose
argument actually carries water in your opinion.
I am NOT trying to determine the truth value of any of these. I am even
willing to believe any or all of these (for the present discussion).
The question is: Are any of these scientific statements? Are any of
these testable hypotheses, clearly operationalizable, or even
understandable if you think about them hard enough?
If scientific discovery merely a social defined phenomenon, how can it
be causally connected to a psychological mechanism like analogy? If all
of you suddenly decide that Joe Blogs is a creative scientist, does the
amount of analogy he does suddenly go up? Obviously not. However, you
might be seduced into think that the opposite *is* true -- that if Joe's
level of analogy increases, he becomes a creative scientist. This is
the issue -- if "creative-scientist" isn't an operationalizable term,
then how can we test this hypothesis? If Rogers says that creativeity
is search, what has he said? I claim, nothing. If Dedre says that
scientists use analogy, have I learned anything about analogy?
Obviously not. However, have I learned anything about science or
scientists? This is like the former question and I have the same
difficulty with it. That is, if Joe is a scientist and Dave isn't, does
that mean (if Dedre's claim is true) that Dave uses less analogy? I
claim not. So, then, what's the scientific force of -- what have we
learned from -- this sentence? It obviously has content -- it says
that Joe *used* analogy and somehow that got him into the position of
being a creative scientist. That's great for the New York Times, but as
a scientist (whatever that means) how has this statement increased my
knowledge of my domain in any way beyond lodging a historical fact in my
memory?
If my domain is "science" (or cretivity, or discovery, or whatever) then
I have, in fact, learned something. However, I'm really concerned over
whether it makes sense for "science" (or cretivity, or discovery, or
whatever) to be a field at all. If you have a field that is delineated
by social convention, then you're an anthropologist and I just don't see
how social delineation is causally connected (in that direction) with
psychological mechanisms.
-- Jeff
∂24-Jan-86 2031 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Call for papers ICALP 87
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 20:31:03 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 24 Jan 86 20:22:53-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 24 Jan 86 20:12:15-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 24 Jan 86 21:46:49 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 23 Jan 86 23:18:15 CST
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by crys.wisc.edu; Thu, 23 Jan 86 23:18:08 CST
Received: from germany by csnet-relay.csnet id aa16991; 23 Jan 86 23:35 EST
Received: by Germany.CSNET (4.12/4.7.3)
id AA05787; Thu, 23 Jan 86 17:04:30 -0100
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 17:04:30 -0100
From: "Prof. Dr. Ottmann" <ottmann%germany.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8601231604.AA05787@Germany.CSNET>
To: theory%uwisc@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: Call for papers ICALP 87
Cc: ottmann%germany.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 24 Jan 86 21:46:30 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
------------------------------------
14th International Colloquium on
Automata, Languages, and Programming
------------------------------------
JULY 13-17, 1987
Karlsruhe, F.R. Germany
The 14th annual ICALP meeting of the European Association for Theoreti-
cal Computer Science (EATCS) will be organized by the University of
Karlsruhe (TH). Papers presenting original contributions in any area of
theoretical computer science are being sought.
TOPICS
Algorithms and Data Structures, Automata and Formal Languages, Compu-
tability and Complexity Theory, Semantics of Programming Languages,
Program Specification, Transformation, and Verification, Theory of
Data Bases, Theory of Logical Design and Layout, Parallel and Distri-
buted Computation, Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, Cryptography,
Theory of Robotics.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive list.
PAPERS
Authors are invited to submit ten copies of an extended abstract or
full draft paper before November 15, 1986 to the Chairman of the Pro-
gram Committee
Thomas Ottmann
Institut fuer Angewandte Informatik
und Formale Beschreibungsverfahren
University of Karlsruhe (TH)
Postfach 6980
7500 KARLSRUHE, F.R.G.
(Telephone 0721-6083923, Telex 7826521,
CSNET ottmann@uka)
Authors will be notified of acceptance/rejection by February 10, 1987.
Final papers are due April 1, 1987.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE
G. Ausiello (Roma); J.L. Balcazar (Barcelona); B. Buchberger (Linz);
A.K. Chandra (Yorktown Heights); H. Ehrig (Berlin); S. Even (Haifa);
M. Hennessy (Edinburgh); J.P. Jouannaud (Nancy); T. Leighton (Cam-
bridge, USA); A. Mazurkiewicz (Warsaw); Th. Ottmann (Karlsruhe);
D. Perrin (Paris); W.P. de Roever (Eindhoven); K. Ruohonen (Tampere);
E.M. Schmidt (Aarhus); P. Spirakis (Patras).
ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
P. Deussen, H. Kleine Buening, W. Menzel, Th. Ottmann, V. Sperschnei-
der, P. Widmayer.
FURTHER INFORMATION
ICALP 87 will be held at the university campus in the city of Karls-
ruhe. Karlsruhe is a lovely city in the southwest of Germany near the
famous Black Forest and other points of interest. Accommodation will
be arranged in hotels in walking distance to the university. Further
details about the conference (and the final program) will be sent
automatically to anyone submitting a paper. Others should write early
1987 to:
I C A L P 87
Institut fuer Angewandte Informatik
und Formale Beschreibungsverfahren
University of Karlsruhe (TH)
Postfach 6980, 7500 Karlsruhe, F.R.G.
or wait for announcements of the final program.
--------------------
Persons submitting papers from countries in which access to copying ma-
chines is difficult or impossible may submit a single copy.
--------------
TN Message #17
--------------
∂24-Jan-86 2033 KFL%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Objective Reality
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 20:33:07 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 23:15-EST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 86 23:17:06 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Objective Reality
To: x.Gyro@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
cc: KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, MetaPhilosophers@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].795534.860124.KFL>
From: Scott W. Layson <x.Gyro@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
... "Survival" does not satisfy
me as as a purpose for life, because it only invites the question over
again: what do I want to survive to be able to do?
One thing about death is, it really limits your options.
...Keith
∂24-Jan-86 2044 KFL%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Fond memories
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 20:44:01 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 23:31-EST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 86 23:33:06 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Fond memories
To: x.Gyro@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
cc: KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, MetaPhilosophers@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].795543.860124.KFL>
From: Scott W. Layson <x.Gyro@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 86 20:39:49 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
I would rather have it said of the free countries "they cheated and
won unfairly" than "they played fair and lost and we remember them so
fondly now".
Why? What you're calling victory can only be temporary. The Roman
empire is long since dust, but the culture of the Greeks they conquered
lives on in the entire Western world.
I am not talking about patterns on vases, styles of architecture, or
native dances. The western world has invented the free market system
and the principle of individual liberties. With technology what it
is, it seems likely that if these get wiped out they will stay wiped
out. Read Orwell's ←1984← and Stapledon's ←Darkness←and←Light←.
Now, this discussion of whether the eastern mystics may have had
something all along has been fun, but just look around you and ask
yourself WHAT WORKS? Perhaps it really IS possible for a mystic to,
with years of practice, train himself to not be bothered by the cold,
but we have CENTRAL HEATING. Perhaps it is possible to resign oneself
to the inevitability of early death, but we have SANITATION and
MEDICAL SCIENCE.
I for one am not willing to give midaevel philosophy another try.
The belief that the rewards of life are mostly spiritual and/or in the
next life have had their day in the sun, and a dark day it was indeed.
As I said, next time, there may not BE any renaissance. The next dark
age may not last a mere millenium, but for a time without end. Thanks,
but no thanks.
Also, read almost anything by AYN RAND. I agree with about 80% of
what she says, which is a very high score coming from me.
...Keith
∂24-Jan-86 2055 KFL%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU a question
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Jan 86 20:55:31 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Jan 86 23:35-EST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 86 23:36:20 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: a question
To: MetaPhilosophers@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].795545.860124.KFL>
From: Scott W. Layson <Gyro%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
As for the test, here's the secret: you made up the questions, you check
the answers, you assign the grade. And you know exactly how well you're
doing.
How do you KNOW?
Some reason more substantive than "I feel good when I think this
way" please.
Also, just because a 'teacher' has a name that can't be pronounced
doesn't mean he has a hotline to TRUTH.
...Keith
∂25-Jan-86 0234 JSOL%BUCS20%bostonu.csnet%CSNET-RELAY.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Objective Reality
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 02:31:37 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Jan 86 05:13-EST
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 25 Jan 86 05:14:34 EST
Received: from bostonu by csnet-relay.csnet id am01751; 25 Jan 86 4:43 EST
Received: from BUCS20 by bu-cs.ARPA (3.0/4.7)
id AA06872; Fri, 24 Jan 86 21:18:25 EST
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1986 21:17 EST
Message-Id: <[BUCS20].JSOL.24-Jan-86 21:17:12>
From: Jon Solomon <JSOL%BUCS20%bostonu.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: metaphilosophers%oz@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Objective Reality
Phase-Of-The-Moon: FQ+7D.7H.22M.19S.
The problem with reality is that it changes as time goes on. Something
you think might happen in the future might not due to subtle shifts in
reality.
--JSol
∂25-Jan-86 0555 UL2O%DKAUNI48.BITNET%WISCVM.WISC.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 05:55:51 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Jan 86 08:48-EST
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 25 Jan 86 08:50:00 EST
Received: from (UL2O)DKAUNI48.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 01/25/86 at
07:48:38 CST
Date: 01/25/86 14:48:07 CET
To: PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC.ARPA
From: UL2O%DKAUNI48.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject:
Hello!
Please tell me how I can join your discussion about philosophy in
science and artificial intelligence.
Send messages to user ul2o at node dkauni48.
Thank you!
∂25-Jan-86 0614 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Solipsism: not true for me
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 06:14:39 PST
Date: 25 Jan 1986 09:06 EST (Sat)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178053682.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Solipsism: not true for me
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 18:13 EST
From: Anders Weinstein <aweinste@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
> For the Ron Cain's, the answer is
> "No, isn't it obvious I am fundamentally different from all those
> zombies? -- I am the perceiver of the universe while they are just players."
Actually, only Ron Cain himself believes this; other solipsists each
believe an incompatible claim, viz. that THEY (and not Ron Cain) are the
only non-zombies around.
Well, those claims are not necessarily incompatible. The argument that
they are presupposes a particular individuation of consciousness, to
wit, that each body holds a different consciousness. Well, to be fair
about it, Ron's manner of speaking ("I" and "they") suggests the same
individuation. But I suggest another individuation: that there is only
one consciousness and that each body holds a different *state* of that
consciousness. Those states converse with one another (exchange
information), but you can look at this either as a society or as the One
Mind talking to itself.
I don't think that the discussion of "objectivity" is primarily about
solipsism (at least for me it's not). As far as I can tell, even the
"conversation" view at least has the virtue of being completely antithetical
to solipsism: it emphasizes the communal invention of reality by a society
of conversants.
So what I'm suggesting is that solipsism, or something very much like
it, and intersubjectivism, or something very much like it, are not only
not antithetical but in fact are just two different viewpoints on the
same thing.
-- Scott
∂25-Jan-86 0624 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU a question
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 06:24:45 PST
Date: 25 Jan 1986 09:08 EST (Sat)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178054035.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: a question
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 86 20:21 EST
From: Keith F. Lynch <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
It may be the case that it is all really a big test. If so, I hope
I am passing. Some friends of mine have told me that I am in fact
flunking the test and will spend eternity in a very unpleasant place
for not distrusting my senses and believing in something that must be
taken on faith. I hope they are wrong.
Heavens! Who's telling you that? Please accept my assurances that they
are indeed wrong. There is something to be believed in, but you needn't
distrust your senses to do it, and you won't spend eternity in "a very
unpleasant place" if you don't.
As for the test, here's the secret: you made up the questions, you check
the answers, you assign the grade. And you know exactly how well you're
doing.
-- Scott
∂25-Jan-86 0634 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU solipsism
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 06:34:41 PST
Date: 25 Jan 1986 09:26 EST (Sat)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178057348.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: Anders Weinstein <aweinste@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
Cc: metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: solipsism
Date: Friday, 24 January 1986 15:08-EST
From: Anders Weinstein <aweinste at BBN-VAX.ARPA>
> But I suggest another individuation: that there is only
> one consciousness and that each body holds a different *state* of that
> consciousness. Those states converse with one another (exchange
> information), but you can look at this either as a society or as the One
> Mind talking to itself.
This view IS antithetical to solipsism, since it doesn't enable you to draw
any invidious distinction between yourself and the other folks around (the
"zombies"). On your view, we are all equally mindful; this is not so for
Ron Cain's formulation of solipsism.
Well, I'm not convinced that Ron really wants to draw such invidious
distinctions -- as I recall his message, it sounded like he was
intending to include himself among the "zombies"? Anyway, now that
we've developed a little more terminology, let's ask him. Ron?
-- Scott
∂25-Jan-86 0710 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Fond memories
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 07:10:47 PST
Date: 25 Jan 1986 10:01 EST (Sat)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178063580.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Cc: MetaPhilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Fond memories
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Jan 1986 23:33-EST from Keith F. Lynch <KFL at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Date: Friday, 24 January 1986 23:33-EST
From: Keith F. Lynch <KFL at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
From: Scott W. Layson <x.Gyro@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 86 20:39:49 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
I would rather have it said of the free countries "they cheated and
won unfairly" than "they played fair and lost and we remember them so
fondly now".
Why? What you're calling victory can only be temporary. The Roman
empire is long since dust, but the culture of the Greeks they conquered
lives on in the entire Western world.
I am not talking about patterns on vases, styles of architecture, or
native dances. The western world has invented the free market system
and the principle of individual liberties. With technology what it
is, it seems likely that if these get wiped out they will stay wiped
out. Read Orwell's ←1984← and Stapledon's ←Darkness←and←Light←.
I just disagree. I've read ←1984←, and what's clear to me is that
life that way is just too painful. People won't put up with it
forever. Why, you ask, do they put up with it now? Because they're
bullied into it by their own governments. Why do their governments
feel the need to do that? Because, it seems to me, they feel
threatened by external forces. My argument, then, is that a unified
global totalitarian state cannot stand, certainly not forever. What
threat could it hallucinate to protect itself from?
Now, this discussion of whether the eastern mystics may have had
something all along has been fun, but just look around you and ask
yourself WHAT WORKS? Perhaps it really IS possible for a mystic to,
with years of practice, train himself to not be bothered by the cold,
but we have CENTRAL HEATING. Perhaps it is possible to resign oneself
to the inevitability of early death, but we have SANITATION and
MEDICAL SCIENCE.
Hey, I'm a technologist too. I love my LispMachine and my waterbed
and my three stereos and my new apartment that I just moved into.
Those things work for certain purposes, and that's great. BUT...
I for one am not willing to give midaevel philosophy another try.
The belief that the rewards of life are mostly spiritual and/or in the
next life have had their day in the sun, and a dark day it was indeed.
As I said, next time, there may not BE any renaissance. The next dark
age may not last a mere millenium, but for a time without end. Thanks,
but no thanks.
... the belief that the rewards of life are mostly material and/or in
the form of physical pleasure has had its day, too -- uh, well, it's
early afternoon anyway. The end is in sight, is what I mean. I
agree, there's a certain fatalism to medieval philosophy that just
does not excite me either. I think the New Spiritualism (Yuppies find
God?) will look quite different.
Also, read almost anything by AYN RAND. I agree with about 80% of
what she says, which is a very high score coming from me.
Hmm, I've read very little Rand, just a few pages I think, but her
viewpoint sat with me about like metallic sodium sits with water.
Please be more specific, if you want to continue this conversation.
It's much easier to discuss my and your views than hers, since she's
not here, though it's certainly fair to use her words if you like
them.
-- Scott
∂25-Jan-86 0846 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Objectivity, cont, cont....
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 08:46:04 PST
Date: 25 Jan 1986 11:35 EST (Sat)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178080700.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@NBS-VMS.ARPA>
Cc: metaphilosophers%mit-oz <metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Objectivity, cont, cont....
In-reply-to: Msg of Fri 10 Jan 86 07:28 EST from "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 86 07:28 EST
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Objectivists might not claim that there
is one best description of the world or a part of it; certainly
we can describe the world at different levels, (physical,
economical, ...) for different purposes. Objectivism merely
claims that any given description (if suitably clear) is or is
not true, based solely on the state of the world.
Those two sentences strike me as contradictory. Here's another way of
talking about this whole issue that will show why. I'm going to do a
predicate analysis on the way we're using the word "truth". I have
observed Cugini using "is true" as a unary predicate applicable both
to propositions (well, sometimes to sentences, but let's ignore that
distinction for now) and to theories, which are interlocking systems
of propositions. Does that fit, John? I am proposing that there are
really two predicates here. The first is binary and relates
propositions and the theories which assert them: "proposition ... is
p-true in theory ..." The second is ternary and relates theories,
theory-interpreters (i.e. us), and the purposes for which we use the
theories: "theory ... is t-true in ...'s semantics for purpose ...".
So what's inconsistent between those two sentences is that you're not
sticking to a single theoretical *language*, if you will, for setting
forth your epistemology. In the first sentence you're talking about a
binary relation of description to level/purpose. In the second,
you've gone back to unary truth.
But rather than harp on just what you meant by those two sentences,
I'd rather hear how you use this new way of speaking I've just
introduced. Have I understood you correctly? What kind of predicate
do you think "truth" is?
[A footnote. This manner of analyzing predicates is a habit I picked
up in my study of Loglan, an artificial language which was designed to
test the effect of language on thought. I think it's had some
delightful effects on my way of thinking over the years, of which this
is an example. Predicate analysis of this form is a very useful tool
for interacting with informational systems, that is to say, everything
from writing and debugging software to practicing psychotherapy.]
> > My first simple-minded reaction is: since it seems possible to
> > have the conversationalists, and not the conversation, but not
> > the converse (yes, that really makes sense), shouldn't they (the
> > conversationalists) be "philosophically prior"?
> I find something extremely, well, *elegant* about the idea that the
> conversation comes first. ...For instance,
> evolution itself can be considered the ongoing conversation between
> Organism and Niche. Granted, the abstract distinction between
> Organism and Niche has to have always existed. But the two co-evolve,
> and as they do so, the particular form or structure of that
> distinction changes. Not only that, but neither the organism nor the
> niche could have become what it is without the conversation.
I'm not sure we've managed to disagree yet - I no objection
to the above account - certainly things interact (a less
mentalistic-laden word than "converse" - do electrons "converse"
when they repel each other?). I guess the issue is what does
this "philosophical priority" consist of? If you mean that
it is just a useful methodological outlook, fine. If you mean
that the conversation in some sense creates (rather than affects)
the participants, I protest.
Oh, but in the case of evolution at least, it blatantly and unarguably
*does* create the participants. You and I would not be here but for
that particular conversation. Seems to me the same thing goes on, on
a smaller scale, in any (successful) conversation -- that there is at
least something new about each of the participants, something they've
learned from each other.
When you say it "really makes sense" to have the conversationalists
and not the conversation, I think the intuition you're adverting to is
that people exist even when they're not talking to each other. Well,
certainly they exist as people, but do they exist *as
conversationalists* or only as potential conversationalists? If you
look at the case of evolution, clearly the conversationalists cannot
exist without the conversation -- either you, the observer, draw the
distinction that brings both into being, or you don't.
-- Scott
∂25-Jan-86 1008 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Objectivity, cont, cont.... [LONG MESSAGE]
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 10:08:41 PST
Date: 25 Jan 1986 12:32 EST (Sat)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178091061.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@NBS-VMS.ARPA>
Cc: metaphilosophers%mit-oz <metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Objectivity, cont, cont.... [LONG MESSAGE]
In-reply-to: Msg of Fri 10 Jan 86 07:28 EST from "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 86 07:28 EST
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@nbs-vms.ARPA>
> > I still believe that there's an object out there which is
> > causing my representation to be what it is.
> The only trouble I have with this is with the word "cause". And the
> trouble I have with it is, again, that it shows a misconstrual of
> responsibility. You and the stuff-out-there *cooperate* to select one
> representation from all those your mind is capable of holding. One
> element of that representation is the chair/non-chair distinction.
Whoa, ho. If I say A causes B, I don't commit myself to saying that
A utterly and completely determines the nature of B, just that
B wouldn't have happened without A. Obviously, my perceptions
depend on both the stuff perceived and my own "equipment", eg
whether I'm color-blind. Surely you're not denying: (real) light
reflects off (real) chair, into eye, strikes retina, jiggles optic
nerve, etc etc - that's all I mean.
Funny you should mention that. I can think of nothing better to say
at this point than to quote Humberto Maturana in his introduction to
←Autopoiesis←and←Cognition. C'mon fingers, here we go...
"When Jerry Y. Lettvin and I wrote our several articles on frog
vision, we did it with the implicit assumption that we were handling a
clearly defined cognitive situation: there was an objective (absolute)
reality, external to the animal, and independent of it (not determined
by it), which it could perceive (cognize), and the animal could use
the information obtained in its perception to compute a behavior
adequate to the perceived situation. This assumption of ours appeared
clearly in our language. We described the various kinds of retinal
ganglion cells as feature detectors, and we spoke about the detection
of prey and enemy. We knew that was not the whole neurophysiological
story, as was apparent particularly in the discussion of the article
called `Anatomy and Physiology of Vision in the Frog (Rana pipiens)'.
But even there the epistemology that guided our thinking and writing
was that of an objective reality independent of the observer. Thus,
when Samy Frenk and I began to work with pigeons in 1961, first
studying form vision, we approached that study with the same
fundamental view. No problem arose then and without any difficulty we
could characterize many classes of retinal ganglion cells. Yet, when
Gabriela Uribe joined us and we in fact began to study color vision in
1964, it soon became apparent to us that that approach leads to deep
trouble. Neurophysiologically we did not see anything fundamentally
different from what other scholars had already seen. We found the
classic types of ganglion cells with separate, concentric or
overlapping opponent spectral preferences. But we also found: (a)
that although the geometry of the receptive fields of the ganglion
cells with opponent spectral preferences had nothing to do with the
geometry of the visual object, the geometry of the visual object had
to do with the response of those cells; and (b) that we could not
account for the manifold chromatic experiences of the observer by
mapping the visible colorful world upon the activity of the nervous
system, because the nervous system seemed to use geometric relations
to specify color distinctions. A different approach and a different
epistemology were necessary.
"There are many visual configurations, with uniform and variegated
spectral compositions, in simple and complex geometrical forms, that
give rise to indistinguishable color experiences. How should one,
then, look for the invariances in the activity of the nervous system,
if any, in relation to the perception of color? After we realized
that the mapping of the external world was an inadequate approach, we
found that the very formulation of the question gave us the clue.
What if, instead of attempting to correlate the activity in the retina
with the physical stimuli external to the organism, we did otherwise,
and tried to correlate the activity in the retina with the color
experience of the subject?
"Such a step entailed two difficulties. On the one hand it required
the definition of a reference which would permit the characterization
of the activity of the retinal ganglion cells independently of the
stimulus as such; on the other hand it required us to close the
nervous system and treat the report of the color experience as if it
represented the state of the nervous system as a whole. In other
words, the new approach required us to treat seriously the activity of
the nervous system as determined by the nervous system itself, and not
by the external world; thus the external world would only have a
triggering role in the release of the internally-determined activity
of the nervous system. We did this rigorously, and showed that such
an approach did indeed permit us to generate the whole color space of
the observer. That was a very fundamental result that was published
in a very unknown article [reference omitted].
"But what was still more fundamental was the discovery that one had to
close off the nervous system to account for its operation, and that
perception should not be viewed as a grasping of an external reality,
but rather as the specification of one, because no distinction was
possible between perception and hallucination in the operation of the
nervous system as a closed network. Although we arrived at this
conclusion through the study of color vision, there are many earlier
experimental studies (such as those of Stone on the rotation of the
eye of the salamander in the early 'forties) that could also have led
to an understanding of the nervous system as a closed network of
interacting neurons. Whether they did or not, I do not know; but if
they did it seems that the implications were not pursued to their
ultimate consequences.
"Whatever the case, for me this finding had great significance and
plunged me into the study of cognition as a legitimate biological
problem. Two immediate consequences arose from this: the first one
was that in my neurophysiological studies I had to take seriously the
indistinguishability in the operation of the nervous system between
perception and hallucination; the second one was that I needed a new
language to talk about the phenomena of perception and cognition. The
first consequence required that the question: `How does the organism
obtain information about its environment?' be changed to: `How does it
happen that the organism has the structure that permits it to operate
adequately in the medium in which it exists?' A semantic question had
to be changed into a structural question. The second consequence
required the actual attempt to describe the phenomena that take place
in the organism during the occurrence of the phenomena of perception
and cognition in a language that retained them as phenomena proper to
a closed nervous system."
Hey, that wasn't as long as it looked. A couple of brief comments:
It occurs to me that in quoting Maturana I'm finally starting to do
something Cugini has been challenging us intersubjectivists to do for
many weeks, which is to provide more concrete examples of the
difficulties we ascribe to objectivism. And in retrospect, I feel
like I should have been saying all along that one encounters those
difficulties when one starts to study mental phenomena per se.
While I frankly don't yet fully understand Maturana's examples, I
think I can come up with equivalent examples in the realm of computer
science. For instance consider the operation of the software system
at which I am typing this text. For the purpose of understanding that
operation, it doesn't and *cannot* matter whether it is "perceiving"
or "hallucinating" my keystrokes. What *does* matter is that there is
a stable state of the me+machine system, in which it hallucinates a
character exactly when I type the corresponding key, and that the
system tends to evolve toward that stable state (i.e., when my
keyboard breaks I fix it). The question, as Maturana says, is how
does that evolution happen?
-- Scott
∂25-Jan-86 1118 KFL%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Reality
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 11:18:09 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Jan 86 14:12-EST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Jan 86 14:06-EST
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 86 14:08:06 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Reality
To: X.GYRO@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
cc: KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, MetaPhilosophers@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].795993.860125.KFL>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
"But what was still more fundamental was the discovery that one had to
close off the nervous system to account for its operation, and that
perception should not be viewed as a grasping of an external reality,
but rather as the specification of one, because no distinction was
possible between perception and hallucination in the operation of the
nervous system as a closed network. ...
I agree that it is not possible to tell, simply from observing a
nervous system (including your own, from the inside) whether it is
observing reality or hallucinating. But as I said before, assuming
everything is a hallucination doesn't seem very useful. And it leaves
one with the problem of explaining the apparent consistency of the
hallucinations. They are in fact so consistent that the only
explanations that are remotely plausible are that either there is an
external reality, or someone is attempting to make us believe there is
one, by constructing an artificial one.
The notion of an artificial reality is intriguing. It can be
regarded as a sort of computer-simulation or video-game world, with
rules of its own. But it begs the question of where it came from. I
suppose 'real' reality does too. If you think I am going to venture
into THAT morass, you are mistaken!
Nothing you have said seems to call objectivism into question in any
way.
If you assume that there is an external reality, organisms would
tend to evolve so as to perceive it as accurately as possible, so as
to avoid falling off cliffs or getting eaten, etc. So I think that if
there IS a reality anywhere, that we either
1) Perceive it fairly accurately, or
2) Are actually subsidiary creatures, created by some primary (or
higher subsidiary) creature(s) to interact with a synthetic
reality for some unimaginable purpose(s), or
3) Both
By Occam's principle, I will believe (1) until given convincing
evidence otherwise.
The alternative, that there is no reality anywhere (as opposed to
the milder hypothesis that there is one but we do not perceive it)
doesn't mean anything to me. The fact that I am aware proves to me
that I, at least, am real, am not a hallucination. So reality DOES
exist and does consist of at least me. I cannot imagine what it would
be like for there to be no reality.
The 'consensus' theory is obviously bogus. I cannot think of any
evidence that could convince me that it is true. A theory is only
useful if it makes a difference, i.e. what would the world be like if
it was/wasn't true. What WOULD the world be like if the consensus
theory was true? What would you consider sufficient evidence to
completely prove it? Or to prove the lack of a reality?
In the past, there was a near universal consesus on many things that
we now believe to be false. There is no evidence that any of these
things was ever true when it was strongly believed in by many people.
Or to take a more modern example, most people in the socialist
countries strongly believe (albeit due to propaganda) that socialism
is a superior way of life to capitalism. But reality refuses to go
along with them, millions of them are starving or are dependent on
wheat sales from the free world.
...Keith
∂25-Jan-86 1149 KFL%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.#Internet@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Orwell and Rand
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 11:49:16 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Jan 86 14:39-EST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Jan 86 14:32-EST
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 86 14:33:26 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Orwell and Rand
To: X.GYRO@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
cc: KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, MetaPhilosophers@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].796015.860125.KFL>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
... I've read ←1984←, and what's clear to me is that
life that way is just too painful. People won't put up with it
forever.
You don't seem to have read very deeply. The whole point was that
people weren't given any choice in the matter. As I read it I kept
asking myself what I would do in that intolerable situation. The only
solution that came to me was suicide. The only rational response to
the world of ←1984← is to keep it from happening in the first place.
Once the socialists take over, it's too late.
... My argument, then, is that a unified
global totalitarian state cannot stand, certainly not forever. What
threat could it hallucinate to protect itself from?
Are you sure you have read it? In ←1984←, the three identical
governments in the world are in perpetual warfare.
... the belief that the rewards of life are mostly material and/or in
the form of physical pleasure has had its day, too ...
This is NOT what I am advocating. I am advocating free choice.
Individualism. That each individual can choose for himself what is
important for himself, and is free to enter into voluntary
organizations and agreements with others to procure 'life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness', whether it takes the form of membership
in a church, purchase of a CD player, searching mountaintops for the
one true guru, or whatever.
Perhaps I am being over-sensitive, but it seems to me that this idea
of people being told what is best for them, and of people being over-
analyzed (for instance a recent statement that 2/3 of the population
are 'mentally ill' and should be treated, even aginst their will!) is
a prelude to severe erosion of individual liberties.
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Also, read almost anything by AYN RAND. I agree with about 80% of
what she says, which is a very high score coming from me.
Hmm, I've read very little Rand, just a few pages I think, but her
viewpoint sat with me about like metallic sodium sits with water.
I'm not surprised.
Please be more specific, if you want to continue this conversation.
It's much easier to discuss my and your views than hers, since she's
not here, though it's certainly fair to use her words if you like
them.
It's much easier for me to point to a book than to type in the whole
book. She is much better than me at explaining objectivism.
Ok, how about ←Capitalism:←the←Unknown←Ideal←, currently in print
from Signet, $4.50 in paperback.
...Keith
∂25-Jan-86 1212 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Searches (Long Msg)
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Jan 86 12:12:33 PST
Date: Sat 25 Jan 86 12:07:10-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Searches (Long Msg)
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178119277.18.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Departments are
initiating and continuing various faculty searches. This message
reviews the status of some of the ongoing searches and announces new
ones.
Continuing Searches
The CSD is continuing to search for a senior faculty member in
robotics. The search committee consists of Profs. Bob Cannon
(chair), Bill Reynolds (M.E. Dept.), John McCarthy, Tom Binford,
and Nils Nilsson. The committee expects to report on progress
shortly.
A committee composed of CSL faculty is continuing to search for systems
faculty. My recollection is that prior to Jan. 1, 1986 there were two
1/2 CSD systems billets open and perhaps two 1/2 EE systems billets.
(There may be another EE billet besides these; I don't have John
Hennessy's notes in front of me as I write this.) We have recent
approval from Dean Gibbons to add additional systems people as described
below.
New Searches
The following new searches are hereby initiated:
1. Artificial Intelligence
Advertisement to be placed in CACM, the SIGART Newsletter, the AI
Magazine, and distributed over bboards:
The Computer Science Department of Stanford University seeks a
tenure-track professor with interest in pursuing basic research in
artificial intelligence drawing on engineering applications as sample
problem areas. Applicants must have a record of strong research and an
interest and competence in teaching. Candidates should send curriculum
vitae with suggested references to Professor Nils J. Nilsson, Computer
Science Department, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305.
Further inquiries can be made to the above address or to ARPAnet
address: Nilsson@SU-SCORE. Stanford is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative
Action employer and welcomes applications from women and minorities.
Committee: Nils Nilsson (chair), Bruce Buchanan, John McCarthy,
Michael Genesereth, plus one outside CSD person, plus students.
2. Theoretical Computer Science
Advertisement to be placed in CACM, Notices of the American Math
Society, and distributed over bboards:
The Computer Science Department of Stanford University seeks a
tenure-track professor with interest in theoretical computer science
(analysis of algorithms, computational complexity, mathematical theory
of computation, and/or logics of programs). Applicants must have a
record of strong research and an interest and competence in teaching.
Candidates should send curriculum vitae with suggested references to
Professor Andrew C. Yao, Computer Science Department, Stanford
University, Stanford, California 94305. Further inquiries can be made
to the above address or to ARPAnet address: Yao@SU-SCORE. Stanford is
an Equal-Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer and welcomes
applications from women and minorities.
Committee: Andy Yao (chair), Christos Papadimitriou, Vaughan Pratt, Jeff
Ullman, plus students.
3. Applied Math/Scientific Computing
Advertisement to be placed in The Notices of the American Math Society,
The SIAM News, the CACM, and distributed over bboards:
The Computer Science Department and the Mathematics Department of
Stanford University jointly seek a tenure-track professor with
interest in numerical analysis and scientific computing for a newly
proposed Applied Mathematics/Scientific Computing program. Applicants
must have a record of strong research and an interest and competence in
teaching. Candidates should send curriculum vitae with suggested
references to Professor Gene H. Golub, Computer Science Department,
Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305. Further inquiries can
be made to the above address or to ARPAnet address: Golub@SU-SCORE.
Stanford is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer and
welcomes applications from women and minorities.
Committee: Gene Golub (chair), Joe Oliger, Joe Keller (Math), Joel
Ferziger (M.E.), plus students.
4. Systems
In addition to the ongoing searches in systems, the existing systems
search committee has authorization to search for new faculty members
specializing in programming languages (2), architecture (1), and VLSI
CAD/CAM (1).
Everyone is encouraged to take an active effort in getting people of the
very highest calibre to apply for these positions. Excellent computer
science at Stanford depends on getting excellent new people. The
student bureaucrats are hereby asked to appoint two students each to the
new committees. Betty Scott, could you please coordinate with the search
chairs about placing ads and sending out bboard notices?
-Nils
-------
∂26-Jan-86 0848 Ira.Monarch%G.CS.CMU.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU representation, discovery, science, and psychology
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 08:48:30 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 Jan 86 11:40-EST
Received: from G.CS.CMU.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 26 Jan 86 11:41:48 EST
Date: 26 Jan 1986 11:27-EST
From: Ira.Monarch@G.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: representation, discovery, science, and psychology
To: Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-Id: <507140848/iam@G.CS.CMU.EDU>
Shrager ends his second message on "this" topic with the following:
> If you have a field that is delineated by social convention, then you're an
> anthropologist and I just don't see how social delineation is causally
> connected (in that direction) with psychological mechanisms.
Shrager may be right in the sense that social delineation or factors do not
causally influence learning mechanisms, but rather are something like the
context in which they work. But to someone who is interested in the design
of intelligent computer assisted learning systems or intelligent
human-computer interfaces, neither social factors or learning mechanisms
should be left out of the reckoning. I think we have to be careful of a
certain kind of psychological reduction here.
As to some of the others in the discussion, I agree with much of what Hall
had to say, tho unlike him, I did, at one time, closely follow discussions
in the philosophy/history/sociology of science. Also, my interest is not in
building a computational simulation of scientific reasoning or even in the
psychology of science, but rather in what I can learn from the
philosophy/history/psychology/sociology of science to design and build
better human-computer interfaces. I also agree with Gentner and Hollan that
a specific difference between scientific and other forms of reasoning is
engendered by technologies, but don't feel the force of Hollan's claim that
the difference is not fundamentally psychological. I guess I would say if
new technologies influence us to represent the world differently and reason
differently, then they are capable of engendering psychological
differences, even if the learning mechanisms were the same, whatever that
might mean.
Insofar as there is a psychology of cognitive systems, there's a psychology
of science, because science is a cognitive system.
Scientific reasoning consists of many of the same learning mechanisms you
might find in a child, that is scientific learning and non-scientific
learning have much in common. Maybe there's no difference between the two
with respect to a certain conception of psychology of learning. But one
reason to focus on science is that it is a fairly well delineated basis for
studying the cognitive systems of groups as well as individuals - for
studying the role of representation, communication, and power in knowledge
and learning. Of course there are other ways of doing this. Science isn't
the only cognitive system or systems in which social factors come into play.
But science is the exemplary cognitive system in our culture.
Of course people who have been building computer models of scientific
reasoning or even learning in general haven't always been very interested in
the role of representation or communication in these processes. But some
are, e.g. those interested in graphical interfaces in ICAL. A recent example
is Clancey and Richer in their Guidon-Watch. Also as Hollan has pointed out
in an on-going discussion of authoring tools, ai, and education on the ai-ed
mailing list: "I think it would be a mistake if one were to conclude that
graphics and interface issues are outside of the theoretical issues that
need to be confronted in ICAI. Interfaces are representational systems used
as means of communication and as such confront all the hard representational
questions."
One could argue that many of the important discoveries in science revolve
around new ways of representing the world or, at least, a problem domain.
Some examples are: the use of writing co-occuring with the rise of something
like what we call science, certainly what we call geometry, in ancient
Greece; what can be called the mathematicization of physics starting in the
Late Middle Ages and reaching one important stage in Newtonian physics;
learning how to use such scientific instruments as the telescope and
microscope; Carnot's steam engine; non-visualizable entities like quanta.
Kuhn and Feyerabend have studied these shifts of representation, calling
them paradigm shifts and likening them to gestalt shifts. No doubt such
shifts involve an implicit aesthetics. And there is the important question
of how agreement comes to be reached when such shifts take place.
Understanding these shifts, whether evolutionary or revolutionary, is
arguably part of a theory of cognition and is not unlike the sort of
understanding we will need to design better human-computer interfaces and
learning aids.
I happen to think it's a mistake to compartmentalize scientific questioning
into so-called scientific disciplines whose raison d'etre may be as much a
question of political power as reasoning. It's not clear that it's necessary
to have a psychology of science that is "NOT retrospective (or historical)".
Ira
∂26-Jan-86 1238 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU Orwell and Rand
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 12:38:07 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 Jan 86 15:30-EST
Date: 26 Jan 1986 15:27 EST (Sun)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178385123.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Cc: MetaPhilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Orwell and Rand
In-reply-to: Msg of 25 Jan 1986 14:33-EST from Keith F. Lynch <KFL at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Date: Saturday, 25 January 1986 14:33-EST
From: Keith F. Lynch <KFL at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
... My argument, then, is that a unified
global totalitarian state cannot stand, certainly not forever. What
threat could it hallucinate to protect itself from?
Are you sure you have read it? In ←1984←, the three identical
governments in the world are in perpetual warfare.
Well, it's been a few years since I've read the book. But actually
what you say does not contradict my thesis: that the external threat
is necessary for the maintenance of the totalitarian regime.
... the belief that the rewards of life are mostly material and/or in
the form of physical pleasure has had its day, too ...
This is NOT what I am advocating. I am advocating free choice.
Individualism. That each individual can choose for himself what is
important for himself, and is free to enter into voluntary
organizations and agreements with others to procure 'life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness', whether it takes the form of membership
in a church, purchase of a CD player, searching mountaintops for the
one true guru, or whatever.
Well, okay, we don't disagree on *that* point.
Perhaps I am being over-sensitive, but it seems to me that this idea
of people being told what is best for them, and of people being over-
analyzed (for instance a recent statement that 2/3 of the population
are 'mentally ill' and should be treated, even aginst their will!) is
a prelude to severe erosion of individual liberties.
Huh? Where did this come from? Did I sound like I was playing Big Brother?
Ok, how about ←Capitalism:←the←Unknown←Ideal←, currently in print
from Signet, $4.50 in paperback.
Well, I'll put it on my list, but since I have many books to read that
I frankly consider more important, it would speed up this conversation
if you would quote a few paragraphs that you consider particularly
representative.
I should say in advance that I enjoy capitalism -- I'm currently on my
second software startup -- and think it's a useful technology for
managing the system of production. I do not, however, think for a
minute that it's The Answer to mankind's ills, any more than is my C
compiler. Even for what it does, I expect it could be improved on;
technologies always can.
-- Scott
∂26-Jan-86 1907 JJW New world loads for 3600s
To: MJH-LispM@SU-AI.ARPA
Over the weekend I created new world loads for the 3600s in MJH. They
have the new Chaos address (4032) for Ignorant, the namespace server;
and have the rest of the namespace up-to-date so that from now on, the
old Chaos addresses for the machines should never appear.
[A question before I go into further details which may not interest
you: does anyone still use the Release 5.1 world on Spurious? If not,
it should be deleted to allow two 6.0 worlds to be stored there.]
At this moment, all of the machines except Ignorant and Coax have as
FEP0:>release-6-0.load a world that has Release 6.0, IP-TCP and the
new namespace.
Mount Saint Coax has two newer worlds on its disk, which contain the
systems MJH and DVI. (Macsyma exists in one of the two.) MJH is
intended to hold all local modifications for the machines in Margaret
Jacks, just as the KSL-Patches system does for the machines at Welch
Road. Currently MJH includes some fixes to the TCP code, and the
Boise spooling code. DVI is the DVI file previewer that Richard
Treitel brought up last week. The file FEP0:>mjh-6-0.load on Coax can
be copied with si:receive-band to install these on other machines.
Ignorant has the Macsyma version on its Eagle disk and is using it as
the normal world to load.
Any worlds saved before January 24 will not be able to contact the
name server during their start-up, and will also be confused about
their own name, as they have been whenever the name server was down,
because of the change in Chaos addresses. If you find it necessary to
use an old world, you can still do so by locally editing the namespace
to update the Chaos addresses, but it would be better not to use those
worlds at all.
∂26-Jan-86 1924 loeb%CIT-VAX.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 19:24:11 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 Jan 86 22:18-EST
Received: from csvax.caltech.edu by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 26 Jan 86 22:19:20 EST
Received: by csvax.caltech.edu (5.31/1.2)
id AA23987; Sun, 26 Jan 86 19:19:15 PST
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 86 19:19:15 PST
From: loeb@csvax.caltech.edu (Daniel Loeb)
Message-Id: <8601270319.AA23987@csvax.caltech.edu>
To: phil-sci@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Please take me off of your mailing list
∂26-Jan-86 2121 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Rewind, please!
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 21:21:33 PST
Date: 27 Jan 1986 00:12 EST (Mon)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178480741.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: MetaPhilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Rewind, please!
I have lately gotten a sense of lost context in our discussion of
objectivism/intersubjectivism. I would like to back up for a moment
and check to see if my perception of what's going on is anything like
anyone else's. This is prompted by Keith's recent comment "Nothing
you have said seems to call objectivism into question in any way."
We started out noticing that under certain circumstances, different
people on this list used words in very different ways. It soon became
apparent that there were two thought systems; one group of people
experiences agreement with one pattern of word use, and another group
finds another pattern to its liking. We have since been entertaining
various hypotheses about what the essence of the difference is between
the two thought systems, without, it seems, being able to quite put
our collective finger on it; that is, without finding a way to state
the difference that we can all agree on.
Is everyone with me so far? The project I'm embarking on is to map
out the largest area of agreement I can.
-- Scott
∂26-Jan-86 2217 KFL%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Definitions
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 22:17:19 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 Jan 86 01:08-EST
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 86 01:09:50 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Definitions
To: X.GYRO@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
cc: KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, MetaPhilosophers@OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].797004.860127.KFL>
Ok, here are the definitions as I see them
Objectivism: The belief that there is just one reality, and that most
people's perceptions are relatively accurate
representations of it most of the time. For instance
Jupiter's moons really are there, and are there for
everyone, and have been there long before Galileo, and
would be there even if nobody ever discovered them, and
would be there even if nobody ever WILL discover them.
Subjectivism: There are several semi-overlapping versions of this,
including:
Solipsism: The belief that I am the only aware being, and reality
consists of my perceptions and thoughts, and would not
exist if it weren't for me.
Magical thinking: The belief that reality can be altered purely by
wishful thinking.
Consensus theory: The belief that reality is determined by majority
vote (or by some other kind of vote).
These did not come from any reference book, I just put down what I
think of when I hear these terms.
Any competing definitions? Clarifications?
...Keith
∂26-Jan-86 2228 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Truth, Justice and The American Way
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 22:28:38 PST
Date: 27 Jan 1986 01:19 EST (Mon)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178492809.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@NBS-VMS.ARPA>
Cc: "metaphilosophers%mit-oz" <metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Truth, Justice and The American Way
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Jan 1986 09:04-EST from "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini at nbs-vms.ARPA>
Date: Friday, 24 January 1986 09:04-EST
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini at nbs-vms.ARPA>
> It isn't the nature of the action, it's the nature of
> the thought behind the action (and unfortunately "sincerity" doesn't
> quite address the right issue). The Nazi may sincerely think he's doing
> God's work, and may just be wrong about that.
Aha, but if he's "just wrong" (as he surely is), it must wrt to
what? Some objective morality, no?
No, actually, wrt a purely subjective morality, which however is the
same for every conscious being by virtue of the nature of consciousness.
> The way he can tell is by noticing whether his peace of mind is
> increasing or decreasing. The more afraid he feels, the more
> his fear feeds his anger and his thirst for power, the clearer
> it is he hasn't been doing God's work.
All blithely assuming fear and anger are (objectively?) worse than
peace of mind. Ie, how do you know fear and anger aren't signs
of God's favor, that they aren't meant to re-inforce you in your
course of action?
I just know. So do you. Have you experienced fear and/or anger
lately? You could not have made it this far in life if you took those
as positive feedback.
Well, you're urging us to take responsibility for our
thoughts/actions. Don't the bad guys have to do the same? If
Mr. X more or less gratuitously decides to hold up the 7-11 and
shoot the girl on duty, do we hold him responsible or not?
"The bad guys"?! I hope you don't take such words literally.
What do you mean "hold him responsible"? Do you mean urge him to take
responsibility himself? Sure, though I wouldn't necessarily be too
hopeful that he'll respond. In any case, you can take responsibility
for your part in creating a situation in which someone would do that.
I *don't* mean feal guilty about it; I mean take positive action to
change things, whatever you perceive that to be (for instance, you
might lobby for tighter handgun legislation).
> What I've learned is that suffering is simply the outcome, in a
> strict, impersonal cause-and-effect way, of a choice made by the
> sufferor. It exists so that we can learn not to make those choices.
This really is insensitive! Would you care to explain to the
family of a murder victim how he/she "chose" to get killed?
"Insensitive"? Such an explanation may well help them to make sense
of what would otherwise seem a senseless event. Do you want me to
agree with them that their anger is justified?
Perhaps the Jews of Europe had a long-suppressed death wish?
I'm sure they did. Most everyone does, such is my experience anyway,
it's just that some people's death wish is stronger than others'.
Guilt is just a manifestation of it.
I agree with more of what you say than you might expect (see
below), but this contention is really crazy. Even if you want
to analyze (what old-guard types like me would call) evil as
some kind of sickness or internal imbalance, at least let it be
that of the aggressor, not the victim!
Wait a minute. I think you've misunderstood. I'm trying to show you
a way of thinking that will keep *you* from being the aggressor. Of
course you'll have to transcend your rationalizations.
> "Not meanly, I hope, but critically."
This wasn't clear - I didn't mean that the mystics were unmoved,
but that theirs was one possible response among those who are.
Those who don't even see this as a problem are the jerks.
Careful with your judgments. It's always a part of yourself you
judge. If you're honest you'll catch yourself being unmoved from time
to time. It's only human. A common way to be unmoved is "they don't
have it as bad as I do".
> As for Mengele and Stalin, it sounds like you want them to
> suffer for what they did. I beg you to reconsider. The
> simplest reason is that such suffering will probably not get
> them to stop, especially as long as they perceive someone else
> as the cause of their suffering.
Hmmm...as above, I don't want revenge per se. "Hate the sin,
love the sinner" the saying goes - not bad for a start. But what
to do with evildoers (whether or not they're evilbe-ers)? - two points:
1. At least stop them from doing bad things to innocent victims.
If you see a certifiably insane person firing into a crowd,
the FIRST thing you do is physically stop him (OK, with
minimal violence), not as punishment, or because you blame him
at all, but because his sickness doesn't seem to be a good reason
to have people killed and crippled. Prevention first, psychotherapy
AFTER you've got him in a nice quiet room.
No disagreement here.
The point of WWII
wasn't primarily to "catch" Hitler and punish him, but to stop
him from what he was doing.
Well, that may have been the point for you, but I don't think the rest
of the country was quite so clear on that.
2. So suppose you've got hold of a person who is apparently sane
and has done something bad. It is NOT clear to me that, even
from a purely psychological point of view, even if your only
goal is to "turn him around", the best thing to do is just
gab at him about karma. Ever read Crime and Punishment?
Raskolnikov is redeemed, at the end, not because of the
sensitivity of his jailers but because the reality of prison
helped him confront (after a LONG time) the enormity of his
crime. In my experience there's more practical wisdom there
than in your approach.
If that's true, why the high recividism rate of prisons? And why did
Leary have so much success in the '60s giving psilocybin to prisoners?
You're almost right with some things,
but you don't take crime/sin seriously enough, and therefore you
can't see the point of making the *criminal* take it seriously.
And this is the point of justice - making, forcing, the criminal
"take it seriously" - for his sake and others.
Yeah, the word "forcing" gives it away -- what you're talking about is
an act of emotional violence, at the least. You can't force anyone
into anything of the kind -- try it sometime (I have).
As far as I can tell, all you're doing is asserting your victim
reality and your supposed "right" to inflict that reality on others.
But we're not victims. (I said this was counterintuitive.) If you
can get *that* across to one of your "criminals" -- that he/she is not
a victim of society and has no "right" to strike back -- then you
begin to break the vicious circle. Then you *really* help someone.
If that's what Raskolnikov finally got, great. But punishing someone
usually just encourages them to feel like victims themselves.
-- Scott
∂26-Jan-86 2252 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Barbara Liskov
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 22:51:52 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 26 Jan 86 22:47:57-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 26 Jan 86 22:47:56 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA01558; Sun, 26 Jan 86 22:47:35 pst
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 86 22:47:35 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8601270647.AA01558@coraki.uucp>
To: faculty@su-score.ARPA, phd@su-score.ARPA
Subject: Barbara Liskov
If you would like to talk with Barbara Liskov in the early afternoon of
either this Wednesday or Thursday please let me know (pratt@navajo will
reach me, as always).
-v
∂26-Jan-86 2302 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Tomorrow's planlunch: Peter Ladkin on Intervals....
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 23:01:44 PST
Date: Sun 26 Jan 86 22:58:53-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Tomorrow's planlunch: Peter Ladkin on Intervals....
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
THE ALGEBRA OF TIME INTERVALS
Peter Ladkin (LADKIN@KESTREL)
Kestrel Institute
11:00 AM, MONDAY, January 27
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
We build on work of James Allen (Maintaining Knowledge about
Temporal Intervals, CACM Nov 1983), who suggested a calculus
of time intervals. Allen's intervals are all convex (no gaps).
We shall present a taxonomy of *natural* relations between
non-convex intervals, and illustrate the expressiveness of this
subclass, with examples from the domain of project management.
In collaboration with Roger Maddux, we have new mathematical
results concerning both Allen's calculus, and our own. We shall
present as many of these as time permits.
The talk represents work in progress. We are currently
designing and implementing a time expert for the Refine system
at Kestrel Institute, which will include the interval calculus.
-------
∂26-Jan-86 2322 X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Truth, Justice and The American Way
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Jan 86 23:22:43 PST
Date: 27 Jan 1986 02:12 EST (Mon)
Message-ID: <X.GYRO.12178502475.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: Scott Layson <X.GYRO%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini@NBS-VMS.ARPA>
Cc: "metaphilosophers%mit-oz" <metaphilosophers%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Truth, Justice and The American Way
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Jan 1986 09:05-EST from "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini at nbs-vms.ARPA>
Date: Friday, 24 January 1986 09:05-EST
From: "CUGINI, JOHN" <cugini at nbs-vms.ARPA>
No one thinks that reforming your typical sociopath is a
simple matter, and I don't pretend to have an effective method.
What I've read and experienced, however, leads me to believe
that such people are absolutely *great* at these abstract
discussions about mind-clearing, but it's just a word-game to
them, unless backed up by some stark reality like prison.
I don't have any direct experience with axe murderers, but I'm
dubious. If we're talking about split personalities, which is what
this sounds like, I should think prison would be a last resort.
> What does help is to teach people how not to cause *themselves*
> suffering. -- Which is my purpose in having this conversation
> with you.
Well yes, but such teaching (in extreme cases) may have to take
harsher forms than perhaps you'd like to admit.
No. By any such violence I would only cause myself suffering.
> > Both of the above are "Western" in the broad sense that they
> > believe that what happens before their eyes is real. The strand
> > uniting the mystics' beliefs always seems to be "It's all right,
> > it doesn't really matter."
>
> Yes, that's right.
Then why try to do anything? Why try to clear your mind of fear
and anger? Why fireproof kids' pajamas? Why feed the
Ethiopians? If you believe we "should" change in the way you're
advocating, then you apparently believe some states of affairs
are vaguely preferable to others. But then some things do
matter, right?
This one took me a while to figure out myself. What matters to me is
the choices I make in the light of whatever situation presents itself.
This is all I have control over, anyway; I can't control anyone else's
choices. And how I respond matters to me a *lot*. And that's why it
makes no sense to me to respond with negativity to a situation I may
experience as external. All that does is interfere with my ability to
do something constructive.
So I know what *I* want to do. I'm not trying to tell you what you
"should" do, I'm just sharing with you the reality that works for me,
to see whether you pick up on it.
> > Is it fair to imagine the mystics...doing nothing?
>
> Well, any mystic who behaves that way is working out his/her own
> destiny, that's for sure! Whenever I run into someone like that, I make
> a point of gently encouraging them to do something ...
But why, given the above?
Because in my experience it *feels* good to help.
I think the dismissal of guilt is a modern notion which is
uncritically accepted and perniciously wrong - I won't argue the
point now, I just want to protest for the record.
Okay, fine, hang on to your guilt, it's no skin off my back. However
I must share with you the observation that made me realize the
importance of letting go of it: a few months ago I noticed that I used
it primarily as a way of evading responsibility. "Surely if I just
*feel* bad enough I won't have to actually *do* anything about it" was
the subconscious thought. Well, of course my next reaction was to
feel guilty about having thus evaded responsibility. Thus do our
minds work.
As I say, I agree with some of your insights, but you seem to feel
that the only alternative to your view is the Charles Bronson school
of jurisprudence. Sure, justice can degenerate into revenge.
Yes, I believe that violence is never justified, however rationalized
and prettified. However, I'm not saying the only alternative is to
"gab about karma". I have no trouble with being firm with someone
that they are not going to be permitted to move freely in society
until it's clear they're not going to kill any more people (say).
This strikes me as fulfulling a clear responsibility we have to both
those who have killed and the society. But there's a real problem
with speaking of "justice", which is that it focuses on the past
crime, which is why it so easily degenerates into revenge.
But "Laysonism" can degenerate into apathetic acceptance of
whatever the world dishes out.
Mm, no, I think I haven't communicated the point very well. But my
previous paragraph touches on it. The past can't be changed, and the
present is the outcome of the past. The only thing I can change in
the present is me, that is, my mind. I bring a lot of energy to that
task. And indeed, I may as well accept everything else. Do you get
the distinction?
-- Scott
∂27-Jan-86 0145 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #4
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 01:41:31 PST
Date: Saturday, January 18, 1986 4:06AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #4
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 20 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Announcement - Call For Papers,
Implementation - C-Prolog 1.5 and VMS,
LP Philosophy - What is the expressive power of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 Jan 1986 12:54-EST
From: Peter Henderson <pbh%suny-sb.csnet@CSNET-RELAY>
Subject: Call For Papers
Call For Papers
ACM SIGSOFT/SIGPLAN Symposium on
Practical Software Development Environments
December 9 - 11, 1986, Palo Alto, California
Practical Software Development Environments assist with the
development and maintenance of larger, better, and more reliable
software systems. The symposium will address issues fundamental
to the development of such practical environments.
The logic programming research community is invited to submit
papers relating to programming environments to improve software
development.
For more information please refer to the call for papers which
appears in:
Communication of the ACM, January 1986, page A-67
IEEE Computer, January 1986, page 74
or contact: Peter B. Henderson (pbh@sbcs.CSNet)
Department of Computer Science
SUNY at Stony Brook
Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 86 21:15:26 pst
From: Mike Newton <Newton@cit-vlsi.ARPA>
Subject: C-Prolog 1.5 and VMS
Yes, there is a bug in the CProlog source, which the Berkeley
compiler blindly ignores (Its okay, because both elements are
the first in the structure). We've been running with the
change you mentioned for a few months.
In a couple of weeks I'm going to post a small announcement
regarding an 'updated' version of CProlog. We used it a lot
(!!!!) in constructing our Prolog compiler for the IBM-370/
4341/308x/3090 series computers, and have made many changes
-- bug fixes, speed improvements, Dec-20 compatibility,
portability, .... .
I've talked to Fernando Pereira and Edinburgh about duplicating
it for people that already have CProlog licenses, and both
were agreeable. The only delay is fixing a bug in the IO
routines and testing.
- Mike
ps: Timings of our compiler as of Dec 31, 1985: (naive reverse)
IBM 4341-12 85 KLips
IBM 3081 480 KLips (one processor)
IBM 3090 750 KLips (one processor)
Figures are +/- about 5%, with naive reverse as the test case.
No mode declarations were used (partly due to the fact that the
would have made only a very minor difference). Speeds show go
up roughly 5-10 % on the faster models with a few changes.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 86 22:55 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: What is the expressive power of Prolog?
Ching-Tsun Chow raised a very good question in his message
to Prolog Digest: [see V3, issue no. 44 Prolog Digest]
Although your question appears to be rhetorical, I believe
that it deserves to be taken seriously. Do you completely
discount the importance of expressive capability for Prolog?
What do you think are the tradeoffs between the expressive
capablility of Prolog and other aspects of its design?
By definition machine languages have the strongest expressive
capability. We need languages of strong expressive capability
that are higher level than machine language. The evidence
shows that Prolog is NOT such a language.
-- Carl Hewitt
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂27-Jan-86 0721 mclean%NRL-CSS.ARPA.#Internet@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU definitions
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 07:18:25 PST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by XX.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 Jan 86 10:09-EST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 Jan 86 10:04-EST
Received: from nrl-css by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 27 Jan 86 10:05:27 EST
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 86 10:04:16 est
From: John McLean <mclean@nrl-css.ARPA>
Message-Id: <8601271504.AA28352@nrl-css>
To: metaphilosophers%mit-oz@mit-mc
Subject: definitions
Keith Lynch has nobly supplied some definitions to help focus the
objective/subjective debate. I think that he conflates three issues,
however, by including magical thinking, solipsism, and the consensus
theory under subjectivism. Each addresses a separate issue as can be
seen by noting that while objectivism and the consensus theory are
theories of truth, magical thinking and solipsism are theories about how
the world is. Both magical thinking and solipsism are compatable
with objectivism as I see it being used:
Objectivism: The belief that the there is exactly one true theory and its truth
is determined solely by its correspondence to reality. The
statement "A is B" is true because "A" refers (corresponds) to
some entity that has the property referred (corresponded) to by
"B".
As Keith points out, the consensus theory is the belief that truth is
determined by consensus. Subjectivism (as a contrast to objectivism),
however, is more general:
Subjectivism: The belief that a theory of truth based solely on reference
is incompatible with the belief that there is onely one true
theory. We have to either accept the belief that there are
incompatible true theories or that truth is not determined
solely by reference.
Note that subjectivism as defined does *not* say that anything goes,
or that if I don't believe something it can't hurt me. All these
responses miss the boat. Even if I believe in incompatible true
theories, I can still require that any true theory be observationally
adequate. Verificationists who believe that all observationally equivalent
theories are simply different formulations of each other already embrace
subjectivism since the correspondence that makes one theory true must make
the other false if they contradict each other, even if the contradictions
are limited to the nonobservational part of the theories.
Subjectivism's strength stems from the fact that a nobody has made any sense
of the notion of "correspondence" except in the cases where we are using a
metalanguage to describe the truth of an object language a la Tarski. In this
case, however, we are taking the correspondence of the metalanguage for granted
and using it to specify the notion of correspondence for the object language.
What nobody has succeeded in doing is starting from scratch and making any
sense of it. The reason that this is hard is, as I pointed out in a
couple of previous postings, that truth does not determine reference.
Given a list of all that I believe true, a foreign translator could
interpret my beliefs in any number of ways. I believe that this is
the hard philosophical core of the many who have been stating that
theories are metaphors, and I believe that this is the issue that the
objectivists should be addressing.
John McLean
∂27-Jan-86 0922 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA talks of AFLB interest
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 09:22:32 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 09:17:05-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: talks of AFLB interest
To: aflb.local@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178612604.23.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
In addition to the usual AFLB, there are 4 talks of potential
AFLB interest this week:
Tuesday 28th, Richard Beigel's orals, "Query-limited Reducibilities
(Two Questions Are Better Than One)", Bldg. 200, Room 34 2:15 PM
Tuesday 28th, Barbara Simons, CSD Colloquium, "On Synchronizing Clocks",
Skilling Auditorium, 4:15 PM
Wednesday 29th, Yinyu Ye, orals in Engineering Economic Systems, "Polynomial
Time Algorithms for Linear and Quadratic Programming", Terman 329, 2:15 PM
Thursday 30th, Steven Smale (from UC-Berkeley), Math Dept. Colloquium on
"Some New Thoughts on Newton's Method", MATH Bldg. 380-C, 4:15 PM
-------
∂27-Jan-86 0934 aweinste%BBN-VAX.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU What are we talking about?
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 09:33:27 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 Jan 86 12:20-EST
Received: from BBN-VAX by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 27 Jan 86 12:21:58 EST
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 86 12:09:33 EST
From: Anders Weinstein <aweinste@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
To: metaphilosophers%mit-oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: What are we talking about?
This is in response to the recent requests to try to clarify the
discussion of "objectivity".
Speaking personally, I'd say that I DON'T see the question primarily in
terms of Eastern-style mysticism, so-called "magical thinking", or the
related ethical and political questions (of course, I'm not trying to stop
others from discussing these). Rather, I'm interested in the more
fundamental question of objectivity per se. I can see that giving up the
notion of objectivity might be a first step on the path toward mysticism,
but I also think that it's possible to do an awful lot of philosophy
without proceeding any further down that path. One can apparently argue
against the notion of objectivity without using mysticism as a premise (or
a conclusion), and this is the area of discussion I see as most fundamental.
For example, a lot of the anti-objectivist positions seem to be predicated
in part on views about the actual practice of scientists or on results in
psychology (e.g. the Kuhn/Feyerabend/Lakoff line on the need for paradigms
or metaphors or suchlike in order to "see" the world at all). Use of such
arguments suggest that there is some good reasoning that JUSTIFIES
rejecting the notion of objectivity (i.e. it's not just a matter of "I
found that Zen works for me, try it and you'll see too"). My preference is
to concentrate on this reasoning and view the mysticism debate as an
interesting tangent, though of course I recognize that others may well have
different interests.
To get back to the objectivity question as I'd like to approach it (the
characterization that follows comes pretty directly from Hilary Putnam, see
his ←Reason←Truth←and←History←, or ←Meaning←and←the← Moral←Sciences← for
details of his still-evolving position):
We all believe that some beliefs are somehow more right than others (e.g. the
heliocentric theory has it over the geocentric one). We might as well call
this property of "rightness" by its old-fashioned name of "truth", as long as
we're careful not to prejudge the objectivity issue by adopting this loaded
word as a label.
I believe the central question then comes down to this: "what is the nature
of truth?". Expanded slightly, it is the question "what is it in virtue of
which some beliefs are 'true' and others 'false'?".
Two perspectives dominate this discussion:
Realism: truth is correspondence to the mind-independent reality. This view
makes the truth of a sentence (or theory) quite independent of any
evidence we might actually have for it.
Non-realism: A family of views according to which truth is something else.
Typically, makes truth depend in some way on evidence or justification
conditions that we could actually observe. E.g: theories are true if
they are simple, elegant, coherent,lead to true predictions,
instrumentally fruitful, are stable in the face of new evidence or
theories, etc, etc, etc. A common slogan of this set of views is that
the world is (at least in part) made, not found.
Now it's important to undestand whether there's a genuine distinction
between these two views. I.e. we have to make sure that these aren't just
two fancy ways of saying the same thing. The major differences
between the two perspectives are as follows:
- Realism: even the most epistemically ideal theory -- one that
predicts every observation, is simple and elegant, etc. as above --
might still be false if it doesn't correspond to the way things
really are. (for example, if we are "brains in a vat")
Non-realism: there is no room left to doubt such an "ideal" theory.
- Realism: there is one true theory of the world (typically physics).
Non-realism: Possibility of pluralism: there might be many different
coherent systems of the world, all of which deserve to be judged
"true". Scientific non-realists might limit this claim to many
incompatible physical theories; others embrace the possibility of
multiple incompatible true world-versions both inside AND outside
the exact sciences. This view tends towards relativism: truth can
only be assessed relative to one or another "conceptual scheme" or
set of purposes, or guiding metaphor, or whatever.
- Realism: every sentence is determinately true or false.
Non-realism: Undecidable sentences may just not HAVE any truth
value (gives up "bivalence", cf. "intuitionism" in mathematics),
Note that this relatively obscure point hasn't come up in the
discussion so far.
∂27-Jan-86 1045 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 10:45:23 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 10:38:43-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178627463.10.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Computer Graphics '85. National Computer Graphics Association. Conference
Proceedings. Technical Sessions. Volume III. (8517180).
Graphics Interface '84. Proceedings. National Computer Graphics Association
of Canada. Ottawa, Ontario. T385.P78 1984.
Graphics Interface '82. Proceedings. National Computer Graphics Association
of Canada. Toronto, Ontario. T385.P76 1982.
Networks In Office Automation. IFIP. edited by K. Boyanov. HF5547.5.I34 1985.
PasRo. Pascal For Robots. by C. Blume and W. Jakob. TJ211.B58 1985.
Applications Of Computer Algebra. editor Richard Pavelle. QA155.7.E4A67 1985.
Toward Foundations Of Information Science. edited by Laurence Heilprin.
Z674.T69 1985.
Workshop On Database Interfaces. October 1982. University of Penn.
(8600643)
A Handbook Of Software Development And Operating Procedures For
Microcomputers. by Paul Holliday. QA76.6.H645 1985.
Medicine In The Age Of The Computer. by George J. Flynn
R858.R58 1986.
Role Of Informatics In Health Data Coding And Classification Systems.
IFIP. IMIA. edited by Cote, Protti, and Scherrer. RB115.I37 1984.
Structured Techniques For Computing. by James Martin and Carma McClure.
QA76.9.S84M37 1985.
The MacPascal Book. by Paul Goodman and Alan Zeldin. QA76.8.M3G66 1985. c.3
H. Llull
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1118 JMYERS%SRI-AI.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Quick comment
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 11:18:35 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 Jan 86 13:46-EST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 27 Jan 86 13:47:30 EST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 10:45:59-PST
From: JMYERS@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Quick comment
To: metaphilosophers%mit-oz@MIT-MC.ARPA
Thanks to Scott Layson for responding to my comments, and presenting some
interesting viewpoints over the past week on reality and what to do with it.
My comment is that violence is justified in some cases, not "never justified".
Violence is an alternative action, that has certain consequences. As with all
situations, one must consider the alternatives, choose the appropriate action,
and take responsibility (acknowledge that they are going to happen--don't try
to hide) for the consequences. To me, there are clearly situations in which
asserting one's existence, by using violence, is the optimal action. It is
VERY important to keep violence in mind, because otherwise, one is limiting
one's choice of actions. I believe that limiting your own choices is a crime
against yourself, because sometimes the very actions you have excluded are
the most appropriate!
I agree with Keith's definitions. I am basically an objectivist.
John~~
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1156 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA DVI fonts
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 11:56:19 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 11:56:01-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: DVI fonts
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178641535.26.TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Jock reminded me to send out a message saying that the new CM fonts are now
installed on Ignorant, so the DVI previewer should be usable with all DVI
files generated here in the recent past. Bugs => me and Kanef.
- Richard
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1442 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 14:42:21 PST
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 14:36:10-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178670691.30.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow, at lunch in MJH 146 at 12:15, the topic is of your choosing.
Enjoy!
-------
∂27-Jan-86 1912 JJW File storage problems
To: MJH-LispM@SU-AI.ARPA
If you're having problems sending files from the 3600s to SAIL or to
TOPS-20 hosts, put something like the following in your lispm-init.lisp:
(unless (get :waits 'fs:attributes)
(push :cant-set-creation-info (get :waits 'fs:attributes))
(push :cant-set-creation-info (get :tops-20 'fs:attributes)))
Apparently this was put into the world loads on Coax and Ignorant and
maybe the other systems, but got undone because no one told me about it.
Also, the ephemeral garbage collector is OFF when you boot one of the
new worlds. If you want it on when you're running, put
(gc-on :ephemeral t)
in your lispm-init file. It slows down the machine a bit, but lets it
run longer before full garbage collection or a reboot is necessary.
Joe
∂27-Jan-86 2104 GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Seminar on January 29
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 21:04:30 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 27 Jan 86 20:58:06 pst
Date: Mon 27 Jan 86 20:56:32-PST
From: GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Seminar on January 29
To: nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Cc: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Wednesday January 29 NAIL! seminar.
Haim Gaifman's talk:UNDECIDABILITY RESULTS FOR SOME QUESTIONS ON BASIC LOGIC PROGRAMS.
Haim Gaifman
Consider a predicate defined recursively from basic predicates
by a basic logic program (collection of function-free rules in pure Prolog).
Is the number of recursive iterations needed to evaluate the predicate
uniformly bounded for all databases? (This is equivalent to asking whether
the predicate can be defined by non-recursive rules).
Sufficient conditions for programs of certain restricted types were
given by Sagiv, Minker and Nicolas, and by Ioanides. A decision
procedure for programs consisting of one linear recursive rule and
one initialization rule, with some additional restrictions, was given
by Naughton. (A rule is LINEAR if the body contains only one occurence
of a recursively defined predicate. An INITIALIZATION rule is one in
which the body contains only basic predicates).
We shall show that the problem is undecidable even for programs
satisfying all the following restrictions: (1) There is only
one recursive predicate (2) All recursive rules are linear.
(3) There is only one non-recursive rule (4) Different argument
places in the head of each rule are filled by different variables.
Moreover there is some fixed set of predicates and some fixed
set of recursive rules of this type, such that the problem is
undecicable when the single initialization rule is allowed to vary.
At present the number of rules which is needed is around 500
and the single recursive predicate has arity 8. But there is
a good chance that the number of rules needed for undecidability
can be greatly reduced.
Also undecidable is the question whether the program obtained
by omitting a certain fixed recursive rule in the above-mentioned
set is equivalent to the original one. Various other related
problems can be shown to be undecidable and even Sigma-2 complete.
All this is done for general (finite) relational data-bases.
We do not assume any ordering relation and the language is without
equality.
-------
∂27-Jan-86 2312 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA No meeting this week
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 23:12:42 PST
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1986 23:12 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12178764733.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: No meeting this week
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
There will be no meeting this week -- not because I'll be in Dallas,
but because another meeting will be occupying much of the group at the
same time.
-- Byron
∂28-Jan-86 0208 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #5
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 02:08:30 PST
Date: Friday, January 24, 1986 4:11AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #5
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 27 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Syntactic Sugar & Coding Algorithms,
LP Philosophy - What is the expressive ability of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 86 16:59:46-EST (Mon)
From: Zerksis D. Umrigar <Zerksis%sutcase.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa>
Subject: More syntactic sugar for Prolog.
One can drastically reduce the use of cuts in Prolog programs
by the use of if-then-else control constructs. However, I feel
that the syntax of 'if P then Q else R' in most Prolog implement
-ations (P-> Q ; R) leaves much to be desired. By introducing
a declaration similar to op, it should be possible to permit non
-iterative control constructs similar to those found in most
procedural languages, while still retaining the syntax of Prolog
"clauses" as terms.
Basically, the idea is that one should allow general parentheses,
with general punctuation. Hence one can think of 'if' as left
parenthesis with say 'end←if' as the closing parenthesis. 'then'
and 'else' would be general punctuation marks. The precedence of
any term enclosed within general parentheses would be identical to
that enclosed within '(' and ')' (0 for DEC-10 Prolog). The
declaration could be something like :-paren([if,then,else,end←if]).
By allowing suitable meta-characters in the declaration, one
could specify optional punctuation, or punctuation characters
which are repeated 0 or more times. This would make possible the
use of if-then and case control constructs. (The semantics of
the case statement would be to commit to the first alternative
whose guard is solved successfully). Another useful
construct would be something similar to case, which would allow
backtracking over the "guards" - (equivalent to cut-free disjunction
in regular Prolog).
If the implementation looks at the control constructs at the
top-level of a "clause", it should be possible for it to
automatically generate indexing information to obtain rapid
access to the chosen alternative. This should make it
possible to write efficient single-"clause" procedures.
Hopefully, this sugared syntax should be easier to read and
comprehend than regular Prolog syntax.
Any comments?
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 1986 00:04-CST
From: Kale@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU
Subject: Coding an interesting algorithm in Prolog
Recently, I was reading an algorithm (fairly complex, it seemed)
for finding the median of a set of numbers in linear time. At the
back of my mind were arguments I recently had regarding the
suitability of Prolog for coding complex algorithms. So I decided
to code it. I was pleasnatly surprised at the simplicity of code
and the ease of coding.
Here is the code:
/* Given a list of length N and a number K, `select' selects an
element, E, of the list such that there are exactly K-1 elemets
less than E. This can be used for finding the median by calling
it with K = length/2.
The algorithm requires 28*N comparisons. */
select(L,K,V) :- length(L,N), N < 28, !, sort(L,L1), nth←member(L1,K,V).
select(L,K,V) :-
choose(L,M), /* Choose a member of L that is `close' to
the median */
partition(L,M,L1,Length1,L2),
((K =< Length1, select(L1,K,V)) ;
(K2 is K - Length1, select(L2,K2,V))).
choose(L,M) :- medians(L,S,Length←S), N is (Length←S // 2)+1, select(S,N,M).
medians([X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6,X7|Rest],[Y|New],Length1) :- !,
sort([X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6,X7],[←,←,←,Y,←,←,←]),
medians(Rest,New,Length), Length1 is Length+1.
medians(L,[],0).
partition([],M,[],0,[]).
partition([First|Rest],M,[First|L1],Length1,L2) :-
First < M, !,
partition(Rest,M,L1,Length,L2),
Length1 is Length + 1.
partition([First|Rest],M,L1,Length1,[First|L2]) :-
partition(Rest,M,L1,Length1,L2).
nth←member([F|R],1,F).
nth←member([F|R],N,M) :- N > 1, N1 is N-1, nth←member(R,N1,M).
/* coded for CProlog */
The algorithm is taken from the book `combinatorial algorithms'
by Reingold, Deo, and Nievergelt.
I used the system sort here, which is ok ONLY IF the original
list does not have duplicates. The system sort eats up the
duplicates. Write your own (bubble) sort if you have duplicates.
The first clause can be taken to provide the definition of the
problem, (without the `length < 28' check). For linearity, all
that you have to ensure is that the first clause requires
(< 28*n) comparisons.
Proof of Linearity: The `choose' predicate finds a member that
is close to the median in the sense that there are at least
(n*2/7) on either side of it. Thus the worst case recursive-call
will be on a list of length 5n/7, taking 28*5n/7 =20n comparisons
by inductive hypothesis. `choose' itself takes 3n comparisons to
sort the sublists of length 7 each, and 4n to find the `median of
the medians' recursively (28*n/7).
`partition' takes n more comps. , so the total is: 20n+3n+4n+n=28n!
The first clause provides the BASIS for the inductive proof.
-- Kale
p.s. Do people out there have examples of complex data structures
being coded in Prolog? Some of my concerns are algorithms for
graph traversals that need to repeatedly update values at nodes,
connectionist algorithms etc.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 20 Jan 86 11:31:04-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Expressive ability
The expressive power of machine languages it the power of
being able to instruct a machine to do any elementary step
(machine instruction) that the machine has been designed to
do. That kind of expressive power is thus irrevocably tied
to a particular machine architecture, so let's call it
``machine power''.
Like many other computer scientists, advocates of logic
programming understand the advantages of relinquishing machine
power in favor of ``abstraction power'': the ability to express
abstract relationships and processes without having to delve
into the peculiarities of the implementation of that expression
on a particular machine.
The discipline needed to keep abstractions alive in a language
with substantial machine power (such as Lisp) seems beyond the
grasp of most programmers, to judge by their products. Learning
to use a language with superior abstraction power but little
machine power takes time and also requires discipline, but pays
off in better products: maintainable, reusable.
The tremendous growth and success of modern mathematics depended
in no small measure on the acquisition by mathematicians of
increasingly powerful abstraction tools. The laborious combinato
-rial methods of 19th century algebra (the mathematical counter
-part of machine power), are today of only historical interest,
and no one (well, almost no one...) would blame a present-day
mathematician for not being able to work in those terms.
Our inability to build reliable software products is not due to
lack of machine power in our tools (we have had plenty ot that...)
but to our inability to predict the interactions between components
for which there are no good abstract specifications and implementa
-tions. The practice of Lisp programming shows this clearly. Current
logic programming tools are somewhat better, but clearly not good
enough, particularly with respect to modularity.
We should not let criticisms of logic programming from the point of
view of a programming practice discredited by the unreliability of
its products manuever us into wasting our effort trying to increase
the machine power of logic programming tools rather than building on
logic programming's strength, abstraction power.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂28-Jan-86 0942 ADOLFO@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 09:41:22 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 09:35:23-PST
From: Adolfo Garcia <ADOLFO@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In the name of the Mexican community at Stanford, I express deep sorrow
for the shuttle's tragedy.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1009 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tues Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 10:09:12 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 09:56:28-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tues Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178881918.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm being called away at the last minute for a meeting with
Street/Gibbons (to talk about budgets for new computers for the
UG program), so I cannot attend the faculty lunch today. Have
a good time and pleasant conversation! -Nils
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1116 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #6
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:15:55 PST
Date: 28 Jan 86 1049-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #6
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 28 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 6
Today's Topics:
Response to PARSYM Debugging Survey
Name the best articles in parallel computing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 86 1:17:36 EST
From: "Curtis A. Scott" <cscott@BBN-VAX.ARPA>
Subject: survey response
<Note for purists: I contrast the C environment on our machine with
the "symbolic" Lisp environment because it may be useful or
interesting, even though the C environment is not very useful
for symbolic computation.>
>> 1. Briefly describe the hardware architecture (MIMD/SIMD, number of
>> processors, distributed vs. shared memory), programming system
>> (language, interpreted vs. compiled), and application.
Hardware: BBN Butterfly, MIMD, 1-256 processors, shared memory.
Software Environment: C (compiled) and Lisp (Multilisp and MultiScheme so far,
both interpreted (no experience with compiled code yet)).
>> 2. Are your bugs typically "serial" or "concurrent"; i.e., do they
>> occur in the midst of sequential code running on a single processor,
>> or do they have to do with communication, timing, or network resource
>> conflict?
The Butterfly's network has a very high bandwidth and hides the details
from the programmer, so it is rarely the source of problems.
Caveat: The following is based on remembered experience, not statistics.
In C, bugs are sequential the vast majority of the time and result in
catastrophic failure of the program. Multilisp and MultiScheme bugs
are usually sequential type mismatches ("careless mistakes") and
easily patched. The remaining bugs are algorithmic and result in
1) type mismatches (80%)
2) incorrect result values (10%)
3) other (infinite loops, deadlocks, etc.) (10%)
Deadlock and resource-contention bugs are quite rare since the FUTURE
construct in both Multilisp and MultiScheme encourages a functional
style of programming which rarely needs to lock resources.
>> 3. What kind of output does your program have so that you can detect a
>> bug? How do bugs manifest themselves?
In C, you usually get a bus error or notification from a system
procedure about a bad object in a system call. The notification
includes the proximate cause of the error and a more-or-less-helpful
error message. The Butterfly's operating system saves the state of
such a program for examination by the debugger. Since C programs on
the Butterfly run as distinct processes with a partially shared
address space, common errors can result in 128 process states to
examine. Algorithmic and intermittent bugs are harder to catch.
In the lisps, bugs caught as type errors enter a debugging
read-eval-print loop. Multilisp in particular has the notion of
"exception objects", which are created when a task runs into an
exceptional condition. The state of task is saved, an exception
object created, and a new task created to handle the exception using
the exception handlers inherited from the task signalling the
exception. Exception objects can be passed around and built into
objects until a strict primitive tries to examine them. This allows
exception handling to be dynamically scoped in a mostly lexical
language. MultiScheme does not have this idea, although it does
have the similar concept of dynamic state and it is possible to
arrange for similar behavior. This part of MultiScheme (and its
Common Lisp package) is still being thought through.
In both lisps, non-type-error bugs show themselves by unexpected
behavior, either returning an incorrect value or not returning at all.
>> 4. What kinds of debugging tools do you have?
The C environment has a Unixoid DDT which can examine the state of
any process, running or stopped. The debugger is symbolic and
allows examination of registers, the address space, and stack traces.
It also allows processes to be started, stopped, and stepped to the
instruction level, breakpoints, and fast switching between processes.
It is not the ultimate in easy debugging, but it's not bad.
The Lisp environments have debuggers which can examine the execution
history of the FUTURE and its environment. Tracing and breaking are
available at the procedure level. Stepping is not implemented yet in
either lisp. The full power of the language is available from
breakpoint or error-spawned read-eval-print loops. In the MultiScheme
environment, the system console will have a set of tools for full
examination of the state of objects, processors, tasks, and resource
utilization; this will give the user quick feedback on the progress of
the computation. Meters can be set up to continuously display any
statistics of interest.
>> 5. What literature references, including your own, would you recommend
>> for learning about debugging parallel programs?
I'd recommend Bert Halstead and Juan Loaiza's paper "Exception
Handling in Multilisp" (which I think appeared in the Proc. '85
IEEE Parallel Processing Conf.), and its references, for some
theory on what errors mean in a parallel context. As far as
a how-to manual for the activity of debugging parallel programs,
I have seen nothing.
>> What programming language features would help?
A lack of side-effecting constructs, or at least the availability of
functional equivalents. The Multilisp FUTURE construct is notable
for its useful masking of synchronization and scheduling concerns.
>> What hardware features would help?
Hardware assistance in keeping history-of-execution data would be very
nice. The problem with this is that such additional hardware usually
comes at a cost in VLSI floorspace (sacrificing space which could be
used for more processors or cache) and slows down the machine. I
believe the future of general-purpose parallel processing lies with
high level specification languages and smart compilers on large
numbers of simple machines with big caches, and hardware history
mechanisms would degrade total system performance in that environment.
The history must be stored within the processor or communicated to the
outside, neither of which is compatible with high performance to
hardware ratios. Better would be a synchronous trace mode (comparable
to uniprocessor single-step) which could halt all processors after
each "instruction" (which could be at a very high level) and send any
interesting state to the outside world before resuming.
Failing this, if the language used has a simple evaluation model (like
Scheme), debugging can be done in interpreted mode. If the
interpreter for this language is fast enough on the parallel machine,
hardware support may be unnecessary. In any case, the compiler should
find all statically-discoverable type errors by taking advantage of
declarations and the known types of the arguments and values returned
from primitives. It should then generate appropriate code to ensure
type safety when the type of a value cannot be determined until
execution time. This would at least allow the post-mortem debugging
of type errors in compiled code comparable to what is available on
lisp machines.
>> Should we immediately begin developing expert systems to detect bugs
>> in parallel programs, or should we wait until we have experts?
I think we should wait until we have excellent expert compilers. Most
non-algorithmic bugs will be caught that way. Algorithmic bugs
("What you said is not what you meant") won't be discovered by
an expert system!
>> What debugging techniques are common across architectures and what
>> techniques are unique to architectures such as the Connection Machine,
>> actors, or dataflow?
<Not an answer, just a comment>
I've heard that one of the CM's "front panel lights" may be a monitor
with a continuous color display of processor states mapped onto a pixel
grid. This evokes the interesting picture of programmers developing
an understanding of program behavior through an unquantifiable skill
(like the use of an AM radio for debugging in early uniprocessors).
A class of such programmers with this exotic rapport might develop --
it would make a good science-fiction story.
Such a device is obviously more useful on a machine whose data
structures and processing activity are geometrically mapped onto local
groups of processors, as in the CM. It seems too abstracted from the
computation to be relied upon, since it's like watching a PET brain
scan to see what someone is thinking. But as far as quick detection
of incorrect programs goes, it would be a useful adjunct to more
specific tools.
DISCLAIMER DEPT.
The usual disclaimer applies, especially since most of the opinions
expressed herein are not shared yet by my employer, BBN Labs Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 24 January 1986 18:34-PST
From: eugene at AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Subject: Updating keywords "required" and "recommended" in my
Subject: bibliography
I want to do my yearly update of the two keywords in my multiprocessor/
distributed processing bibliography. This is one way we can keep current.
Please send me your suggestions for the 10 required readings in parallel
processing. The papers should be REQUIRED at say the 1st or 2nd year grad
student level. 10 most important papers get required in their keyword
field. Following 100 get "recommended." Current papers include the
C.mmp paper (1972 by Wulf and Bell), the original ILLIAC papers (68 & 72),
the MPP (Batcher), Cm*, and so forth. In particular, we are weak in
parallel symbolic computing and parallel algorithms [shows the state of
the field]. I will close nominations at the end of January.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
eugene@ames-nas
{hao,hplabs,decwrl,riacs,lll-crg,tektronix,menlo70,icase,jpl}!ames!eugene
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂28-Jan-86 1131 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA SOE Faculty Mtg
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:30:41 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:20:47-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: SOE Faculty Mtg
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178897265.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The School of Engineering (SOE) will be having a general faculty meeting
on Wednesday, March 12 from 3:00 - 5:00 in the Oak Lounge at Tressider.
All SOE faculty are invited. There will be discussion of the
organization of the school, of opportunities in the school and of new
research in the school. There will also be a question and answer period,
special presentations, and recognition for faculty who have been at
Stanford 25 years. Coffee and cookies will be served at 3:00 and wine
and cheese will be served at 5:00.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1134 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Mtg
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:34:40 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:25:53-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Mtg
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178898196.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be no senior faculty mtg at the regular time
next Tuesday. Perhaps there will be one on the first Tuesday
of March (to decide on the Genesereth promotion case). -Nils
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1143 BACH-HONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA traffic cop here
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:43:22 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 10:59:44-PST
From: Bach-Hong Tran <BACH-HONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: traffic cop here
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Traffic cop now here in parking lot!
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1154 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Forsythe Lectures
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 11:54:33 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 11:45:31-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Forsythe Lectures
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178901770.13.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
**************************************************************************
DON'T MISS THE FORSYTHE LECTURES
**************************************************************************
Computer Science Professor Barbara Liskov of the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology will deliver the George and Sandra Forsythe Memorial
Lectures on January 29 and 30, 1986. Professor Liskov was the first
woman to be awarded a PhD degree by the Stanford Computer Science
Department (in 1968).
Professor Liskov, at MIT since 1972, is an authority on
computer programming languages. Her most recent work is on a language
called ARGUS for programming an ensemble of several computing machines
that can survive the failure of individual members.
The first lecture, entitled "Implementation of Resilient, Atomic Data
Types," will suggest an approach by which distributed programs can
preserve the consistency of data in the presence of concurrency and
hardware failures. This lecture will take place in Terman Auditorium on
the Stanford Campus at 4:15 pm on January 29, 1986 and will be of
interest primarily to specialists in computer systems.
The second lecture, at 7:30 pm on January 30, 1986, is directed at a
more general audience and will be in the Fairchild Auditorium at
Stanford. Entitled "Specifications of Distributed Programs," this
lecture will discuss how to give user-oriented, informal specifications
of distributed programs embodying concurrency and requiring high
availability. There will be a reception in the Fairchild Auditorium
foyer immediately following the lecture.
The lectures honor the memory of computer science pioneers George and
Sandra Forsythe. George was the founder of Stanford's Computer Science
Department, and as its first chairman attracted a core of distinguished
faculty members. Sandra was an influential textbook writer and educator
in computer science. The Forsythes encouraged young people to pursue
academic careers and did much to support the educational process.
Computer Science Department Chairman Nils Nilsson notes: We are honored
that Professor Liskov accepted our invitation to give the Forsythe
Lectures this year. Her research is particularly important for helping
our understanding of distributed computer systems."
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1226 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 12:22:03 PST
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 1329 LB@SU-CSLI.ARPA C.-J. Bailey
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 13:29:11 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 13:21:10-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: C.-J. Bailey
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
TEL: (415) 497-9007
Professor C.-J. Baily from the Technical University of Berlin will be
visiting CSLI on Monday, February 3. If you wish to make an appointment
to see him, please contact Leslie Batema at 497-9007 or send mail
to LB@CSLI.
-------
∂28-Jan-86 1514 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA UG Planning
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 15:14:33 PST
Date: Tue 28 Jan 86 14:56:48-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: UG Planning
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12178936590.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Deans Gibbons and Street and I met today to talk about space and
computing resources to support the new UG major. As we probably all
know, Street/Gorin are buying a new DEC 8650 for LOTS. They feel
confident that a budget request for another one will be approved if
another one is in fact needed to support the major. Street also
feels confident about CSD/ACIS being able to get funds to acquire
workstations as might be needed by the program. Les Earnest (as
chair of our facilities committee) has agreed to represent the
CSD in dealings with Street's people on these matters. (David
Cheriton: although I haven't asked you personally yet, perhaps
you wouldn't mind expressing your opinions on what sort of workstations
we might need. I mentioned to Street that I would ask you to do that.)
Gibbons/Street are going to write a joint memo requesting at least
temporary space for UG instructors, TA's, Stuart, workstations, etc.
in the Tressider Bowling Alley. There was some talk also about the
possibility of space in CERAS. I'll keep everyone posted as things
develop. -Nils
-------
∂28-Jan-86 2136 gregory%ARI-HQ1.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU PHIL-SCI & METAPHILOSOPHERS
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Jan 86 21:35:45 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 29 Jan 86 00:06-EST
Received: from ari-hq1.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 29 Jan 86 00:06:19 EST
Date: 28 Jan 86 16:51:00 EST
From: <gregory@ari-hq1>
Subject: PHIL-SCI & METAPHILOSOPHERS
To: mly.g.daniels%mit-oz <mly.g.daniels%mit-oz@mit-mc>
cc: metaphilosophers%mit-oz@mit-mc, phil-sci%mit-oz@mit-mc
Reply-To: <gregory@ari-hq1>
Dear Gub,
In case you are still in the dark re: flames about phil-sci and metaphil:
a few days ago I put out a message on phil-sci net after months of
inactivity apart from occasional requests to be included. I made the utterly
naive suggestion that since the list appeared dead or dormant, interested
parties might like their attention drawn to the metaphilosophers list.
This was naive (with hindsight of course), because it produced not a welter
of new contributors to metaphilosophers, but instead, a series of messages
from people whose reason for their obvious outrage is completely beyond me.
Ironically, my message to phil-sci coincided with more correspondence than
that list has had in two years (or some such).
As you were, boys and girls. Sorry I spoke, and let's not waste any more
time being unpleasant.
--Dik Gregory
------
∂29-Jan-86 0625 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA This week's AFLB
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 06:25:09 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 06:21:53-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: This week's AFLB
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179104998.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here's the abstract for this week's AFLB. Next week's speaker isn't
set yet.
-----------------------------------------------
30-Jan-86 : Harry Mairson (Stanford)
Average Case Lower Bounds on the Construction
and Searching of Partial Orders
It is very well known in computer science that partially ordered files
are easier to search. In the worst case, for example, a totally
unordered file requires no preprocessing, but Omega(n) time to search,
while a totally ordered file requires Omega(n log n) preprocessing
time to sort, but can be searched in O(log n) time. Behind the casual
observation, then, lurks the notion of a computational tradeoff
between sorting and searching.
We analyze this tradeoff in the average case, using the decision tree
model. Let P be a preprocessing algorithm that produces partial
orders given a set U of n elements, and let S be a searching algorithm
for these partial orders. Assuming any of the n! permutations of the
elements of U are equally likely, and that we search for any y in U
with equal probability (in unsuccessful search, all "gaps" are
considered equally likely), the average costs P(n) of preprocessing
and S(n) of searching may be computed. We demonstrate a tradeoff of
the form
P(n) + n log S(n) = Omega (n log n),
for both successful and unsuccessful search. The bound is tight up to
a constant factor.
In proving this tradeoff, we show a lower bound on the average case of
searching a partial order. Let A be a partial order on n elements
consistent with Pi permutations. We show S(n) = Omega(Pi↑{3/n}/n↑2)
for successful search of A, and S'(n) = Omega(Pi↑{2/n}/n) for
unsuccessful search. These lower bounds show, for example, that heaps
require linear time to search on the average.
***** Time and place: January 30, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂29-Jan-86 0813 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA RSVP for Forum meals
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 08:13:43 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 08:08:25-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: RSVP for Forum meals
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: diaz@SU-SCORE.ARPA, macmilk@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179124390.21.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is a reminder to please send in your responses for the
meals during the Forum conference next week. We have to give
numbers and guarantees.
Tuesday buffet supper
Wed. breakfast
Wed. lunch
Wed. banquet
Thursday lunch
Carolyn
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1112 BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Change in Newsletter
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 11:11:58 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 11:02:05-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Change in Newsletter
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In response to suggestions from a number of you, we are going to
replace the newsletter with two different publications:
a weekly Calendar of Public Events which will be similar to the
front page of the present newsletter and will include brief
abstracts (half a screen at most) of the events listed
and
a monthly publication which will contain progress reports
from the projects. We will ask each project to contribute
something once a quarter, so each monthly publication will
contain reports from about 1/3 of the projects.
We will explain the new situation to our subscribers, and invite
them to subscribe to one or both of the new publications.
CSLI FOLKS will automatically receive both new publications.
We hope that this change will give our distant subscribers a more
balanced picture of the research at CSLI than is given by the present
newsletter while continuing to give our local subscribers information
about events they may wish to attend. Please let me know how this is
working and give me any additional suggestions you may have.
Thanks,
Betsy
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1119 BACH-HONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 11:19:04 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 11:10:45-PST
From: Bach-Hong Tran <BACH-HONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The traffic cop is here in the parking lot.....
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1451 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 14:50:59 PST
Received: from ames-vmsb.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Jan 86 14:45:58-PST
Date: 29 Jan 86 13:57:00 PST
From: welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: super@su-score.arpa
Reply-To: welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Meetings on the first Wednesday of each month at 7:30 PM. Speakers
who can give insights to various aspects of SUPERCOMPUTING are
featured each month.
Next meeting: Wednesday, February 5, 1986, 7:30 PM
Speaker: Dr. Paul Kutler /
Chief of the Fluid Dynamics Division in the
Aerophysics Directorate at NASA Ames Research
Topic: Computational Fluid Dynamics at NASA Ames Research
Abstract: Numerical aerodynamic simulation is a computational tool
for predicting the aerodynamics and fluid dynamics of aerospace
vehicles by solving a set of mathematical equations with a high-
speed digital computer. Researchers working in the area are required
to be knowledgeable in four technical areas: aerodynamics, fluid
dynamics, mathematics, and computer science. Numerical aerodynamic
simulation, which is more commonly referred to as computational
fluid dynamics, provides the aerospace vehicle designer with a
relatively new but formidable tool to be used in the design and
analysis process.
The present effectiveness and future promise of computational
fluid dynamics (CFD) will be discussed in Dr. Kutler's lecture. The
CFD ideal of computer-designed flight vehicles and the progress that
has been made towards its achievement will also be addressed. During
the course of the lecture numerous examples demonstrating the practical
application of this tool will be presented. Movie clips of the nu-
merical solutions will be shown depicting some of the rather compli-
cated flowfields that are currently being computed using CFD.
Location: AXIOM Systems
1589 Centre Pointe Drive
Milpitas, CA
Directions: 17 South to Montague Expressway East. Left from
Montague onto Centre Point (before Capitol).
or 17 South to Capitol Expressway East. Right from
Capitol onto Centre Point (before Montague).
or 680 South to Montague Expressway West. Right from
Montague onto Centre Point (after Capitol).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tape-recordings of most of the previous may be obtained
in exchange for a tape cassette or $5.00 by contacting:
Mary Fowler (415)261-4058 (rec)
Supercomputing #192, BOX 2787
Alameda, CA. 94501-0787
For information contact Mary Fowler, Chairperson (415) 839-6547
or Mike Austin, Publ. Chair (415) 423-8446
------
∂29-Jan-86 1617 BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Change in Seminar Format
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 16:17:42 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 16:08:05-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Change in Seminar Format
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
We are trying to work out a new seminar format in line with your
comments and suggestions. We haven't worked out the details, but many
of you have suggested substituting 4-or 5-week "topics" for some of
the individual and project presentations.
Would those of you (projects or individuals) currently scheduled for
seminar presentations between now and the end of June let me know if
you want me to keep a slot reserved for you even if the overall format
for seminars changes? Feel free to give me any ideas you may have
about the general format as well.
Thanks.
Betsy
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1622 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Papers received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 16:22:33 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 16:17:37 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 16:17:37 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Papers received
To: nail@diablo
Lustig and Shmueli (Technion): 1) Hypergraph covering algorithms
for relational query processing
2) Acyclic hypergraph projections and relationships to circular-arc
graphs and circular representable hypergraphs.
I don't want to push these on anybody. However, there is the
hint in some things AVG has been working on that the hypergraph
structure of a rule (nodes=variables; hyperedges=terms) is important
for algorithms that implement logic in a demand-driven, or "lazy"
way. That is, "acyclic hypergraphs" allow us to do sideways information
passing in a way that avoids some potential redundancy or useless work.
∂29-Jan-86 1640 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 4, 1986
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 16:40:51 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA18022; Wed, 29 Jan 86 16:32:59 PST
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 16:32:59 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8601300032.AA18022@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 4, 1986
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 4, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Developmental Paths between Form and Meaning:
Crosslinguistic and Diachronic Perspectives''
Dan I. Slobin
Department of Psychology, UCB
It will be argued that children come to the task of
language acquisition equipped with four interacting mental
spaces, each with its own kind of multidimensional hierarchical
structure: (1) semantic space, containing notions that are
universally privileged for grammatical expression; (2) prag-
matic space, regulating the ways in which utterances are put to
social, interpersonal purposes; (3) morphosyntactic space,
defining grammatical forms in conjunction with processing and
organizational parameters; and (4) morphophonological space,
defining the acoustic-articulatory material of speech (or the
visual-motor material of sign). Crosslinguistic developmental
and diachronic data will be called upon to illustrate ways in
which language acquisition requires constant interaction
between these four mental spaces, each with its own internal
hierarchy of accessibility and with relations of mutual
relevance between individual elements across spaces. The dis-
cussion will focus on the problem of allomorphy and the means
used by the child to find distinct functions for varying forms
of words with common meanings. It will be shown that children
use both semantic and non-semantic factors for paradigm con-
struction, and that similar patterns can be found in historical
language change. Implications for language and cognition will
be suggested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 11: Jonas Langer, Psychology, UCB
Feb 18: Michael Silverstein, Anthropology, University of Chicago
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, School of Education, UCB
Mar 11: Carlotta Smith, Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences
Mar 18: John Seely Brown, Xerox PARC
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
EMST Faculty Candidate Presentation: Andr'e Boder of the Univer-
sity of Geneva and M.I.T will speak on "Familiar Schemes,
Problem-Solving Strategies, and the Acquisition of New
Knowledge" on Monday, February 3, from 1:30 to 3:00 in 2515
Tolman.
∂29-Jan-86 1647 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 4, 1986
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 16:47:34 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 29 Jan 86 16:37:20-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA18022; Wed, 29 Jan 86 16:32:59 PST
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 16:32:59 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8601300032.AA18022@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 4, 1986
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 4, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Developmental Paths between Form and Meaning:
Crosslinguistic and Diachronic Perspectives''
Dan I. Slobin
Department of Psychology, UCB
It will be argued that children come to the task of
language acquisition equipped with four interacting mental
spaces, each with its own kind of multidimensional hierarchical
structure: (1) semantic space, containing notions that are
universally privileged for grammatical expression; (2) prag-
matic space, regulating the ways in which utterances are put to
social, interpersonal purposes; (3) morphosyntactic space,
defining grammatical forms in conjunction with processing and
organizational parameters; and (4) morphophonological space,
defining the acoustic-articulatory material of speech (or the
visual-motor material of sign). Crosslinguistic developmental
and diachronic data will be called upon to illustrate ways in
which language acquisition requires constant interaction
between these four mental spaces, each with its own internal
hierarchy of accessibility and with relations of mutual
relevance between individual elements across spaces. The dis-
cussion will focus on the problem of allomorphy and the means
used by the child to find distinct functions for varying forms
of words with common meanings. It will be shown that children
use both semantic and non-semantic factors for paradigm con-
struction, and that similar patterns can be found in historical
language change. Implications for language and cognition will
be suggested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 11: Jonas Langer, Psychology, UCB
Feb 18: Michael Silverstein, Anthropology, University of Chicago
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, School of Education, UCB
Mar 11: Carlotta Smith, Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences
Mar 18: John Seely Brown, Xerox PARC
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
EMST Faculty Candidate Presentation: Andr'e Boder of the Univer-
sity of Geneva and M.I.T will speak on "Familiar Schemes,
Problem-Solving Strategies, and the Acquisition of New
Knowledge" on Monday, February 3, from 1:30 to 3:00 in 2515
Tolman.
∂29-Jan-86 1803 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar Vol. 1, No. 1
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 18:02:45 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 17:00:01-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar Vol. 1, No. 1
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
January 30, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 1
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, January 30, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Pragmatics: An Overview
Conference Room Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson
Discussion led by Stephen Neale (Neale@csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Term Rewriting Systems and Application to Automated
Trailer Classroom Theorem Proving and Logic Programming
Helene Kirchner (Kirchner@sri-ai)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, February 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall The Wizards of Ling
Conference Room by Thomas Wasow
Discussion led by Mark Gawron (Gawron@csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall To be announced
Trailer Classroom
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
The CSLI Newsletter has been replaced by two different publications: a
weekly calendar of public events and a monthly summary of research
progress. CSLI FOLKS will automatically receive both publications on
line. Other Newsletter subscribers will receive separate messages
about their subscriptions.
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar January 30, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
The Wizards of Ling
by Thomas Wasow
Discussion led by Mark Gawron
In this brief note, Wasow argues forcefully that linguistics is not
a science, and indeed, like ``ballet dancing, chess,...and knitting,''
may never be. The core of his argument is that linguistics does not
exhibit any of three characteristics that a purported science ought to
exhibit: incremental progress, objective verifiability, and practical
applicability. For next week's TINLunch, we will look closely at this
argument, as well as discuss some of the broader questions in the
foundations of linguistics that it raises.
--------------
LOGIC SEMINAR
Branching Generalized Quantifiers, cont.
Dag Westerstahl
Monday, February 3, 4:15-5:30
Math. Faculty Lounge, Room 383-N
In this second talk on BGQ, I hope to say something about each of the
following topics: (i) the expressive power of logics with branching
generalized quantifiers; (ii) first-order definability of branching;
(iii) logics with branching quantifier variables; (iv) the relation
between a branching sentence and its linear versions.
-------
∂29-Jan-86 1951 kasif@HOPKINS-EECS-BRAVO.ARPA Are you interested?
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 19:51:42 PST
Received: from Hopkins (hopkins-eecs-bravo.arpa) by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 19:43:07 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 22:38:30 EST
From: Simon Kasif <kasif@hopkins-eecs-bravo.ARPA>
To: nail@su-aimvax.ARPA
Subject: Are you interested?
The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical Enginnering
and Computer Science, invites applications for tenure-track faculty positions
in Computer Science. The university is committed to
double the size of the EE&CS department over the next five years.
We are seeking outstanding candidates in all fields of computer
science.
We are particularly interested in the following research areas.
Fundamental aspects of artificial intelligence
such as logic programming/logics of knowledge, knowledge representation,
learning, robotics, computer vision and parallel symbolic computation.
Expert systems for medical and scientific applications.
Computer engineering with emphasis on distributed and
parallel systems, programming languages and VLSI.
The intellectual community at Hopkins offers many
possibilities for interdisciplinary activity with the medical school,
the space telescope center, mathematical sciences and biophysics
departments, and the applied physics laboratory (APL).
Thus, both theoretical and applications oriented applicants can
apply their backgrounds to fundamental
scientific problems.
The light teaching load, the highly selective procedure for student
admission, and a unique research-oriented environment at Hopkins allow
the faculty to develop a basic research program while enjoying
all aspects of working in an true academic atmosphere.
The Johns Hopkins University has an excellent geographic
location, close to numerous government agencies and
the cultural attractions of Baltimore and Washington.
If you need further information please contact
Simon Kasif or Joseph O'Rourke
Department of Electrical Engineering
and Computer Science
The Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Md 21218
Phone: (301) 338-8296
ARPANET: KASIF@HOPKINS-EECS-BRAVO
OROURKE@HOPKINS-EECS-BRAVO
Applications should be sent to
Professor F. Davidson, Chairman
Department of Electrical Engineering
and Computer Science
The Johns Hopkins University
Baltimore, Md 21218
∂29-Jan-86 2130 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Conference announcement
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 21:29:53 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 21:20:20 pst
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 21:20:20 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Conference announcement
To: nail@diablo
I received the following conference announcement from H. Katsuno.
If anyone is interested, I assume you can contact him as
nttlab!NTT-20!KATSUNO@shasta
*************************************************************
The following is a English translation of an announcement about a
meeting which will be held on February in Kyoto.
Meeting on integration of knowledge base and database
Date: February 20-21, 1986
Place: Kyoto University
Program:
February 20:
Yahio Kambayashi (Kyushuu Univ.) et al.
Transformation of natural language representation by relational
algebra
Tetsuya Furukawa (Kyushuu Univ.) et al.
Transformation of network structure for efficient processing
Hideki Yamamoto (Kyushuu Univ.) et al.
Development of unnormalized interface suitable for meaning
representation
Junnichi Nakamura (Kyoto Univ.)
Longman dictionary database and extraction of information
Setsuo Arikawa (Kyuushu Univ.)
Application of analogy
Setsuo Ohsuga (Tokyo Univ.)
Problems and perspectives about knowledge processing
Hisao Kameda (Electro. Comm. Univ.)
Processing capability and resource managing method of computer
system
Kaname Kobayashi (Fijitu Ltd.)
On role notion of information system
February 21:
Isamu Kobayashi (Sanno Univ.)
Classification of 2-ary relation schemas
Kazunori Horikiri (Nagoya Univ.)
Implementation of mirco-program PROLOG interpreter on workstation
Yoshihisa Udagawa (Mitsubishi Ltd.)
Engineering database for circuit diagram
Seiichi Uchinami (Osaka Univ.)
Statistical database management system
Takako Matsuda (Tohoku Univ.) et al.
Construction of knowledge base and database for integration of
various software
Makoto Takizawa (JIPDEC) et al.
Implementation of logic programming interface on CODASYL DBS
Hideaki Ito (JIPDEC)
Formalization of knowledge representation language ZERO
Kunihiko Moriya (JIPDEC)
On databases based on unnormalized relations
I translated all the titles from Japanese into English. So, there
might be some mistakes in them.
Hirofumi Katsuno (NTT)
∂30-Jan-86 0201 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #5
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 02:01:13 PST
Date: Monday, January 27, 1986 4:55AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #5
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 28 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Syntactic Sugar & Coding Algorithms,
LP Philosophy - What is the expressive power of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 86 16:59:46-EST (Mon)
From: Zerksis D. Umrigar <Zerksis%sutcase.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa>
Subject: More syntactic sugar for Prolog.
One can drastically reduce the use of cuts in Prolog programs
by the use of if-then-else control constructs. However, I feel
that the syntax of 'if P then Q else R' in most Prolog implement
-ations (P-> Q ; R) leaves much to be desired. By introducing
a declaration similar to op, it should be possible to permit non
-iterative control constructs similar to those found in most
procedural languages, while still retaining the syntax of Prolog
"clauses" as terms.
Basically, the idea is that one should allow general parentheses,
with general punctuation. Hence one can think of 'if' as left
parenthesis with say 'end←if' as the closing parenthesis. 'then'
and 'else' would be general punctuation marks. The precedence of
any term enclosed within general parentheses would be identical to
that enclosed within '(' and ')' (0 for DEC-10 Prolog). The
declaration could be something like :-paren([if,then,else,end←if]).
By allowing suitable meta-characters in the declaration, one
could specify optional punctuation, or punctuation characters
which are repeated 0 or more times. This would make possible the
use of if-then and case control constructs. (The semantics of
the case statement would be to commit to the first alternative
whose guard is solved successfully). Another useful
construct would be something similar to case, which would allow
backtracking over the "guards" - (equivalent to cut-free disjunction
in regular Prolog).
If the implementation looks at the control constructs at the
top-level of a "clause", it should be possible for it to
automatically generate indexing information to obtain rapid
access to the chosen alternative. This should make it
possible to write efficient single-"clause" procedures.
Hopefully, this sugared syntax should be easier to read and
comprehend than regular Prolog syntax.
Any comments?
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 1986 00:04-CST
From: Kale@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU
Subject: Coding an interesting algorithm in Prolog
Recently, I was reading an algorithm (fairly complex, it seemed)
for finding the median of a set of numbers in linear time. At the
back of my mind were arguments I recently had regarding the
suitability of Prolog for coding complex algorithms. So I decided
to code it. I was pleasnatly surprised at the simplicity of code
and the ease of coding.
Here is the code:
/* Given a list of length N and a number K, `select' selects an
element, E, of the list such that there are exactly K-1 elemets
less than E. This can be used for finding the median by calling
it with K = length/2.
The algorithm requires 28*N comparisons. */
select(L,K,V) :- length(L,N), N < 28, !, sort(L,L1), nth←member
(L1,K,V).
select(L,K,V) :-
choose(L,M), /* Choose a member of L that is `close' to
the median */
partition(L,M,L1,Length1,L2),
((K =< Length1, select(L1,K,V)) ;
(K2 is K - Length1, select(L2,K2,V))).
choose(L,M) :- medians(L,S,Length←S), N is (Length←S // 2)+1, select
(S,N,M).
medians([X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6,X7|Rest],[Y|New],Length1) :- !,
sort([X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6,X7],[←,←,←,Y,←,←,←]),
medians(Rest,New,Length), Length1 is Length+1.
medians(L,[],0).
partition([],M,[],0,[]).
partition([First|Rest],M,[First|L1],Length1,L2) :-
First < M, !,
partition(Rest,M,L1,Length,L2),
Length1 is Length + 1.
partition([First|Rest],M,L1,Length1,[First|L2]) :-
partition(Rest,M,L1,Length1,L2).
nth←member([F|R],1,F).
nth←member([F|R],N,M) :- N > 1, N1 is N-1, nth←member(R,N1,M).
/* coded for CProlog */
The algorithm is taken from the book `combinatorial algorithms'
by Reingold, Deo, and Nievergelt.
I used the system sort here, which is ok ONLY IF the original
list does not have duplicates. The system sort eats up the
duplicates. Write your own (bubble) sort if you have duplicates.
The first clause can be taken to provide the definition of the
problem, (without the `length < 28' check). For linearity, all
that you have to ensure is that the first clause requires
(< 28*n) comparisons.
Proof of Linearity: The `choose' predicate finds a member that
is close to the median in the sense that there are at least
(n*2/7) on either side of it. Thus the worst case recursive-call
will be on a list of length 5n/7, taking 28*5n/7 =20n comparisons
by inductive hypothesis. `choose' itself takes 3n comparisons to
sort the sublists of length 7 each, and 4n to find the `median of
the medians' recursively (28*n/7).
`partition' takes n more comps. , so the total is: 20n+3n+4n+n=28n!
The first clause provides the BASIS for the inductive proof.
-- Kale
p.s. Do people out there have examples of complex data structures
being coded in Prolog? Some of my concerns are algorithms for
graph traversals that need to repeatedly update values at nodes,
connectionist algorithms etc.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 20 Jan 86 11:31:04-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Expressive ability
The expressive power of machine languages it the power of
being able to instruct a machine to do any elementary step
(machine instruction) that the machine has been designed to
do. That kind of expressive power is thus irrevocably tied
to a particular machine architecture, so let's call it
``machine power''.
Like many other computer scientists, advocates of logic
programming understand the advantages of relinquishing machine
power in favor of ``abstraction power'': the ability to express
abstract relationships and processes without having to delve
into the peculiarities of the implementation of that expression
on a particular machine.
The discipline needed to keep abstractions alive in a language
with substantial machine power (such as Lisp) seems beyond the
grasp of most programmers, to judge by their products. Learning
to use a language with superior abstraction power but little
machine power takes time and also requires discipline, but pays
off in better products: maintainable, reusable.
The tremendous growth and success of modern mathematics depended
in no small measure on the acquisition by mathematicians of
increasingly powerful abstraction tools. The laborious combinato
-rial methods of 19th century algebra (the mathematical counter
-part of machine power), are today of only historical interest,
and no one (well, almost no one...) would blame a present-day
mathematician for not being able to work in those terms.
Our inability to build reliable software products is not due to
lack of machine power in our tools (we have had plenty ot that...)
but to our inability to predict the interactions between components
for which there are no good abstract specifications and implementa
-tions. The practice of Lisp programming shows this clearly. Current
logic programming tools are somewhat better, but clearly not good
enough, particularly with respect to modularity.
We should not let criticisms of logic programming from the point of
view of a programming practice discredited by the unreliability of
its products manuever us into wasting our effort trying to increase
the machine power of logic programming tools rather than building on
logic programming's strength, abstraction power.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂30-Jan-86 0756 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:YM@SU-AI.ARPA a seminar of interest
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 07:56:05 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 30 Jan 86 07:50:24-PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 30 Jan 86 07:50:11-PST
Date: 30 Jan 86 0752 PST
From: Yoni Malachi <YM@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: a seminar of interest
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
∂29-Jan-86 1142 trish@su-isl.ARPA ISL Seminar EE 370
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 11:42:41 PST
Received: from su-isl.arpa by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 29 Jan 86 11:32:13 pst
Received: by su-isl.arpa with TCP; Wed, 29 Jan 86 11:34:01 pst
To: su-bboards@su-isl.ARPA, msgs@su-isl.ARPA
Cc: jparker@su-sierra.ARPA
Subject: ISL Seminar EE 370
Date: 29 Jan 86 11:33:50 PST (Wed)
From: trish@su-isl.ARPA
EE 370 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS SEMINAR
DATE: Thurs. 1/30/86
TIME: 4:15 pm Room: Skilling 193
Refreshments at 4:00 in ISL Conference Room 126.
TITLE: SORTING WITH K-COMPARATORS
SPEAKER: John T. Gill, EE Dept., Stanford University
ABSTRACT
A k-comparator is a device that sorts its k inputs in a single
operation. (A k-comparator may be implemented either as special
purpose hardware or by a software subroutine.)
We consider the
problem of sorting n objects using k-comparators when n >> k
This work is a collaboration with Richard Beigel of the Stanford Computer
Science Department.
.PP
When k = 2 this is the problem of sorting using binary comparisons.
The information theoretic lower bound on the number of comparisons
needed, both worst case and average case, is log2 n!, which follows
from the facts that there are
n! possible orderings of the inputs and each comparison supplies at
most one bit of information. Many binary-comparison sorting
algorithms come close to this lower bound, including binary insertion
sort, merge sort, and (in the average case) Quicksort.
.PP
The information theoretic lower bound for general k is
log2 n! / log2 k k-comparisons. We
will present an algorithm which for large k has
worst case running time within a factor of 4 of this lower bound.
We also show that an analog of Quicksort has average running time
asymptotically equal to the lower bound for large k.
.PP
The problem of minimum k-comparison sorting is especially interesting
for small values of k. For k = 3, several algorithms have worst case
running times of log2 n! / log2 4, compared with the lower bound of
log2 n! / log2 6. It is an open question
whether log2 n! / log2 4 is in fact a lower bound.
∂30-Jan-86 0924 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI mailing lists
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 09:16:35 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 09:12:46-PST
From: csli-request
Subject: CSLI mailing lists
Sender: EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Reply-To: csli-request@su-csli.arpa
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
Please see the announcement in the CSLI calendar (which you should
have received last night).
If you received this message, you will receive both the CSLI weekly
calendar of public events and the monthly summary of research
progress. If you wish to receive only the monthly summary of research
or neither publication, please send a message to csli-request@su-csli.arpa.
-------
∂30-Jan-86 1049 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar in Logic and Foundations
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 10:47:23 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 30 Jan 86 10:44:30-PST
Date: 30 Jan 86 1028 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar in Logic and Foundations
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
Speaker: Professor Dag Westerstahl, visiting CSLI
Title: Branching generalized quantifiers (continued)
Time: Monday, February 3, 4:15 - 5:30 pm
Place: The Faculty lounge, 3rd floor, Math dept.
Abstract:
The idea that partially ordered prefixes (branchings) of the universal
and existential quantifiers occur in natural languages originates with
Hintikka, who in particular claimed that the Henkin quantifier occurs
essentially in English. In these talks, the notion of branching is extended
to (logics with) generalized quantifiers. It was Barwise who in "On
branching quantifiers in English" (J.Phil. Logic, 1979) observed that
certain non first-order quantifiers provide even more convincing examples
of proper branching in English - that paper is the point of departure of my
discussion. The first talk is concerned with finding a uniform truth de-
finition for sentences with branching generalized quantifiers, and related
issues such as monotonicity constraints on quantifiers which allow
branching. For example, a generalized Henkin prefix, with four arbitrary
quantifiers (of the appropriate types), is defined. The second talk gives
some simple facts about the logical expressive power of branching.
S. Feferman
∂30-Jan-86 1103 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 10:53:09 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 10:45:33-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The new improved winter quarter Happy Hour will be held
in the Greenberg Room this Friday evening at the
new improved hour of 4:00. Come one, come all!
-------
∂30-Jan-86 1538 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu A preliminary program for 1986 STOC
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 15:34:27 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 30 Jan 86 15:25:02-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 30 Jan 86 15:23:20-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 30 Jan 86 16:43:34 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 30 Jan 86 15:30:18 CST
Message-Id: <8601302130.AA14694@crys.wisc.edu>
Received: from CS.COLUMBIA.EDU by crys.wisc.edu; Thu, 30 Jan 86 15:30:06 CST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 15:11:46-EST
From: Zvi Galil <GALIL@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: A preliminary program for 1986 STOC
To: theory@CRYS.WISC.EDU
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 30 Jan 86 16:41:55 CST (Thu)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
1986 ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing
Berkeley, California, May 28-30, 1986
Wednesday Morning
Bounded-Width Polynomial-Size Branching Programs Recognize Exactly
Those Languages in NC.
David A. Barrington, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Improved Lower Bounds for Small Depth Circuits.
Johan Hastad, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
With Probability One, a Random Oracle Separates PSPACE from the
Polynomial-Time Hierarchy.
Jin-Yi Cai, Cornell University
Two Lower Bounds for Branching Programs.
M. Ajtai, IBM Almaden Research Center, L. Babai and P. Hajnal,
University of Chicago and Eotvos University, J. Komlos, University of
California, San Diego, and Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, E.
Szmereldi, University of Chicago and Hungarian Academy of Sciences,
Budapest, and G. Turan, University of Illinois, Chicago and Hungarian
Academy of Sciences, Szeged.
On Nontrivial Separators for k-Page Graphs and Simulations of
Nondeterministic One-Tape Turing Machines.
Zvi Galil, Columbia University and Tel-Aviv University, Ravi Kannan,
Carnegie-Mellon University, Endre Szmereldi, University of Chicago
and Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
How Hard is it to Marry at Random? (On the Approximation of the
Permanent).
Andrei Z. Broder, Digital Equipment Corporation.
Arthur Merlin Games versus Interactive Proof Systems.
Shafi Goldwasser, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Michael
Sipser, University of California, Berkeley.
The Complexity of Optimization Problems.
Mark W. Krentel, Cornell University.
Wednesday Afternoon
A Provably Efficient Algorithm for Dynamic Storage Allocation.
E. G. Coffman, Jr., AT&T Bell Laboratories, and F. T. Leighton,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Tight Bounds for Minimax Grid Mathching, With Applications to the
Average Case Analysis of Algorithms.
Tom Leighton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Peter Shor,
Mathematical, Sciences Research Institute.
Four Pages are Necessary and Sufficient.
Mihalis Yannakakis, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Roommate Stability Leads to Marriage -or- Gender is Necessary and
Sufficient.
Dan Gusfield, Yale University.
Making Data Structures Persistent.
James R. Driscoll, Carnegie-Mellon University, Neil Saranak, New York
University, Daniel D. Sleator, Carnegie-Mellon University, Robert E. Tarjan,
Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Rotation Distance, Triangulations, and Hyperbolic Geometry.
Daniel D. Sleator, Carnegie-Mellon University, Robert E. Tarjan,
Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories, William P. Thurston,
Princeton University.
A New Approach to the Maximum Flow Problem.
Andrew V. Goldberg, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Robert
E. Tarjan, Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Fast Algorithms for Convex Quadratic Programming and Multicommodity
Flows.
Sanjiv Kapoor and Pravin M. Vaidya, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign.
Thursday Morning
Parallel Hashing- An Efficient Implementation of Shared Memory.
Anna R. Karlin, Stanford University, and Eli Upfal, IBM San Jose.
Limits on the Power of Concurrent-Write Parallel Computation.
Paul Beame, University of Toronto.
New Lower Bounds for Parallel Computation.
Ming Li and Yaacov Yesha, Ohio State University.
Deterministic Selection in O(loglog N) Parallel Time.
Janos Komlos, University of California, San Diego, W. L. Steiger,
Rutgers University, Endre Szemeredi, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
Linear Programming with Two Variables per Inequality in Poly-Log Time.
George S. Lueker, University of California, Irvine, and Mathematical
Sciences Research Institute, and Vijaya Ramachandran, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and Mathematical Sciences Research
Institute.
Deterministic Coin Tossing and Accelerating Cascades: Micro and Macro
Techniques for Designing Parallel Algorithms.
Richard Cole, New York University, and Uzi Vishkin, New York
University and Tel-Aviv University.
Introducing Efficient Parallelism into Approximate String Matching.
Gad M. Landau, Tel-Aviv University, and Uzi Vishkin, New York
University and Tel-Aviv University.
Parallel Evaluation of Division-Free Arithmetic Expressions.
S. Rao Kosaraju, Johns Hopkins University.
Thursday Afternoon
Ramanujan Conjecture and Explicit Constructions of Expanders and
Super-Concentrators.
A. Lubotzky, Hebrew University, and R. Phillips and P. Sarnak,
Stanford University.
Non-Blocking Networks.
Paul Feldman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Joel Friedman,
University of California, Berkeley, and Nicholas Pippenger, IBM
Almaden Research Center.
An Optimal Sorting Algorithm for Mesh-Connected Arrays of Processors.
S. Rao Kosaraju, Johns Hopkins University, and Mikhail J. Atallah,
Purdue University.
Classifying Learnable Geometric Concepts with the Vapnik-Chervonenkis
Dimension.
Anselm Blumer, University of Denver, Andrzes Ehrenfeucht, University
of Colorado, Boulder, David Haussler, University of Denver, and
Manfred Warmuth, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Reasoning about Fair Concurrent Programs.
Constantin Courcoubetis, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM
Almaden Research Center, and Pierre Wolper, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
A Note on the One-Way Functions and Polynomial-Time Isomorphisms.
Ker-I Ko, University of Houston and Mathematical Sciences Research
Institute, Timothy J. Long, Ohio State University and New Mexico State
University, and Ding-Zhu, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute.
The Complexity of Reasoning About Knowledge and Time.
Joseph Y. Halpern and Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM Almaden Research Center.
Friday Morning.
A Provably Correct and Probably Fast Primality Test.
Shafi Goldwasser and Joe Kilian, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Uniform Closure Properties of P-Computable Functions.
Erich Kaltofen, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute and
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
A Fast Parallel Algorithm for Determining All Roots of a Polynomial
with Real Roots.
Michael Ben-Or, Hebrew University, Ephraim Feig, IBM Yorktown, Dexter
Kozen, Cornell University, and Prasoon Tiwari, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign.
Finding Irreducible Polynomials Over Finite Fields.
Leonard M. Adelman, University of Southern California, and Hendrik W.
Lenstra, University of Amsterdam and Mathematical Sciences Institute.
Pseudo-Random Permutation Generators and the Data Encryption Standard.
Michael Luby and Charles Rackoff, University of Toronto.
The Impossibility of Secure Coin Flips When Half the Processors are
Faulty.
Richard Cleve, University of Toronto.
Fault Tolerance in Networks of Bounded Degree.
Cynthia Dwork, David Peleg, Nicholas Pippenger, and Eli Upfal, IBM San
Jose.
Friday Afternoon
A Linear-Time Algorithm for Triangulating Simple Polygons.
Robert E. Tarjan, Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories, and
Christopher J. Van Wyk, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Topologically Sweeping an Argument.
Herbert Edelsbrunner, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, and
Leonidas J. Guibas, Digital Equipment Corporation and Stanford
University.
Constructing Higher-Dimensional Convex Hulls at Logarithmic Cost per
Face.
Raimund Seidel, Cornell University.
Further Applications of Random Sampling to Computational Geometry.
Kenneth L. Clarkson, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Probing Convex Polytopes.
D. Dobkin, Princeton University, H. Edelsbrunnner, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and C. K. Yap, New York University.
Two Probabilistic Results on Rectilinear Steiner Trees.
Marshall W. Bern, University of California, Berkeley.
To Compute the Volume is Difficult.
I. barany and Z. Furedi, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, and
Rutgers University.
Aspects of Information Flow in VLSI Circuits.
Alan Siegel, New York University.
--------------
TN Message #18
--------------
∂30-Jan-86 1736 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA S6 unavailable tomorrow
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 17:35:23 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 17:33:24-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: S6 unavailable tomorrow
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179489386.45.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
We'd like to take S6 from 1 to 3 tomorrow afternoon to install a cooling
fan in the color system. If this presents a big hassle to you, let me
know.
-- Rich
-------
∂30-Jan-86 1825 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA HPP-3670-4 and KSL-3600-8
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 18:20:17 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 18:19:32-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: HPP-3670-4 and KSL-3600-8
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179497784.45.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
For the moment, S4 is down. Its power cord has been moved to S8,
which is now up and running with its console in C2-4 (near S2 and S6).
S8 is running release 6.1. I encourage everyone to try using 6.1 on
S8 to make sure their software works with it. If it goes well, I hope
to bring up 6.1 on S2, S5, S6, and S7 soon. My current plan is to
overwrite the current worlds with Simple in them, since those seem to
be no longer used. Please let me know if this is a problem for you.
S4 might come back up briefly after a new power cord is installed
and before it moves to MJH.
-- Rich
-------
∂30-Jan-86 1913 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Symbolics release 6.1
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 19:00:41 PST
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 18:59:57-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Symbolics release 6.1
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179505143.45.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I've finally recieved one copy of the release notes. If you'd like to
look at them, come by my office. Mostly, they talk about changes in
raster (bitmap) operations caused by the upcoming (in release 7.0) change
to row-major arrays, and the NFILE protocol. There should be very few
incompatibilities between 6.0 and 6.1.
-- Rich
-------
∂31-Jan-86 0839 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Class Lists
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 08:38:55 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 08:34:41-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Class Lists
To: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179653460.29.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I have put preliminary class lists in your mailboxes (if you have one
in MJH), or sent them through ID mail. Let me know if you don't receive
anything within the next few days.
-Gina
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1105 NUNBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA Harry Caray day
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 11:05:00 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 10:59:47-PST
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Harry Caray day
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
On Saturday, May 3, we will be organizing a field trip to Candlestick
Park to watch the Giants take on the Cubs (game time: 1:05). In order
to secure a block of good seats (first-base line lower boxes), we
should order as soon as possible after tickets go on sale, March 24.
If you want to come, please give nine dollars per ticket to Suzi at
the CSLI desk. (Boxes are up a dollar from last year.) The deadline
for requests is March 24.
The box office people tell me that we can arrange to have a greeting
flashed on the scoreboard. Any suggestions? Also, John Perry has
agreed to write a brief precis of the game of baseball for the benefit
of foreign guests.
Geoff Nunberg
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1126 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA hh
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 11:26:21 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 11:19:55-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: hh
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Happy Hour begins at 4:00 in the Greenberg Room tonight. Untold
delights await you there.
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1224 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Spring Colloquium
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 12:24:35 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 12:20:16-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Spring Colloquium
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179694526.35.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I need a volunteer to handle the CS Collquium during Spring Quarter.
It is CS500 and meets every Tuesday at 4:15. "Handling" the colloquium
means lining up the ten or so speakers needed and introducing them
at the colloquium. Most of you who have done this know that it is not
a difficult task---I did it last Autumn Quarter. It is an important
series because it gives all of us, students, staff and faculty, an
opportunity to hear about ongoing research in computer science.
Prime volunteer pool: faculty members who have never done it
Next: faculty members who haven't done it in "a long time"
Thanks, -Nils
p.s. We already have some speaker prospects
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1414 HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA BATS - call for speakers
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 14:14:40 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 13:57:34-PST
From: BATS coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: BATS - call for speakers
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179712239.33.HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Now that Joan is busy interviewing on the East Coast, I am going to be
the Stanford coordinator for the Bay Area Theory Seminar (BATS).
The next BATS will be at IBM Alamden on Friday, Feb. 28th. We still
need a speaker from Stanford for that BATS. Anyone who's interested
should contact me.
Ramsey.
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1427 STUCKY@SU-CSLI.ARPA STanford Computer Forum
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 14:26:54 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 14:22:17-PST
From: Susan Stucky <Stucky@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: STanford Computer Forum
To: research@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: ras@SU-CSLI.ARPA
STANFORD COMPUTER FORUM Tour of CSLI
Wednesday, February 5
2-4 at Ventura Hall
Each year, the Stanford Computer Forum holds a meeting at Stanford for
representatives from their industrial affiliates. Aside from a day and
a half of talks by graduate students and faculty from the computer
science department, there is a half-day allowed for tours of labs etc.
They have graciously invited CSLI to host a tour as part of this
meeting. Participating in the Forum meetings seems to be a good idea for
a lot of obvious reasons; it allows us to participate in the larger
community at Stanford as well as to make ourselves known in the
industrial community.
This year's Forum meeting takes place this coming week, Tuesday and
Wednesday. That's Feb. 4 and 5. You are hereby invited (and strongly
urged) to come over to Ventura, where the presentation to the affiliates
will be held. I realize that this is very short notice, and that we
should have sent out a message much earlier. Nevertheless, I hope that
you can come. In particular, I urge graduate students to stop by. One
of the reasons companies belong to this program is to have first crack
at hiring graduates. Since it's going to take a long time for industry
to get used to the idea of hiring their very own resident philosopher,
we'd better get started.
Here's the plan. As some of you know, the CSLI tour is Wednesday
afternoon, from 2-4. The tour consists of two parts: an hour
presentation that includes an overview of the Center by John Perry and
talks by Jon Barwise and Phil Cohen on their research. That's mostly for
the affiliate representatives. The second hour (3-4)is a little less
formal. That's where you come in. There will be a couple of demos of
HUG and of BLT, which are two grammar writing environments being
developed by the foundations of Grammar folks. This is also a time for
the researchers from the affiliate companies (there are 75 in all, a
third of which are interested in AI--we're expecting 25-50 people) to
meet the researchers here. They will have some materials on the research
program as a whole and I'm hoping John will actually be able to mention
some projects and names. Introduce yourselves. Introduce other people.
There will be coffee, tea and pastries to help get you over any awkward
silences. Obviously, some of us are going to be better at this than
others.
If you have any questions--if you don't know what affiliates programs
are all about and your curiosity is piqued, say-- give me a call or send
a message.
Susan Stucky
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1746 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Buffet supper industry attendees
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 17:46:49 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 17:42:23-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Buffet supper industry attendees
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-faculty@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179753166.45.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The list is long, but I will list the names of the companies that will
be represented at the Tuesday Evening Buffet Supper. The plan for
Tuesday evening is to have the buffet supper from 6 to 8. Then only the
industrial visitors stay for a special session from 8 to 10.
ARCO
BELL LABS
AT&T INFORMATION SYSTEMS
BANK OF AMERICA
BELLCORE
BNR
BOEING
BULL CORP. OF AMERICA
BURROUGHS
CHEVRON
DEC
EG&G IDAHO
ERICSSON
ESL
FUJITSU
GENERAL DYNAMICS
GE
GM
GRE
GTE (Oliver Selfridge is one)
H-P
HONEYWELL
HUGHES
IBM SCIENTIFIC CENTER
IBM RESEARCH
IBM JAPAN (JAPAN SCIENCE INST)
INFERENCE CORPORATION
INTEL
KODAK
LOTUS
NCR
OLIVETTI
PACIFIC TELESIS
PHILIPS
PHILIPS NETHERLANDS
P&G
RICOH
ROCKWELL
SCHLUMBERGER-DOLL
SCHLUMBERGER-SPAR
SIEMENS
SIGNAAL
SINGER KEARFOTT
SOHIO PETROLEUM
SOHIO R&D
SPERRY
TEKTRONIX
TEXACO
TI
TRW
VARIAN
XEROX PARC
CAROLYN
-------
∂31-Jan-86 1751 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next week's PLANLUNCH -- WEDNESDAY -- Feb. 5
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 17:51:38 PST
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 17:44:36-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next week's PLANLUNCH -- WEDNESDAY -- Feb. 5
To: planlunch.dis: ;
PLANLUNCH seminars will be held on WEDNESDAY (11am) for the next three
weeks, starting with Marcel Schoppers on Feb. 5 (see abstract below).
Following that, we will have Dan Carnese on Feb. 12 and Leslie Kaelbling
on Feb. 19. After these three talks, we will resume the normal Monday
seminar time. Notice also that next week's seminar will be held in
a different location -- the old AIC conference room.
-Amy Lansky
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AND ACTING IN DYNAMIC DOMAINS:
AN EXPERIMENT WITH AN AUTONOMOUS ROBOT
Marcel Schoppers
SRI International
and
University of Illinois
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, February 5
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242 (old conference room)
This talk will describe progress made toward having an autonomous
mobile robot reason and plan complex tasks in real-world environments.
To cope with the dynamic and uncertain nature of the world, we use a
highly reactive, goal-directed system based on SRI's Procedural
Reasoning System. Preplanning is only done where necessary, and does
not use classical planning techniques. This architecture allows the
integration of complex reasoning with real-time response, and allows
us to eliminate overly constrained expectations about the environment,
overly specific domain knowledge (such as room-to-room distances), and
other forms of over-commitment common to previous planners.
During the talk we will exhibit SRI's autonomous robot (Flakey) in a
scenario involving navigation and the performance of an emergency task
on a simulated space station. We believe this to be the first
demonstration of a robot combining rich cognitive and reactive
capabilities.
-------
∂31-Jan-86 2014 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #7
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 20:14:01 PST
Date: 31 Jan 86 1653-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #7
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Friday, 31 Jan 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 7
Today's Topic:
Response to PARSYM Survey on Debugging
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 30 Jan 86 17:53:39-PST
From: Michael S. Kenniston <MSK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: survey
Survey Response:
>> 1. Briefly describe the hardware architecture (MIMD/SIMD, number of
>> processors, distributed vs. shared memory), programming system
>> (language, interpreted vs. compiled), and application.
We have a couple dozen SUN (68000 family) and MicroVax workstations
(exact number varies as we buy more) connected to an Ethernet, running
the "V" operating system (see [Cheriton] in IEEE Software, April '84)
which provides cheap process creation and messages. A restricted form
of shared memory is also available, but messages are the preferred
form of interprocess communication. Nearly everything is programmed
in the C language. As this is an experimental system, most of the
software is system software (file servers, internet servers, name
servers, print spoolers, compilers, etc.) but there are also a few
applications (VLSI layout, bulletin board service). (Other sites are
using V as well, presumably for applications, but I'm not familiar
with those.)
>> 2. Are your bugs typically "serial" or "concurrent"; i.e., do they
>> occur in the midst of sequential code running on a single processor,
>> or do they have to do with communication, timing, or network resource
>> conflict?
Typically "serial"; most bugs seem to be caused by a single process,
and are of relatively familiar types (stack overflow, table overflows,
misconceptions about the meaning of data structures, etc). Note,
however, that althought "concurrent" bugs are less common, they are
often hard to find.
>> 3. What kind of output does your program have so that you can detect a
>> bug? How do bugs manifest themselves?
The project I work with most normally produces graphical output, and
also has a command to dump a lot of internal variables. Bugs usually
manifest themselves by obviously incorrect graphical output,
processor-trapped exceptions (e.g. odd address), or refusal to accept
any input.
>> 4. What kinds of debugging tools do you have?
We have a single-process assembly-language debugger. My former
office-mate and I both used "printf" statements (and recompilation)
because we couldn't stand debugging in assembly-language. (This is
particularly ironic because my project is an experimental debugger!)
>> 5. What literature references, including your own, would you recommend
>> for learning about debugging parallel programs?
Many people (including, alas, me) have proposed nifty new ways to
debug, but very few have actually studied how people debug now and
published their results. Many of the following deal with debugging in
general, but I recommend them for distributed debugging as well:
Barron, D. W. "Programming in Wonderland", The Computer Bulletin,
Vol 15 page 153, April 1971.
This is just a short, satiric story. First you laugh, then
you cry. Useful as a reminder that we shouldn't put up with
lousy tools.
Cargill, Thomas A. "The Blit Debugger", Sigplan Notices, Vol 18 No 8,
pp 190-198, August 1983.
A simple tool with a good user interface is more useful than
a fancy one that nobody uses.
Garcia-Molina, Hector, et. al. "Debugging a Distributed Computing
System", IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol 10 No 2,
pages 210-219, March 1984.
Describes the authors' experiences debugging real programs in
a distributed system.
Johnson, John D. and Kenney, Gary W. "Implementation Issues for a
Source Level Symbolic Debugger", Sigplan Notices Vol 18 No 8,
pages 149-151, August 1983
A good list of recommendations for what you ought to have in
a debugger.
Marzullo, Keith. "Maintaining the Time in a Distributed System", Ph.D.
Thesis, Stanford University, 1984. (Also available as a
Xerox PARC technical report.)
Describes experiences debugging a real distributed application.
McDaniel, Gene. "METRIC: A Kernel Instrumentation System for Distributed
Environments", Proceedings of SOSP 6, ACM, pages 93-99,
November 1977.
A description of a simple event logger that was actually used
by real programmers.
Schoch, John F. and Hupp, Jon A. "The 'Worm' Programs -- Early
Experience with a Distributed Computation", CACM Vol 25 No 3,
pages 172-180, March 1982.
A description of problems encountered debugging a real distributed
application.
Van Horn, Earl C. "Three Criteria for Designing Computing Systems to
Facilitate Debugging", CACM Vol 11 No 5, pages 360-365, May 1968.
Almost 20 years old, but still good food for thought. Advice
on how to design a system from the ground up so you can debug
it later.
>> How can graphics be used to help debug parallel programs? How can we
>> graphically represent the execution of parallel programs to help us
>> understand and debug them?
This is a major topic of my dissertation [Kenniston, Michael S.,
"Debugging the Communications Behavior of Distributed Programs in a
Message-Based System", Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University, 1986 (to
appear)]. Basically, a debugger can log communication events (sends
and receives) and draw a space-time diagram of them on a bit-mapped
display. This can be done with acceptable efficiency in real systems.
>> How best can multiple windows be managed to display the behavior of
>> parallel programs? Which is better: fixed windows or pop-up windows?
I prefer a particular type of info in each window, rather than (or in
addition to) one per process. I don't care if the windows pop up or
hang around, as long as they overlap; there isn't enough room on the
screen for everything at once, not even with a 1000 X 800 bit-mapped
display.
>> What programming language features would help?
All messages should be typed, and the debugger should have access to
the type information. All communication actions should be explicit so
the debugger can identify them.
>> How do we debug complex parallel processes in the real world? For
>> example, how does a corporation or university recognize that one of
>> its departments is "faulty" or that communication between departments
>> is faulty? How does a football team recognize and repair its "bugs"?
Redundancy: There are usually many people within a system who are in a
position to notice that something is wrong.
Autonomy: For any given incorrect action in a system, that action will
probably have direct negative effects on one or more people. Those
people will notice, they have an incentive to correct matters, and
they generally have the authority to apply pressure to get the system
fixed. (Note that in real administrative systems, when no individual
is injured, or the affected people have no authority, the system often
does NOT get fixed. This indicates a design flaw in the system.)
>> In parallel systems, the presence of a debugging tool or a spy program
>> my induce a Heisenberg effect, causing the bug to disappear or a new
>> one to appear. How can this problem be minimized?
If you are willing to settle for post-mortem analysis of execution
logs, and can make the logging very efficient, then you can leave the
logging turned on all the time. This also helps with "cosmic-ray
bugs" (unreproducible behavior).
Additional Comments
The difference in difficulty between debugging a sequential program
and debugging a distributed program seems to be less than the
difference between having good debugging tools and having poor ones.
I completely agree with Gentleman's statement that "it's more
productive to analyze a selective history of the execution of a
program than to try to debug on one processor while the others are
still running."
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂31-Jan-86 2128 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Computer Forum 18th Annual Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 20:21:33 PST
Mail-From: TAJNAI created at 31-Jan-86 17:20:45
Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 17:20:44-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Forum 18th Annual Meeting
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-everyone@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12179749225.45.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-Date: Fri 31 Jan 86 18:29:55-PST
ReSent-From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
ReSent-Message-ID: <12179761818.19.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
*****************************************************************************
SPECIAL FUNCTIONS ARE FOR FACULTY, INDUSTRIAL VISITORS, AND INVITED GUESTS
ONLY. STUDENTS (OTHER THAN SPEAKERS) ARE INVITED TO ATTEND THE SESSIONS
ON A SPACE AVAILABLE BASIS., I.E., PEOPLE WITH NAME TAGS HAVE SEATING
PRIORITY. FORUM COMPANIES HAVE BEEN INVITED TO SEND 3 REPRESENTATIVES EACH
(OR MORE IF THEY ARE TIME SHARING). THE MEETING IS NOT OPEN TO COMPANIES
WHO DO NOT BELONG TO THE FORUM. ALL CSD/CSL FACULTY, STAFF, STUDENTS AND
INVITED GUESTS ARE WELCOME TO THE FINAL RECEPTION
Note we are having parallel sessions. A Sessions are being held in
CERAS; B Sessions in Tresidder Cypress Lounge
*****************************************************************************
STANFORD COMPUTER FORUM
Program for the Eighteenth Annual Meeting
4 - 6 February 1986
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Informal Buffet Supper 6:00 - 8:00 p.m., Tues., 4 Feb. 1986
Gold Lounge, Faculty Club
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preliminary Session 8:00 - 10:00 p.m., Tues. 4 Feb. 1986
Informal Gathering for Industrial Visitors, Gold Lounge, Faculty Club
This is for industrial visitors only.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registration & Buffet Breakfast 8:00 - 9:00 a.m., Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
Tresidder Union, Room 281 [Large Lounge on second floor]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plenary Session 9:00 - 9:45 a.m., Wed., 5 February 1986
Tresidder, Room 281
Prof. Terry Winograd
Conference Chairman
Prof. William Miller
Director, Stanford Computer Forum; President, SRI International
Prof. Nils Nilsson
Chairman, Department of Computer Science
Prof. John Hennessy
Director, Computer Systems Laboratory
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: A SESSIONS ARE IN CERAS; PARALLEL B SESSION IN TRESIDDER
Technical Session I A 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
CERAS Rm. 112
Session Chairman: Prof. Michael Genesereth
Apprenticeship Learning: A Study in Transfer of Expertise for Expert Systems
David Wilkins Advisor: Prof. Bruce Buchanan
Reasoning from Experimental Evidence
Glenn Rennels Advisor: Prof. Ted Shortliffe
Exploiting Design Constraints
Jeff Finger Advisor: Prof. Mike Genesereth
Choosing Directions for Rules
Richard Treitel Advisor: Prof. Mike Genesereth
Analogy: A Reasonable Reasoning Method
Stuart Russell Advisor: Prof. Mike Genesereth
Automatic Design of Graphical Presentations
Jock Mackinlay Advisor: Prof. Mike Genesereth
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session I B 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
Tresidder, Cypress Lounge, North and South
Session Chairman: Prof. Mike Flynn
Analysis of Cache Performance for Operating-system and Multi-tasking Workloads
Anant Agarwal Advisor: Prof. John Hennessy
Optimizations in Single Assignment Languages
K. Gopinath Advisor: Prof. John Hennessy
Reducing the Cost of Branches
Scott McFarling Advisor: Prof. John Hennessy
Partitioning Program Graphs for Execution on Multiprocessors
Vivek Sarkar Advisor: Prof. John Hennessy
The MIPS-X Microprocessor
Dr. Paul Chow
Processor Architecture and Memory System Performance
Chad Leland Mitchell Advisor: Prof. Mike Flynn
Memory Performance of Lisp and Prolog Programs
Evan Tick Advisor: Prof Mike Flynn
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luncheon 12:15 p.m., Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
Tresidder Union, Room 281
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tours and Demonstrations 1:30 - 4:00 p.m., Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
CIS
CSLI
KSL
Robotics Lab
Rodin Collection
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Systems Laboratory Seminar 4:15 - 5:00 p.m., Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
Skilling Auditorium
Important Areas of Computer Science Research as Seen from an Industrial
Viewpoint
Panel Discussion
Professor Jeff Ullman, Moderator
Dr. Elliot Pinson
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Dr. Janusz Kowalik
Boeing Computer Services Company
Dr. George Dodd
General Motors Research Laboratories
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evening Activities 6:00 p.m., Wed., 5 Feb. 1986
International Room, SRI International
6:00 p.m.: Social Hour
7:00 p.m.: Dinner
Toastmaster: Prof. William F. Miller
Cello Solo: Maarten Boasson
Title: Movements from Bach's First Cello Suite
Speaker: Prof. James Adams
Topic: Conceptual Blocks and Problem Solving
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continental breakfast 8:00 - 9:00 a.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Tresidder Union, Oak Lounge
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session II A 9:00 - 10:30 a.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
CERAS Rm. 112
Session Chairman: Prof. Fouad Tobagi
An Architecture for a High-Speed Network Interface Unit
Prof. Fouad Tobagi
Selective-broadcast interconnections (SBI)
Yitzhak Birk Advisor: Prof. Fouad Tobagi
Fiber-Optical Configurations for Local Area Networks
M. Mehdi Nassehi Advisor: Prof. Fouad Tobagi
Performance of Channel Access Schemes in Multihop Packet Radio Networks with
Regular Structure
David Shur Advisor: Prof. Fouad Tobagi
Throughput of a Spread Spectrum Packet Radio Network
James Storey Advisor: Prof. Fouad Tobagi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session II B 9:00 - 10:30 a.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Tresidder Cypress Lounge
Session Chairman: Prof. Jeff Ullman
Relationships Among Argument Sizes in Logic Programs
Allen Van Gelder Advisor: Prof. Jeff Ullman
Parallel Hashing - Shared Variables without Shared Memory
Anna Karlin Advisor: Prof. Jeff Ullman
Recursion Elimination and Reduction in Function-Free Inference Rules
Jeff Naughton Advisor: Prof. Jeff Ullman
Updating Databases with Incomplete Information
Marianne Wilkins Advisor: Prof. Gio Wiederhold
A Mathematical Theory of Plan Synthesis
Ed Pednault Advisor: Prof. Gio Wiederhold
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * Coffee Break * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session III A 10:45 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
CERAS Rm. 112
Session Chairman: Prof. Steve Lundstrom
Parallel Distributed Computations on a Workstation Cluster
Dr. Michael Stumm
Replication of Computer Bulletin Boards
Ginger Edighoffer Advisor: Prof. Keith Lantz
Performance Prediction of Concurrent Systems
Victor Mak Advisor: Prof. Steve Lundstrom
Dynamic Placement of Communicating Objects on Loosely Coupled Multiprocessors
Jerry Yan Advisor: Prof. Steve Lundstrom
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session III B 10:45 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Tresidder, Cypress Lounge
Session Chairman: Prof. David Luckham
The Semantics of Dynamic Memory Operations
Ian Mason Advisor: Prof. Solomon Feferman
Design and Verification of Distributed Runtime Supervisors for
Concurrent Languages
David Rosenblum Advisor: Prof. David Luckham
An Environment Interface for Requirement Analysis
Randy Neff Advisor: Prof. David Luckham
Testing Ada Software Against Formal Specifications
Sriram Sankar Advisor: Prof. David Luckham
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luncheon 12:15 p.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Tresidder Union, Room 281
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session IV A 1:30 - 2:45 p.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
CERAS Rm. 112
Session Chairman: Prof. Tom Binford
Multi-Scale Directional Edge Operators For Range And Intensity Images
Dr. Jean Ponce
Sensor and Algorithm Modeling for Prediction
David Chelberg Advisor: Prof. Tom Binford
Tactile Sensing for Dextrous Manipulation
Ron Fearing Advisor: Prof. Tom Binford
Problem Reformulation and Representation Change
Michael Lowry Advisor: Prof. Tom Binford
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session IV B 1:30 - 2:45 p.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Tresidder, Cypress Lounge
Session Chairman: Prof. Christos Papadimitriou
Planning Shortest Paths
Joe Mitchell Advisor: Prof. C. Papadimitriou
Complexity Issues of Cycles and Paths in Graphs
Esther Arkin Advisor: Prof. C. Papadimitriou
Generalized Graph Coloring Problems
Vlad Rutenburg Advisor: Prof. C. Papadimitriou
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * Short Break * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session V A 3:00 - 4:30 p.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
CERAS Rm. 112
Session Chairman: Prof. Brian Reid
Smalltalk on a RISC: Triumphs and Tragedies
Prof. David Ungar
Graphical Foundations for User Interfaces
Scott Kim Advisor: Prof. Don Knuth
Editing Procedural Representations of Graphical Objects
Paul Asente Advisor: Prof. Brian Reid
High-Resolution Printing Without a Frame Buffer
Carolyn Bell Advisor: Prof. Brian Reid
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Session V B 3:00 - 4:30 p.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Tresidder, Cypress Lounge
Session Chairman: Prof. Joe Oliger
Improving Gauss-Newton Methods for Nonlinear Least Squares Problems
Christina Fraley Advisor: Prof. Joe Oliger
Some New Optimal Iterative Parallel Algorithms for the Solution of Elliptic
P.D.E.
Wei-Pei Tang Advisor: Prof. Joe Oliger
Linear Programming Controversy: Practice versus Complexity Theory
Irvin Lustig Advisor: Prof. George Dantzig
Query-Limited Reducibilities
Richard Beigel Advisor: Prof. John Gill
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reception 4:30 - 6:00 p.m., Thurs., 6 Feb. 1986
Faculty Club, Red and Gold Lounges
An informal reception will be held at the Faculty Club to
enable our visitors to become better acquainted not only
with the faculty and students they have seen during the
past two days, but also to meet the students and staff of
the entire Computer Science Department and Computer
Systems Laboratory.
-------
∂31-Jan-86 2339 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa A Modest Proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Jan 86 23:38:44 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 31 Jan 86 23:34:31-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:33:35 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA08751; Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:30:07 pst
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:30:07 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602010730.AA08751@coraki.uucp>
To: faculty@su-score.ARPA
Subject: A Modest Proposal
It has come to my attention that a considerable amount of the DARPA
money that was provided some years ago for upgrading our general
research facilities remains unspent.
This money appears to have been distributed in four categories: KSL,
CSL, Formal Reasoning, and general CSD allocation. The spokesmen for
the first three categories are Ed Feigenbaum, John Hennessy, and John
McCarthy. By far the largest residue is in the fourth category: some
$580,000.
I don't know whether I am qualified to speak for any of the first three
categories, but I believe I am as qualified as anyone to speak for the
fourth, CSD, unless its spokesman wishes to step forward and resume the
helm of this Flying Dutchman.
I propose that the residue of the CSD money now be spent on computing
resources for research, as was DARPA's intent. I further propose a
modification to the general CSD allocation. The rationale for this
modification is based on the following two premises.
(i) Since so little of the general CSD allocation has been spent to
date, by comparison to the other allocations, it would appear that the
CSD allocation was out of proportion to need.
(ii) The distribution to KSL, CSL, and Formal Reasoning appears not to
cover all faculty, many of whom have research needs no less critical
than those faculty who are covered. I do not understand how all
faculty were intended to be accommodated under the allocation, but I
propose to do something about it now.
With this in mind I propose that a new category, "Meek," be created,
consisting of those who didn't speak up the first time around, with
myself as its spokesman, and that the meek inherit half the CSD
allocation, to be distributed equally (as measured by faculty head
count, recognizing fractions), or in proportion to need when a case
can be made.
A rough approximation to the "meek" faculty is as follows. It attempts
to omit just those who (presumably) are beneficiaries of the KSL, CSL,
and Formal Reasoning allocations; please complain at once of any Type I
or Type II errors (incorrect omissions or inclusions).
Floyd Mayr Ullman
Golub Nilsson Wiederhold
Guibas Oliger Winograd
Knuth Papadimitriou Yao
Manna Pratt
At a half-share of $290K for a head count of about 13 (give or take a
couple when the list settles down) this comes to around $22K per head.
If any subset of this list feels intimidated by spending this princely
sum on their own and would feel more comfortable letting someone else
manage it I will be happy to organize that subset into a consortium
(group, Lie algebra, whatever) and manage its share for it to the
extent necessary to meet its research computing needs.
It is hard not to notice the preponderance of theorists on this list.
However once you've accounted for KSL, CSL, and Formal Reasoning it is
not so surprising given the strength of the department's theoretical
*research*. I emphasize the word "research" here, this being what
DARPA wanted the money spent on, after all.
I respectfully submit this proposal to the faculty for their
consideration.
-v
∂01-Feb-86 0725 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:CAB@SU-AI.ARPA self-referential meekness
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Feb 86 07:25:48 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 1 Feb 86 07:21:42-PST
Date: 01 Feb 86 0723 PST
From: Chuck Bigelow <CAB@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: self-referential meekness
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Vaughan speaks up for all the CSD faculty who don't speak up for themselves.
∂01-Feb-86 1148 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: A Modest Proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Feb 86 11:48:23 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 1 Feb 86 11:44:13-PST
Date: Sat 1 Feb 86 11:47:00-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: A Modest Proposal
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <8602010730.AA08751@coraki.uucp>
Message-ID: <12179950616.25.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I did receive some funds, but must say that it was very painful, had to be
negotiated at every point, and involved unkept promises of shared equipment.
I have no idea of what my `fair' share is, or how it should be allocated
(By no. of faculty, by amount of research grants from ARPA, amount of
research grants total, or no. of graduate students.)
At this point I suggest strongly
1. asking for a no-cost extension (The money is due to disappear in March? ).
2. using the money for maintenance as well - getting more equipment
which is not maintained and just fills up space is more frustrating
than anything else.
Gio
-------
∂01-Feb-86 1741 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SU-AI.ARPA An Immodest Proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Feb 86 17:41:37 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 1 Feb 86 17:36:55-PST
Date: 01 Feb 86 1739 PST
From: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: An Immodest Proposal
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I am puzzled by Vaughan Pratt's proposal that he take responsibility for
spending some $290K in CSD computer facility funds. His "Modest Proposal"
begins:
"It has come to my attention that a considerable amount of the DARPA
money that was provided some years ago for upgrading our general
research facilities remains unspent."
He neglects to mention how this information came to his attention: it was
in a message from me inviting him to join the Facilities Committee in
reviewing this matter. Vaughan subsequently reported that he had not read
the message carefully and so missed the first meeting, on Friday.
The Facilities Committee had been asked by Nils to review and formulate
plans in this area. We spent two hours on Friday discussing how best to
structure the review and set up subcommittees to formulate specific
proposals in 6 functional areas. It is our plan to inform the faculty of
our approach and to invite additional proposals or participation by
interested parties. (A message on these matters will be forthcoming
shortly.) Our final proposals will, of course, be open for general review
and modification.
I am sorry that Vaughan missed the meeting. I am sure that his request
for control of a substantial portion of these funds is not based on any
disagreement over priorities, since he is not yet aware of our initial
plans. My immodest proposal is that Vaughan join the committee at least
long enough to figure out whether he agrees or disagrees with our
approach.
Responding to points raised by Gio, we have already gotten a one year
extension on the facilities contract, which now runs out May 31. While we
can do some things that will ease the maintenance burden, such as buying
spare parts, and are planning to do so, we cannot legally contract for
maintenance beyond the life of the contract.
Les Earnest
Facilities Committee Chair
∂01-Feb-86 2354 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Re: An Immodest Proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Feb 86 23:54:48 PST
Received: from su-pescadero.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sat 1 Feb 86 23:50:44-PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 1 Feb 86 23:50:54 pst
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 86 23:50:54 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa>
Subject: Re: An Immodest Proposal
To: LES@Sail, faculty@SU-Score
As a member of the facilities committee, I support and am participating in
the examination of how to spend the DARPA funds that Les described.
However, as a DARPA contractor, I see an entirely different "fair" view from
Vaughan's that might be taken, namely...
The original DARPA facilities money was provided to significantly improve
the computer facilities of DARPA-supported PI's. The distribution of money
into 4 pots was designed to allow distributed decision making. At the time,
the CSD pot was primarily targeted at a large-scale timesharing machine
and some terminal support (MacSuns). For a variety of reasons, the money
has not been spent. However, over the last 4 years, those of us who are
DARPA contractors have had to struggle to upgrade and maintain experimental
facilities at a level required for adequate performance of our contracts
with DARPA (and of course to achieve our own research goals.) The problem
has been severely aggravated by the rapid technological change during this
time. Also, DARPA program managers have applied pressure for us to rely
on these facilities funds in place of budgeting equipment in proposals.
At this point in time, DARPA is asking some to reduce costs/requests
due to the budget pressure on DARPA.
Personally, I can think of nothing fairer or better for the dept. than
addressing the current (as opposed to 4 year-old) equipment needs of
the DARPA PIs with this money. After all, that is why the money is here
at all and these PIs are the only ones with money and staff to operate and
maintain the equipment.
In general, it seems far more appropriate for surplus (older) DARPA-funded
equipment to migrate to wider general department when possible, than to
give the "meeks" 1986 equipment while DARPA PI's struggle with '82 relics.
David C.
P.S. Some of the "meeks" (e.g. Jeff Ullman) are DARPA PI's and none of them
are precluded from becoming one.
∂02-Feb-86 0658 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Rationale for my proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Feb 86 06:58:11 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 2 Feb 86 06:54:07-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 2 Feb 86 06:52:26 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA10500; Sun, 2 Feb 86 06:47:56 pst
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 86 06:47:56 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602021447.AA10500@coraki.uucp>
To: faculty@su-score.ARPA
Subject: Rationale for my proposal
What Les sent me in the way of notice of the first meeting of his
committee was not quite what he sent the committee, and the unintended
effect of what I received was that I learned the correct time of the
meeting too late to attend. Until I have an opportunity to present
my views to Les's committee I will continue to address them to the
faculty at large, from where it should reach the committee anyway.
The main issue is surely the extent to which the money is earmarked for
DARPA investigators. Shortly before I left for Sun I attended some of
the early discussions of this arrangement, including one involving Bob
Kahn (at which, incidentally, Bob grumbled about how much better
Stockman was doing than Weinberger, my how time flies!). One
noteworthy feature of that discussion was the question, raised
repeatedly, of what non-DARPA uses the money could be put to. I don't
think Kahn ever gave a straight answer to this question. It seemed as
though he wanted to provide for the department as a whole, but that
technically DARPA had to take the position that the money was for
DARPA-supported research. I would be interested in how others who were
present at these meetings interpreted Bob's evident reluctance to
answer this question directly.
In view of how the contract is presumably worded it may well be
inappropriate for a non-DARPA PI to be administering these funds,
although that would be worth investigating further. If this is indeed
the case then I withdraw with regret my offer of such administration.
However, David's eloquently expressed trickle-down theory
notwithstanding, I leave intact my proposal to spread some of the
remaining money further around the department than David is happy
with. If this is not done the current extreme schism between the haves
and the have-nots of the department will only widen.
I remind people that our department, along with MIT's and CMU's, is not
eligible for NSF Coordinate Experimental Research (CER) money for
equipment precisely because of the ready availability of DARPA
support. CER grants typically amount to about $5M per department,
considerably more than the DARPA money we are talking about. It was
surely more in recognition of this inequity than out of a sense of the
current DARPA contractors' poverty that DARPA provided this support. If
the part of the Stanford department to which I belong is going to be
made to suffer in a way that happens at no other department in the top
10, I will cease to see the advantages of being a member of this
department.
In view of the fact that CMU does not have Stanford's reluctance to
share the DARPA wealth more uniformly around the department, I infer
that the forces limiting this distribution come not from DARPA but from
within the department. It is to the advantage of the have's to
perpetuate the myth that DARPA is very strict about how their money is
to be spent. David's message provides a prototypical case of this
argument.
I will be happy to make the case for this both to the faculty and to
Les's committee at any opportunity that presents itself. For now
faculty@score seems to have been a quite effective medium in getting
a lot of people thinking about the issue. It is not clear to me how
this can be accomplished without making some people feel that their
turf is being threatened. I apologize to those people, and ask for
more forbearance from them in this regard than they presently appear
willing to grant.
-v
∂02-Feb-86 1235 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA fun with DVI
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Feb 86 12:34:56 PST
Date: Sun 2 Feb 86 12:35:09-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: fun with DVI
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180221524.41.TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
To get the feature where the LispM DVI Previewer can send your file to Boise,
load I:>dvi>code>patchdvi.bin and it'll be on the H key when you're in the
previewer.
I don't know whether the regular Hardcopy command understands DVI format, but
my guess is no -- Joe?
- Richard
-------
∂03-Feb-86 0202 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #5
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 02:02:03 PST
Date: Monday, January 27, 1986 4:55AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #5
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 28 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Syntactic Sugar & Coding Algorithms,
LP Philosophy - What is the expressive power of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 86 16:59:46-EST (Mon)
From: Zerksis D. Umrigar <Zerksis%sutcase.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa>
Subject: More syntactic sugar for Prolog.
One can drastically reduce the use of cuts in Prolog programs
by the use of if-then-else control constructs. However, I feel
that the syntax of 'if P then Q else R' in most Prolog implement
-ations (P-> Q ; R) leaves much to be desired. By introducing
a declaration similar to op, it should be possible to permit non
-iterative control constructs similar to those found in most
procedural languages, while still retaining the syntax of Prolog
"clauses" as terms.
Basically, the idea is that one should allow general parentheses,
with general punctuation. Hence one can think of 'if' as left
parenthesis with say 'end←if' as the closing parenthesis. 'then'
and 'else' would be general punctuation marks. The precedence of
any term enclosed within general parentheses would be identical to
that enclosed within '(' and ')' (0 for DEC-10 Prolog). The
declaration could be something like :-paren([if,then,else,end←if]).
By allowing suitable meta-characters in the declaration, one
could specify optional punctuation, or punctuation characters
which are repeated 0 or more times. This would make possible the
use of if-then and case control constructs. (The semantics of
the case statement would be to commit to the first alternative
whose guard is solved successfully). Another useful
construct would be something similar to case, which would allow
backtracking over the "guards" - (equivalent to cut-free disjunction
in regular Prolog).
If the implementation looks at the control constructs at the
top-level of a "clause", it should be possible for it to
automatically generate indexing information to obtain rapid
access to the chosen alternative. This should make it
possible to write efficient single-"clause" procedures.
Hopefully, this sugared syntax should be easier to read and
comprehend than regular Prolog syntax.
Any comments?
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jan 1986 00:04-CST
From: Kale@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU
Subject: Coding an interesting algorithm in Prolog
Recently, I was reading an algorithm (fairly complex, it seemed)
for finding the median of a set of numbers in linear time. At the
back of my mind were arguments I recently had regarding the
suitability of Prolog for coding complex algorithms. So I decided
to code it. I was pleasnatly surprised at the simplicity of code
and the ease of coding.
Here is the code:
/* Given a list of length N and a number K, `select' selects an
element, E, of the list such that there are exactly K-1 elemets
less than E. This can be used for finding the median by calling
it with K = length/2.
The algorithm requires 28*N comparisons. */
select(L,K,V) :- length(L,N), N < 28, !, sort(L,L1), nth←member
(L1,K,V).
select(L,K,V) :-
choose(L,M), /* Choose a member of L that is `close' to
the median */
partition(L,M,L1,Length1,L2),
((K =< Length1, select(L1,K,V)) ;
(K2 is K - Length1, select(L2,K2,V))).
choose(L,M) :- medians(L,S,Length←S), N is (Length←S // 2)+1, select
(S,N,M).
medians([X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6,X7|Rest],[Y|New],Length1) :- !,
sort([X1,X2,X3,X4,X5,X6,X7],[←,←,←,Y,←,←,←]),
medians(Rest,New,Length), Length1 is Length+1.
medians(L,[],0).
partition([],M,[],0,[]).
partition([First|Rest],M,[First|L1],Length1,L2) :-
First < M, !,
partition(Rest,M,L1,Length,L2),
Length1 is Length + 1.
partition([First|Rest],M,L1,Length1,[First|L2]) :-
partition(Rest,M,L1,Length1,L2).
nth←member([F|R],1,F).
nth←member([F|R],N,M) :- N > 1, N1 is N-1, nth←member(R,N1,M).
/* coded for CProlog */
The algorithm is taken from the book `combinatorial algorithms'
by Reingold, Deo, and Nievergelt.
I used the system sort here, which is ok ONLY IF the original
list does not have duplicates. The system sort eats up the
duplicates. Write your own (bubble) sort if you have duplicates.
The first clause can be taken to provide the definition of the
problem, (without the `length < 28' check). For linearity, all
that you have to ensure is that the first clause requires
(< 28*n) comparisons.
Proof of Linearity: The `choose' predicate finds a member that
is close to the median in the sense that there are at least
(n*2/7) on either side of it. Thus the worst case recursive-call
will be on a list of length 5n/7, taking 28*5n/7 =20n comparisons
by inductive hypothesis. `choose' itself takes 3n comparisons to
sort the sublists of length 7 each, and 4n to find the `median of
the medians' recursively (28*n/7).
`partition' takes n more comps. , so the total is: 20n+3n+4n+n=28n!
The first clause provides the BASIS for the inductive proof.
-- Kale
p.s. Do people out there have examples of complex data structures
being coded in Prolog? Some of my concerns are algorithms for
graph traversals that need to repeatedly update values at nodes,
connectionist algorithms etc.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 20 Jan 86 11:31:04-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Expressive ability
The expressive power of machine languages it the power of
being able to instruct a machine to do any elementary step
(machine instruction) that the machine has been designed to
do. That kind of expressive power is thus irrevocably tied
to a particular machine architecture, so let's call it
``machine power''.
Like many other computer scientists, advocates of logic
programming understand the advantages of relinquishing machine
power in favor of ``abstraction power'': the ability to express
abstract relationships and processes without having to delve
into the peculiarities of the implementation of that expression
on a particular machine.
The discipline needed to keep abstractions alive in a language
with substantial machine power (such as Lisp) seems beyond the
grasp of most programmers, to judge by their products. Learning
to use a language with superior abstraction power but little
machine power takes time and also requires discipline, but pays
off in better products: maintainable, reusable.
The tremendous growth and success of modern mathematics depended
in no small measure on the acquisition by mathematicians of
increasingly powerful abstraction tools. The laborious combinato
-rial methods of 19th century algebra (the mathematical counter
-part of machine power), are today of only historical interest,
and no one (well, almost no one...) would blame a present-day
mathematician for not being able to work in those terms.
Our inability to build reliable software products is not due to
lack of machine power in our tools (we have had plenty ot that...)
but to our inability to predict the interactions between components
for which there are no good abstract specifications and implementa
-tions. The practice of Lisp programming shows this clearly. Current
logic programming tools are somewhat better, but clearly not good
enough, particularly with respect to modularity.
We should not let criticisms of logic programming from the point of
view of a programming practice discredited by the unreliability of
its products manuever us into wasting our effort trying to increase
the machine power of logic programming tools rather than building on
logic programming's strength, abstraction power.
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂03-Feb-86 0920 KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU%XX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 09:20:23 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 Feb 86 12:11-EST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 FEB 86 11:56:18 EST
Date: 3 Feb 1986 11:55 EST (Mon)
Message-ID: <KIRSH.12180443619.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: David Kirsh <KIRSH%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: Shrager.pa@XEROX.COM
Cc: gentner@P.CS.UIUC.EDU, hollan@NPRDC.ARPA, Phil-sci@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Is there science in "scientific discovery"?
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Jan 1986 19:49-EST from Shrager.pa at Xerox.COM
-- This message is three screens long. Apologies.
SCIENTIFIC NORMS CONSTRAIN THE SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY PROCESS
The core of Jeff's worry as I originally read him was roughly this:
Why assume that scientists, as problem solvers of scientific problems,
do anything very different than we do as problem solvers in everyday
life? Isn't the process of scientific discovery just like the process
of common sense discovery, a hodge podge of activities with no special
characteristics of its own?
The refinement that I read him to have made in his second message is
that he is more interestedin knowing whether there is any scientific
status to these claims. Can we test the claim that the psychological
processes underlying scientific discovery are different than those
underlying non-scientific discovery? The catch turns on the term
`scientific'. If `scientific' refers to an `arbitrary' (ie
sociologically determined) subset of the population, we are not
singling out a natural psychological group. Why suppose that some
people think differently just because they are called scientists?
I think a reasonably fashionable answer of the mid 80's would run
like this. Psychological processes may be affected by one's belonging
to a social group because frequently one can belong to that group only
by accepting certain norms or ideals. Scientists are obliged to meet
certain standards of rigour. Might these not affect the way they
think?
The obvious retort is to distinguish the context of discovery from
the context of justification. Accordingly, scientists are obliged to
ensure that their published material is rigourous and unfolds with a
certain logic. But these public standards hide private vices. The
truth is that scientists do their thinking the way we all do; only
after their discovery do they come back and tart up their theory by
reconstructing it rationally.
Is this true? Do norms constrain only the justification episode of
thought? Let me try a counterargument.
It is arguable that we will not understand much about the
discovery process in any domain, whether physics, biochemistry or
common sense, until we know what the point of discovery is. One of
the plausible ends of discovery -- at least the sort of discovery we
associate with science -- is improved conceptualization. Clearly
there are many kinds of discoveries one can make. Discovering a new
concept differs from discovering a new way of simplifying a theory
formally, or from discovering a new correlation. But I take it as
axiomatic -- by which I mean I will not argue for it here -- that when
someone makes a scientific discovery he advances his and our
UNDERSTANDING of the subject. What this amounts to is not clear. But
we can be sure that discovering a new idea or principle is not like
discovering what's in the cabinet downstairs. New facts added to an
already adequate conceptual framework do not improve understanding.
In general, conceptual revision is involved.
What constrains conceptual revision? Here's where the norms and
ideals come in. One thing we know is that when we're finished
revising our conceptualization of a certain domain we ought to be able
to EXPLAIN the phenomena, or explain it better than we could
beforehand. This may be a bit extreme since inarticulate people may
understand without being able to make explicit what they understand.
Nonetheless understanding is linked to explanation in the minimal
sense that if someone does understand, say, why metals conduct
electricity, then that person must at least be able to grasp an
explanation of that fact. Somehow the norms which apply to
explanation are going to bear on the discovery process. Different
norms can be expected to constrain the process in different ways. The
trick is to discover just how.
Let me restate my argument. We started by asking
1) Is scientific DISCOVERY different from common sense discovery? We
reformulated that question as
2) Is scientific UNDERSTANDING different from common sense
understanding? Which in turn can be reformulated as
3) Is scientific EXPLANATION different from common sense explanation?
This, then, I take to be the central issue: How different is
scientific from common sense explanation? Prima facie if two
processes (start from the same spot) but lead to different goals, they
are likely to be different processes. If scientific and common sense
explanation differ significantly, their discovery processes likely
will to.
What are the desiderata of good scientific explanation?
Explicitness, precision, comprehensiveness, elegance, are a few.
Another is coherence with other theories. A scientist needs to check
that his theory is consistent with other accepted theories. Indeed,
where possible his theory should link up with pre-existing theory.
This urge for consistency may exercise a powerful constraining
influence on scientific discovery. For discovery is not a single
leap of the imagination. It involves judgements as to where to look
next for hints. If we suppose that the process of discovery unfolds
bit by bit, possible lemma by possible lemma, then some spots in the
problem space or whatever, may be more stable, scientifically more
acceptable. I share Jeff's concern that this still sounds like a
filtering process and not a conjecturing process, but we know so
little about the conjecturing process that there may well be
constraints on that process that are connected to these stable
stopover points. Who is to say that the conjecturing system has not
adapted to these stable points?
By contrast, consider what are the desiderata of good common sense
explanation? Being easy to understand, brief, good enough for the
needs of the questioner. Neither consistency nor comprehensiveness
are particular requirements of common sense. Our ordinary discoveries
support a tissue of criss-crossing, partially overlapping theories.
What matters is not elegance or simplicity in a global sense, but ease
of use locally, in ways that allow us to deal with everyday life.
Solutions can be accepted in common sense that would never even be
entertained in science.
Our conclusion ought to be, I think, that science and common sense,
for all their obvious and important similarities also have significant
differences. A first pass at the discovery process is not likely to
show up much difference in everyday and scientific discovery. But on
second and later passes, new variables will be seen to complicate the
scientific discovery process. The need to formulate precisely one's
position, to organize reports in a manner that meets the approval of
one's peers, to check for consistency with other theories, to test, to
discuss, and to defend, are all factors that perturb the scientist's
discovery system in novel, non-common sense ways. These perturbing
factors complicate the process and also, somehow, constrain the
process. The discovery process, after all, is primarily a process of
disciplined inquiry. If so, who teaches us the discipline?
-- David Kirsh
∂03-Feb-86 0952 LB@SU-CSLI.ARPA C-J Bailey is here
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 09:52:24 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 09:47:22-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: C-J Bailey is here
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
TEL: (415) 497-9007
Prof. C.-J. Bailey from the Technical University of Berlin is now here
at Ventura Hall. If you wish an appointment to see him, please send me
a message or call me at 497-9007.
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1021 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa PODS conference
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 10:19:18 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 3 Feb 86 10:13:43 pst
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 86 10:13:43 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: PODS conference
To: nail@diablo
I just got my conference announcement.
If you didn't get one, you can make a hotel
reservation at:
Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge
777 Memorial Drive
Cambridge, MA 02139
617-492-7777
Rates are $68 single/ 74 double
Also, you can register with
Dr. Arvola Chan
CCA
4 Cambridge Center
Cambridge, MA 02142
Rates are 130 if you are a member of ACM & (SIGACT + SIGPLAN),
140 if a member of ACM + SIGACT + SIGMOD (oops- PLAN should be MOD above)
165 if a member of nothing, but only $30 for students.
Both these items need to be attended to by MArch 1, or the rates
go up substantially.
Also, hotel space often sells out quickly, so it pays to get on
the stick.
---Jeff
∂03-Feb-86 1035 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Invitation to the Forum Reception
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 10:35:10 PST
Mail-From: TAJNAI created at 3-Feb-86 09:19:38
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 09:19:38-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Invitation to the Forum Reception
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-everyone@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180448074.20.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 10:24:54-PST
ReSent-From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
ReSent-Message-ID: <12180459958.46.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Faculty, Staff, Students, and Friends
of the
Computer Science Department
and the
Computer Systems Laboratory
are cordially invited to
attend the
Stanford Computer Forum Reception
which closes our
Eighteenth Annual Conference
Faculty Club -- Red and Gold Lounges
Thursday, February 6, 1986
4:30 - 6:00pm
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1105 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #8
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 11:04:51 PST
Date: 3 Feb 86 1053-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #8
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Monday, 3 Feb 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 8
Today's Topic:
Announcement: Workshop on Logic Programming and
Parallel Processing (Weizmann Institute)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 86 11:28:50 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <udi%wisdom.bitnet at WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: workshop
The third Weizmann Institute workshop
on
logic programming and parallel Processing
February 12-13, 1986
9am-5pm, Schmidt Hall
On the occasion of the meeting of the program commitee for the Third
International Conference on Logic Programming, we will hold an open
informal workshop. A preliminary program is enclosed. Titles of
some lectures are not confirmed yet.
Wednesday, February 12, Morning:
Koichi Furukawa, ICOT
ICOT's project --- a progress report
Ehud Shapiro, The Weizmann Institute
The Concurrent Prolog project --- a progress report
Giorgio Levi, Pisa University
Semantics of Concurrent Prolog
Wednesday, February 12, Afternoon:
Ken Kahn, Xerox PARC
A case study of paradigm support: objects in Concurrent Prolog
Michael Codish, Weizmann Institute
Safety and the implementability of parallel logic languages
Ben Moskowski, Cambridge University
Tempura --- programming with temporal logic
Thursday, February 13, Morning:
David HD Warren, Manchester University
Implementation of Or-parallel Prolog
Michael Hirsch, The Weizmann Institute
Layers of protection and control in Logix
Mantis Cheng, University of Waterloo
TBA
Thursday, February 13, Afternoon:
Maarten van Emden, University of Waterloo
Logic programming as a basis for functional programming
Frank McCabe, Imperial College
The Prolog abstract machine
Peter Koves, SZKI Hungary
TBA
Antonio Porto, University Nova Lisboa
TBA
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂03-Feb-86 1159 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA Changes to CSD@Score list
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 11:59:38 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 11:45:25-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Changes to CSD@Score list
To: CSD@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 460-206 Computer Science, Stanford
Phone: 415/725-5555 (This is a new number)
Message-ID: <12180474616.19.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Summary: CSD@SCORE will become a BBOARD.
The CSD@SCORE mailing list is being converted to a BBOARD. It is
currently available on SCORE and SUSHI as "BBOARD CSD." On Sail
it is "/CSD." And on the CSD Vaxen, it is newsgroup "csd.bboard."
It will soon be available on SUMEX-AIM, also as "BBOARD CSD."
To submit messages to the bboard, send mail to CSD@SCORE (or use
'Pnews' or 'postnews' for newsgroup 'csd.bboard' from a Vax).
The original CSD mailing list has been renamed to CSD-LIST@SCORE.
Mail sent to that address will go out as individual mail messages
to everyone on the CSD list.
Until the bboard becomes available on SUMEX-AIM, messages sent to
CSD will go to BOTH the bboards AND the original mailing list.
-J
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1358 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Explorer software
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 13:57:44 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 13:55:54-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Explorer software
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180498369.85.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
We have new software from TI ready for internal distribution. This
release (called FAN 12 or 2.82), along with the patches we've added to
it, seems to be fairly stable, and I encourage everyone to make use of
it. I am not aware of any incompatibilities with older versions.
I will be putting this up on LOD1 and MCR1 of all pool machines
today. Everyone with an Explorer in her office should either contact
me, telling me which LODn and MCRp he wants this software on, or use
SI:TRANSMIT-BAND to get it off of one of the pool machines. NOTE:
SI:RECEIVE-BAND still seems to have problems, so don't use it.)
-- Rich
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1539 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA No meeting this week
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 15:39:13 PST
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1986 15:37 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12180516881.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: No meeting this week
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Because of the Computer Forum, there will be no Wednesday meeting of
the Advanced Architectures Project this week.
-- Byron
∂03-Feb-86 1557 BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA On-Line Calendar
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 15:57:37 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 15:50:02-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: On-Line Calendar
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Several people have requested an on-line calendar of events sponsored
by or relating to CSLI. Such a calendar is now available on
<CSLI>calendar.
At the moment, the calendar contains only the events published in the
last weekly Calendar of Public Events, but Emma will add others as you
tell her about them. Feel free to send information about any events
that might be of interest to CSLI folks and friends; the events don't
have to be sponsored by CSLI and they can be as far into the future as
you know about them. Send the entries to CALENDAR@su-csli.
Remember, everyone with a CSLI account can read this calendar, so
don't send information about events that are for selected small groups
only.
Betsy
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1603 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 16:03:06 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 15:49:47-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180519100.25.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tuesday faculty lunch tomorrow as usual. My suggested topic:
salaries for 1986-87. -Nils
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1649 RUTENBURG@SU-SUSHI.ARPA orals
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 16:49:28 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 16:43:15-PST
From: Vlad Rutenburg <RUTENBURG@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: orals
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180528834.31.RUTENBURG@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
My orals are this Tuesday, February 4 at 2:15 in Terman 332.
The topic: ``Algorithms and complexity of generalized graph coloring
problems''.
Please come. But don't bring friends: the room holds about 20 people.
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1707 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:RUTENBURG@SU-SUSHI.ARPA orals
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 17:07:04 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Feb 86 16:57:28-PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Feb 86 16:43:56-PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 16:43:15-PST
From: Vlad Rutenburg <RUTENBURG@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: orals
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180528834.31.RUTENBURG@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
My orals are this Tuesday, February 4 at 2:15 in Terman 332.
The topic: ``Algorithms and complexity of generalized graph coloring
problems''.
Please come. But don't bring friends: the room holds about 20 people.
-------
∂03-Feb-86 1829 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Feb 86 18:27:17 PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 18:21:57-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180546802.25.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I would like to call a faculty meeting of the tenured faculty
next Tuesday, Feb. 11 at 3:30 pm. (Location to be announced.)
The Genesereth promotion committee has met and recommends
promotion. John McCarthy, the committee chairman, will summarize
the case, and then I would like the senior faculty to discuss it
and attempt to make a decision. I apologize for having this
meeting on a "non-standard Tuesday" (usually we have it on the
first Tuesday of the month, but we have just now received all the
outside review letters). I hope most of you will be able to
be there for the discussion; those who cannot will be asked to
vote separately. Copies of several of Mike's papers will be
distributed to all of you tomorrow (plus vitae). Copies of the
letters from outside evaluators (and students) will be available
for you to read in my office. I hope everyone has a chance to
look this material over carefully before the meeting. -Nils
-------
∂04-Feb-86 0525 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #6
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 05:25:24 PST
Date: Wednesday, January 29, 1986 9:42AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #6
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 30 Jan 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 6
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Coding Algorithm & Syntactic Sugar & NAIL!,
LP Philosophy - What is the Expressive Power of Prolog?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 86 15:56:30 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: median algorithm in Prolog
In Kale's algorithm for median (see Issue 5) the "choose"
rule divides by 2, when it apparently should divide by 7.
Incidentally, the correct way to divide Length←S by K and
round up if there is any non-zero remainder is:
N is ((Length←S + K - 1) // K)
provided you know Length←S is nonnegative, of course.
Now for the real test of Prolog's usefulness (CHALLENGE,
CHALLENGE!): Modify the program to lower the constant
factor, by "remembering" the results of comparisons done
in "medians" i.e., the results of sorting sublists of length
7. Avoid repeating those comparisons in "partition".
The test of a well designed program is that such enhancements
can be done with reasonable effort, re-using most of the
original code.
Run some tests to see if this really saves time on sets of,
say, 200 items. Does the cost of comparing two items enter
significantly? I.e., does it matter whether we compare
integers or arbitrary terms?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 86 15:23:33 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: More syntactic sugar for Prolog
Zerksis commented on Prolog's if-then-else in Issue 5. I will
comment on two points not mentioned there.
The first point not mentioned is that
(P -> Q ; R)
will not backtrack thru P, if implemented as advertised --
i.e., equivalent to
(P, !, Q; R)
In other words, if P has several solutions, Q had better need
only the first one.
To me, the more consistent implementation would be equivalent to
(P, Q; \+ P, R)
where \+ is the "finite failure not."
Consequently, we are defining it this way in NAIL, a logic
programming language under development at Stanford CSD.
The second point is that (P -> Q ; R) is parenthesized as
((P -> Q) ; R)
which is not what one would expect, reading ";" as "else" in this
setting. The NAIL syntax is
(P -> Q else R)
That is, "else" is a binary operator that is TIGHTER than "->"
(whereas ";" is LOOSER than "->"), so that the above expression
is parenthesized as
(P -> (Q else R))
as one would expect.
I agree with Zerksis on the desirability of providing constructs
that reap the efficiency benefits of cuts, so that "raw cuts" can
be done away with. NAIL's if-else does this (Prolog's doesn't).
Zerksis' cut-free case structure might allow greater efficiency,
but it needs an ambitious interpreter or compiler. The cut
simulating case structure retains the undesirable semantics of the
cut, however, so I would steer away from it.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 86 10:20:22 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Quick summary of NAIL
NAIL is a research project one of whose goals is to determine
what degree of expressiveness and efficiency can be obtained
by a logic based language without resorting to certain
"undesirable" non-logical mechanisms such as cut, assert and
retract, rule order, and subgoal order. Jeff Ullman, the PI,
likes to draw the analogy:
"NAIL is to Prolog as Relational DBMS is to CODASYL."
NAIL is in a preliminary stage of development at Stanford CSD.
An overview, "Design overview of the Nail! System" is available
from Professor Ullman.
NAIL! is an acronym for "Not Another Implementation of Logic!"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 86 11:37:43 PST
From: Deutsch.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: Expressive power
I would like to disagree with the final points in Fernando
Pereira's argument about "machine power" and "expressive
power".
Our inability to build reliable software products is not due to
lack of machine power in our tools (we have had plenty ot that...)
but to our inability to predict the interactions between components
for which there are no good abstract specifications and implementa
-tions. The practice of Lisp programming shows this clearly. Current
logic programming tools are somewhat better, but clearly not good
enough, particularly with respect to modularity.
First, for "Lisp" one can substitute any other existing language --
including Prolog. What I have seen of the logic programming
literature does not support the implicit assertion that people
write "good abstract specifications" for logic programs in practice
more often than for other kinds of programs. Indeed, the practice
seems to be the opposite -- people seem to say "logic programs are
self-documenting and so transparent that abstract specifications
are unnecessary". Furthermore, Prolog has no support for data
abstraction -- Prolog data structures are typically lists or terms,
which correspond precisely to the lists/sequences/arrays and records
of conventional languages (or Lisp). Also, as Pereira observes,
Prolog (like Lisp) has no modularity, which I believe has proven
to be one of the most powerful constructs for organizing large
systems of programs. Finally, it has been observed many times that
large-scale (system-scale) programs exhibit problems that are
qualitatively different from those of small programs or algorithms.
The logic programming literature that I have seen is only about
small programs. Because of this, I think comparisons of Prolog
and anything else from a software engineering standpoint are not
appropriate.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂04-Feb-86 0629 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLB
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 06:29:51 PST
Date: Tue 4 Feb 86 06:25:18-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180678483.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
There will be no AFLB this week because of the Computer Forum.
It will return next week at its usual time. Here's next week's
title.
------------------------------------
13-Feb-86 : Peter Shor (MSRI)
Linear Algorithms on Convex Polygons
(title tentative)
***** Time and place: February 13, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂04-Feb-86 0709 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #7
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 07:09:27 PST
Date: Saturday, February 1, 1986 6:36PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #7
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 3 Feb 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 7
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - NL & Shoppers,
Implementation - Syntactic Sugar,
LP Philosophy - Lack of Expressive Capability in Prolog
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1986 05:58-EST
From: Gregory.Stein@K.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Shoppers
I have found a solution to the puzzle posted by Paul Weiss in
Volume 4, #3 of the digest. It took quite a bit of grinding
and CAREFUL analysis. I did most of it using a grid method
which I think is probably pretty common for these types of
puzzles. Anyhow, here is the solution:
Couples (in order) What they bought
1. Adam & Geraldine Jones - Gloves, Book, COCO, Pearls
2. Bob & Martha Day - Gloves, COCO, Pearls, Handbag
3. Jack & Susan O'Connor - Gloves, COCO, Pearls, Sweater
4. Tom & Sandra Smith - Gloves, Book, COCO, Handbag
5. Gary & Cathleen Collins - Gloves, COCO, Sweater, Handbag
6. John & Margaret Marshall - Gloves, Book, Sweater, Handbag
7. George & Cheryl Swain - Gloves, Pearls, Sweater, Handbag
8. Bill & Evelyn Stanton - Gloves, Book, Pearls, Sweater
9. Chuck & Rosalyn Douglas - Book, COCO, Pearls, Handbag
10. Steve & Eleanor Craig - Book, Pearls, Sweater, Handbag
11. Allen & Dorothy Murphy - Book, COCO, Pearls, Sweater
12. Joe & Elizabeth Anthony - Book, COCO, Sweater, Handbag
There it is! Check it if you like, but it's right as far as I know.
Anyone who likes a puzzle - this is it - it's a real toughy. Takes
hours.
-- Greg Stein
------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 13:44:08-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Syntactic Sugar
There is a more general solution to the syntactic sweetening
problem raised by Zerksis D. Umrigar. This is the introduction
of ``distfix'' operators in the Prolog-10 syntax. A Prolog
reader supporting distfix operators was written a while ago by
Richard O'Keefe, and is available as DISTFI.PL at [SU-SCORE]
<PROLOG>. The following is extracted from the comments in that
file:
Distfix operators have finally been added. They are declared
by distfixop(Priority, Type, Pattern, Term)
where Priority is as usual, Type is currently only fx or fy (if
the Pattern doesn't specify a right argument one of the types
must still be specified but it doesn't matter which), Term is
what the reader is to return when it sees something matching
the pattern, and the Pattern is a list of atoms and variables
whose first elements is an atom, and in which no two variables
appear side by side without an intervening atom. To avoid
ambiguities, the first atom following each variable should NOT
be an infix or postfix operator, but the code below does not
check for that, as you could declare such an operator after
declaring the distfix form.
Examples:
distfixop(950, fy, [for,each,X,show,that,Y], forall(X,Y))
distfixop(1105, fx, [try,Goal,reverting,to,Alternative,on,failure],
(Goal;Alternative))
distfixop(999, fy, [there,is,a,clause,with,head,H,and,body,B],
clause(H,B))
distfixop(999, fy, [there,is,a,clause,with,head,H], clause(H,←))
Infix forms are also available. These have the side effect of
declaring the head keyword as an infix operator; anything that
did not do this would be significantly harder to patch into the
old parser.
Examples:
distfixop(700, xfy, [S,is,the,set,of,X,such,that,P], setof(X,P,S))
distfixop(700, xfy, [B,is,the,bag,of,X,such,that,P], bagof(X,P,S)),
distfixop(700, xfy, [X,is,to,Y,as,A,is,to,B], X*B =:= A*Y),
distfixop(700, xfx, [X,had,N,variables], numbervars(X,0,N))
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 21:37 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Lack of expressive capability in Prolog
In his contribution to PROLOG Digest [Volume 4 : Issue 5],
Fernando Pereira states "The expressive power of machine
languages it the power of being able to instruct a machine
to do any elementary step (machine instruction) that the
machine has been designed to do. That kind of expressive
power is thus irrevocably tied to a particular machine
architecture, so let's call it ``machine power''." I
believe that the expressive power of a machine also
includes the ability to COMMUNICATE with other machines
operating concurrently. Prolog leaves out this ability to
communicate as well as the ability of a machine to CHANGE
ITS LOCAL STATE. This why I moved beyond MicroPlanner
(late 1960's) to actors (early 1970's). Prolog is a subset
of the capabilities of MicroPlanner that were implemented
by Charniak, Sussman, and Winograd in 1970. (The designers
of Prolog LEFT OUT belief-invoked forward chaining from
Micro-Planner as well as some other things.)
Pereira makes the further point that "Like many other
computer scientists, advocates of logic programming
understand the advantages of relinquishing machine power
in favor of ``abstraction power'': the ability to express
abstract relationships and processes without having to
delve into the peculiarities of the implementation of that
expression on a particular machine." However the abstraction
power of Prolog is fundamentally LESS than that of Common Lisp,
a machine independent language which does a better job than
Prolog of hiding the peculiarities of the implementations of
expressions. The multiple value return mechanism of Common
Lisp provides the same capabilites of returning values from
subroutines as the values of variables in Prolog goal relations.
Information hiding in Prolog is DEFECTIVE in that it does not
provide the ability to construct new locally acessible objects
the same way that Lisp does. Instead the newly constructed
relations of Prolog must be placed in the global data base thus
BETRAYING the needs of hiding the peculiarities of implementation.
Prolog does offer backtracking capabilities not found in Lisp.
However, through the experience of using MicroPlanner, the users
discovered that BACKTRACKING IS NOT A GOOD ABSTRACTION MECHANISM.
Concurrency is needed instead.
Pereira claims that "The discipline needed to keep abstractions
alive in a language with substantial machine power (such as Lisp)
seems beyond the grasp of most programmers, to judge by their
products." However my experience is that PROGRAMMERS CONSTRUCT
AND MAINTAIN BETTER ABSTRACTIONS IN LISP THAN IN PROLOG.
Programmers for standalone Prolog systems are constantly fighting
the limited expressive power of their language. They are forced
to use INELEGANT HACKS like "print" pseudo-predicates and clumsy
primitives like "assert" and "assertz" to cause needed effects
that cannot be directly expressed in Prolog.
I believe that these limitations of Prolog are FUNDAMENTAL in the
sense that there is no way to remedy them and still remain within
the realm of using Logic as a Programming language.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂04-Feb-86 0841 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 08:41:04 PST
Date: Tue 4 Feb 86 08:34:40-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180702035.20.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lunch today at 12:15 in MJH 146!!!
-------
∂04-Feb-86 1148 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa meeting tomorrow
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 11:20:11 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 4 Feb 86 11:15:30 pst
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 86 11:15:30 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: meeting tomorrow
To: nail@diablo
We'll have one of our typical no-topic meetings.
I'd like to say a few things about progress on the ICODE
and try to get some activity on implementing some simple capture
rules that use it.
∂04-Feb-86 1452 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Happy Hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Feb 86 14:52:24 PST
Date: Tue 4 Feb 86 14:43:13-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Happy Hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
There will be no Linguistics happy hour this week. Stay tuned
for details about future happy hours.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 0011 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Tomorrow's Planlunch -- 11am -- EK242
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 00:11:06 PST
Date: Tue 4 Feb 86 23:40:54-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Tomorrow's Planlunch -- 11am -- EK242
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
PLANNING AND ACTING IN DYNAMIC DOMAINS:
AN EXPERIMENT WITH AN AUTONOMOUS ROBOT
Marcel Schoppers
SRI International
and
University of Illinois
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, February 5
SRI International, Building E, Room EK242 (old conference room)
This talk will describe progress made toward having an autonomous
mobile robot reason and plan complex tasks in real-world environments.
To cope with the dynamic and uncertain nature of the world, we use a
highly reactive, goal-directed system based on SRI's Procedural
Reasoning System. Preplanning is only done where necessary, and does
not use classical planning techniques. This architecture allows the
integration of complex reasoning with real-time response, and allows
us to eliminate overly constrained expectations about the environment,
overly specific domain knowledge (such as room-to-room distances), and
other forms of over-commitment common to previous planners.
During the talk we will exhibit SRI's autonomous robot (Flakey) in a
scenario involving navigation and the performance of an emergency task
on a simulated space station. We believe this to be the first
demonstration of a robot combining rich cognitive and reactive
capabilities.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 0125 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA after the birthday's over...
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 01:18:25 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 01:12:16-PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 00:42:41-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: after the birthday's over...
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180878255.46.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
To Stanford friends:
Due to the unexpected arrival of the automotive birthday present,
I will be selling my 1985 Honda Accord (described below). I want to
offer it to my Stanford friends before advertising it because I think
it is a really excellent car in great shape. If you're interested,
call me on the weekend at 493-5618.
1985 Honda Accord SEi (SE=Special Edition; i=fuel injection; Honda
made a small number of "special" Accords last year with fuel
injection, leather interiors, and other luxury features). 5560 miles.
Perfect condition. Leather seats, all leather interior. Electric
windows, door locks, and sunroof. Air conditioning, AM/FM/cassette/four
speakers, power steering, auto.transmission (four forward speeds),
arm rest console. Metallic dark brown exterior, tan leather interior.
Includes registration until Feb. '87.
Price= $11,615 (if I go to the "open market", I'll try for the
going price, which is about 12.6K for this car)
-------
∂05-Feb-86 0258 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Tina release
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 02:48:58 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 02:48:39-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Tina release
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180901186.57.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I have just released a new version of Tina.
This is mainly for bug fixes. There are no new features but the bug
fixes have resulted in some fairly major cleaning up internally.
I have tested it as thoroughly as posible but it is quite likely that
this release will be a bit more buggy than normal because of the
representational changes. I shall try to fix any problems that arise
rapidly.
You MUST recompile any existing models through the Tina compiler, since
this has changed too, in order to have any chance of them working.
Good luck.
Rice.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1035 STUCKY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Forum Today!
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 10:35:12 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 10:29:41-PST
From: Susan Stucky <Stucky@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Forum Today!
To: researchers@SU-CSLI.ARPA, ras@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Just a reminder that the Stanford Computer Forum Tour of CSLI is today.
Hope to see you around Ventura this afternoon (3:00-4:00)
-Susan
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1141 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar in Logic and Foundations
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 11:34:10 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 11:28:10-PST
Date: 05 Feb 86 1113 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar in Logic and Foundations
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Speaker: Prof. Haim Gaifman, Hebrew University, visiting SRI and Stanford
Title: Logics with transitive closures and fixpoint operants.
Time: Monday, Feb. 10, 4:15-5:30
Place: Faculty Lounge, 3d floor, Math. Corner, Stanford.
S. Feferman
∂05-Feb-86 1143 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 11:41:57 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 11:32:35-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboard@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180996567.24.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Foundations Of Software Technology And Theoretical Computer Science.
Fifth Conference. India. 1985. Proceedings. Lecture Notes In Computer
Science. edited by Maheshiwari QA76.751.F68 1985
Computation Theory. Fifth Symposium, Zaborow, Poland. December 1984.
Proceedings. Lecture Notes In Computer Science. edited by Skowron.
(8619401)
A Study In String Processing Languages. Lecture Notes In Computer Science.
by Paul Klint. QA76.9.T48K58 1985.
Trace Theory And VLSI Design. Lecture Notes In Computer Science. by
Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut. TK7874.S625 1985.
Second Conference Of The European Chapter Of The Association For
Computational Linguistics. Proceedings of the Conference. March 1985.
Switzerland. (8600781)
Artificial Intelligence and Simulation. edited by Willard Holmes.
Q335.5.A78 1985
Applied Finite Mathematics. (Introductory Text) by Gilbert and
Koehler. QA39.2.G5 1984.
Computers and Data Processing. Second Edition. by Capron and Williams.
Special Software Version. QA76.C357 1986.
H. Llull
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1230 JOSHI@SU-CSLI.ARPA H.H.
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 12:30:16 PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 12:21:33-PST
From: Joshi Smita <JOSHI@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: H.H.
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The reason we cannot have the H.H. this week is due to low funds inspite of very generous contributions from many. Infact, we have enough money for just 4/5 HHs. We therefore decided to have them on alternate Fridays and thus continue into the Spring quarter aswell. If we get more contributions we will be more than thrilled to arrange one every week. Next week most of the HH committee members are going to be out of town and if I can get someone to drive me to the store and someone to help cleanup, I can arrange for one.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1424 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA The Return of the CSD Potluck!
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 14:24:25 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 14:07:10-PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 14:08:20-PST
From: CSD Social Committee
Subject: The Return of the CSD Potluck!
Sender: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
To: csd@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181024919.13.MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
The event we've all been waiting for -- the return of the CSD POTLUCK!
This time it will be held on Saturday, February 22, at 6:30.
The Nilssons have once again been kind enough to offer us the use of
their house. Unfortunately, we must limit the number of people, so
act early and secure your place.
For those of you who don't know how this works, a quick explanation.
This is basically an excuse to get CSD people together in an informal,
computerless environment. We ask people to bring food in one of the
following categories:
Salad
Main Dish
Dessert
Drink
We'll supply plates, cups, and utensils. Based on past experience,
we'll especially welcome main dishes, but we'll prod as necessary to
ensure a reasonable balance. Consider this a prime opportunity to
test out your recipe for sweet and sour bicycle tire, or some such
culinary treat.
To recap:
WHAT: CSD Potluck
WHEN: Saturday, February 22, 6:30 PM
WHO: CSD faculty, staff, students, and their guests
WHERE: Nils Nilsson's house
HOW: directions to the Nilssons' house will be provided
WHY: because
rsvp to morris@sushi. please tell us what you plan to bring (one of
the categories above is specific enough) and also how many people
you'll be bringing.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1424 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA The Return of the CSD Potluck!
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 14:24:25 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 14:07:10-PST
Date: Wed 5 Feb 86 14:08:20-PST
From: CSD Social Committee
Subject: The Return of the CSD Potluck!
Sender: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
To: csd@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181024919.13.MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
The event we've all been waiting for -- the return of the CSD POTLUCK!
This time it will be held on Saturday, February 22, at 6:30.
The Nilssons have once again been kind enough to offer us the use of
their house. Unfortunately, we must limit the number of people, so
act early and secure your place.
For those of you who don't know how this works, a quick explanation.
This is basically an excuse to get CSD people together in an informal,
computerless environment. We ask people to bring food in one of the
following categories:
Salad
Main Dish
Dessert
Drink
We'll supply plates, cups, and utensils. Based on past experience,
we'll especially welcome main dishes, but we'll prod as necessary to
ensure a reasonable balance. Consider this a prime opportunity to
test out your recipe for sweet and sour bicycle tire, or some such
culinary treat.
To recap:
WHAT: CSD Potluck
WHEN: Saturday, February 22, 6:30 PM
WHO: CSD faculty, staff, students, and their guests
WHERE: Nils Nilsson's house
HOW: directions to the Nilssons' house will be provided
WHY: because
rsvp to morris@sushi. please tell us what you plan to bring (one of
the categories above is specific enough) and also how many people
you'll be bringing.
-------
∂05-Feb-86 1605 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 11 (Jonas Langer)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 15:56:14 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 15:46:41-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA24573; Wed, 5 Feb 86 15:40:45 PST
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 86 15:40:45 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602052340.AA24573@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 11 (Jonas Langer)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 11, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``The Origins of Logic''
Jonas Langer
Department of Psychology, UCB
I will try to show that logical cognition (1) originates
during the first year of infancy and (2) begins to be represen-
tational during the second year of infancy. This includes pro-
posing some of its initial structural features. These claims
imply that (a) a symbolic language is not necessary for the
origins of logical cognition and (b) that ordinary language is
not necessary for its initial representational development.
Supporting data will be drawn from J. Langer, The Origins of
Logic: Six to Twelve Months, Academic Press, 1980, and The Ori-
gins of Logic: One to Two Years, Academic Press, 1986.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 18: Michael Silverstein, Anthropology, University of Chicago
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, School of Education, UCB
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyk, Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlotta Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas (currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"orn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stockholm;
Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of Texas;
Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens College
(all currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
The Bay Area Sociolinguistics Association will meet on Saturday,
Feb. 8, at the home of Ruth Cathcart-Strong, 1105 The Alameda,
Berkeley (415) 525-8616. Informal talks will be given by:
Ruth Cathcart-Strong (MIIS) & Allison Heisch (SJSU), "Contrastive
Discourse: Crosscultural Approaches to Writing";
Denise Murray (SJSU),"The Web of Communication";
Wally Chafe (UCB), "Follow-up to the Pear Stories"
John Haviland will be giving a lecture and video illustration on
``Complex Referential Gestures in Gwguyumidhir Story-Telling''
at the Anthropology Department Seminar on Monday, February 10,
3:00-5:00pm in 160 Kroeber. John Haviland has been working with
natural conversations among Australian aborigines and Tzotzil-speaking
Mexican Indians for number of years. In this paper he will seek to show
how a variety of referential systems in language and gesture interact
to produce narrative that draws on linguistic knowledge, biographical
knowledge and indexical features of speech events.
Ruth A. Berman of the Linguistics Department at Tel-Aviv University
will be giving a talk entitled "Between Syntax and the Lexicon: Noun
Compounding in Hebrew" at the Linguistics Group Meeting on Tuesday,
Feb. 11 at 8:00 p.m. in room 117 Dwinelle Hall, Campus.
∂05-Feb-86 1618 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 11 (Jonas Langer)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 15:53:22 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA24573; Wed, 5 Feb 86 15:40:45 PST
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 86 15:40:45 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602052340.AA24573@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 11 (Jonas Langer)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 11, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``The Origins of Logic''
Jonas Langer
Department of Psychology, UCB
I will try to show that logical cognition (1) originates
during the first year of infancy and (2) begins to be represen-
tational during the second year of infancy. This includes pro-
posing some of its initial structural features. These claims
imply that (a) a symbolic language is not necessary for the
origins of logical cognition and (b) that ordinary language is
not necessary for its initial representational development.
Supporting data will be drawn from J. Langer, The Origins of
Logic: Six to Twelve Months, Academic Press, 1980, and The Ori-
gins of Logic: One to Two Years, Academic Press, 1986.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 18: Michael Silverstein, Anthropology, University of Chicago
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, School of Education, UCB
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyk, Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlotta Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas (currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"orn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stockholm;
Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of Texas;
Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens College
(all currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
The Bay Area Sociolinguistics Association will meet on Saturday,
Feb. 8, at the home of Ruth Cathcart-Strong, 1105 The Alameda,
Berkeley (415) 525-8616. Informal talks will be given by:
Ruth Cathcart-Strong (MIIS) & Allison Heisch (SJSU), "Contrastive
Discourse: Crosscultural Approaches to Writing";
Denise Murray (SJSU),"The Web of Communication";
Wally Chafe (UCB), "Follow-up to the Pear Stories"
John Haviland will be giving a lecture and video illustration on
``Complex Referential Gestures in Gwguyumidhir Story-Telling''
at the Anthropology Department Seminar on Monday, February 10,
3:00-5:00pm in 160 Kroeber. John Haviland has been working with
natural conversations among Australian aborigines and Tzotzil-speaking
Mexican Indians for number of years. In this paper he will seek to show
how a variety of referential systems in language and gesture interact
to produce narrative that draws on linguistic knowledge, biographical
knowledge and indexical features of speech events.
Ruth A. Berman of the Linguistics Department at Tel-Aviv University
will be giving a talk entitled "Between Syntax and the Lexicon: Noun
Compounding in Hebrew" at the Linguistics Group Meeting on Tuesday,
Feb. 11 at 8:00 p.m. in room 117 Dwinelle Hall, Campus.
∂05-Feb-86 2018 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 11 (Jonas Langer)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Feb 86 20:09:09 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 15:46:41-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA24573; Wed, 5 Feb 86 15:40:45 PST
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 86 15:40:45 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602052340.AA24573@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 11 (Jonas Langer)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 11, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``The Origins of Logic''
Jonas Langer
Department of Psychology, UCB
I will try to show that logical cognition (1) originates
during the first year of infancy and (2) begins to be represen-
tational during the second year of infancy. This includes pro-
posing some of its initial structural features. These claims
imply that (a) a symbolic language is not necessary for the
origins of logical cognition and (b) that ordinary language is
not necessary for its initial representational development.
Supporting data will be drawn from J. Langer, The Origins of
Logic: Six to Twelve Months, Academic Press, 1980, and The Ori-
gins of Logic: One to Two Years, Academic Press, 1986.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 18: Michael Silverstein, Anthropology, University of Chicago
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, School of Education, UCB
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyk, Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlotta Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas (currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"orn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stockholm;
Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of Texas;
Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens College
(all currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
The Bay Area Sociolinguistics Association will meet on Saturday,
Feb. 8, at the home of Ruth Cathcart-Strong, 1105 The Alameda,
Berkeley (415) 525-8616. Informal talks will be given by:
Ruth Cathcart-Strong (MIIS) & Allison Heisch (SJSU), "Contrastive
Discourse: Crosscultural Approaches to Writing";
Denise Murray (SJSU),"The Web of Communication";
Wally Chafe (UCB), "Follow-up to the Pear Stories"
John Haviland will be giving a lecture and video illustration on
``Complex Referential Gestures in Gwguyumidhir Story-Telling''
at the Anthropology Department Seminar on Monday, February 10,
3:00-5:00pm in 160 Kroeber. John Haviland has been working with
natural conversations among Australian aborigines and Tzotzil-speaking
Mexican Indians for number of years. In this paper he will seek to show
how a variety of referential systems in language and gesture interact
to produce narrative that draws on linguistic knowledge, biographical
knowledge and indexical features of speech events.
Ruth A. Berman of the Linguistics Department at Tel-Aviv University
will be giving a talk entitled "Between Syntax and the Lexicon: Noun
Compounding in Hebrew" at the Linguistics Group Meeting on Tuesday,
Feb. 11 at 8:00 p.m. in room 117 Dwinelle Hall, Campus.
∂06-Feb-86 0637 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re: Rationale for my proposal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 06:37:37 PST
Received: from su-sonoma.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 6 Feb 86 06:32:00-PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Thu, 6 Feb 86 06:35:44 pst
Date: 6 Feb 1986 0635-PST (Thursday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.ARPA (Vaughan Pratt)
Cc: faculty@su-score.ARPA, jlh@su-sonoma.arpa
Subject: Re: Rationale for my proposal
In-Reply-To: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt) /
Sun, 2 Feb 86 06:47:56 pst.
<8602021447.AA10500@coraki.uucp>
∂06-Feb-86 0641 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:jlh@su-sonoma.arpa Re-equipment money
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 06:41:01 PST
Received: from su-sonoma.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 6 Feb 86 06:34:18-PST
Received: by su-sonoma.arpa with TCP; Thu, 6 Feb 86 06:38:10 pst
Date: 6 Feb 1986 0638-PST (Thursday)
From: John Hennessy <jlh@su-sonoma.arpa>
To: faculty@su-score
Cc:
Subject: Re-equipment money
Apologies for the last message: mailer breakdown.
I hesitate to step into this, but since I was there when the division
of funds was set up and the discussions with Kahn occurred, perhaps I
can shed some light on the topic.
1. DARPA did intend to fund the ARPA projects, but also to boost
the overall level of equipment. As I recall, Kahn imagined a tickle down
effect would occur. That is, the equipment would be put there first for
ARPA contractors, but that a natural sharing would occur, and other
equipment might be released for use by Pratt's "meek".
2. The division into four pools was to simplify the decision making
process. The "CSD" pool was intended to provide resources that could
not be connected to any one group. La Brea is an example of such a
resource. I still think this is a good idea and that CSD-CF should
pursue this direction. Perhaps, a multiprocessor that would serve the
research interests of a wide range of faculty (both meek and others),
would be appropriate.
3. A major problem remains maintenance. We received sufficient funds
for the first year of maintenance but not beyond. If we were to try to
put all the machines we have purchased with these funds on maintenance
contracts, I am sure the bill would exceed $200,000 a year.
John
∂06-Feb-86 0829 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar February 6, No. 2
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 08:29:49 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 08:25:19-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar February 6, No. 2
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
February 6, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 2
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, February 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall The Wizards of Ling
Conference Room by Thomas Wasow
Discussion led by Mark Gawron (Gawron@csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall No seminar
Trailer Classroom
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, February 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall No TINLunch
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall To be announced
Trailer Classroom
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar February 6, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING
Next week (Monday, February 10) we will begin the System
Description and Development Meetings that were described in the
Newsletter in January (a copy of the initial description is available
in <winograd>SDDM.TXT on CSLI and SCORE). The meetings will be on
Mondays at noon in the Ventura Trailer Classroom. The first speaker
will be Jens Kaasboll, a visitor to CSLI from the University of Oslo.
He has been working on the FLORENCE project, in which precise system
description languages (not programming languages) are being designed
to serve in the development of informatics systems for use by nurses
in hospitals. FLORENCE is part of a larger project on System
Development and Profession Oriented Languages (SYDPOL) which includes
projects in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. There will be no meeting on
February 17 (Presidents day Holiday). They will resume on the 24th.
Future talks will include Kristen Nygaard (originator of the SYDPOL
project) on March 3. Suggestions for other speakers are welcome (send
to WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA).
Abstract for February 10:
Intentional Development of Professional Language through System
Development: A Case Study and Some Theoretical Considerations
Jens Kaasboll, University of Oslo
Monday, February 10, 12:00
In order to develop informatics oriented languages for nurses,
various techniques have been employed, including system description
with nurses and observation of nurses at work. Observation revealed
unformalizable parts of the work, while these parts did not show up at
the system descriptions. The system description process, however,
triggered reflection among the nurses.
Nurses' use of language differs from common language in concepts
and intentions. Knowing parts of their language helps avoiding
confusions and guiding the functionality of computer systems.
Extending the professional language of nurses with concepts for
dealing with information processing was partly unpredictable.
Knowledge and concepts teached were reflected by the nurses' use of
more concrete terms. During the system description, the nurses coined
new symbols suited for their work.
--------------
LOGIC SEMINAR
Logics with Transitive Closures and Fixpoint Operants
Haim Gaifman, Hebrew University, visiting SRI and Stanford
Monday, February 10, 4:15-5:30
Math. Faculty Lounge, Room 383-N
-------
∂06-Feb-86 0842 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Correction Calendar
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 08:41:28 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 08:32:02-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Correction Calendar
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
Next Thursday's activities (if we have any) will be on February
13 not on February 6 as stated in the Calendar.
Emma Pease
-------
∂06-Feb-86 0914 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Birthday Party
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 09:14:39 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 08:58:48-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Birthday Party
To: CSD-LIST@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181230715.19.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
***************************************************************************
Today (Feb. 6) we will be celebrating Nils Nilsson's BIRTHDAY. Come one -
come all! MJH 146 from 2:00 - 3:00.
****************************************************************************
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1105 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tools
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 11:05:41 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 10:59:58-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tools
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181252774.42.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
There are a number of useful tools coming into existance as a result of
the work going on in the KSL. I have been trying to collect many of these
together so that everyone can use them easily. There is a system called
TOOLS which can be used from Explorers or 36xx's at Welch Rd. After doing
(make-system 'tools), look at the documentation for the function LOAD-TOOLS
to see how it works. The easiest thing to do is just (LOAD-TOOLS) which
will present a menu of all known tools, along with a way of getting
documentation for each of them. Most of them work on both 36xx's and
Explorers.
If you have some software you think will make a good tool, please
let me know and we'll arrange to have it included. Also, let me know
of any problems and I'll pass them along to the right person. It should
be noted that most of the current set of tools were contributed by James
Rice.
-- Rich
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1244 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:GINN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Reaction
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 12:44:08 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 6 Feb 86 12:30:56-PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 12:36:45-PST
From: Michael Ginn <GINN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Reaction
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181270391.54.GINN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reaction is a new kind of interactive networking program which
divides discussions by topics (anyone can add a new topic) and
which prints the most-liked/most-important items first.
It is available to all students and faculty of Stanford by typing:
@Reaction on SUSHI
@UNS:Reaction on LOTS
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1300 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tina workshop.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 13:00:01 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 12:59:06-PST
From: Jim Rice <RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tina workshop.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181274459.11.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
We haven't had one of these for a while and I'm going to be away most of
the time next week, therefore I've booked the conference room from 2pm
on Friday for just such an occasion.
Next week I'll be on a KEE course so I'll only be able to deal with Tina
problems in the evenings or by email.
Rice.
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1446 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa meeting 2/12?
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 14:44:48 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 6 Feb 86 14:37:55 pst
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 86 14:37:55 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: meeting 2/12?
To: nail@diablo
I'm going to be away from Monday-Thursday of next week.
Karin has (will?) arrange a talk by Peter Gray on Prolog/DB interactions
at 2PM on Wednesday 2/12, I believe. She should announce the
talk and its room if it is to take place.
As for a meeting at the usual 11AM time, somebody else is going
to have to volunteer to run it. If nobody volunteers, I'll see
you on the 19th next.
∂06-Feb-86 1540 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Offices Closing
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 15:35:52 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 15:18:58-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Offices Closing
To: CSD-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181299921.12.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Computer Science Department will close at 4:30 today, in order to
attend the Computer Forum Reception.
-------
∂06-Feb-86 1550 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: TOPS-20 CHFINGER PCL command
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 15:50:28 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 15:45:48-PST
From: Hiroshi G. Okuno <OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: TOPS-20 CHFINGER PCL command
To: SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: pcl-bboard@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, ksl-lisp-machines@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Christopher Schmidt <SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>" of Fri 17 Aug 84 15:19:43-PDT
Message-ID: <12181304807.75.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I modified the chfinger originally created by Christopher in the
format of listing. To use my modified chfinger, please do "dec pcl
<okuno>chfinger" and then a "chfinger" command will do the same job as
Christopher's.
I have some pcl routines such as universal calendar listing, radix
conversion, and so on. If you are interested in them, please do
"dec pcl <okuno>mycommands".
- Gitchang -
-------
∂06-Feb-86 2212 GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 22:12:04 PST
Return-Path: <@SU-SCORE.ARPA:MAR12AA%TECHNION.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 23:50:24-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 5 Feb 86 23:49:38 pst
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 5 Feb 86 23:50:06-PST
Received: from (MAR12AA)TECHNION.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 02/06/86
at 01:54:11 CST
Date: 6 February 1986, 09:40:09 IST
To: <na@su-score.ARPA>
From: <MAR12AA%TECHNION.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject:
ReSent-Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 21:45:08-PST
ReSent-From: Gene Golub (415/497-3124) <GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
ReSent-To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
ReSent-Message-ID: <12181370222.15.GOLUB@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
=========================================================================
Paris, February 2nd
Conseil National Francais pour la protection
des droits des Juifs d'URSS
---------------------------
C.Cohen-Tanoudji H.Cartan A.Lwoff J.P.Mathieu
Dear Colleague:
Vladimir Lifhshitz, a Jewish mathematician from Leningrad,
was arrested on January 8, 1986 and will shortly be tried.
He stands accused of defamation of the Soviet regime (art
190/1 of the RSFSR penal code), punishable by three years of
imprisonment. His only crime was the desire to emigrate to
Israel. Following his application for a visa, he was forced
to resign his position as head of Department of Economic
Forecast, he was dismissed from another minor position, his
mail was confiscated, his home was searched, and his son was
refused admission to the Institute of Mechanics in Leningrad
in spite of his having successfully passed the entrance
requirements.
This arrest, like others before it (R.Zelichonok,
L.Volvokski,etc...) can only arouse pessimism when
confronted with the many rumors of a possible
restart of Jewish emigration from the USSR ,and a general
liberalisation of the Soviet Jewish policy.
Only your demonstration of solidarity may help Vladimir
Lifshitz escape the ordeal which awaits him. For this
reason we are requesting that you sign the following appeal
and that you distribute it as widely as possible among your
Colleagues.
"We hereby demand the release of Vladimir Lifshitz and his
imprisoned colleagues and that permission be granted them to
practice their professions in the countries of their
choice."
Many thanks.
On behalf of the Committee: Professeur Yves Quere
How to reply:
-------------
1-Send an electronic mail message to one of the following
addresses stating that you wish to sign the appeal.
BVIOLET at FRCPN11 on BITNET/EARN
(if you can't reach Bitnet from uucp: mcvax!inria!kahn on UUCP)
2-If you do NOT want your position to appear on the
Statement to be sent to the Soviet scientific authorities,
please state so clearly.
3-We thank you in advance for your efforts to distribute
this message among your friends and colleagues.
∂06-Feb-86 2341 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Hardware status
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Feb 86 23:41:24 PST
Date: Thu 6 Feb 86 23:41:26-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Hardware status
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181391394.18.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
For the first time since I've been here, as far as I know, ALL
of the Symbolics and TI hardware at the KSL is working. You could
probably safely hold your breath until the next failure, but I'm
still impressed.
-- Rich
-------
∂07-Feb-86 0947 WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Computer forum
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 09:47:11 PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 09:41:37-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Computer forum
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA, WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Thanks to all who helpd in the presentation for the Computer
Forum. IT went very well, and I heard a number of very
positive comments. Especially thanks to Susan for putting together
an excellent packet and organizing the program.
--t
-------
∂07-Feb-86 0946 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Forum
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 09:46:07 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Feb 86 09:34:20-PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 09:39:25-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Forum
To: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Now that the forum is over and went so successfully, I want to take
the opportunity to thank everyone who helped.
Special thanks to Carolyn Tajnai for really making it all work, and
to all her staff who worked so hard.
--t
-------
∂07-Feb-86 1222 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Last chance for CSD potluck
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 12:22:28 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Feb 86 12:10:25-PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 12:09:30-PST
From: CSD social committee
Subject: Last chance for CSD potluck
Sender: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
To: csd@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181527576.8.MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
That's right! If you want to go to the potluck, and you haven't
let us know yet, then send a message to morris@sushi. We've almost
filled the limited number of places available. The details again:
WHAT: CSD Potluck
WHEN: Saturday, February 22, 6:30 PM
WHO: CSD faculty, staff, students, and their guests
WHERE: Nils Nilsson's house
HOW: directions to the Nilssons' house will be provided
WHY: because!
rsvp to morris@sushi. Please tell us what you plan to bring (salad, main
dish, drinks or dessert), and also how many people you'll be bringing.
The Social Committee
-------
∂07-Feb-86 1222 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Last chance for CSD potluck
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 12:22:28 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Feb 86 12:10:25-PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 12:09:30-PST
From: CSD social committee
Subject: Last chance for CSD potluck
Sender: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
To: csd@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181527576.8.MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
That's right! If you want to go to the potluck, and you haven't
let us know yet, then send a message to morris@sushi. We've almost
filled the limited number of places available. The details again:
WHAT: CSD Potluck
WHEN: Saturday, February 22, 6:30 PM
WHO: CSD faculty, staff, students, and their guests
WHERE: Nils Nilsson's house
HOW: directions to the Nilssons' house will be provided
WHY: because!
rsvp to morris@sushi. Please tell us what you plan to bring (salad, main
dish, drinks or dessert), and also how many people you'll be bringing.
The Social Committee
-------
∂07-Feb-86 1342 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:LES@SU-AI.ARPA Computer Facilities Planning
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 13:42:47 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Feb 86 13:34:03-PST
Date: 07 Feb 86 1339 PST
From: Les Earnest <LES@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Computer Facilities Planning
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
$582k in DARPA funds are potentially 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.
Funds Available
Several years ago certain members of the department sought and obtained
DARPA funds for upgrading departmental computer facilities. $3.3 million
was 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:
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 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.
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 considerable financial pressure on DARPA,
which means that we should make sure that our proposals are soundly
formulated. [Yes, I know that Gramm-Rudman was just declared
unconstitutional in a lower court, but this issue is far from resolved.]
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 may be addressed to
the Facilities Committee Chair (Les@Sail) or to the committee as a whole
(facil@Sail). 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, such as Sun, Symbolics,
TI Explorers, IBM RT PC. At least some must support Lisp.
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 the Sequent Balance
8000 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.
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.
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.
∂07-Feb-86 1722 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa paper received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 17:21:57 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Feb 86 17:15:50 pst
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 86 17:15:50 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo
"Prolog Extensions", D Sciamma and F. J. Sola, Bull Research,
Louveciennes, France.
Dicsusses types in the context of Prolog.
∂07-Feb-86 1836 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Wednesday's Planlunch-- Dan Carnese
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 18:36:03 PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 18:33:54-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Wednesday's Planlunch-- Dan Carnese
To: planlunch.dis: ;
PLANNING BY PROCEDURAL DECISIONMAKING
Dan Carnese (CARNESE@SRI-KL)
AI Lab, Schlumberger Palo Alto Research
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, February 12
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The standard approach to plan construction involves applying a general planning
algorithm to a representation of a problem to be solved. This approach will
fail on a given problem when the search space explored by the algorithm is too
large. If this occurs, the only alternatives are to re-encode the problem or
to improve the general algorithm.
In this talk, I'll describe an alternative approach where control of the
planning process is provided by a domain-specific procedure. A given planning
procedure is defined by a collection of primitive decisionmaking procedures
composed using sequential execution, and- and or- parallelism, and structural
hierarchy. Planning proceeds by propagating "planning contexts" through the
procedure, guided by a global scheduler. A planning context is defined by a
set of assumptions representing constraints on the plan, and a set of
deductions identifying some of the logical consequences of these assumptions.
The power of this approach comes from the identification of three
fundamental types of primitive decisionmaking procedures, each of which can
be associated with a coherent specification of its intended effect.
* Local choice-makers: functions which map planning contexts to new
planning contexts, such that the assumptions of the new context are a
superset of the assumptions of the old one.
* Consequence-derivers: functions which map planning contexts to
new planning contexts in which additional logical consequences of the
assumptions have been identified.
* Global choice-makers: functions which map planner states to new
continuations involving previously-executed steps of the planning
procedure. The existence of these continuations allows the scheduler
to proceed from a previously-explored state with a different set of
assumptions.
My thesis is that the use of decisionmaking procedures with clear
specifications will facilitate both the initial design and the subsequent
incremental re-implementation of the planner.
-------
-------
∂07-Feb-86 1835 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA potluck full...
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 18:35:20 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Feb 86 18:24:30-PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 18:23:58-PST
From: CSD social committee
Subject: potluck full...
Sender: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
To: csd@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181595745.7.MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Well, it looks like we've got as many people as can fit in Nils' house.
Apologies to those who missed out. We'll probably organise another
potluck sometime in the next few months for those who didn't make it
to this one.
As Brian Reid pointed out, we shouldn't have to turn CSD people
away from an event advertised as ``for CSD''. There are a couple of
possible solutions:
. find somewhere larger (Brian suggested EV center, or one of the larger
faculty houses). So, if there's anyone out there with a large house...
. organise more than one potluck so everyone gets to go to one.
Those of you who replied in time will be getting another message; to the
others, our apologies -- we'll try to organise another event sometime
in the next few months.
Kathy
-------
∂07-Feb-86 1835 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA potluck full...
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 18:35:20 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Feb 86 18:24:30-PST
Date: Fri 7 Feb 86 18:23:58-PST
From: CSD social committee
Subject: potluck full...
Sender: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
To: csd@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Reply-To: MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12181595745.7.MORRIS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Well, it looks like we've got as many people as can fit in Nils' house.
Apologies to those who missed out. We'll probably organise another
potluck sometime in the next few months for those who didn't make it
to this one.
As Brian Reid pointed out, we shouldn't have to turn CSD people
away from an event advertised as ``for CSD''. There are a couple of
possible solutions:
. find somewhere larger (Brian suggested EV center, or one of the larger
faculty houses). So, if there's anyone out there with a large house...
. organise more than one potluck so everyone gets to go to one.
Those of you who replied in time will be getting another message; to the
others, our apologies -- we'll try to organise another event sometime
in the next few months.
Kathy
-------
∂08-Feb-86 1347 JJW Tape left in drive
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
Someone left a tape in Ignorant's tape drive. It has a Symbolics
label, but no label saying what's on the tape. If it is yours,
please claim it in MJH 360.
Joe
∂09-Feb-86 1013 NEALE@SU-CSLI.ARPA milk
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Feb 86 10:13:17 PST
Date: Sun 9 Feb 86 10:09:36-PST
From: Stephen <Neale@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: milk
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
If any of you are coming in today could you bring a drop of milk with you?
Thanks Stephen.
-------
∂09-Feb-86 1627 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Discount airfare to EDS conf.
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Feb 86 16:27:13 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 9 Feb 86 16:22:26 pst
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 86 16:22:26 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Discount airfare to EDS conf.
To: nail@diablo
If anybody is going to the EDS conference (old Kiowa Conf.)
Delta is offering 30% discounts. You have to call 1-800-241-6760
and refer to "file number K0165" to arrange your discount.
∂09-Feb-86 2311 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Tina release.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Feb 86 23:11:07 PST
Date: Sun 9 Feb 86 23:11:38-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Tina release.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182172399.46.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Hello,
The following are the changes that have happened to Tina over the weekend:-
i) There are two new Change Types; Recycle and Discard.
ii) There is a new command menu option called "Trace & Break", this sets
some global trace and break options.
iii) You no longer need to put a debug print in your models to print out the
current record number, since this is covered by ii).
iv) The Class Monitor Pane trace and break options have changed quite a
bit. The operations which the L and R buttons used to do are now
mapped onto R and Meta-R. L and Meta-L set trace and break options
associated with nodes as a whole, not their slots. At present there
are trace and break points on Recycling and Discarding for L and Meta-L.
v) There is a new user level procedure called User::Reset-Tina, which
allows the user conditionally to reset parts of the Tina system when it
gets confused.
vi) Initialisation should now be working properly. "Initialisation" is now
spelled consistently thoughout the system and you shouldn't have to
use Elint-Initialisation at all now.
vii) A bug introduced when I implemented automatic timestamping that caused
the check for reading an uninitialised slot not to work has now been
fixed. Previously apparently working models might now give errors
because of this.
viii) The procedure "Start-Up-Tina", mentioned in the documentation, has
been included in the system and should work now.
ix) L100 has changed so that Dynamic binding will not happen unless you
use the new Bind primitive. This is documented in the new L100
manual.
All of the changes to Tina are documented in the new Tina manual (3.2),
which can be found, as usual, in 3602:>system-software>tina>. It is not
envisaged that a hard copy version of this edition will be produced.
One word of warning about the new manual:- It is a little ahead of reality
since it is now all in terms of the new name for Tina/Parallel-Tina
(Oligon/Poligon). Tina will be changing its name properly soon but until
then simply substitute "Tina" for "Poligon" in the manual to get the real
references.
Rice.
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0056 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #7
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 00:56:07 PST
Date: Monday, February 3, 1986 7:22AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #7
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 4 Feb 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 7
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - NL & Shoppers,
Implementation - Syntactic Sugar,
LP Philosophy - Lack of expressive capability
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1986 05:58-EST
From: Gregory.Stein@K.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Puzzle
I have found a solution to the puzzle posted by Paul Weiss in
Volume 4, #3 of the digest. It took quite a bit of grinding
and CAREFUL analysis. I did most of it using a grid method
which I think is probably pretty common for these types of
puzzles. Anyhow, here is the solution:
Couples (in order) What they bought
1. Adam & Geraldine Jones - Gloves, Book, COCO, Pearls
2. Bob & Martha Day - Gloves, COCO, Pearls, Handbag
3. Jack & Susan O'Connor - Gloves, COCO, Pearls, Sweater
4. Tom & Sandra Smith - Gloves, Book, COCO, Handbag
5. Gary & Cathleen Collins - Gloves, COCO, Sweater, Handbag
6. John & Margaret Marshall - Gloves, Book, Sweater, Handbag
7. George & Cheryl Swain - Gloves, Pearls, Sweater, Handbag
8. Bill & Evelyn Stanton - Gloves, Book, Pearls, Sweater
9. Chuck & Rosalyn Douglas - Book, COCO, Pearls, Handbag
10. Steve & Eleanor Craig - Book, Pearls, Sweater, Handbag
11. Allen & Dorothy Murphy - Book, COCO, Pearls, Sweater
12. Joe & Elizabeth Anthony - Book, COCO, Sweater, Handbag
There it is! Check it if you like, but it's right as far as I know.
Anyone who likes a puzzle - this is it - it's a real toughy. Takes
hours.
-- Greg Stein
------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 13:44:08-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Syntactic Sugar
There is a more general solution to the syntactic sweetening
problem raised by Zerksis D. Umrigar. This is the introduction
of ``distfix'' operators in the Prolog-10 syntax. A Prolog
reader supporting distfix operators was written a while ago by
Richard O'Keefe, and is available as DISTFI.PL at [SU-SCORE]
<PROLOG>. The following is extracted from the comments in that
file:
Distfix operators have finally been added. They are declared
by distfixop(Priority, Type, Pattern, Term)
where Priority is as usual, Type is currently only fx or fy (if
the Pattern doesn't specify a right argument one of the types
must still be specified but it doesn't matter which), Term is
what the reader is to return when it sees something matching
the pattern, and the Pattern is a list of atoms and variables
whose first elements is an atom, and in which no two variables
appear side by side without an intervening atom. To avoid
ambiguities, the first atom following each variable should NOT
be an infix or postfix operator, but the code below does not
check for that, as you could declare such an operator after
declaring the distfix form.
Examples:
distfixop(950, fy, [for,each,X,show,that,Y], forall(X,Y))
distfixop(1105, fx, [try,Goal,reverting,to,Alternative,on,
failure],
(Goal;Alternative))
distfixop(999, fy, [there,is,a,clause,with,head,H,and,body,B],
clause(H,B))
distfixop(999, fy, [there,is,a,clause,with,head,H], clause(H,←))
Infix forms are also available. These have the side effect of
declaring the head keyword as an infix operator; anything that
did not do this would be significantly harder to patch into the
old parser.
Examples:
distfixop(700, xfy, [S,is,the,set,of,X,such,that,P], setof(X,P,S))
distfixop(700, xfy, [B,is,the,bag,of,X,such,that,P], bagof(X,P,S)),
distfixop(700, xfy, [X,is,to,Y,as,A,is,to,B], X*B =:= A*Y),
distfixop(700, xfx, [X,had,N,variables], numbervars(X,0,N))
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 21:37 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Lack of expressive capability in Prolog
In his contribution to PROLOG Digest [Volume 4 : Issue 5],
Fernando Pereira states "The expressive power of machine
languages it the power of being able to instruct a machine
to do any elementary step (machine instruction) that the
machine has been designed to do. That kind of expressive
power is thus irrevocably tied to a particular machine
architecture, so let's call it ``machine power''." I
believe that the expressive power of a machine also
includes the ability to COMMUNICATE with other machines
operating concurrently. Prolog leaves out this ability to
communicate as well as the ability of a machine to CHANGE
ITS LOCAL STATE. This why I moved beyond MicroPlanner
(late 1960's) to actors (early 1970's). Prolog is a subset
of the capabilities of MicroPlanner that were implemented
by Charniak, Sussman, and Winograd in 1970. (The designers
of Prolog LEFT OUT belief-invoked forward chaining from
Micro-Planner as well as some other things.)
Pereira makes the further point that "Like many other
computer scientists, advocates of logic programming
understand the advantages of relinquishing machine power
in favor of ``abstraction power'': the ability to express
abstract relationships and processes without having to
delve into the peculiarities of the implementation of that
expression on a particular machine." However the abstraction
power of Prolog is fundamentally LESS than that of Common Lisp,
a machine independent language which does a better job than
Prolog of hiding the peculiarities of the implementations of
expressions. The multiple value return mechanism of Common
Lisp provides the same capabilites of returning values from
subroutines as the values of variables in Prolog goal relations.
Information hiding in Prolog is DEFECTIVE in that it does not
provide the ability to construct new locally acessible objects
the same way that Lisp does. Instead the newly constructed
relations of Prolog must be placed in the global data base thus
BETRAYING the needs of hiding the peculiarities of implementation.
Prolog does offer backtracking capabilities not found in Lisp.
However, through the experience of using MicroPlanner, the users
discovered that BACKTRACKING IS NOT A GOOD ABSTRACTION MECHANISM.
Concurrency is needed instead.
Pereira claims that "The discipline needed to keep abstractions
alive in a language with substantial machine power (such as Lisp)
seems beyond the grasp of most programmers, to judge by their
products." However my experience is that PROGRAMMERS CONSTRUCT
AND MAINTAIN BETTER ABSTRACTIONS IN LISP THAN IN PROLOG.
Programmers for standalone Prolog systems are constantly fighting
the limited expressive power of their language. They are forced
to use INELEGANT HACKS like "print" pseudo-predicates and clumsy
primitives like "assert" and "assertz" to cause needed effects
that cannot be directly expressed in Prolog.
I believe that these limitations of Prolog are FUNDAMENTAL in the
sense that there is no way to remedy them and still remain within
the realm of using Logic as a Programming language.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂10-Feb-86 0606 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #7
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 06:05:58 PST
Date: Tuesday, February 4, 1986 5:58AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #7
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 4 Feb 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 7
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - NL & Shoppers,
Implementation - Syntactic Sugar,
LP Philosophy - of expressive capability in Prolog
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1986 05:58-EST
From: Gregory.Stein@K.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Puzzle
I have found a solution to the puzzle posted by Paul Weiss in
Volume 4, #3 of the digest. It took quite a bit of grinding
and CAREFUL analysis. I did most of it using a grid method
which I think is probably pretty common for these types of
puzzles. Anyhow, here is the solution:
Couples (in order) What they bought
1. Adam & Geraldine Jones - Gloves, Book, COCO, Pearls
2. Bob & Martha Day - Gloves, COCO, Pearls, Handbag
3. Jack & Susan O'Connor - Gloves, COCO, Pearls, Sweater
4. Tom & Sandra Smith - Gloves, Book, COCO, Handbag
5. Gary & Cathleen Collins - Gloves, COCO, Sweater, Handbag
6. John & Margaret Marshall - Gloves, Book, Sweater, Handbag
7. George & Cheryl Swain - Gloves, Pearls, Sweater, Handbag
8. Bill & Evelyn Stanton - Gloves, Book, Pearls, Sweater
9. Chuck & Rosalyn Douglas - Book, COCO, Pearls, Handbag
10. Steve & Eleanor Craig - Book, Pearls, Sweater, Handbag
11. Allen & Dorothy Murphy - Book, COCO, Pearls, Sweater
12. Joe & Elizabeth Anthony - Book, COCO, Sweater, Handbag
There it is! Check it if you like, but it's right as far as I know.
Anyone who likes a puzzle - this is it - it's a real toughy. Takes
hours.
-- Greg Stein
------------------------------
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 13:44:08-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <PEREIRA@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Syntactic Sugar
There is a more general solution to the syntactic sweetening
problem raised by Zerksis D. Umrigar. This is the introduction
of ``distfix'' operators in the Prolog-10 syntax. A Prolog
reader supporting distfix operators was written a while ago by
Richard O'Keefe, and is available as DISTFI.PL at [SU-SCORE]
<PROLOG>. The following is extracted from the comments in that
file:
Distfix operators have finally been added. They are declared
by distfixop(Priority, Type, Pattern, Term)
where Priority is as usual, Type is currently only fx or fy (if
the Pattern doesn't specify a right argument one of the types
must still be specified but it doesn't matter which), Term is
what the reader is to return when it sees something matching
the pattern, and the Pattern is a list of atoms and variables
whose first elements is an atom, and in which no two variables
appear side by side without an intervening atom. To avoid
ambiguities, the first atom following each variable should NOT
be an infix or postfix operator, but the code below does not
check for that, as you could declare such an operator after
declaring the distfix form.
Examples:
distfixop(950, fy, [for,each,X,show,that,Y], forall(X,Y))
distfixop(1105, fx, [try,Goal,reverting,to,Alternative,on,
failure],
(Goal;Alternative))
distfixop(999, fy, [there,is,a,clause,with,head,H,and,body,B],
clause(H,B))
distfixop(999, fy, [there,is,a,clause,with,head,H], clause(H,←))
Infix forms are also available. These have the side effect of
declaring the head keyword as an infix operator; anything that
did not do this would be significantly harder to patch into the
old parser.
Examples:
distfixop(700, xfy, [S,is,the,set,of,X,such,that,P], setof(X,P,S))
distfixop(700, xfy, [B,is,the,bag,of,X,such,that,P], bagof(X,P,S)),
distfixop(700, xfy, [X,is,to,Y,as,A,is,to,B], X*B =:= A*Y),
distfixop(700, xfx, [X,had,N,variables], numbervars(X,0,N))
-- Fernando Pereira
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 21:37 EST
From: Hewitt@MIT-MC.ARPA
Subject: Lack of expressive capability in Prolog
In his contribution to PROLOG Digest [Volume 4 : Issue 5],
Fernando Pereira states "The expressive power of machine
languages it the power of being able to instruct a machine
to do any elementary step (machine instruction) that the
machine has been designed to do. That kind of expressive
power is thus irrevocably tied to a particular machine
architecture, so let's call it ``machine power''." I
believe that the expressive power of a machine also
includes the ability to COMMUNICATE with other machines
operating concurrently. Prolog leaves out this ability to
communicate as well as the ability of a machine to CHANGE
ITS LOCAL STATE. This why I moved beyond MicroPlanner
(late 1960's) to actors (early 1970's). Prolog is a subset
of the capabilities of MicroPlanner that were implemented
by Charniak, Sussman, and Winograd in 1970. (The designers
of Prolog LEFT OUT belief-invoked forward chaining from
Micro-Planner as well as some other things.)
Pereira makes the further point that "Like many other
computer scientists, advocates of logic programming
understand the advantages of relinquishing machine power
in favor of ``abstraction power'': the ability to express
abstract relationships and processes without having to
delve into the peculiarities of the implementation of that
expression on a particular machine." However the abstraction
power of Prolog is fundamentally LESS than that of Common Lisp,
a machine independent language which does a better job than
Prolog of hiding the peculiarities of the implementations of
expressions. The multiple value return mechanism of Common
Lisp provides the same capabilites of returning values from
subroutines as the values of variables in Prolog goal relations.
Information hiding in Prolog is DEFECTIVE in that it does not
provide the ability to construct new locally acessible objects
the same way that Lisp does. Instead the newly constructed
relations of Prolog must be placed in the global data base thus
BETRAYING the needs of hiding the peculiarities of implementation.
Prolog does offer backtracking capabilities not found in Lisp.
However, through the experience of using MicroPlanner, the users
discovered that BACKTRACKING IS NOT A GOOD ABSTRACTION MECHANISM.
Concurrency is needed instead.
Pereira claims that "The discipline needed to keep abstractions
alive in a language with substantial machine power (such as Lisp)
seems beyond the grasp of most programmers, to judge by their
products." However my experience is that PROGRAMMERS CONSTRUCT
AND MAINTAIN BETTER ABSTRACTIONS IN LISP THAN IN PROLOG.
Programmers for standalone Prolog systems are constantly fighting
the limited expressive power of their language. They are forced
to use INELEGANT HACKS like "print" pseudo-predicates and clumsy
primitives like "assert" and "assertz" to cause needed effects
that cannot be directly expressed in Prolog.
I believe that these limitations of Prolog are FUNDAMENTAL in the
sense that there is no way to remedy them and still remain within
the realm of using Logic as a Programming language.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂10-Feb-86 0826 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Faculty Meeting]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 08:26:03 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 08:20:05-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Faculty Meeting]
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182272244.20.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to reconfirm that there will be a sr. faculty meeting tomorrow
(Feb. 11) at 3:30 pm as indicated below. The meeting will be held in MJH 252.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Return-Path: <@SRI-AI.ARPA:NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Feb 86 18:23:39-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Feb 86 18:27:32-PST
Date: Mon 3 Feb 86 18:21:57-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12180546802.25.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I would like to call a faculty meeting of the tenured faculty
next Tuesday, Feb. 11 at 3:30 pm. (Location to be announced.)
The Genesereth promotion committee has met and recommends
promotion. John McCarthy, the committee chairman, will summarize
the case, and then I would like the senior faculty to discuss it
and attempt to make a decision. I apologize for having this
meeting on a "non-standard Tuesday" (usually we have it on the
first Tuesday of the month, but we have just now received all the
outside review letters). I hope most of you will be able to
be there for the discussion; those who cannot will be asked to
vote separately. Copies of several of Mike's papers will be
distributed to all of you tomorrow (plus vitae). Copies of the
letters from outside evaluators (and students) will be available
for you to read in my office. I hope everyone has a chance to
look this material over carefully before the meeting. -Nils
-------
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0858 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 08:58:52 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 08:51:53-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182278033.20.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lunch tomorrow in MJH 146 at 12:15...discussion of "Proposed Changes in the
CSD PhD Program" with Terry Winograd.
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0912 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD BBoard Now on SUMEX
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 09:12:12 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 08:57:34-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD BBoard Now on SUMEX
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: csd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 206 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12182279067.15.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The CSD bboard is now available on SUMEX-AIM.
Mail sent to CSD@SCORE now goes to the bboards ONLY. To send
mail to the original CSD mailing list, address it CSD-LIST@Score.
To read CSD notices on SCORE, SUSHI, or SUMEX, put this line in
your LOGIN.CMD file:
BBOARD CSD
On the CSD VAXEN, use 'rn' or 'readnews' to look at the newgroup
'csd.bboard.'
On SAIL the bboard is \CSD.
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0919 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: schedule]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 09:19:32 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 09:07:51-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: schedule]
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, CSL-faculty@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182280939.35.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We ran into a number of conflicts on the calendar during Forum week.
Looks like we already have a conflict for 1987.
Please look at your conference schedules for 1987. Would the second
week of February, i.e., Feb. 11-13, be better than the first week,
i.e., Feb. 3-5? Or would we just run into different conflicts?
Traditionally the Forum has been held the first week of February.
However, we have change it to the second week if it works out better.
But, we need to set the date immediately. I have already reserved
space at Tresidder for Feb. 3-5, 1987, but could possibly change it to
Feb. 11-13.
Please let me know.
Carolyn
---------------
Return-Path: <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 9 Feb 86 21:48:35-PST
Date: Sun 9 Feb 86 21:55:24-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: schedule
To: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182158522.32.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The next data engineering conference in LA has been set for Feb.2-6.
It would be great if the next forum can avoid that date, and having it
adjacent may even make it convenient for some people ( Shuey, EG&G, .. )
to attend both.
-- sorry forv the timing of this message -- I realize you are not yet quite
breathing ..
gio
-------
-------
∂10-Feb-86 0943 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Wednesday's meeting
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 09:42:51 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Feb 86 09:36:38 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 86 09:36:38 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Wednesday's meeting
To: nail@diablo
I'm away this week, but Paris Kanellakis is going to talk about
"Equational Theories and DB COnstraints" at the usual 11AM
Wednesday slot.
---jeff
∂10-Feb-86 0954 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 09:54:04 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Feb 86 09:47:32-PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 09:45:50-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
drake@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12182278033.20.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12182287852.18.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The meeting conflicts unfortunatly with a CSL faculty meeting, so that
system voices will not be heard at the CSD faculty lunch on the Changes
in the curriculum. it would be nice if the arrangers could avoid such conflicts.
Gio
-------
∂10-Feb-86 1058 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 10:58:24 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Feb 86 10:51:47-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Feb 86 10:49:23 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA21458; Mon, 10 Feb 86 10:54:40 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 86 10:54:40 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602101854.AA21458@coraki.uucp>
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
drake@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Re: CSD Tuesday Lunch
In-Reply-To: message of Mon 10 Feb 86 09:45:50-PST.
<12182287852.18.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Gio has a good point. A fair bit of the previous CSL faculty meeting
was spent discussing the proposed new CSD comp (Leo gave a good account
of the CSD Ph.D. committee's thinking). The next CSL faculty
meeting after this one is I believe scheduled for *Monday* March 10,
so any Tuesday other than tomorrow, for quite a way into the future,
should be OK.
-v
∂10-Feb-86 1143 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA electronic access to the bookstore
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 11:43:16 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 11:35:56-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: electronic access to the bookstore
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
Message-ID: <12182307896.20.REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I just had an interesting meeting with one of the adminstrators from the
Stanford University Bookstore. He seemed interested in the idea of giving us
electronic access to their database. They keep track of textbook orders and
their local inventory online. They are also thinking about electronic ordering
and how to best facilitate that. I plan to pursue the possibility of reading
their database to see what books have been ordered for CS courses. I thought
others might be interested in the possibility of seeing what CS/EE/Math books
are in stock and the possibility of ordering the books electronically. If you
are interested, please let me know so that I can pursue this as well.
-------
∂10-Feb-86 1345 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Wednesday meeting
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 13:44:52 PST
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1986 13:30 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12182328748.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Wednesday meeting
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
This Wednesday at 10:45 am, Nelleke Aiello will speak on CAGE, a
concurrent blackboard system derived from AGE.
-- Byron
∂10-Feb-86 1419 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 14:19:44 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 14:12:30-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182336399.50.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
By popular demand, the lunch topic "Proposed Changes in the CSD PhD
Program" with Terry Winograd has been changed to March 4. Tomorrow -
general discussion.
-------
∂10-Feb-86 1503 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Gaifman talk Mon.
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 15:03:16 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Feb 86 14:56:37 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 86 14:56:37 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Gaifman talk Mon.
To: nail@diablo
4:15 in Math lounge. Logic with T.C.s and LFPs
∂10-Feb-86 1810 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Matthew Hennessy: Change of address
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 18:10:21 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Feb 86 18:07:17-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Feb 86 18:06:56-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 10 Feb 86 19:36:31 CST
Received: from Cs (cs.ucl.ac.uk) by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 5 Feb 86 08:51:38 CST
Received: from ecsvax.edinburgh.ac.uk by 44d.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK via Janet with NIFTP
id a000263; 5 Feb 86 14:14 GMT
Date: 5 Feb 86 14:19:00 GMT
From: Alistair Sinclair <ALI%ecsvax.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Subject: Matthew Hennessy: Change of address
To: "N%theory%rsch.wisc.edu@ucl.cs,ALI" <@cs.ucl.ac.uk,@cs.ucl.ac.uk:theory@rsch.wisc.edu>
Message-Id: < 5-FEB-1986 14:19:00 at UK.AC.EDINBURGH.ECSVAX>
Status: RO
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 10 Feb 86 19:36:03 CST (Mon)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
CHANGE OF ADDRESS
=================
Please note that Matthew Hennessy has recently moved
from the Computer Science Department at Edinburgh
University. His new address is:-
Prof. Matthew Hennessy
University of Sussex
School of Mathematics and Physical Sciences
Falmer
Brighton
Sussex
United Kingdom
Tel: +44/273/606755 X3033
ARPA: mpff4%uk.ac.sussex.vax2@ucl.cs
(This update was not included in the Program Committee
of the recently circulated ICALP 87 Call for Papers.)
--------------
TN Message #19
--------------
∂10-Feb-86 1820 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Delaney Tina User-fns.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 18:20:46 PST
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 18:21:10-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Delaney Tina User-fns.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182381666.27.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Some have expressed a problem concerning Tina compiling the Delaney User-fns
file. This was because of a violation of a Declare Before Use constraint
in Tina, though the .XFasl file was always loadable. To circumvent this
problem the user-fns file is now two files; user-fns-structures.Tina and
user-fns.Tina .
In order for user-fns.Tina to be compilable the structures file must have
been Tina and Zetalisp compiled and it must have been loaded. These files
have been compiled so all you have to do is load them. You will have to
fix any command files that you might have for loading these. There should
be no reason for anyone other than Delaney compiling these.
Rice.
-------
∂10-Feb-86 1824 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Distinguished Research Professorship - North Carolina State University
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 18:24:25 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Feb 86 18:19:23-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 10 Feb 86 18:19:04-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 10 Feb 86 19:47:33 CST
Message-Id: <8602100545.AA08120@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA (ibm-sj.csnet) by rsch.wisc.edu; Sun, 9 Feb 86 23:45:37 CST
Date: 9 Feb 86 21:38:25 PST
From: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: THEORY@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: Distinguished Research Professorship - North Carolina State University
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 10 Feb 86 19:47:04 CST (Mon)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
The Department of Computer Science
North Carolina State University
is proud to announce the position of
Distinguished University Research Professorship
at an annual support level of
$250,000/yr
We invite applicants with an outstanding record of research to
direct inquiries to
Robert E. Funderlic, Head
Department of Computer Science
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-8205
A similar position has been allocated to the Computer Engineering
Program.
North Carolina State University is located in the high technology
Research Triangle Park area, which also includes Duke University
and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Within the
Computer Science Department there interdisciplinary research
with several other departments.
The local research environment and temperate climate make it a very
pleasant place to work and live.
--------------
TN Message #20
--------------
∂10-Feb-86 2101 vardi@su-aimvax.arpa More undecidable properties of programs
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Feb 86 21:01:41 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Feb 86 20:53:55 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 86 20:53:55 pst
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@diablo>
Subject: More undecidable properties of programs
To: nail@diablo
By now we know that boundedness is undecidable for linear datalog
programs with one ternary recursive predicate. Furthermore, if we
allow inequality as a standard edb predicate, than boundedness is
undecidable for linear datalog programs with one unary predicate.
New undecidability result: 1. It is undecidable whether a datalog
program has the polynomial fringe property. 2. It is undecidable
whether a datalog program is PTIME complete.
Moshe
∂11-Feb-86 0610 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 06:10:45 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 06:09:27-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182510605.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here are the next two AFLBs:
------------------------------------
13-Feb-86 : Peter Shor (MSRI)
Linear Algorithms on Convex Polygons
Voronoi diagrams are an important tool in computational geometry; they
can be used to solve a variety of geometric proximity problems. The
Voronoi diagram of n points in the plane can be computed in O(n log n)
time. Since an algorithm for finding the Voronoi diagram can also be
used for sorting, O(n log n) is optimal. If the points are the
vertices of a convex polygon and are given in order, however, the
lower bound techniques do not hold. Whether in this case the Voronoi
diagram could be computed in time o(n log n) was for several years an
open question. We give a linear time algorithm for finding the
Voronoi diagram of a convex polygon. We believe that the techniques
used also give linear time algorithms for finding the furthest point
Voronoi diagram and the medial lines of a convex polygon.
This is joint work with Alok Aggarwal, and is only a couple of
weeks old, so we are still working on extensions of it.
***** Time and place: February 13, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
20-Feb-86 : Andy Yao (Stanford)
On the Complexity of Partial Order Production
Let G be a partial order on n atoms. Given an input set of n numbers,
the partial order production problem is to produce a labeling of the
elements that is consistent with G. For example, the sorting problem and
the median-finding problem are special cases (G is a chain for sorting).
Let C(G) and C'(G) denote the minimum numbers of comparisons needed in
the worst case and the average case, respectively, for any algorithm.
In this talk, we prove that C(G) is equal to C'(G) up to a constant
multiplicative factor.
***** Time and place: February 20, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂11-Feb-86 0834 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: More undecidable properties of programs
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 08:34:09 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 11 Feb 86 08:23:59 pst
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 08:22:11-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: More undecidable properties of programs
To: vardi@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Cc: nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Moshe Vardi <vardi@diablo>" of Mon 10 Feb 86 20:59:54-PST
Message-Id: <12182534768.12.PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Don't both these undecidability results follow from Greibach's Theorem,
when restricted to chain programs? I had thought for some time that they do.
---Christos.
-------
∂11-Feb-86 0843 vardi@su-aimvax.arpa Re: More undecidable properties of programs
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 08:43:20 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 11 Feb 86 08:37:50 pst
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 86 08:37:50 pst
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@diablo>
Subject: Re: More undecidable properties of programs
To: PAPA@SU-Score
Cc: nail@diablo
Could be. What theorem of Greibach do you have in mind?
Moshe
∂11-Feb-86 0954 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 09:52:57 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 09:50:02-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182550761.28.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lunch today in MJH 146 at 12:15!
-------
∂11-Feb-86 1053 BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Seminar Topics
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 10:50:20 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 10:35:44-PST
From: Betsy Macken <BETSY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar Topics
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In response to my last message about seminar "topics", in which
I asked people to let me know if they wanted me to reserve the
slot they had under the old format, three people volunteered to
organize lectures for three different topics. Thus we have
scheduled the following:
2/20, 2/27, 3/6 Lexical Representations and Lexical Rules
Mark Gawron, Annie Zaenen, Paul Kiparsky
3/13, 3/20 Available for scheduling
(Dead Week and Finals Week)
3/27 Reflexivisation: Some connections between
lexical, syntactic, and semantic representation
Annie Zaenen, Peter Sells, Draga Zec
4/3, 4/10, 4/17, 424 Representation
Brian Smith, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy, Ken Olson,
John Perry
5/1, 5/8, 5/15 Visual Communication
Sandy Pentland, Fred Lakin, Guest Speakers
5/22 Carol Cleland
5/29 Available for scheduling
6/5, 6/12 Available for scheduling
(Dead Week and Finals Week)
We need individual presentations or a 2-week series in March, a
3-week series in May/June, and after that everything is open.
Shall we have summer seminar topics?
Any volunteers or suggestions?
Notice that February 13th (this Thursday) is open as well; would
anyone like to use that slot?
Betsy
-------
∂11-Feb-86 1159 MARJORIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA New phone number
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 11:56:24 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 11:50:04-PST
From: Marjorie Maxwell <MARJORIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New phone number
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: consultants@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Just a reminder that the consultant's new phone number - 5-2312 - will
be answered more promptly now than the old number (7-1932) - since there
is no backup for the old number.
Thanks,
Marjorie
-------
∂11-Feb-86 1209 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 12:09:02 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 11:50:34-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182572705.28.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a sr. faculty meeting today at 3:30 in MJH 252.
-------
∂11-Feb-86 1539 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Programs & Abstract Booklets
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 15:39:16 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 15:37:07-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Programs & Abstract Booklets
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182613947.59.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If you did not receive a program and abstract booklet from the Forum
meeting, please let me know and we will send them to you.
We will send them to the Forum companies who were not represented at
the meeting.
Carolyn
-------
∂11-Feb-86 2124 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tina backup.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 21:24:16 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 21:23:54-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tina backup.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182677075.47.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I have just made a backup version of the Tina system and of the Tina-language
compiler. As is the way with Care, these are called Old-Tina and
Old-Tina-Language respectively.
The versions which these represent are, at present, the same as the latest
version of Tina, which is to say the same as it was on monday only with a
couple of small bug fixes.
Of course the Old-* systems will be changing on a longer time constant than
the current irritating frequency.
Rice.
-------
∂11-Feb-86 2201 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 22:01:32 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 21:58:40-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182683404.14.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
At our senior faculty meeting today we reviewed the M. Genesereth
promotion case. The promotion committee members (JMC, chair; EAF;
and NJN) summarized their points of view on the matter. (A fourth
member of the committee, Jeff Ullman, was absent from today's meeting,
but his position was summarized by NJN.) Some faculty members felt
that they would like to have more time to study MRG's papers and
evaluations and then have further discussions. It was decided to have
a senior faculty meeting at 4:15 pm on Tuesday, Feb. 18, 1986.
Stay tuned for announcement about location.
Evaluation letters and copies of MRG's papers will be available in
my office. (Also, copies of some of MRG's papers have been distributed
to senior faculty.) Please do take time to familiarize yourselves with
these materials so that we will be able to reach a sound conclusion at
our next meeting. Remember that next Monday is a holiday so my office
will be closed that day. (I'm off on a three-day ski trip! If anyone
wants to volunteer to "baby sit" the evaluation letters over the
weekend and to host "drop-ins" who want to read them, please make your
intentions known to me and to Anne Richardson and then send a note
around to "tenured@score" to let folks know. Otherwise, I hope everyone
gets a chance to see everything they need to before Friday late pm. I've
been advised that it is not a good idea to make several copies of the
evaluation letters.)
Summary: Senior Faculty Meeting 2/18/86 at 4:15 pm.
-Nils
-------
∂11-Feb-86 2253 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA PLANLUNCH cancellation....
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Feb 86 22:53:00 PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 22:49:40-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: PLANLUNCH cancellation....
To: planlunch.dis: ;
Due to unforseen circumstances, tomorrow's speaker (Dan Carnese)
has had to cancel his talk this week. He will be giving his
talk sometime in March, however. Sorry for any inconvenience
this may have caused any of you!
-Amy Lansky
-------
∂12-Feb-86 0935 OLIVA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Peter Trudgill's visit next week
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 09:35:21 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 09:27:31-PST
From: Sonia Oliva <OLIVA@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Peter Trudgill's visit next week
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Peter Trudgill will be available to meet with interested people
on Tuesday morning, or at the reception following his talk ("Interdialect"
Tues. Feb. 18th, 3:15 p.m., Bldg 200, Rm 217) or at dinner that evening.
He may also be around on Wed., Feb. 19th. Please let me know if
you would like to schedule an appointment with him. Send EM to Oliva
or call me at 7-0388.
-------
∂12-Feb-86 0958 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 09:57:50 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Feb 86 09:57:01-PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 09:28:13-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Since I can't be at the meeting next week, here is my evaluation:
Many of the criticisms of Mike's research are valid, but in fact they
apply equally to a great deal of the AI work done by most (including
many of the most respected) workers in the field. In particular he was
criticized for being too attached to "toy problems" and for making the
assumption that previous existing work in related fields (data bases,
linguistics, etc.) was uninteresting and irrelevant. He buys too much
into the ideology that AI is providing all-new all-wonderful answers, to
be gotten by just coming up with clever ideas, not by studying. He may
be more egregious in these problems than some other people, as his MIT
training encouraged (so says the man who had one), but I he is also
beter than some (to remain unnamed) others, and I think he can be
advised and encouraged to shift. He is bright, articulate, and
energetic and though his research may not end up being a landmark, it
will be well within the range of that done by the average AI researcher
at a place like Stanford, CMU, MIT, etc. There are there others on the
list who I would rank higher on research alone (e.g. deKleer), but as
discussed in the meeting, once we take teaching into account, Mike is
clearly a better person to have in our department.
So my vote is yes. -t
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1025 BERGMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Spring quarter RA's
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 10:25:34 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 10:16:04-PST
From: Sharon Bergman <BERGMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Spring quarter RA's
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: bergman@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182817646.14.BERGMAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
For Sring quarter, if you plan on discontinuing the support of any students who
you are currently supporting or if you have any new research assistants
who you want to have appointed, please let me know. The paperwork for
these changes is due in the Graduate Awards office within the next few
days.
Thanks. Sharon Bergman
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1045 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 10:45:50 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Feb 86 10:37:46-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 12 FEB 86 10:35:22 PST
Date: 12 Feb 86 10:24 PST
From: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
To: Friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Reply-to: BrianSmith.pa@Xerox.COM
Message-ID: <860212-103522-1327@Xerox>
You are all invited to attend the Annual Meeting of Computer
Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), to be held on Saturday,
March 1, 1986. The meeting will consist of a day-long program on
important social issues in computation, followed by an evening banquet
featuring Dr. Herbert Abrams.
Day Program:
10:00 -- Noon Issues Forum (details below)
Noon -- 2:00 Lunch
2:00 -- 4:00 The Direction and Future of CPSR
4:30 -- 6:00 Ad Hoc Workshops on Issues of Interest, and
a short meeting the CPSR Board of Directors.
Place: Redwood Hall at Stanford University (across the street from
Ventura Hall, the Stanford site of CSLI, at the corner of
Campus Drive and Panama St., near the medical school). The
Ad Hoc Workshops will be at Stanford CSLI in Ventura Hall.
Evening Banquet:
7:00 -- 10:00 Camino Ballroom, Rickey's Hyatt, 4219 El Camino,
Palo Alto.
Featured Speaker: Dr. Herbert Abrams, speaking on "The Problem of
Accidental or Inadvertant Nuclear War"
(Dr. Abrams is a founder of PSR and IPPNW, the
1985
recipient of the Nobel Peace Price).
Registration fee for the full day program and banquet is $25: $5 for
the day program, which includes a sandwich lunch; $20 for the banquet
dinner. You may sign up for both parts, or either, as you like.
For more information: Call CPSR at (415) 322-3778.
Registration tickets: CPSR, at the above number, or
Stanford: Susan Stucky (723-3301, Ventura Hall)
Terry Winograd (723-2780, Margaret
Jacks)
Xerox PARC: Brian Smith (494-4336, Room 1656)
Denise Pawson (494-4303, Room 1656A)
Forum on CPSR Issues (10:00 a.m. -- Noon)
-----------------------------------------
1. "The Constitutionality of Automatic Launch of Nuclear Weapons"
-- Clifford Johnson, Plaintiff, Johnson vs. Weinberger. Manager,
Stanford University Information Technology Services.
2. "The Computer Aspects of the Strategic Defense Initiative"
-- Dave Redell, Digital Equipment Corporation Systems Research
Center.
3. "Artificial Intelligence and the Law"
-- Sysan Nycum, Attorney, Gaston, Snow & Ely Bartlett, Palo Alto.
4. "Computers and Civil Liberties"
-- Marc Rotenberg, Student at Stanford Law School, former
President
of the Public Interest Computing Association (PICA).
5. "A Feminist Perspective on Computer Technology"
-- Deborah Estrin, Assistant Professor of Computer Science,
University of Southern California, and
-- Lucy Suchman, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
∂12-Feb-86 1226 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 12:25:50 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 12:17:42-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Due to limited funds for the happy hour, we won't be able to have a
happy hour every week for the remainder of the year. We would like
feedback on whether people would prefer to have happy hours every week
until we use up the funds or to spread out the happy hours until
the end of the year. Please reply to this message or talk
to Smita Joshi, Gary Holden, Susan Hirsh, or Mary Dalrymple
about what you would prefer.
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1309 JODY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Qume terminals
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 13:08:02 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 12:59:17-PST
From: Joe Zingheim <JODY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Qume terminals
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
If you're a Qume user, would you take a moment and reply to this note
with the serial number of the keyboard on your Qume.
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1408 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU Berkeley Linguistics Society's 12th Annual Meeting
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 14:06:58 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA29390; Wed, 12 Feb 86 13:44:58 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 13:44:58 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602122144.AA29390@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: Berkeley Linguistics Society's 12th Annual Meeting
The Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society
February 15-17, 1986
Final Schedule
SATURDAY, February 15, 1986 (60 Evans)
MORNING SESSION: GENERAL
9:00 Martha Macri, UCB, "Polyadicity of Three Verbs Associated
with Blood-Letting Rituals in Western Glyphic Maya "
9:30 Dawn Bates, University of Washington, "An Analysis of
Lushootseed Diminutive Reduplication"
10:00 Arnold Zwicky, Ohio State University and Stanford University,
"The General Case : Basic Form versus Default Form"
10:30 BREAK
10:50 Deborah Tannen, Georgetown University, "Folk Formality"
11:30 Cheryl Ramsey Garcia, "Sex and the Question : Terminal Contours
of Responses by Women and Men"
12:00 Mark Gawron, Stanford University, "Clefts, Discourse Representations,
and Situation Semantics"
12:30 LUNCH BREAK
AFTERNOON SESSION: PARASESSION
2:00 John Hawkins, USC, "A Semantic Typology Derived from Variation
in Germanic"
2:30 Carol Genetti, University of Oregon, "The Development of
Subordinators from Postpositions in Bodic Languages"
3:00 Zygmunt Frajzyngier, University of Colorado, "From Preposition
to Copula"
3:30 BREAK
3:50 Cynthia Welsh, University of Chicago, "Is the Compositionality
Principle a Semantic Universal ?"
4:20 George Lakoff, UCB, and Claudia Brugman, UCB, "Methods of
Semantic Argumentation : Polysemy as a Major Source of Evidence"
4:50 Eve Sweetser, UCB, "Polysemy vs. Abstraction: Mutually Exclusive
or Complementary ? "
5:20 DINNER BREAK
EVENING SESSION: GENERAL
7:00 Charles Li, UCSB, "The Rise and Fall of Tonal Systems"
7:40 Amy Dahlstrom, UCB, "Weak Crossover and Obviation"
8:10 Marianne Mithun, SUNY-Albany, "When Zero Isn't There"
8:50 Janine Scancarelli, UCLA / UCSB, "Pragmatic Roles in Cherokee
Grammar"
9:20 PARTY (Stephens Hall Lounge)
SUNDAY, February 16, 1986 (2003 Life Sciences Building)
MORNING SESSION: GENERAL
9:00 Charles Fillmore, UCB, "Pragmatically Controlled Zero Anaphora"
9:30 Wayne Cowart, Ohio State University, "Evidence for a Strictly
Sentence-internal Antecedent Finding Mechanism"
10:00 Linda Schwartz, Indiana University, "Levels of Grammatical Relations
and Characterizing Reflexive Antecedents in Russian"
10:30 BREAK
LATE MORNING : PARASESSION
10:50 Michael Silverstein, University of Chicago, "Classifiers, Verb
Classifiers, and Verbal Categories"
11:30 Judy Kegl, Northeastern University, and Sara Schley, Northeastern
University, "When is a Classifier not a Classifier ? "
12:00 David Dowty, Ohio State University, "Thematic Roles and Semantics"
12:40 LUNCH BREAK
AFTERNOON SESSION: GENERAL
2:00 Nancy Dorian, Bryn Mawr College, "Abrupt Transmission Failure
in Obsolescing Languages; How Sudden the `Tip' to the Dominant
Language in Communities and Families ? "
2:40 Kathie Carpenter, Stanford University, "Productivity and Pragmatics
of Thai Numeral Classifiers"
3:10 Linda Thornburg, CSU-Fresno, "The Development of the Indirect
Passive in English"
3:40 BREAK
4:00 Stephen Wilson, UCB, "Metrical Structure in Wakashan Phonology"
4:30 Rachelle Waksler, UCSC/ Harvard University, "CV- versus X-Notation :
A Formal Comparison"
5:00 Michael Dobrovolsky, University of Calgary, "Stress and Vowel
Harmony Domains in Turkish"
5:30 DINNER BREAK
EVENING SESSION: PARASESSION
7:30 Ronald Schaefer, University of Kansas, "On Reference Objects in
Emai Path Expressions"
8:00 Leonard Talmy, UCB, "Linguistic Determiners of Perspective and
Attention"
8:40 Claudia Brugman, UCB, and Monica Macaulay, UCB, "Interacting
Semantic Systems : Mixtec Expressions of Location"
MONDAY, February 17, 1986 (2003 Life Sciences Building)
MORNING SESSION: GENERAL
9:00 Suzanne Fleischman, UCB, "Overlay Structures in the ` Song of
Roland ' : a Grounding Strategy of Oral Narrative"
9:30 Wallace Chafe, UCB, "Academic Speaking"
10:10 Geoffrey Nathan, Southern Illinois University, "Phonemes as
Mental Categories"
10:40 BREAK
11:00 Jeri Jeager, UC Davis, "On the Acquisition of the Vowel Shift
Rule"
11:30 William Eilfort, University of Chicago, "Non-finite Clauses in
Creoles"
12:00 Jack Hoeksema, Ohio State University, "Some Theoretical Consequences
of Dutch Complementizer Agreement"
12:30 LUNCH BREAK
AFTERNOON SESSION: PARASESSION
2:00 Sandra Thompson, UCLA, "A Discourse Approach to the Cross-Linguistic
Category of `Adjective' "
2:40 Mark Durie, UCLA, "The Grammaticization of Number"
3:10 Elizabeth Closs Traugott, Stanford University, "From Polysemy
to Internal Semantic Reconstruction"
3:50 BREAK
4:10 Eric Pederson, UCB, "Intensive and Expressive Language in White
Hmong"
4:40 Ronald Langacker, UCSD, "Abstract Motion"
5:20 Justine Cassell, University of Chicago, and Robert Chametzky,
University of Chicago, "A la Recherche du Temps de Verbe Perdu :
Semantic Bootstrapping and the Acquisition of the Future Tense"
∂12-Feb-86 1408 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU Berkeley Linguistics Society's 12th Annual Meeting
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 14:08:09 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Feb 86 13:49:42-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA29390; Wed, 12 Feb 86 13:44:58 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 13:44:58 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602122144.AA29390@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: Berkeley Linguistics Society's 12th Annual Meeting
The Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society
February 15-17, 1986
Final Schedule
SATURDAY, February 15, 1986 (60 Evans)
MORNING SESSION: GENERAL
9:00 Martha Macri, UCB, "Polyadicity of Three Verbs Associated
with Blood-Letting Rituals in Western Glyphic Maya "
9:30 Dawn Bates, University of Washington, "An Analysis of
Lushootseed Diminutive Reduplication"
10:00 Arnold Zwicky, Ohio State University and Stanford University,
"The General Case : Basic Form versus Default Form"
10:30 BREAK
10:50 Deborah Tannen, Georgetown University, "Folk Formality"
11:30 Cheryl Ramsey Garcia, "Sex and the Question : Terminal Contours
of Responses by Women and Men"
12:00 Mark Gawron, Stanford University, "Clefts, Discourse Representations,
and Situation Semantics"
12:30 LUNCH BREAK
AFTERNOON SESSION: PARASESSION
2:00 John Hawkins, USC, "A Semantic Typology Derived from Variation
in Germanic"
2:30 Carol Genetti, University of Oregon, "The Development of
Subordinators from Postpositions in Bodic Languages"
3:00 Zygmunt Frajzyngier, University of Colorado, "From Preposition
to Copula"
3:30 BREAK
3:50 Cynthia Welsh, University of Chicago, "Is the Compositionality
Principle a Semantic Universal ?"
4:20 George Lakoff, UCB, and Claudia Brugman, UCB, "Methods of
Semantic Argumentation : Polysemy as a Major Source of Evidence"
4:50 Eve Sweetser, UCB, "Polysemy vs. Abstraction: Mutually Exclusive
or Complementary ? "
5:20 DINNER BREAK
EVENING SESSION: GENERAL
7:00 Charles Li, UCSB, "The Rise and Fall of Tonal Systems"
7:40 Amy Dahlstrom, UCB, "Weak Crossover and Obviation"
8:10 Marianne Mithun, SUNY-Albany, "When Zero Isn't There"
8:50 Janine Scancarelli, UCLA / UCSB, "Pragmatic Roles in Cherokee
Grammar"
9:20 PARTY (Stephens Hall Lounge)
SUNDAY, February 16, 1986 (2003 Life Sciences Building)
MORNING SESSION: GENERAL
9:00 Charles Fillmore, UCB, "Pragmatically Controlled Zero Anaphora"
9:30 Wayne Cowart, Ohio State University, "Evidence for a Strictly
Sentence-internal Antecedent Finding Mechanism"
10:00 Linda Schwartz, Indiana University, "Levels of Grammatical Relations
and Characterizing Reflexive Antecedents in Russian"
10:30 BREAK
LATE MORNING : PARASESSION
10:50 Michael Silverstein, University of Chicago, "Classifiers, Verb
Classifiers, and Verbal Categories"
11:30 Judy Kegl, Northeastern University, and Sara Schley, Northeastern
University, "When is a Classifier not a Classifier ? "
12:00 David Dowty, Ohio State University, "Thematic Roles and Semantics"
12:40 LUNCH BREAK
AFTERNOON SESSION: GENERAL
2:00 Nancy Dorian, Bryn Mawr College, "Abrupt Transmission Failure
in Obsolescing Languages; How Sudden the `Tip' to the Dominant
Language in Communities and Families ? "
2:40 Kathie Carpenter, Stanford University, "Productivity and Pragmatics
of Thai Numeral Classifiers"
3:10 Linda Thornburg, CSU-Fresno, "The Development of the Indirect
Passive in English"
3:40 BREAK
4:00 Stephen Wilson, UCB, "Metrical Structure in Wakashan Phonology"
4:30 Rachelle Waksler, UCSC/ Harvard University, "CV- versus X-Notation :
A Formal Comparison"
5:00 Michael Dobrovolsky, University of Calgary, "Stress and Vowel
Harmony Domains in Turkish"
5:30 DINNER BREAK
EVENING SESSION: PARASESSION
7:30 Ronald Schaefer, University of Kansas, "On Reference Objects in
Emai Path Expressions"
8:00 Leonard Talmy, UCB, "Linguistic Determiners of Perspective and
Attention"
8:40 Claudia Brugman, UCB, and Monica Macaulay, UCB, "Interacting
Semantic Systems : Mixtec Expressions of Location"
MONDAY, February 17, 1986 (2003 Life Sciences Building)
MORNING SESSION: GENERAL
9:00 Suzanne Fleischman, UCB, "Overlay Structures in the ` Song of
Roland ' : a Grounding Strategy of Oral Narrative"
9:30 Wallace Chafe, UCB, "Academic Speaking"
10:10 Geoffrey Nathan, Southern Illinois University, "Phonemes as
Mental Categories"
10:40 BREAK
11:00 Jeri Jeager, UC Davis, "On the Acquisition of the Vowel Shift
Rule"
11:30 William Eilfort, University of Chicago, "Non-finite Clauses in
Creoles"
12:00 Jack Hoeksema, Ohio State University, "Some Theoretical Consequences
of Dutch Complementizer Agreement"
12:30 LUNCH BREAK
AFTERNOON SESSION: PARASESSION
2:00 Sandra Thompson, UCLA, "A Discourse Approach to the Cross-Linguistic
Category of `Adjective' "
2:40 Mark Durie, UCLA, "The Grammaticization of Number"
3:10 Elizabeth Closs Traugott, Stanford University, "From Polysemy
to Internal Semantic Reconstruction"
3:50 BREAK
4:10 Eric Pederson, UCB, "Intensive and Expressive Language in White
Hmong"
4:40 Ronald Langacker, UCSD, "Abstract Motion"
5:20 Justine Cassell, University of Chicago, and Robert Chametzky,
University of Chicago, "A la Recherche du Temps de Verbe Perdu :
Semantic Bootstrapping and the Acquisition of the Future Tense"
∂12-Feb-86 1600 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Demo
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 16:00:01 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 15:55:04-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Demo
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182879359.55.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Ed Feigenbaum mentioned at our meeting yesterday that he had
arranged with MRG to see a demo of the DART/HELIOS system on
this Friday. MRG can accomodate some additional people at this
demo. Please let him know if you are planning to attend so he will
have some idea of how many to plan for. (If seeing the demo is not
critical for you, you might want to wait until some later time. This
will ensure that there aren't too many shoulders to look over to see
the screen.) Mike's net address is Genesereth@sumex. The demo is
currently scheduled for 3:15 pm, Friday, Feb. 14 in MJH 242. -Nils
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1607 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu CALL FOR PAPERS
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 16:06:44 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Feb 86 16:03:57-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Feb 86 15:56:57-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 12 Feb 86 17:30:35 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 12 Feb 86 10:36:50 CST
Message-Id: <8602121636.AA14598@crys.wisc.edu>
Received: from CS.COLUMBIA.EDU by crys.wisc.edu; Wed, 12 Feb 86 10:36:40 CST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 11:34:16-EST
From: "Debra A. Jenkins" <JENKINS@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS
To: theory@CRYS.WISC.EDU
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 12 Feb 86 17:29:55 CST (Wed)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
CALL FOR PAPERS
SIXTH CONFERENCE ON FOUNDATIONS OF SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY &
THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
New Delhi, India, 18-20 December 1986
Sponsored by Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research
Tata Research Development and Design Centre
This is the sixth in a series of annual computer science conferences
organized to provide a forum for presenting research results, from
India and abroad. papers are invited in the following and related
areas:
Programming and proof methodologies
Functional and logic programming
Formal semantics and specifications
Theory of computation
Formal languages and automata
Algorithms and complexity
VLSI
Data bases
Distributed computing
Computing practice
Papers will be refereed and the final selection will be made by the
Programme Committee. Authors should send four copies of each full
paper to
K. V. Nori
TRDDC
1 Magaldas Road
Pune 411 001 India
to reach by 31 May 1986. Authors will be informed of acceptance by
31 July 1986 and final manuscripts of papers must be received by
6 September 1986 to be included in the Proceedings.
Conference Advisory Committee
A. Chandra (IBM Res.)
B. Chandrasekaran (Ohio State)
S. Crespi Reghizzi (Milan)
Z. Galil (Columbia)
D. Gries (Cornell)
M. Joseph (Warwick)
A. Joshi (Pennsylvania)
U. Montanari (Pisa)
A. Nakamura (Hiroshima)
R. Narasimhan (TIFR)
J. Nievergelt (North Carolina)
M. Nivat (Paris)
R. Parikh (New York)
S. Rao Kosaraju (Johns Hopkins)
S. Sahni (Minnesota)
P.S. Thiagarajan (Aarhus)
W. A. Wulf (Tartan Labs.)
Programme Committee
A. Bagchi (IIM, Calcutta)
A. Kumar (ITT Delhi)
K. B. Lakshmanan (ITT Madras)
S. N. Maheshwari (ITT Delhi)
K. V. Nori (Tata RDDC, Pune)
R. Sangal (ITT Kanpur)
R. Siromoney (Madras Christian College)
C. E. Veni Madhavan (IISc, Banagalore)
--------------
TN Message #21
--------------
∂12-Feb-86 1713 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 18 (Michael Silverstein)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 17:12:55 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA29580; Wed, 12 Feb 86 14:20:45 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 14:20:45 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602122220.AA29580@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 18 (Michael Silverstein)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 18, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Tense, aspect, and the functional componentialization of events in language''
Michael Silverstein
Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago
Linguistic categories of tense, aspect, "relative tense,"
Aktionsart, predicate perspective, etc., differently coded in
languages, have distinct potentials for denoting (representing)
the characteristics of predicated events, depending on the
specific configuration of categories differentially operative
in any language, their markedness relations, and what I term
the "metapragmatic" content of the categories implemented in
the utterance/communication act---the denotational coding of
the very components of the communicative event as indexed by
it. Variation along these dimensions generates, it would seem,
the apparent complexity of representational content, and yields
a kind of topology of `eventhood' that, in our culture for
example, is consciously objectified and reconstructed as
"time," though it need not be.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, Education, UCB
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyck, Education and Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlota Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas
(currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bjorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society,
Feb. 15-17:
Saturday, 2/15 in 60 Evans: 9:00-12:30; 2:00-5:20; 7:00-9:20
Sunday, 2/16 in 2003 Life Sciences Bldg.: 9:00-12:40; 2:00-
5:30; 7:30-9:10
Monday, 2/17 in 2003 Life Sciences Bldg.: 9:00-12:30; 2:00-6:00
(The schedule will be sent out via electronic mail; hard-copy
schedules are available in the Linguistics Dept., 2337 Dwinelle,
642-2757.)
∂12-Feb-86 1748 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar February 13, No. 3
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 17:47:44 PST
Date: Wed 12 Feb 86 17:40:37-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar February 13, No. 3
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
February 13, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 3
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, February 13, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall No TINLunch
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall No seminar
Trailer Classroom
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No colloquium
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, February 20, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Cresswell's Got a Real Attitude Problem
Conference Room Discussion led by David Israel, SRI and CSLI
(israel@csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Lexical Rules and Lexical Representation
Trailer Classroom Mark Gawron (Gawron@csli)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
The Quest for Inheritance and Polymorphism
Luca Cardelli, DEC Stanford Research Center
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
An online, up-to-date calendar of CSLI events is available on SU-CSLI
in <csli>calendar.
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar February 13, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
TINLUNCH ABSTRACT
Cresswell's Got a Real Attitude Problem
M. J. Cresswell has been working on the problems of the semantics
of the propositional attitudes for lo, these many years. He has
canvassed a large and bewildering array of options and has experimented
with more than a few. He now thinks he has the problem licked. Alas,
he doesn't. --David Israel
--------------
CSLI TALK
On the Semantic Content of the Notion `Thematic Role'
David Dowty, Ohio State
Tuesday, February 18, 12:00
Ventura Trailer Classroom
--------------
PIXELS AND PREDICATES
Idiosyncratic Diagrams
Kristina Hooper, Apple
1:00 pm, Wednesday, February 19, CSLI trailers
As we try to develop visual programming languages, we often rely on
our intuitions about ``humans use of visuals'', be the humans us or
them, me or you. Basically we seem to assert that people are great
with visuals, so we should do things visually.
In our enthusiasm we often forget that any complete visual language
must include both an input and an output phase, and that the current
state of most human's visual output capabilities is extremely limited.
Of course we can argue that people's general lack of manual
dexterity accounts for visual output difficulties, and that better
tools can assist them. But is this the case? Is there a deeper issue
revolving around conceptual representation that is contaminating our
communicativeness?
In an attempt to deal with this bothersome set of questions
somewhat systematically I once collected a huge number of diagrams to
see how people generated them. Putting aside for the moment the
incredible difficulties inherent in analyzing these systematically, I
was extremely astonished and impressed overall at the incredible
variation in diagrams, where it was the "difference" rather than the
goodness or badness that impressed me.
In this talk I will show you some of my collected diagrams, and
give you the benefit of my insights on these. My hope is that your
insights will add to mine, and that this might provide a start to
studying actual (as opposed to imaginary or wished for) visual
communication abilities. For though we all should plan on developing
new and powerful classes of visual communication, we will do well to
also examine such communication as it is now practiced.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar February 13, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING
12:00, Monday February 24, Ventura trailer classroom
At last week's meeting Jens Kaasboll described his research on
developing systematic descriptions of the work and communication
patterns in a nursing situation in a hospital in Oslo. At our next
meeting on February 24 (no meeting Monday the 17th---Presidents' day
holiday) we will start from his papers and analyze the situation in
terms of linguistic theories being developed here. In particular we
want to look at the semantics of the interactions in terms of the
articulation of the domains of action (as they emerge in anticipation
of potential breakdowns) and the pragmatics in terms of interlinked
conversations for action. The session will be in a discussion and
workshop style. Relevant readings are two papers by Kaasboll
(entitled ``Intentional Development of Professional Language through
Computerization'' and ``Observation of People Working with
Information: A Case Study'') available in Room 238, computer science
dept., and parts (especially Chapter 12) of the book by Winograd and
Flores, ``Understanding Computers and Cognition'' just published by
Ablex.
--------------
SEMINAR SCHEDULE
Lexical Rules and Lexical Representations
Mark Gawron, Paul Kiparsky, Annie Zaenen
February 20, 27, and March 6
This series of talks reflects the ongoing elaboration of a model of
lexical representation. In the first, Mark Gawron will discuss a
frame-based lexical semantics and its relationship to a theory of
lexical rules. In the second, Paul Kiparsky will propose a theory of
the linking of thematic roles to their syntactic realizations,
emphasizing its interactions with a theory of morphology; and in the
third, a sub-workgroup of the lexical project will sketch a unification
based representation for the interaction of the different components
of the lexical representation and both syntax and sentence semantics.
The Structural Meaning of Clause Type: Capturing Cross-modal
and Cross-linguistic Generalizations
Dietmar Zaefferer
March 20
Dietmar Zaefferer will discuss the structure and meaning of
declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamative, and other clause
types in a number of typologically different languages.
!
Page 4 CSLI Calendar February 13, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Reflexivisation:
Some Connections Between
Lexical, Syntactic, and Semantic Representation
Annie Zaenen, Peter Sells, Draga Zec
March 27
This presentation will concentrate on cross-linguistic variation in
the expression of simple direct object reflexivisation (as found in
English in a sentence like `John washed himself'). It will be shown
that the counterparts of such sentences in different languages can be
lexically transitive or intransitive, can be expressed in one word or
in two or three, and allow for one or more semantic interpretations
requiring semantic representations that treat the reflexive as a bound
variable in some cases but not in others. The data presented will show
that some simple ideas about the mapping from lexical arguments to
surface structure constituents and/or to semantic arguments are not
tenable.
Representation
Brian Smith, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy, Ken Olson, John Perry
April 3, 10, 17, and 24
Issues of representation permeate CSLI research, often in implicit
ways. This four-part series will examine representation as a subject
matter in its own right, and will explore various representational
issues that relate to mind, computation, and semantics.
Visual Communication
Sandy Pentland, Fred Lakin, Guest Speakers
May 1, 8, and 15
Speakers in this series will discuss and illustrate ongoing research
concerned with mechanisms of visual communication and visual languages
and the identification of visual regularities that support the
distinctions and classes necessary to general-purpose reasoning. Alex
Pentland will discuss how organizational regularities in human
perception can be used to facilitate a rational computer system for
3-D graphics modelling. Fred Lakin will describe a Visual
Communication Lab, and, in particular, a project to construct visual
grammars for visual languages. Examples show the use of these
grammars to recognize and parse ``blackboard'' diagrams.
Events and Modes of Representing Change
Carol Cleland
May 22
!
Page 5 CSLI Calendar February 13, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
COLLOQUIUM PREVIEW
February 20: Luca Cardelli, ``The Quest for Inheritance and
Polymorphism''
February 27: Haim Gaifman, ``Logic of Pointers and Evaluations---The
Solution to the Self-referential Paradoxes''
March 6: Bill Rounds
March 13: Raymond Smullyan
April 17: Hector-Neri Castaneda
-------
∂12-Feb-86 1758 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 18 (Michael Silverstein)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 17:58:35 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Feb 86 17:44:55-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA29580; Wed, 12 Feb 86 14:20:45 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 14:20:45 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602122220.AA29580@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 18 (Michael Silverstein)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 18, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Tense, aspect, and the functional componentialization of events in language''
Michael Silverstein
Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago
Linguistic categories of tense, aspect, "relative tense,"
Aktionsart, predicate perspective, etc., differently coded in
languages, have distinct potentials for denoting (representing)
the characteristics of predicated events, depending on the
specific configuration of categories differentially operative
in any language, their markedness relations, and what I term
the "metapragmatic" content of the categories implemented in
the utterance/communication act---the denotational coding of
the very components of the communicative event as indexed by
it. Variation along these dimensions generates, it would seem,
the apparent complexity of representational content, and yields
a kind of topology of `eventhood' that, in our culture for
example, is consciously objectified and reconstructed as
"time," though it need not be.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Feb 25: Frederick Reif, Physics and EMST, Education, UCB
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyck, Education and Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlota Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas
(currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bjorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society,
Feb. 15-17:
Saturday, 2/15 in 60 Evans: 9:00-12:30; 2:00-5:20; 7:00-9:20
Sunday, 2/16 in 2003 Life Sciences Bldg.: 9:00-12:40; 2:00-
5:30; 7:30-9:10
Monday, 2/17 in 2003 Life Sciences Bldg.: 9:00-12:30; 2:00-6:00
(The schedule will be sent out via electronic mail; hard-copy
schedules are available in the Linguistics Dept., 2337 Dwinelle,
642-2757.)
∂12-Feb-86 1853 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #9
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 18:53:05 PST
Date: 12 Feb 86 1807-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #9
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Thursday, 13 Feb 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 9
Today's Topics:
Seminars: Efficient and correct execution of parallel programs that
share memory (MIT)
Semi-applicative programming: An example (UPenn)
Optical digital computers (NASA-Ames)
Magazine article: Actors from Gold Hill
[Further responses to the PARSYM Survey on Debugging are welcomed.
Other contributions, on any of the following topics, would also be
appreciated:
Descriptions of ongoing projects
Reviews of existing architectures
Pointers to seminars and articles
Programming languages for parallel symbolic computing
General-purpose parallel symbolic computing
Special-purpose parallel symbolic computing
Hardware for parallel symbolic computing
Applications which would benefit from parallel symbolic computing
AI on multiprocessor architectures
Problem-solving architectures to exploit parallelism
Control structures in parallel problem-solving systems
Data structures
Memory subsystems
-- BD]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Feb 1986 1001-EST
From: ELIZA at XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
[Forwarded from the MIT-XX BBoard by Steven A. Swernofsky
<SASW@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>]
EFFICIENT AND CORRECT EXECUTION OF
PARALLEL PROGRAMS THAT SHARE MEMORY
MARC SNIR
DENNIS SHASHA
Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science
Hebrew University, Israel
ABSTRACT
In this work, we consider an optimization problem that arises in the
execution of parallel programs on shared memory multiple-instruction
stream multiple-data stream (MIMD) computers. A program on such a
machine consists of many processes each executed sequentially by a
single processor. The processors have access to a shared memory.
This memory is distributed and access time is large, and
nondeterministic.
The semantics of such system prescribe that instruction issuing (by a
processor) and instruction execution (by a memory module) can be
assumed to be parts of one atomic operation. This holds true if
memory accesses generated by a processor are executed in the order
they are issued. For performance reasons, we want to allow a memory
access to begin before a previous one in the same instruction stream
has completed. As a result memory accesses may be executed out of
order.
Our analysis gives a method for determining which operations in a
stream may be issued concurrently, without changing the semantics of
the execution.
We next consider code where blocks of operations have to be executed
atomically. Our analysis determines when locks can be disposed of
without changing the semantics of the execution.
The analysis uses a conflict graph similar to that used to analyze
serializability of transactions in distributed databases.
HOST: Professor Nancy A. Lynch
Date: Monday, February 3, 1986
Time: Refreshments 4:00 P.M.
Lecture 4:15 P.M.
Place: NE43-512A
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 86 15:41 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Semi-Applicative Programming (UPenn)
[Forwarded from AIList Digest V4 #16]
SEMI-APPLICATIVE PROGRAMMING: AN EXAMPLE
N.S Sridharan
BBN Labs, AI Department, Cambridge MA
3pm Thursday, January 30, 1986
216 Moore, University of Pennsylvania
Most current parallel programming languages are designed with a
sequential programming language as the base language and have added
constructs that allow parallel execution. We are experimenting with
an applicative base language that has implicit parallelism everywhere,
and then we introduce constructs that inhibit parallelism. The base
language uses pure LISP as a foundation and blends in interesting
features of Prolog and FP. Proper utilization of available machine
resources is a crucial concern in functional programming. We advocate
several techniques of controlling the behavior of functional programs
without changing their meaning or functionality: program annotation
with constructs that have benign side-effects, program transformation
and adaptive scheduling. This combination yields us a semi-
applicative programming language and an interesting programming
methodology.
In this talk we give some background information on our project, its
aims and scope and report on work in progress in the area of parallel
algorithms for context-free parsing.
Starting with the specification of a context-free recognizer, we have
been successful in deriving variants of the recognition algorithm of
Cocke-Kasami-Younger. One version is the CKY algorithm in parallel.
The second version includes a top-down predictor to limit the work
done by the bottom-up recognizer. The third version uses a cost
measure over derivations and produces minimal cost parses using a
dynamic programming technique. In another line of development, we
arrive at a parallel version of the Earley algorithm.
------------------------------
Subject: Seminar on Optical Digital Computers
Date: 7 Feb 86 22:53:20 GMT
From: emiya@ames-vmsb.arpa
[Forwarded from Vision-List]
note from eugene miya:
I have never endorsed a seminar topic before, but I would like
to endorse this seminar. I believe the speaker has something very
special to say about the future of computing. I think there is
a lot of hand waving about the future of fast parallel machines, but
until I heard Alan's presentation at Stanford over a year ago,
I was not convinced many electronic or "biological" or xyz systems
would work. Optical computing does not strike me that way.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Ames Research Center
SEMINAR ANNOUNCEMENT
Computational Research Branch
SPEAKER: Alan Huang
AT&T Bell Laboratories
TOPIC: Optical Digital Computers
(Life, Computers, and Optics)
ABSTRACT: The parallelism and non-interfering propagation of optics
offer new approaches for dealing with problems which constrain the
performance of present day computers such as interconnection
bandwidth, propagation delay, and connectivity. Historically, the
development of digital optics has been frustrated by the lack of
suitable logic, memory, and interconnection mechanisms. Recent
technological advances and architectural insights now make it possible
to overcome these problems. Technologically, optical bistability
offers the possibility of optical logic elements with speed and power
dissipation comparable with electronic gates. Architecturally, the
memory and interconnection problems can be simplified by using a
parallel pipelined architecture.
DATE: 28 Feb. 1986 TIME: 10 AM BLDG: 233 ROOM: 172
Friday
POINT OF CONTACT: E. Miya PHONE NUMBER: (415)-694-6453
emiya@ames-vmsb
VISITORS ARE WELCOME: Register and obtain vehicle pass at Ames Visitor
Reception Building (N-253) or the Security Station near Gate 18. Do
not use the Navy Main Gate.
Non-citizens (except Permanent Residents) must have prior approval from the
Director's Office one week in advance. Submit requests to the point of
contact indicated above. Non-citizens must register at the Visitor
Reception Building. Permanent Residents are required to show Alien
Registration Card at the time of registration.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1986 15:58 PST
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Actors from Gold Hill
In the January 23 issue of Electronic Design, there is an article
entitled "Parallel Lisp casts actors in key development roles". There
are several paragraphs describing the Actor language Act3 as a
concurrent language based on objects and message-passing. The Act3
code for factorial is presented as an example. Credit is given to
Carl Hewitt's invention of Actors.
"The [Actor] concept is being used for the first time by Gold Hill
Computers Inc. (Cambridge) to develop a parallel version of its Common
Lisp for systems like Intel's Hypercube."
The article concludes with:
"Gold Hill plans to implement Act3 on a network that will support
features like dynamic load balancing of processors, real-time garbage
collection, and a mail system for communications.
"The Hypercube architecture, at which Gold Hill is aiming Act3, was
developed at the California Institute of Technology (Pasadena). It
uses Intel's 80286 chip as a central processing unit and the 80287
processor for floating point arithmetic. It is licensed and
manufactured by Intel's Beaverton, Ore. plant and can be connected in
configurations of 32, 64, or 128 nodes."
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂12-Feb-86 2335 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [SASW: [CSL.GERLACH: Seminar - Parallelism in Production Systems (SU)]]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Feb 86 23:35:01 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1986 23:35 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12182963185.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: [SASW: [CSL.GERLACH: Seminar - Parallelism in Production Systems (SU)]]
Date: Wednesday, 12 February 1986 23:29-PST
From: Steven A. Swernofsky <SASW at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: PARSYM at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Re: [CSL.GERLACH: Seminar - Parallelism in Production Systems (SU)]
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 09:28:13-PST
From: Sharon Gerlach <CSL.GERLACH at SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
To: AIList
Re: Seminar - Parallelism in Production Systems (SU)
On Friday, Feb 21, Anoop Gupta, a CSL faculty candidate from CMU, will
be speaking on "Parallelism in Production Systems" in MJH 352 at 3:15.
Parallelism in Production Systems
Anoop Gupta
Department of Computer Science
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Production systems (or rule-based systems) are widely used in Artificial
Intelligence for modeling intelligent behavior and building expert systems.
Most production system programs, however, are extremely computation intensive
and run quite slowly. The slow speed of execution has prohibited the use of
production systems in domains requiring high performance and real-time
response. The talk will elaborate on the role of parallelism in the high-speed
execution of production systems.
On the surface, production system programs appear to be capable of using
large amounts of parallelism -- it is possible to perform match for each
production in a program in parallel. Our research shows that in practice,
however, the speed-up obtainable from parallelism is quite limited, around
10-fold as compared to initial expectations of 100-fold to 1000-fold. The main
reasons for the limited speed-up are: (1) there are only a small number of
productions that are affected (require significant processing) as a result of a
change to working memory and (2) there is a large variation in the processing
requirement of these productions. Since the number of affected productions is
not controlled by the implementor of the production system interpreter (it is
governed mainly by the author of the program and the nature of the problem),
the solution to the problem of limited speed-up is to somehow decrease the
variation in the processing cost of affected productions. We propose a
parallel version of the Rete algorithm which exploits parallelism at a very
fine grain to reduce this variation. We further suggest that to exploit the
fine-grained parallelism, a shared-memory multiprocessor with 32-64 high
performance processors should be used. For scheduling the fine-grained tasks
consisting of about 50-100 instructions, a hardware task scheduler is proposed.
The results presented in the talk are based on simulations done for a large
set of production systems exploiting different sources of parallelism. The
simulation results show that using the suggested multiprocessor architecture
(with individual processors performing at 2 MIPS), it is possible to obtain
execution speeds of 5000-27000 working memory element changes per second. This
corresponds to a speed-up of 5-fold to 27-fold over the best known sequential
implementation using a 2 MIPS processor. This performance is also higher than
that obtained by other proposed parallel implementations of production systems.
∂13-Feb-86 0902 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Grant Possibility
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 09:01:54 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 08:56:15-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Grant Possibility
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183065260.29.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There may be a possibility of getting an ATT $50K grant for ideas
concerning "curriculum development, lab and classroom enhancement."
(These grants specifically are NOT for long term graduate student
support, NSF-style research programs. But they can be used to
purchase equipment if needed for the purposes of the grant.) I need
to send in a proposal around the first week of March. Ideas? -Nils
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1025 PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA Kant Lectures
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 10:25:39 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 10:20:15-PST
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Kant Lectures
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The 1986-86 Immanuel Kant Lecturer is Donald Davidson from Berkeley.
THE LECTURES
Tuesday, February 18, 4:15
"Speaking of Values"
Thursday, February 20, 4:15
alues, Belief, and Meaning"
Tuesday, February 25, 3:15***
"Interpersonal Comparisons of Value"
Thursday, February 27, 4:15
"Disputed Values and Truth"
Location: Building 420 (Psychology) Room 041
Reception following the first lecture in Tanner Library, Building 90
***Note that the February 25 lecture is at 3:15 rather than 4:15
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1041 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Found Kanellakis paper
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 10:41:34 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 13 Feb 86 10:36:02 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 86 10:36:02 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Found Kanellakis paper
To: nail@diablo
If you left "Partition Semantics for Relations" on the micro-wave,
I have it now. You may reclaim it in MJH 244.
If it was Paris' copy and he left, it goes to the highest bidder.
∂13-Feb-86 1340 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA KEE available
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 13:39:36 PST
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 13:26:28-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: KEE available
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183114451.49.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
KEE 2 is available on KSL-EXP-16 in the lobby of Whelan bldg. C.
-- Rich
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1352 WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Area X
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 13:52:26 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 13 Feb 86 13:47:17 pst
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 13:38:12-PST
From: Marianne Winslett <WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Area X
To: nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Message-Id: <12183116586.17.WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Gio thinks that it will be nice if CS545 can continue to have the Area
X connection in future quarters by, say, having a speaker or so per
quarter from inside the various interested groups at Stanford. (In
recent quarters, there have been a fair number of Area-X-y talks, but
essentially all from people outside of Stanford.) This would be in
addition to the usual mix of speakers from outside. Perhaps the
Area X sessions could be advertised slightly differently from
the straight database ones, to catch the right audiences.
How does NAIL feel about this idea? All feedback from impassioned
diatribes to casual comments is welcome.
--Marianne
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1615 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 16:15:48 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Feb 86 16:12:50-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Feb 86 16:08:46-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 17:28:45 CST
Message-Id: <8602131819.AA19800@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA (ibm-sj.csnet) by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 12:19:14 CST
Date: 13 Feb 86 10:09:55 PST
From: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: Theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 13 Feb 86 17:28:07 CST (Thu)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
First Announcement of a
COMPUTER PROGRAMS TOURNAMENT
(of the Prisoners' Dilemma game)
1. INTRODUCTION
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
This is a first announcement of a tournament for computer programs,
playing the famous Prisoners' Dilemma game. Detailed instructions and
some background information are provided below. The tournament is
organized for the purpose of research and no prizes are offered. It
is intended however that the results and winners' names will be
published with permission from the persons involved. One of the goals
is to see what will happen during a SEQUENCE of tournaments in which
information about the participating programs will be released, so that
participants will be able to revise their programs. The tournament is
open to everyone. However, notice the warnings below. If you have
access to electronic mail then you can participate by submitting a
FORTRAN program according to the instructions below. By doing so you
will also release and waive all your copyright rights and any other
intellectual property rights to your program. It will also be assumed
that you have not violated any rights of any third party. This
announcement also includes some programs that will help you prepare
for the tournament.
2. BACKGROUND
←←←←←←←←←←←←←
The so-called prisoners' dilemma game has drawn the attention
of researchers from many fields: psychology, economics, political
science, philosophy, biology, and mathematics. Computer scientists
are also interested in this game in the context of fundamentals of
distributed systems.
The game is simple to describe, does not require much skill and is yet
extremely interesting from both the theoretical and practical points
of view. By the (one-shot) Prisoners' Dilemma game we refer to a game
as follows. The game is played by two players with symmetric roles.
Each has to choose (independently of the other) between playing action
C ("cooperate") or action D ("defect"). The scores to the two
players, corresponding to the four possible combinations of choices of
actions, are as shown in the following table:
Player 2
C D
---------------
| 3 | 4 |
C | | |
| 3 | 0 |
Player 1 |-------|-------|
| 0 | 1 |
D | | |
| 4 | 1 |
---------------
Thus, both players score 3 if both play C. Both score 1 if both play D.
If one plays C and the other one plays D then the one who plays C scores
0 while the other one scores 4.
The prisoner's dilemma game has been the subject of many experiments.
A tournament was organized several years ago by R. Axelrod who later
published a book on it under the title "The evolution of cooperation"
(Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1984).
Following is some discussion for the benefit of readers who are not
familiar with the fundamental considerations of how to play the game. One
should be careful to distinguish the one-shot game from the REPEATED game
in which the (one-shot) game is played many times, and after each round
both players are informed of each other's actions. Furthermore, one
should distinguish between the infinitely repeated game and the finitely
repeated one. These seem to be quite different from the point of view
of equilibrium. An equilibrium in a 2-person game is a pair (S1,S2) of
strategies (one for each player) such that, given that player i (i=1,2)
is playing Si , the other player, j=3-i, scores the maximum if he plays
Sj .
We are interested here in the finitely repeated game where the number
of rounds is known in advance. We first consider the one-shot game.
The analysis of the one-shot game is obvious. Each of the players
realizes that no matter what his opponent does, it is always better
for him to play D rather than C. Thus, under a very weak assumption
of rationality (namely, players do not choose actions that are
strictly dominated by other actions), the pair of actions (D,D)
remains the only rational choice. The resulting score of (1,1) is
inferior to (3,3), which is possible if the choices are (C,C), and
this is the source of the "dilemma".
To get some insight into the more general case, consider first
the 2-round game. After the first round (in which the players choose
independently C or D) each player is informed of the choice of the
other one and then, once again, the players choose independently C or
D. In this game each player has EIGHT strategies that can be coded in
the form XYZ where each of X,Y and Z equals either C or D. The
interpretation of this notation is as follows. (1) Play X in round 1.
(2) In round 2, play Y if the opponent played C and play Z if the
opponent played D. It is easy to verify that any strategy XYZ is
strictly dominated by XDD (that is, regardless of what was done in
round 1, and regardless of what the opponent does in round 2, it is
better to play D rather than C in round 2. However, there is no
domination relation between the strategies CDD and DDD: if player 2
plays DDD then player 1 is better off playing DDD rather than CDD,
whereas if player 2 plays DDC, player 1 is better off playing CDD
rather than DDD. Of course, strategy DDC for player 2 is dominated by
DDD, but in order for player 1 to deduce that player 2 will not play
DDC, he has to assume that player 2 is capable of discovering this
domination. Under such an assumption player 1 can eliminate 2's DDC.
Thus, if both players are "rational" they are left only with strategy
DDD as a reasonable choice.
A similar process of repeatedly eliminating dominated strategies
applies to the general N-round game. It is dominant for both players
to defect in the last round. Therefore (after we drop all strategies
that play C in the last round), it becomes dominant to defect in round
N-1, and so on. This eventually leaves both players only with the
strategy of always playing D.
The winner in both tournaments run by R. Axelrod was the simple
strategy called "Tit-for-Tat". It starts by playing C and in round i+1
plays whatever the opponent played in round i. It seems like a very good
strategy for playing the repeated dilemma for an indefinite number of
rounds. In the N-round game it is obvious that an improvement over Tit-
for-Tat would be to play Tit-for-Tat except for the last round in which
the optimal play is always to defect.
3. HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE TOURNAMENT?
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
If you think you understand the dilemma quite well and would like to
participate in this tournament then please act according to the following
instructions:
1. Design a strategy of how to play the game when the number of rounds
is known in advance. The strategy should specify what to do in round 1
and at any point of the game, knowing what has been done so far and the
number of rounds left, specify what to do in the next round.
2. Write a FORTRAN subroutine with the following specifications. Give
it a six-letter name, for example, the first four letters of your last
name followed by two initials. Suppose you picked the name JONERJ for
your subroutine. Then the first line of your program should look as
follows.
SUBROUTINE JONERJ (N,J,I,M)
The arguments are defined as follows.
N - This is the total number of rounds to be played. Whenever your
program is called it is told the total number of rounds and
this will not change during a single game.
J - This is the serial number of the round you are supposed to play in
the current call.
I - When J is greater than 1, this argument tells you what your opponent
has played in the previous round. If I=1 it means your opponent has
played C. If J=2 then he played D. Any other value is an error.
M - This is what you return as your play in the current round. M=1 means
you play C. M=2 means you play D. Any other value will result in an
error.
Your subroutine may compute anything you wish. In particular, it may
keep track of the entire history of a single (N-round) game. However,
it will not be able to record past games against any opponent since it
will be unloaded at the end of a single N-round game. Please be
reasonable with respect to the space and time you intend your program to
use. Unreasonable programs will have to be dropped from the tournament
at the discretion of the organizers. Also, if your program ever returns
a faulty play, that is, it returns an M which is neither 1 nor 2, then it
will be dropped from the tournament automatically.
3. Fill in the following information (to be transmitted only by
electronic mail):
NAME:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
AFFILIATION:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
STREET:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
CITY:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←← STATE:←←←←←←←←←←←←← Zip:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
COUNTRY:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
TELEPHONE:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
4. Important notice!
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
| By sending your program to any one of the following |
| addresses you agree to waive and release, to the extent |
| permitted by law, all your copyright rights and other |
| intellectual property rights in your computer program. |
| You also warrant that no portion of your program or its |
| use or distribution, violates or is protected by any |
| copyright or other intellectual property right of any |
| third party. You also warrant you have the right to, |
| and hereby do, grant to IBM a royalty-free license to |
| use your program. If any contestant is a minor under |
| the laws of the state in which contestant resides, at |
| least one of the contestant's parents should sign this |
| warranty and license. IBM may elect to publish the |
| results of the contest; names of participants or their |
| submissions will not be published without the written |
| approval and signature of the individual authors. |
|←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←|
Please transmit your program by March 31, 1986, along with the filled
questionnaire to one of the following addresses:
CSNET or ARPANET: megiddo@ibm-sj
VNET or BITNET : megiddo at almvma
4. TRAINING PROGRAM
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
For your convenience, we include here an interactive program that lets
you play the game with another "player". While playing this interactive
program please remember that your goal is actually to SCORE high and not
necessarily to BEAT the other player. In the tournament, your ability
to affect the player's total score is limited since he plays against many
other players besides you. Thus you will benefit if you will create
"confidence" so that both of you end up playing C very often. You have
the option of either playing yourself or using the subroutine that
represents you. If you use a subroutine then you have to name it MINE
and follow the instructions in Section 3. Simply append it the following
program. It is advised that you use this option to test your own program
before submitting it to the tournament.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTEGER SCORE,SCORE2,CH1,CH2,PRE1,PRE2,CC,DD,CD,DC
C
DATA CC,DD,CD,DC/3,1,0,4/
20 SCORE = 0
SCORE2 = 0
PRE1=1
PRE2=1
WRITE(6,102)
102 FORMAT(' ENTER NUMBER OF ROUNDS YOU WISH TO PLAY (0=END)')
103 FORMAT (I6)
READ (5,*) NR
IF (NR.LE.0) STOP
118 FORMAT(' WILL YOU (1) PLAY OR WILL YOUR SUBROUTINE (2) DO? (1/2)')
430 WRITE (6,118)
READ (5,*) II
IF (II.EQ.2) GO TO 420
IF (II.NE.1) GO TO 430
420 DO 30 JR = 1, NR
104 FORMAT(' ROUND NO.',I6,' OF',I6,' ROUNDS. PLEASE ENTER 1 OR 2')
IF (II.EQ.2) GO TO 440
WRITE (6,104) JR,NR
40 CONTINUE
READ (5,*) CH1
GO TO 450
440 CALL MINE(NR,JR,PRE2,CH1)
IF ((CH1-1)*(CH1-2)) 470,71,470
470 WRITE (6,117)
117 FORMAT (' YOUR SUBROUTINE RETURNED A FAULTY PLAY')
GO TO 20
450 IF ((CH1-1)*(CH1-2)) 70,71,70
70 IF (CH1.EQ.0) GO TO 20
105 FORMAT(' PLEASE ENTER EITHER 1 OR 2 . (0=END)')
WRITE (6,105)
GO TO 40
71 IF (JR-1) 220,220,230
220 CH2 = 1
IF (NR.EQ.1) CH2 = 2
GO TO 300
230 IF (JR-NR) 250,260,260
250 CH2 = PRE1
GO TO 300
260 CH2 = 2
107 FORMAT(' PLAY WAS: YOU=',I3,' OPPONENT=',I3)
300 WRITE(6,107) CH1,CH2
IF (CH1-1) 110,110,120
110 IF (CH2-1) 130,130,140
130 SCORE = SCORE + CC
SCORE2 = SCORE2 + CC
GO TO 35
140 SCORE = SCORE + CD
SCORE2 = SCORE2 + DC
GO TO 35
120 IF (CH2-1) 150,150,160
150 SCORE = SCORE + DC
SCORE2 = SCORE2 + CD
GO TO 35
160 SCORE = SCORE + DD
SCORE2 = SCORE2 + DD
35 WRITE (6,106) SCORE,SCORE2
106 FORMAT (' NEW TOTAL SCORE: YOU=',I5,' OPPONENT=',I5)
PRE1=CH1
PRE2=CH2
30 CONTINUE
GO TO 20
END
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. SAMPLE PROGRAMS
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
For your convenience we include here copies of two sample programs.
The first subroutine, called TIFRTA, plays Tit-for-Tat (see Section 2)
except that it always defects in the last round. The second, called
GRIM, starts playing C but switches to D the first time th opponent has
played D. It also always defects in the last round.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBROUTINE TIFRTA (N,J,IHE,MY)
C
C THIS IS THE TIT-FOR-TAT RULE. IN ROUND 1 PLAY 1. IN ROUND N
C PLAY 0. OTHERWISE, PLAY WHAT THE OPPONENT PLAYED IN THE PRECEDING
C ROUND.
C
C N = TOTAL NUMBER OF ROUNDS
C J = CURRENT ROUND
C IHE = THE CHOICE OF THE OPPONENT IN THE PRECEDING ROUND (1 OR 2)
C MY = MY CHOICE FOR THE CURRENT ROUND (1 OR 2)
C
IF (J-1) 20,20,30
20 MY = 1
IF(N.EQ.1) MY=2
RETURN
30 IF (J-N) 50,60,60
50 MY = IHE
RETURN
60 MY = 2
RETURN
END
C------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBROUTINE GRIM (N,J,IHE,MY)
C
C THIS IS THE GRIM STRATEGY: START WITH C AND SWITCH TO D
C AS SOON AS THE OPPONENT DOES
C
IF (J-1) 10,10,20
10 IX = 1
20 IF (IHE.EQ.2) IX = 2
IF (J.EQ.N) IX = 2
MY = IX
RETURN
END
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
TN Message #22
--------------
∂13-Feb-86 1645 ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU Jeffrey Ullman in the news
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 16:45:05 PST
Received: from sally.UTEXAS.EDU by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 13 Feb 86 16:39:08 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 86 18:12:54 cst
From: ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU (Arthur M. Keller)
Posted-Date: Thu, 13 Feb 86 18:12:54 cst
Message-Id: <8602140012.AA06812@sally.UTEXAS.EDU>
Received: by sally.UTEXAS.EDU (4.22/4.22)
id AA06812; Thu, 13 Feb 86 18:12:54 cst
To: nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Subject: Jeffrey Ullman in the news
The following is from the February 10, 1986 issue of U.S. News and
World Report article entitled "Digging for dollars in the singles
market" (pp. 46-47):
"Entrepreneurs such as Jeffrey Ullman specialize in the ultimate
singles service---matchmaking. Ullman, president of Great Expectations
Creative Management in Los Angeles, charges about $1,000 a membership
for his video dating service, which he has franchised nationally."
Arthur
∂13-Feb-86 1657 TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Jeffrey Ullman in the news
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 16:57:37 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 13 Feb 86 16:51:49 pst
Date: Thu 13 Feb 86 16:50:24-PST
From: Richard Treitel <TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Ullman in the news
To: ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU
Cc: treitel@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <8602140012.AA06812@sally.UTEXAS.EDU>
Message-Id: <12183151576.71.TREITEL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
An example of a relationship database, I presume. - R.
-------
∂13-Feb-86 1956 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM David Dowty's talk
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 19:55:59 PST
Received: from Xerox.COM by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Feb 86 19:46:11-PST
Received: from Cabernet.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 13 FEB 86 14:32:09 PST
Date: 13 Feb 86 14:31 PST
From: Zaenen.pa@Xerox.COM
Subject: David Dowty's talk
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Message-ID: <860213-143209-1763@Xerox>
I got this abstract for D.Dowty's talk too late to put it in the
calendar, so here it is by separate mail:
ON THE SEMANTIC CONTENT OF THE NOTION 'THEMATIC ROLE'
Thematic Roles had never been employed in formalized, model-theoretic
work until the recent proposals by Gennaro Chierchia (in his 1984
dissertation) and by Greg Carlson (in a forthcoming paper in
'Linguistics'). The present paper will try to raise some fundamental
questions not treated in these other two proposals as well as respond
to and build on them. The first task is to try to figure out how a
theory of thematic roles can be genuinely distinguishable from the way
n-place predicates and their arguments are interpreted in standard
predicate logic and its model theory. It is suggested that this can
be done by treating "thematic roles" in the standard approach as
clusters of entailments with respect to various arguments of verbs,
then putting constraints on these entailments, but it is argued that a
more revealing method is the neo-Davidsonian one of taking verbs as
one-place predicates of events and thematic roles as relations between
events (taken as primitives) and their participants. The hypothesis
is then put forward that arguments of event-nominals ("Mary's
dismissal of John", etc.) may be interpreted via a thematic-role
theory of this sort, while subcategorized arguments of verbs are
interpreted via the standard approach (verbs denote n-place
relations). The paper closes with some speculation as to the purpose
thematic roles may serve in the acquisition of language and in the
preliminary (but not final) individuation and categorization of
events.
---David Dowty
The talk is this coming tuesday at noon in the trailer class room
∂13-Feb-86 2341 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [RPG: Alliant]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 23:41:50 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1986 23:42 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12183226628.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: [RPG: Alliant]
Date: Thursday, 13 February 1986 17:59-PST
From: Dick Gabriel <RPG at SU-AI.ARPA>
To: davies at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Re: Alliant
Jack Test from Alliant is coming to speak at Lucid next week, mostly
to [John McCarthy's] crowd. Any of the AAP may also attend. 11:30am,
Thursday, Feb 20. At Lucid.
-rpg-
[Alliant manufactures a multiprocessor system aimed at the
"scientific" computing market. It might be interesting to hear why
they think it might be good for a multiprocessor Lisp. -- Byron]
∂14-Feb-86 0212 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu EATCS
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 02:12:15 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Feb 86 02:04:48-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Feb 86 19:28:45-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 20:44:08 CST
Message-Id: <8602031855.AA28126@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 3 Feb 86 12:55:19 CST
Received: from (ROZENBER)HLERUL5.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 02/03/86
at 12:52:39 CST
Date: 3 FEB 86 10:46-N
From: ROZENBER%HLERUL5.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
To: THEORY@WISC-RSCH.ARPA
Subject: EATCS
Status: RO
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 13 Feb 86 20:43:51 CST (Thu)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Dear collegue,
Last month I've sent via "Theory Net" the information leaflet of the EUROPEAN
ASSOCIATION FOR THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE (EATCS).
Since a number of typing mistakes have occurred in this message (the most
notable being dropping the name of J. van Leeuwen from the list of
council members) and since we have modified somewhat the ways of paying the
membership dues, I've decided to mail the (corrected) message once again.
I would like to take this opportunity and make it clear that payments of
membership by sending personal checks are allowed (and welcomed).
Once again: if you have any more questions do not hesitate to contact either
myself (electronic address: ROZENBER@HLERUL5.BITNET) or the secretary of the
association Th. Ottmann (electronic address: OTTMANN@GERMANY.CSNET).
With very best regards,
G. Rozenberg
EATCS President
===============================================================================
EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION FOR THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE (EATCS)
COUNCIL OF EATCS
BOARD
President: G. Rozenberg, Leiden
Vice President: W. Brauer, Munich
Treasurer: J. Paredaens, Antwerp
Secretary: Th. Ottmann, Karlsruhe
Bulletin Editor: G. Rozenberg, Leiden
TCS Editor: M. Nivat, Paris
Past Presidents: M. Nivat, Paris (1972-1977)
M. Paterson, Warwick (1977-1979)
A. Salomaa, Turku (1979-1985)
FURTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS
G. Ausiello Rome
J. De Bakker Amsterdam
J. Diaz Barcelona
F. Gecseg Szeged
J. Gruska Bratislava
J. van Leeuwen Utrecht
Z. Manna Rehovot & Stanford
H. Maurer Graz
Ch.H. Papadimitriou Athens & Stanford
A. Paz Haifa
D. Perrin Paris
E. Schmidt Aarhus
D. Wood Waterloo
EATCS
HISTORY AND ORGANISATION
EATCS is an international organization founded in 1972. Its aim is to
facilitate the exchange of ideas and results among theoretical computer
scientists as well as to stimulate cooperation between the theoretical
and the practical community in computer science.
Its activities are coordinated by the Council of EATCS, out of which a
President, a Vice President, a Treasurer and a Secretary are elected.
Policy guidelines are determined by the Council and the General Assembly
of EATCS. This assembly is scheduled to take place during the annual
International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP),
the conference of EATCS.
MAJOR ACTIVITIES OF EATCS
- Organization of ICALP's
- Publication of the "Bulletin of the EATCS"
- Publication of the "EATCS Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science"
- Publication of the journal "Theoretical Computer Science"
- Other activities of EATCS include the sponsorship of various more
specialized meetings in theoretical computer science. Among such
meetings are: CAAP (Colloquium on Trees in Algebra and Programming),
TAPSOFT (Conference on Theory and Practice of Software Development),
STACS (Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science),
Workshop on Graph Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, European
Workshop on Applications and Theory of Petri Nets, Workshop on Graph
Grammars and their Applications in Computer Science.
BENEFITS
Benefits offered by EATCS include:
- Receiving the "Bulletin of the EATCS" (about 600 pages per year)
- Reduced registration fees at various conferences
- Reciprocity agreements with other organizations
- 25% discount in purchasing ICALP proceedings
- 25% discount in purchasing books from "EATCS Monographs on Theoretical
Computer Science"
- About 70% (equals about US $300.-) discount per annual
subscription to "Theoretical Computer Science".
(1) THE ICALP CONFERENCE
ICALP is an international conference covering all aspects of theoretical
computer science and now customarily taking place during the third week of
July.
Typical topics discussed during recent ICALP conferences are: computability,
automata theory, formal language theory, analysis of algorithms, computa-
tional complexity, mathematical aspects of programming language definition,
logic and semantics of programming languages, foundations of logic programming,
theorem proving, software specification, computational geometry, data types and
data structures, theory of data bases and knowledge based systems, cryptography,
VLSI structures, parallel and distributed computing, models of concurrency
and robotics.
Sites of ICALP meetings:
- Paris, France (1972) - Haifa, Israel (1981)
- Saarbrucken, Germany (1974) - Aarhus, Denmark (1982)
- Edinburgh, Great Britain (1976) - Barcelona, Spain (1983)
- Turku, Finland (1977) - Antwerp, Belgium (1984)
- Udine, Italy (1978) - Nafplion, Greece (1985)
- Graz, Austria (1979) - Rennes, France (1986)
- Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands (1980) - Karlsruhe, Germany (1987)
(2) THE BULLETIN OF THE EATCS
Three issues of the Bulletin are published annually appearing in
February, June and October respectively. The Bulletin is a medium for
rapid publication and wide distribution of material such as:
- EATCS matters
- Information about the current ICALP
- Technical contributions
- Surveys and tutorials
- Reports on conferences
- Calendar of events
- Reports on computer science departments and institutes
- Listings of technical reports and publications
- Book reviews
- Open problems and solutions
- Abstracts of Ph.D. Theses
- Information on visitors at various institutions
- Entertaining contributions and pictures related to computer science.
Contributions to any of the above areas are solicited. All written
contributions should be sent to the Bulletin Editor:
Prof.dr. G. Rozenberg
Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Leiden
P.O. Box 9512
2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
Deadlines for submissions to reach the Bulletin Editor are: January 15,
May 15 and September 15 for the February, June and October issue respec-
tively.
All pictures (preferably black and white) including text of what they
are showing should be sent to the Picture Editor:
Dr. P. van Emde-Boas
University of Amsterdam
Roeterstraat 15
1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Deadlines are 2 weeks before those for written contributions, indicated
above.
(3) EATCS MONOGRAPHS ON THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
This is a series of monographs published by Springer-Verlag and launched
during ICALP 1984; within the first year six volumes appeared. The series
includes monographs as well as innovative textbooks in all areas of theo-
retical computer science, such as the areas listed above in connection
with the ICALP conference. The volumes are hard-cover and ordinarily
produced by type-setting. To ensure attractive prices other production
methods are possible.
The editors of the series are W. Brauer (Munich), G. Rozenberg (Leiden),
and A. Salomaa (Turku). Potential authors should contact one of the editors.
The advisory board consists of G. Ausiello (Rome), S. Even (Haifa), M. Nivat
(Paris), C. Papadimitriou (Athens & Stanford), A. Rosenberg (Durham), and
D. Scott (Pittsburgh).
Updated information about the series can be obtained from the publisher,
Springer-Verlag.
(4) THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE
The aim of the "Theoretical Computer Science" journal is to publish
papers in the fast envolving field of theoretical computer science.
The volume of research on theoretical aspects of computer science
has increased enormously in the past. The classical theories of
automata and formal languages still offer problems and results,
while considerable attention is now being given to newer areas, such
as the formal semantics of programming languages and the study of algorithms
and their complexity. Behind all this lie the major problems of under-
standing the nature of computation and its relation to computing
methodology. While "Theoretical Computer Science" remains mathematical
and abstract in spirit, it derives its motivation from the problems of
practical computation. The editors intend that the domain covered
by "Theoretical Computer Science" will increase and evolve with the
growth of the science itself. The editor-in-chief of "Theoretical
Computer Science" is:
Prof. M. Nivat
162, Boulevard Malesherbes
75017 Paris, France.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Please contact the Secretary of EATCS:
Prof.dr. Th. Ottmann
Institut fur Angewandte Informatik und Formale
Beschreibungsverfahren
Universitat Karlsruhe
Postfach 6380
D-7500 Karlsruhe 1, West Germany
DUES
The dues are US $ 10.- for a period of one year. If the initial
membership payment is received in the period December 21 - April 20,
April 21 - August 20, August 21 - December 20, then the first
membership year will start on June 1, October 1, February 1,
respectively. Every continuation payment continues the membership
for the same time period.
An additional fee is required for ensuring the air mail delivery
of the EATCS Bulletin outside Europe. The amounts are $ 7.- for USA,
Canada, Israel, $ 10.- for Japan and $ 12.- for Australia per year.
For information on additonal fees for other destinations contact either
the Secretary on the Treasurer.
HOW TO JOIN EATCS
To join send the annual dues, or a multiple thereof (to cover a
number of years), to the Treasurer of EATCS:
Prof.dr. J. Paredaens
University of Antwerp, U.I.A.
Department of Mathematics
Universiteitsplein 1
B-2610 Wilrijk, Belgium
The dues can be paid (in order of preference) by US $ cheques,
other currency cheques, US $ cash, other currency cash. It cannot
be paid by International Post Money Order. When submitting payment,
please make sure to indicate complete name and address. For this purpose
you may want to use the form below.
If a transfer is in US $ then the annual membership payment equals
US $ 10.-. If a transfer (covering the membership for any number of years
and/or addtitional air mail delivery for any number of years) is in a
currency other than US $, then additional US $ 2.- for the transfer must
be paid (the difference is used to cover the bank charges). Please remember
to indicate your address clearly (since the Bulletin is send to the address
you give).
You may also pay the membership fee via the following account:
General Bank Antwerp
Antwerp, Belgium
Account number: 220-0596350-30-01130
For each transfer via this account additional US $ 2.- for the transfer
must be paid.
===============================================================================
I would like to join the EATCS and enclose $..... as membership for .....
years (and $..... for air mail delivery).
Name:
Address:
Date: Signature:
===============================================================================
--------------
TN Message #23
--------------
∂14-Feb-86 1053 KUPER@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 10:53:19 PST
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 14 Feb 86 10:44:53 pst
Date: 14 Feb 86 08:21:58 EST
From: KUPER@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: ark@sally.utexas.edu, nail@diablo, t.Jeff@IBM-SJ.ARPA
The following appeared in the NY Times of 8 Feb 1986:
"For those not ready for wedding plans, a new paperback, "The Singles
Almanac" ($8.95, World Almanac Publications), by Jeffrey Ullman, who,
incidentally, is married, is a partly playful, partly educational
guide to being single and enjoying it. The 208-page book contains
chapters on such things as "How to Date Many People at the Same Time,"
"The Living Together Contract," "Twelve Ways to Handle Rejection"
and "Getting Rid of First Date Jitters." "
Gabi
∂14-Feb-86 1301 FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: [RPG: Alliant]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 13:01:46 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 12:49:37-PST
From: Edward Feigenbaum <FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: [RPG: Alliant]
To: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <DAVIES.12183226628.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12183369886.50.FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
ALAS I WILL BE IN WASHINGTON ON 2/20 BUT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW
WHAT ALLIANT HAS TO SAY. CAN SOMEONE FROM AAP GO TO THIS TALK AND GIVE ME
A RUNDOWN ON 2/24? IS ANYONE PLANNING TO GO?....ED F.
-------
∂14-Feb-86 1426 NAKANO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA directions to go to Lucid...
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 14:26:39 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 14:26:53-PST
From: Russell Nakano <NAKANO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: directions to go to Lucid...
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183387592.52.NAKANO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Does anyone have directions on how to get to Lucid? Is it nearby?
-russell
-------
∂14-Feb-86 1512 ADOLFO@SU-CSLI.ARPA Weather
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 15:12:47 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 15:06:03-PST
From: Adolfo Garcia <ADOLFO@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Weather
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Warning: I've just heard that the U.S Geological Survey sent
its employees home, because it seems that the weather is
getting pretty bad within the next hour.
-------
∂14-Feb-86 1557 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu FOCS Call for Papers
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 15:57:18 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Feb 86 15:52:13-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Feb 86 15:55:15-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 14 Feb 86 17:21:32 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:08:48 CST
Message-Id: <8602132008.AA12558@crys.wisc.edu>
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by crys.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:08:38 CST
Received: from (BH00)CLVMS.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 02/13/86 at
14:04:52 CST
Date: Feb 12, 1986
To: theory@wisconsin
From: BH00%CLVMS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: FOCS Call for Papers
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 14 Feb 86 17:19:09 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Call for Papers
1986 IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
The 27th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, sponsored by
the Computer Society's Technical Committee on Mathematical Foundations of
Computing, will be held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, on October 27-29, 1986.
Papers presenting original research on theoretical aspects of computer science
are being sought.
Suggested Topics - typical, but not exclusive, include:
* Algorithms and Data Structures
* Theory of Formal Languages and Automata
* Theory of Logical Design, Layout, and VLSI
* Computability and Complexity Theory
* Cryptography
* Theory of Robotics
* Theory of Data Bases
* Semantics of Programming Languages
* Logic of Programs
* Parrallel and Distributed Computation
Submission of papers: Authors should send nine copies of a detailed
abstract (not a full paper) by May 5, 1986, to the Program Committee Chair:
John E. Hopcroft
Department of Computer Science
Cornell University
311 Upson Hall
Ithaca NY 14853
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by June 23, 1986. A copy of
each accepted paper, typed on special forms for inclusion in the sysmposium
precedings, will be due by August 11, 1986.
IMPORTANT: Because a large number of submissions is anticipated, authors are
advised to prepare their detailed abstracts carefully. It is recommended that
each submission begin with a succinct statement of the problem, a statement of
the main results, and an explanation of the significance that is suitable for a
general research audience. Technical development of the work, directed to the
specialist, should follow as appropriate. In any case, the entire extended
abstract, with comparison to extant work, should not exceed 2,500 words (10
typed double-spaced pages). Submissions arriving later or departing
significantly from the guidelines risk rejection without consideration of their
merits.
Meeting Format: The format of the meeting, including time allocations for
presentations, will be determined by the Program Committee. Authors having a
preference for a short (10-15 minute) or long (20-30 minute) presentation should
express it at the time of submission. Such a preference will not influence
acceptance, and time allocation will not be noted in the proceedings or affect
the space allocation for the paper. If submissions warrant, the committee will
compose a program for parallel sessions.
Machtey Award for Best Student Paper: This award of up to $400, to help defray
expenses for attending the symposium, will be given to that paper which the
Program Committee judges to be the most outstanding paper written solely by a
student or students. To be considered for the award, an abstract must be
accompanied by a letter identifying all authors as full-time students at the
time of submission. (At its discretion, the Committee may decline to make the
award or may split the award among two or more papers.)
Technical Committee Chair
Ashok Chandra
IBM Thomas J. Watson Res.
P.O. Box 218
Yorktown Heights NY 10598
Program Chair
John E. Hopcroft
Department of Computer Science
Cornell University
311 Upson Hall
Ithaca NY 14853
Local Arrangements Chair
Charles Rackoff
Department of Computer Science
University of Toronto
Toronto Canada M5S 1A7
Program Committee
Alok Aggarwal
John Hopcroft
Ravi Kannan
Charles E. Leiserson
Nancy Lynch
Gary Miller
Joel Seiferas
Michael Sipser
Ivan Hal Sudborough
Moshe Vardi
Umesh Vazirani
Mihalis Yannakakis
--------------
TN Message #24
--------------
∂14-Feb-86 1632 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Jeffrey Ullman in the news
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 16:32:21 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 14 Feb 86 16:17:45 pst
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 86 16:17:45 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Ullman in the news
To: ark@SALLY.UTEXAS.EDU, nail@diablo
That Jeff Ullman is my second cousin.
Interestingly, he got his start in video borrowing equipment
from the Berkeley film dept. at a time when I was visiting.
SInce he never returned the stuff, they tried to take it
out of MY salary.
∂14-Feb-86 1634 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu FOCS Call for Papers
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 16:34:00 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Feb 86 15:52:13-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Feb 86 15:55:15-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 14 Feb 86 17:21:32 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:08:48 CST
Message-Id: <8602132008.AA12558@crys.wisc.edu>
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by crys.wisc.edu; Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:08:38 CST
Received: from (BH00)CLVMS.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 02/13/86 at
14:04:52 CST
Date: Feb 12, 1986
To: theory@wisconsin
From: BH00%CLVMS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: FOCS Call for Papers
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 14 Feb 86 17:19:09 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Call for Papers
1986 IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
The 27th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, sponsored by
the Computer Society's Technical Committee on Mathematical Foundations of
Computing, will be held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, on October 27-29, 1986.
Papers presenting original research on theoretical aspects of computer science
are being sought.
Suggested Topics - typical, but not exclusive, include:
* Algorithms and Data Structures
* Theory of Formal Languages and Automata
* Theory of Logical Design, Layout, and VLSI
* Computability and Complexity Theory
* Cryptography
* Theory of Robotics
* Theory of Data Bases
* Semantics of Programming Languages
* Logic of Programs
* Parrallel and Distributed Computation
Submission of papers: Authors should send nine copies of a detailed
abstract (not a full paper) by May 5, 1986, to the Program Committee Chair:
John E. Hopcroft
Department of Computer Science
Cornell University
311 Upson Hall
Ithaca NY 14853
Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by June 23, 1986. A copy of
each accepted paper, typed on special forms for inclusion in the sysmposium
precedings, will be due by August 11, 1986.
IMPORTANT: Because a large number of submissions is anticipated, authors are
advised to prepare their detailed abstracts carefully. It is recommended that
each submission begin with a succinct statement of the problem, a statement of
the main results, and an explanation of the significance that is suitable for a
general research audience. Technical development of the work, directed to the
specialist, should follow as appropriate. In any case, the entire extended
abstract, with comparison to extant work, should not exceed 2,500 words (10
typed double-spaced pages). Submissions arriving later or departing
significantly from the guidelines risk rejection without consideration of their
merits.
Meeting Format: The format of the meeting, including time allocations for
presentations, will be determined by the Program Committee. Authors having a
preference for a short (10-15 minute) or long (20-30 minute) presentation should
express it at the time of submission. Such a preference will not influence
acceptance, and time allocation will not be noted in the proceedings or affect
the space allocation for the paper. If submissions warrant, the committee will
compose a program for parallel sessions.
Machtey Award for Best Student Paper: This award of up to $400, to help defray
expenses for attending the symposium, will be given to that paper which the
Program Committee judges to be the most outstanding paper written solely by a
student or students. To be considered for the award, an abstract must be
accompanied by a letter identifying all authors as full-time students at the
time of submission. (At its discretion, the Committee may decline to make the
award or may split the award among two or more papers.)
Technical Committee Chair
Ashok Chandra
IBM Thomas J. Watson Res.
P.O. Box 218
Yorktown Heights NY 10598
Program Chair
John E. Hopcroft
Department of Computer Science
Cornell University
311 Upson Hall
Ithaca NY 14853
Local Arrangements Chair
Charles Rackoff
Department of Computer Science
University of Toronto
Toronto Canada M5S 1A7
Program Committee
Alok Aggarwal
John Hopcroft
Ravi Kannan
Charles E. Leiserson
Nancy Lynch
Gary Miller
Joel Seiferas
Michael Sipser
Ivan Hal Sudborough
Moshe Vardi
Umesh Vazirani
Mihalis Yannakakis
--------------
TN Message #24
--------------
∂14-Feb-86 1637 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 16:37:08 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 16:34:10-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183410765.13.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
International Computing Symposium On Application System Development. 1983.
Proceedings. German Chapter of the ACM. editor H. J. Schneider.
QA75.5.I57 1983.
Kunstliche Intelligenz. Reprasentation von Wissen und naturlichsprachliche
Systeme. Marz 1984. edited by Habel. Informatik-Fachberichte.
(8600290)
Computer Performance Evaluation and Capacity Management. From the National
Computer Conferences. edited by David Schumacher. QA76.9.E94.C64
Communicating Sequential Processes. by C. A. R. Hoare.QA76.6.H57 1985.
Local Area Networks. An Introduction to the Technology. by John
McNamara. TK5105.7.M36 1985.
Inside Macintosh. Volumes 1,2, and 3 (bound as one)(8600078)
one copy is on reference and one copy is in the book stacks.
H. Llull
-------
∂14-Feb-86 1830 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Wednesday's seminar -- Leslie Kaelbling
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 18:30:33 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 18:27:38-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Wednesday's seminar -- Leslie Kaelbling
To: planlunch.dis: ;
AN ARCHITECTURE FOR INTELLIGENT REACTIVE SYSTEMS
OR
HOW NOT TO BE EATEN BY A TIGER
Leslie Kaelbling
SRI International AI Center and Stanford University
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, February 19
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
In this talk I will present an architecture for intelligent reactive
systems. The ideas are fairly general, but are intended for use in
programming Flakey to carry out complex tasks in a dynamic environment.
Many previous robots simply 'closed their eyes' while a time-consuming
system, such as a planner or vision system, was invoked, allowing
perceptual inputs either to be lost or saved for later processing. In a
truly dynamic world, things might change to such an extent that the
results of the long calculation would no longer be useful. Worse yet,
the robot might run into a wall or be eaten by a tiger. This
architecture will allow the robot to remain aware during long
computations, and to behave plausibly in novel situations.
This talk represents work in progress, so much of the seminar will
be devoted to general discussion.
-------
∂15-Feb-86 2046 MEGIDDO%IBM-SJ.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Feb 86 20:46:52 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 Feb 86 23:36-EST
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 15 Feb 86 23:37:06 EST
Date: 15 Feb 86 18:43:00 PST
From: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: Theory@rsch.wisc.edu, AILIST@SRI-AI, ARMS-D@MIT-MC,
ARPANET-BBOARDS@MIT-MC, EVOLUTION@KESTREL, MsgGroup@BRL,
NA@SU-SCORE, PHIL-SCI@MIT-MC, POLI-SCI@RUTGERS,
PROLOG@SU-SCORE
Prisoner's dilemma tournament mailing list;
Please send back a note if you wish to receive future announcements.
∂16-Feb-86 1049 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Feb 86 09:01:04 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 16 Feb 86 08:53:00-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 16 Feb 86 08:52:36-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Sun, 16 Feb 86 10:31:03 CST
Message-Id: <8602160259.AA22466@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA (ibm-sj.csnet) by rsch.wisc.edu; Sat, 15 Feb 86 20:59:52 CST
Date: 15 Feb 86 18:43:00 PST
From: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: Theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 16 Feb 86 10:30:43 CST (Sun)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Prisoner's dilemma tournament mailing list;
Please send back a note (to megiddo@IBM-SJ.ARPA)
if you wish to receive future announcements.
--------------
TN Message #25
--------------
∂16-Feb-86 1144 JJW MJH LispM news
To: MJH-LispM@SU-AI.ARPA
This weekend I did a full save of all the files on Ignorant. (It took
seven tapes.) Files on Mt. St. Coax were similarly backed up a week ago.
Users of the other MJH Lisp Machines might want to do the same.
Frivolous, the 3640 in the corridor between MJH 351 and MJH 353, is now
running Symbolics release 6.1. The sources and documentation for 6.1 are
all online. We keep the machine turned off when not in use to avoid
disturbing the occupants of those offices with the noise from its fans.
If you want to use Frivolous, please remember to follow the posted
procedure when turning the machine on and off, to ensure consistency of
the file system.
We are not yet licensed to run 6.1 on any of the older machines, but Les
Earnest and Tom Rindfleisch are negotiating with Symbolics for a
reasonably-priced software license that will let us become up-to-date.
The major new features in 6.1 that you might want to try out are:
1. A large number of lexical scoping bugs fixed in Zetalisp and Common
Lisp. Preparation for changes to characters and arrays in Release 7.0.
2. Fixes to the Debugger (lexical scoping), Inspector and Garbage Collector.
3. An improved Document Examiner.
4. Incremental Disk Save (requires a FEP upgrade that we don't have yet).
5. The NFILE protocol for improved file access over TCP connections.
6. The REPEAT key now works.
These and the rest of the changes are described in the Release 6.1 Patch
Notes, a copy of which is in MJH 360 as well as readable online with the
Document Examiner on Frivolous.
Joe
∂17-Feb-86 0046 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #10
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 00:46:44 PST
Date: 17 Feb 86 0024-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #10
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Monday, 17 Feb 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
A System Specification Lanugage
Seminar: Parallelism in Production Systems (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 13 February 1986 11:19-PST
From: coraki!pratt at su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Subject: SSL account
SSL - A System Specification Language.
I've recently tidied up my concurrency ideas some more. In response to
Byron's solicitation of contributions, here's a (necessarily cryptic)
progress report.
[Not so much cryptic as dense. There's a lot of material here in a
few pages of text. I recommend reading it at least three times.
-- BD]
I use "specification" rather than "description" because SSL doesn't
deal with deadlock. The idea is that this is fine for a specification
language for deadlock-free systems for about the same reason that not
mentioning poison is fine for a restaurant menu language. Unlike the
more general notion of "description," "specification" does not need to
talk about things no one wants. The state of the art of the system
description business right now is that a lot of the effort (and
complexity of the resulting systems) is going into dealing with
deadlock. If you just want to specify systems, as opposed to
describing their pathological behavior, you can dispense with all that
hair and get a quite simple semantics.
Here are the control structures of SSL as at present. There are a
dozen constructs, which makes SSL rather larger than your average
abstract language (or even practical language, e.g. OCCAM). However
all the constructs are useful, and I don't have any good ideas about
how to boil it down further. All suggestions welcome.
1. SSL constructs.
CONCURRENCY
p+q Concurrence (Sum)
pT Concurrence closure (Dagger, typographically approximated by T)
p||q Locally serialized concurrence
alpha(p) Make p serializable
CONVOLUTION
pxq Orthocurrence (Product)
SEQUENCING
p;q Sequence (Ordered Sum)
p* Sequence closure (Star)
p.q Local sequence
pi(p) Make p abortable
MISC.
p&q, p|q, p-q Boolean combinations (and, or, difference)
h(p), h'(p) Homomorphism, inverse homomorphism
<>phi Temporal Projection (Diamond)
<>',<.>,<>+ Variants of diamond: Inverse, Local, and Strict
2. Meanings of constructs.
The definition of ``process'' is as for language (set of strings)
except in one detail: the strings are only partially ordered rather
than linearly ordered. While the string L--->E--->V--->E--->L is
linearly ordered, the ``partial string''
L--->E--->V-->L
\ /
---->E---->
is not. It consists of 5 events labelled with three different actions
(L,E,V). Ignoring the order, we have a 5-element multiset. With a partial
order this becomes a partially ordered multiset, or *pomset*.
Definition. A *process* is a set of pomsets.
We regard the pomsets making up a process as all its possible behaviors.
We write p,q,... for processes, phi,psi for predicates on events.
Concurrence means simultaneous execution (formally, the set of pomsets
obtainable by juxtaposing one pomset from each process, so + is
associative and commutative). Concurrence closure of process p means
any number of p's executing simultaneously (pT =
1|p|(p+p)|(p+p+p)|...). Locally serialized means enforcing the order
of colocated events (determining the order one way or the other).
Colocated means "at the same location," e.g. on the same channel --
this means that if u and v are two events at the same location then
either u precedes v or v precedes u. (Formally, events u and v are
*colocated* when the actions labelling them have the form (d,c) and
(d',c) respectively, i.e. ordered pairs agreeing in their second
component, intended to be interpreted as location or channel.) A
serializable process is one such that if two events can occur
simultaneously then they can occur in either order. E.g. the taking
of an exam by two students is not normally a serializable process, you
can't let one finish and then have the other start later. If p is the
simultaneous taking of the exam by two students, then alpha(p) is the
same exam but without this requirement of simultaneity. (Formally
alpha(p) consists of all possible augmentations of the order of
pomsets of p.)
Orthocurrence convolves the temporal order of data arriving at any
given location with the computational or dependency order implied by an
acyclic dataflow graph. (Formally pxq is the direct product of pomsets
p and q, in the algebraic sense.) It allows the definition of
processes that on the one hand compose functions (e.g. via a wiring
diagram) and on the other can act repetitively (neural nets, automata,
...). A simple example is given by two messages 0 and 1 being sent
down a channel with start point A and end point B. The orthocurrence
of the linear order 01 with the linear order AB has four events:
(0,A)---->(0,B)
| |
0-->1 x A-->B = | |
V V
(1,A)---->(1,B)
In general the order is (u,v)-->(u',v') just when u-->u' and v-->v'.
Remember that partial order is transitive; thus (0,A)-->(1,B) in this
example even though we didn't draw that edge explicitly. More complex
data sequences (typically just longer sequences), and more complex data
dependencies (typically combinational circuits), produce more complex
behaviors. Defining a circuit's long-term behavior in terms of
per-component orthocurrence yields fine-grained pipelining, whereas
per-circuit orthocurrence yields coarse pipelining, the behavior
typically obtained with strong interlocking.
Sequencing requires that one process happens before the other. p;q
requires that p finish completely before q can start, whereas p.q only
imposes this order constraint on pairs of colocated events one from p
and one from q and otherwise is like p+q. p* means any number of p's
executing sequentially, i.e. p↑0|p↑1|p↑2|... pi(p) is p allowing for
the possibility that p might abort or otherwise be prevented from
continuing (e.g. its fellow processes might refuse to communicate
further with p).
Boolean operations allow processes to be treated as predicates. p&q can
do anything both p and q can each do separately, whereas p|q can do
anything either of them can do separately, and p-q can do anything that
p can do but q cannot.
Homomorphisms modify actions of processes. The homomorphism concept is
typified by h(f(p,q)) = f(h(p),h(q)), where f is any concurrency or
sequencing operation (anything in the list above under those two
headings). Homomorphisms replace each action with a process; two
events labelled with the same action are replaced with the same
process. Thus the behavior of a homomorphism is local to an event.
(The exact analogue of this for formal languages is language
homomorphism.) One application of homomorphism is to change the scope
of "local" to modify the effect of Local Sequence and Local
Concurrence. Another is to construct functional modules such as Add
(two inputs, one output). Yet another is to define the notion of
projection of a net behavior onto a constituent process of the net.
The inverse homomorphism in this last application allows us to turn a
constituent process into the ``net-embedded'' version of itself in such
a way that we may define the process realized by a net to be the
intersection of what you get by applying these inverse homomorphisms to
the constituent processes of the net.
Temporal projection (and its temporal inverse) is the diamond operator
from temporal logic. It allows the impact of actions to be felt at a
distance in time. For example we may wish to say that eventually
(i.e. in the future) the goal will be reached (<>goal), or that so far
(i.e. in the past) no bad things have happened (not<>'bad, i.e.
[]'good, writing [] for ~<>~ and good for ~bad). <> is a predicate
transformer: it transforms the event predicate phi into the event predicate
<>phi which holds of event u in a behavior just when there exists
event v such that phi holds of v and u-->v. For <>' replace u-->v by
v-->u (reverse the order of time). Local temporal projection, <.>,
requires in addition that v be colocated with u. (Typographically <.>
is <> with a dot in the middle.) Strict temporal projection, <>+,
requires that v be distinct from u. All combinations of inverse, local,
and strict are permitted and meaningful.
Problem 1 of Denvir et al, The Analysis of Concurrent Systems
(Springer-Verlag LNCS 207), is to specify a two-way channel with
disconnect, where a and b are the endpoints of the channel. Using
(much of) the above language we may specify it as the process
pi(((S*xR)xab)||((S*xL)xba)) & ~<.>+'d
S* is a sequence of messages from message set (alphabet) S. S*xR is
the right-bound channel (from a to b) and S*xL the left, from b to a;
the symbols L and R serve merely to mark the messages of each channel
according to which direction they are going, so that each action of
S*xR is of the form (s,R) for some message s in S. The orthocurrence
with ab (resp. ba) creates a process with behaviors that are
``lattice-shaped'' by the appropriate generalization of 01xAB example
above, i.e. each message s on channel R from a to b is associated with
two actions ((s,R),a)-->((s,R),b) and endpoint a is associated with the
sequence ((s1,R),a)-->((s2,R),a)-->... and similarly for endpoint b
(and similarly for channel L). The local concurrence of these two
channels is the two-way channel; local concurrency forces each endpoint
to serialize all its traffic (a natural requirement, though not stated
explicitly in the problem). We then make it abortable with pi so it
can be shut down at any time. We now need a mechanism to shut it down
as soon as any event satisfying the d (disconnect) predicate (assumed
provided) occurs. This is done by asserting that for no event is there
a strictly earlier disconnect event at the same place. (This assertion
is the process consisting of all behaviors all of whose events satisfy
this predicate.) Making <> local allows the other end to keep running
after one end has shut down, until the disconnect message arrives.
Making it strict prevents the disconnecting message from eliminating
itself (we don't want to destroy the evidence of what caused the
disconnection).
3. Nets
One thing missing from the above list is the ability to wire processes
together into bigger processes made up of communicating networks of
processes. It is missing because it is not a primitive with respect to
that list, i.e. we can define it using what we have already.
The things we need in order to define networks are homomorphisms and
their inverses; alpha; pi; and intersection. Homomorphisms allow
actions described in terms of the net to be rephrased in terms of a
constituent; as such they allow a net behavior to be projected
(restricted) onto a constituent process. Alpha is needed to allow
processes to talk to each other even if one dies halfway through, while
pi is needed to allow processes to share two events when one sequences
them and the other does not (there is room for doubt as to the
appropriateness of this). Intersection is used to conjoin the
processes of a net. Thus a net process is the intersection over all i
of alpha(pi(h←i'(p←i)) where h←i' is the inverse homomorphism
associated with the i-th constituent process p←i. For the gory details
of how this works, see either "Some Constructions for Order-Theoretic
Models of Concurrency" (Springer-Verlag LNCS 193) or ask me for my two
more recent papers manuscripts on this ("Modelling Concurrency with
Partial Orders" and "SSL, A System Specification Language.")
4. Petri nets
We have enough here to assign a clean and accurate semantics to Petri
nets (to mention just one model). The trick is to take places to be
processes and transitions to be communication channels. Under the
above theory of nets, communication turns out to have exactly the same
semantics as the firing of a transition in a Petri net. Furthermore
the places are easily described as SSL processes in the basic
language. Condition/event nets, place/transition nets, predicate/event
nets, and relation nets (varieties of Petri nets) can all be handled
easily with this approach. More details in the above reference to
SSL.
------------------------------
Date: Mon 10 Feb 86 09:28:13-PST
From: Sharon Gerlach <CSL.GERLACH at SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
To: AIList
Re: Seminar - Parallelism in Production Systems (SU)
[Forwarded from AIList by Steven A. Swernofsky <SASW at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>]
On Friday, Feb 21, Anoop Gupta, a CSL faculty candidate from CMU, will
be speaking on "Parallelism in Production Systems" in MJH 352 at 3:15.
Parallelism in Production Systems
Anoop Gupta
Department of Computer Science
Carnegie-Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Production systems (or rule-based systems) are widely used in
Artificial Intelligence for modeling intelligent behavior and building
expert systems. Most production system programs, however, are
extremely computation intensive and run quite slowly. The slow speed
of execution has prohibited the use of production systems in domains
requiring high performance and real-time response. The talk will
elaborate on the role of parallelism in the high-speed execution of
production systems.
On the surface, production system programs appear to be capable of
using large amounts of parallelism -- it is possible to perform match
for each production in a program in parallel. Our research shows that
in practice, however, the speed-up obtainable from parallelism is
quite limited, around 10-fold as compared to initial expectations of
100-fold to 1000-fold. The main reasons for the limited speed-up are:
(1) there are only a small number of productions that are affected
(require significant processing) as a result of a change to working
memory and (2) there is a large variation in the processing
requirement of these productions. Since the number of affected
productions is not controlled by the implementor of the production
system interpreter (it is governed mainly by the author of the program
and the nature of the problem), the solution to the problem of limited
speed-up is to somehow decrease the variation in the processing cost
of affected productions. We propose a parallel version of the Rete
algorithm which exploits parallelism at a very fine grain to reduce
this variation. We further suggest that to exploit the fine-grained
parallelism, a shared-memory multiprocessor with 32-64 high
performance processors should be used. For scheduling the
fine-grained tasks consisting of about 50-100 instructions, a hardware
task scheduler is proposed.
The results presented in the talk are based on simulations done for a
large set of production systems exploiting different sources of
parallelism. The simulation results show that using the suggested
multiprocessor architecture (with individual processors performing at
2 MIPS), it is possible to obtain execution speeds of 5000-27000
working memory element changes per second. This corresponds to a
speed-up of 5-fold to 27-fold over the best known sequential
implementation using a 2 MIPS processor. This performance is also
higher than that obtained by other proposed parallel implementations
of production systems.
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂17-Feb-86 0727 Emanuel.henr%XEROX.COM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Re: ---
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 07:25:20 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Feb 86 10:02-EST
Received: from Xerox.COM by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 17 Feb 86 09:08:55 EST
Received: from Muscat.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 17 FEB 86 06:04:08 PST
Date: 17 Feb 86 09:03 EST
From: Emanuel.henr@Xerox.COM
Subject: Re: ---
In-reply-to: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA's message of 15 Feb 86 18:43:00 PST
To: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA
cc: Theory@rsch.wisc.edu, AILIST@SRI-AI.ARPA, ARMS-D@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,
ARPANET-BBOARDS@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, EVOLUTION@KESTREL.ARPA,
MsgGroup@BRL.ARPA, NA@SU-SCORE.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,
POLI-SCI@RED.RUTGERS.EDU, PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <860217-060408-3648@Xerox>
PLEAS CONTINUE SENDING ME PD GAME INFO.
∂17-Feb-86 1120 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa paper received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 11:18:45 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 17 Feb 86 11:13:38 pst
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 86 11:13:38 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo
"A framework for an efficient implementation of deductive databases"
by M. Kifer and E. L. Lozinskii, SUNY Stonybrook.
This is one of a number of "lazy evaluators" for Datalog, but
I urge people to read it because it has a number of new and
interesting ideas.
While I'm at it, though, let me urge Allen Van Gelder to
offer to the nail list copies of his paper on the same subject,
which I understand is to appear in SIGMOD.
Allen has a viewpoint that focusses on the bound/free nature
of variables in rules that will occasionally do things better
than the K&L algorithm. Allen also has an application of
acyclic hypergraph theory to the problem of planning sideways
passing of data.
By the way, this is a good time to remind folks of the "rules"
regarding papers. If you are at Stanford, I'll provide you with
a copy of the paper. If not, please write to the authors directly.
---Jeff Ullman
∂17-Feb-86 1154 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:BUCHANAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 11:51:53 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 17 Feb 86 11:47:51-PST
Date: Mon 17 Feb 86 11:52:21-PST
From: Bruce Buchanan <BUCHANAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Genesereth
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184145892.13.BUCHANAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Since I, too, will be unable to attend the Tuesday meeting, I'd like to record
my vote.
My comments last week were somewhat negative, because I felt that the minus
side should be aired in the discussion. I joined Ed F. at Mike's demo of
HELIOS on Friday, which brought out the strengths of Mike's research on MRS and
helped resolve some of my doubts about balancing positive and negative
attributes. On balance, on both the teaching and research sides, I feel that
Mike is an excellent contributor to the department and to AI.
In spite of the negatives, I believe that Mike is as deserving of tenure as any
Assistant Professor we're likely to see. Therefore I vote FOR tenure.
bgb
-------
∂17-Feb-86 1304 stef%ICSE.UCI.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU OK -- Time for a brief note on group mail ettiquette ...
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 13:04:28 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Feb 86 15:58-EST
Received: from ICSE.UCI.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 17 Feb 86 15:59:06 EST
Received: from localhost by ICSE.UCI.EDU id a000268; 17 Feb 86 12:54 PST
Subject: OK -- Time for a brief note on group mail ettiquette ...
To: MEGIDDO@ibm-sj.arpa
Cc: Emanuel.henr@xerox.com, Theory@rsch.wisc.edu, AILIST@sri-ai.arpa,
ARMS-D@mc.lcs.mit.edu, ARPANET-BBOARDS@mc.lcs.mit.edu,
EVOLUTION@kestrel.arpa, MsgGroup@brl.arpa, NA@su-score.arpa,
PHIL-SCI@mc.lcs.mit.edu, POLI-SCI@red.rutgers.edu, PROLOG@su-score.arpa,
msggroup-request@brl.arpa
Reply-to: msggroup-request@brl.arpa
From: Einar Stefferud (msggroup moderator) <msggroup-request@brl.arpa>
Date: 17 Feb 86 12:53:32 PST (Mon)
Sender: stef@ICSE.UCI.EDU
My apologies to those of you who do not need this little tutorial which
is prompted by receipt of the following items:
Date: Time: Size: From: Subject or beginning of text:
02/07 1008-PST 15615 MEGIDDO@ibm-sj.a <<First Announcement of a COMPUT
02/15 1843-PST 759 MEGIDDO@ibm-sj.a <<Prisoner's dilemma tournament
02/17 0903-EST 894 Emanuel.henr@xer Re: --- <<PLEAS CONTINUE SENDING
First, try to avoid sending administrivia messages to the entire
collection of lists in broadcast messages such as listed below. There
are litterally tens of thousands of recipients who do not want to see
such junk, and who will think very poorly of you for bothering them.
Second, When you address something to a list, try to be sure it is
relevant in the first place. For example, the 400-500 recipients of
MsgGroup think they subscribed to a list that discusses messaging
issues. Classical Dilemmas are not generally on target or interesting.
Please note that it is always very difficult to stop the flow of
inappropriate mail in a case such as this Dilemma Tournament Announcement
because of the number of new users of netmail who have not yet
discovered the problems we have with unaware senders of such junk mail.
Therefore, we tend to be tolerant, up to a point, and quite intolerant
beyond that point.
We have reached the limits of tolerance -- so lets try hard to stop it.
Thanks Much - Einar Stefferud (MsgGroup Moderator)
<msggroup-request@brl.arpa>
∂17-Feb-86 1523 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu THE EIGHTH THEORY DAY AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Feb 86 15:23:28 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 17 Feb 86 15:16:45-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 17 Feb 86 15:16:19-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 17 Feb 86 16:57:51 CST
Message-Id: <8602171721.AA17443@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from CS.COLUMBIA.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 17 Feb 86 11:21:22 CST
Date: Mon 17 Feb 86 12:20:02-EST
From: Zvi Galil <GALIL@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
To: theory@RSCH.WISC.EDU
Subject: THE EIGHTH THEORY DAY AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 17 Feb 86 16:57:10 CST (Mon)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
THE EIGHTH THEORY DAY
AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
SPONSORED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 1986
10:00 PROFESSOR JOHN E. HOPCROFT
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
"MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS IN OBJECT
REPRESENTATION SYSTEMS"
11:00 PROFESSOR HENDRIK W. LENSTRA
UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM
"CODES FROM ALGEBRAIC NUMBER FIELDS"
2:00 PROFESSOR HENRYK WOZNIAKOWSKI
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
"INFORMATION-BASED COMPLEXITY: WORST, AVERAGE
AND PROBABILISTIC SETTINGS"
3:00 PROFESSOR SHAFI GOLDWASSER
MASSACHUSSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
"A PROVABLE CORRECT AND PROBABLY FAST
PRIMALITY TEST"
COFFEE WILL BE AVAILABLE AT 9:30 A.M.
ALL LECTURES WILL BE IN THE KELLOGG CONFERENCE CENTER
ON THE FIFTEENTH FLOOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
BUILDING, 118TH STREET AND AMSTERDAM AVENUE.
THE LECTURES ARE FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
CALL (212) 280-2736 FOR MORE INFORMATION.
--------------
TN Message #26
--------------
∂18-Feb-86 0122 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #8
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 01:22:24 PST
Date: Monday, February 10, 1986 5:10AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #8
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 10 Feb 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 8
Today's Topics:
Puzzles - Shoppers & NL,
LP Philosophy - Expressive Power & Fires
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Feb 1986 13:07:42 EST (Tue)
From: Dan Hoey <hoey@nrl-aic.ARPA>
Subject: Shoppers and Boodle
Shoppers
========
Date: 30 Jan 1986 05:58-EST
From: Gregory.Stein@K.CS.CMU.EDU
I have found a solution to the puzzle posted by Paul Weiss in
Volume 4, #3 of the Digest.
I solved it, too, but I really would rather see a Prolog program
that does it. If anyone would like this, I wrote down a trace of
the reasoning needed to solve the problem.
Paul Weiss mentioned failing to solve the problem ``in a ZEBRA
like fashion.'' Is that a programming method, a logic method, or
both?
...Anyone who likes a puzzle - this is it - it's a real
toughy. Takes hours.
It probably takes days or weeks if you insist on writing a program
to do it.
Boodle Phil Moiven?
===================
I was somewhat more intrigued by the ``natural language'' puzzle
posted in V4#3. I invented a somewhat plausible model for the
problem, but I'm curious what the standard model is. Has anyone
translated the problem? Does anyone recognize the language? Is
it a real language? Does anyone know where the problem came from?
The apparent sender of the problem claims the message was forged.
Anyway, here is my glossary of ``Fear and Loathing in Prolog''.
The language is straightforward, but the relations are only
guesses.
Language Relations
kips = therefore sod'n pho = is friendly with
myt = and bink ptui = is paranoid of
boodle = who does pock matoo = is jealous of
nar = only moiven = despises
I hope the real problem isn't quite as ugly. Then again, from
the standpoint of Rorschach, perhaps I hope it is.
-- Dan Hoey
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 86 11:33:53 GMT
From: William Clocksin <wfc%computer-lab.cambridge.ac.uk>
Subject: Expressive Power
I am not normally given to making ad hominum remarks, but Carl
Hewitt's message in Prolog Digest 4(7) is irresistable. I
apologise for the intemperate nature of what follows; no
insults are intended. I am finally able to understand his
argument strategy: ignore the arguments of others, change the
terminology slightly each time, and state opinions louder each
time, using capital letters if necessary. In Digest 4(7) he
introduces (not for the first time) a "magic ingredient X"
argument (discredited around 1500 years ago): because Prolog
does not have something about constructing local objects,
whatever they are, then Prolog is deficient and hence defective.
Or as Hewitt would say in his too too subtle way, "DEFECTIVE".
How about a reply in kind to the effect that, because Lisp does
not have the ability to insert variables in data structures (as
Prolog can) then Lisp is deficient and hence defective. Using
Hewitt's terminology again, then we would say that this ability
is "fundamental" because (in Prolog) it is used for passing
arguments (both input and output), matching patterns, selecting
/updating data structures, and performing a certain class of
inference (instantiation). But it does not matter who says this
about what language, it is silly to attribute any more than plain
old engineering criteria to such abilities.
It is wrong to seek "foundations" for A.I. in the form of
languages, and I wish people would not contribute pseudophilosophical
discussions of "expressive power" and related illdefined concepts
in this Digest. (Fernando is excused because he was trying (in vain)
to straighten out Carl's terminology). Saying that Lisp (or any other
language or technique) is a foundation for A.I. is like saying that
sulfuric acid is a foundation for chemical engineering.
I use both Lisp and Prolog (separately). If I cannot write a
program cleanly in Prolog, I would rather write it dirtily in Lisp
than dirtily in Prolog. There are also programs for which plain old
backtracking is very useful (such as intabulating figured bass
notation), and a clean Prolog solution is nicer (and faster) than the
Lisp one on this I/O-ridden example. What does this prove? Not much,
and that's my point: programming languages are artifacts for
which engineering criteria apply. There is nothing special about
Lisp and Prolog that excuses them from this.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 86 18:56:53 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <Udi%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Hewitt's small challenge
In response to what might be called "Hewitt's small challenge"
(in contrast to "Hewitt's big challenge", which was under
discussion for a while) I enclose an abstract of a paper of
mine, which answers positively the question of the "machine
expressiveness" of Concurrent Prolog with repect to computers
composed of a network of communicating processors.
-- Ehud Shapiro
P.S. I find capitalizaing condencending adjectives an amusing
typographic technique
On Evaluating General-Purpose Programming Languages
Weizmann Institute Technical Report CS86-01
Abstract
A method for evaluating the expressiveness and efficiency of
a general-prupose high-level language for a given machine is
proposed. It is based on implementing a simulator for the
machine language in the high-level language, and establishing
that the simulator executes efficiently on that machine.
Using this method it is possible to show that one programming
language can implement any algorithm and simulate any other
programming language on a given machine model with a small
overhead.
The method is applied to Concurrent Prolog and two machine
models: a RAM and a network of RAMs.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 4 Feb 86 11:02:18-PST
From: Fernando Pereira <Pereira@SRI-CANDIDE.ARPA>
Subject: Expressive power
In my recent contribution on this topic, I made the mistake of
trying to draw a few general observations from my experience
with Prolog and Lisp, and that of the people I work with every
day. My recent experience of taking a large system written in
Prolog, replacing completely its bottom part (information
representation) and top part (control flow) without touching
the great bulk of the system obviously blinded me to the
glaring lack of modularity in Prolog, to the uselessness of
backtracking, to the magic of communicating systems and to the
horrors inherent in the asserts and retracts I did not use. I
was particularly misled by having taken a large program [a
grammar] which was written as a checker [parser] and turning in
into a (partial) generator, the few changes required having to
do with tightening underspecified constraints in the original.
I apologize again for the infantile blunder of relying on
personal experience to derive my opinions.
-- Fernando Pereira
P.S.: Somehow, I can't help thinking of that fable of a vain king,
a subtle tailor, the king's subjects and a child...
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 86 23:36:07 GMT
From: Jeff Dalton <Jeff%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Subject: Expressive power
I would like to respond to Fernando's message from Vol 4, Issue 5.
Maybe so. I find, however, that I prefer assembly language to
some higher-level languages, such as some dialects of Basic, not
because I can do a MOVE instruction if the machine has one but
because I can implement certain abstractions more easily.
Just to be clear on this point, one can express abstractions in
Lisp without having to delve into the peculiarities, &c. Moreover,
advocates of Lisp programming are also in favor of "abstraction
power". That is one reason why we don't program in assembler.
So most programmers cannot keep abstractions alive in Lisp, to
judge by their products? I'm not sure what evidence there's supposed
to be for this. Is it just something "everyone knows"?
I have not found that products written in Prolog are in general more
maintainable, reusable, &c than those written in Lisp. Obviously,
there are some tasks that are more easily expressed in Prolog, and
for those things a Prolog program may well be better than one written
in Lisp. But there are also some things more easily expressed in
Lisp.
I take it then that Lisp, as a "machine power" language, is eventually
supposed to be of only historical interest. I would like to know how
far this condemnation of lanuages goes. Does it include Pascal, Ada,
Modula, CLU, Hope, ML, all non-declarative languages, all languages
not based on logic, or just Lisp and assembler?
Therefore, in this view, Lisp represents a discreditied programming
practice, doomed to historical oblivion, and so on. A waste of effort
in itself, perhaps.
Again, I would like to know what the evidence is for this. There are,
of course, problems with large software systems that have not been
solved in current Lisp practice. But this does not mean that they
cannot be dealt with, much less that Lisp has no facilities for
dealing with them. Lisp does have means for dealing with modularity,
for example, and so far they seem superior to those in Prolog.
Apparently this counts for nothing.
It is unfortunate that there is, or at least seems to be, hostility
between some parts of the Lisp and Prolog communities. However,
although I disagree with what Fernando has said about Lisp, I don't
want to continue the argument to attack Prolog or to say that Prolog
should change to imitate Lisp (has anyone actually been advocating
that it should?). To me, Ken Kahn's message in Vol 3, Issue 43, and
in particular his comments on object-oriented programming and on the
single-paradigm approach as a research strategy, presents a reasonable
view of the relationship between Lisp and Prolog. And I would like to
stop there rather than to encourage further polemics.
-- Jeff Dalton
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂18-Feb-86 0610 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 06:10:28 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 06:05:07-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184344824.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here are the next two regular AFLBs. There's also a special AFLB on
Monday of the week after next.
-------------------------------------
20-Feb-86 : Andy Yao (Stanford)
On the Complexity of Partial Order Production
Let G be a partial order on n atoms. Given an input set of n numbers,
the partial order production problem is to produce a labeling of the
elements that is consistent with G. For example, the sorting problem and
the median-finding problem are special cases (G is a chain for sorting).
Let C(G) and C'(G) denote the minimum numbers of comparisons needed in
the worst case and the average case, respectively, for any algorithm.
In this talk, we prove that C(G) is equal to C'(G) up to a constant
multiplicative factor.
***** Time and place: February 20, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
27-Feb-86 : Nick Pippenger (IBM-Almaden)
Recurrence Relations Based on Minimization
In a paper with the same title as this talk, M. L. Fredman and
D. E. Knuth solved, among others, a problem that may be paraphrased
as follows: find the largest real-valued function f satisfying the
inequalities f(1) <= 1 and f(i+j) <= 2f(i)+3f(j) for all positive
integers i and j. In this talk we shall consider some multiplicative
analogues of this problem. The simplest of these is to find the
largest real-valued function f satisfying f(z) <= z and f(xy) <=
2f(x)+3f(y) for all reals x, y and z not less than 1. Another case
arises when x, y and z range over integral powers of 2, and still
another arises when they range over positive integers. Our goal in
this talk is to describe the analytic and combinatorial devices
needed to deal with these analogues; the talk will be self-contained,
and no knowledge of the work of Fredman and Knuth will be assumed.
***** Time and place: February 27, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
3-Mar-86 (Monday) : Gyula Katona (UCSD & Hungary)
Convex Hulls of Certain Hypergraph Classes
(abstract next week)
***** Time and place: March 3, 12:30 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) ******
-------
∂18-Feb-86 0818 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: meeting]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 08:18:10 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 08:12:37-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: meeting]
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184368034.14.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to confirm that there will be a Sr. Faculty Meeting 2/18/86 at
4:15 in MJH 252.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
Return-Path: <@SRI-AI.ARPA:NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 11 Feb 86 22:03:07-PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SRI-AI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 11 Feb 86 22:03:23-PST
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 21:58:40-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12182683404.14.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
At our senior faculty meeting today we reviewed the M. Genesereth
promotion case. The promotion committee members (JMC, chair; EAF;
and NJN) summarized their points of view on the matter. (A fourth
member of the committee, Jeff Ullman, was absent from today's meeting,
but his position was summarized by NJN.) Some faculty members felt
that they would like to have more time to study MRG's papers and
evaluations and then have further discussions. It was decided to have
a senior faculty meeting at 4:15 pm on Tuesday, Feb. 18, 1986.
Stay tuned for announcement about location.
Evaluation letters and copies of MRG's papers will be available in
my office. (Also, copies of some of MRG's papers have been distributed
to senior faculty.) Please do take time to familiarize yourselves with
these materials so that we will be able to reach a sound conclusion at
our next meeting. Remember that next Monday is a holiday so my office
will be closed that day. (I'm off on a three-day ski trip! If anyone
wants to volunteer to "baby sit" the evaluation letters over the
weekend and to host "drop-ins" who want to read them, please make your
intentions known to me and to Anne Richardson and then send a note
around to "tenured@score" to let folks know. Otherwise, I hope everyone
gets a chance to see everything they need to before Friday late pm. I've
been advised that it is not a good idea to make several copies of the
evaluation letters.)
Summary: Senior Faculty Meeting 2/18/86 at 4:15 pm.
-Nils
-------
-------
∂18-Feb-86 0822 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 08:22:24 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 08:14:13-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184368327.14.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a CSD Lunch today in MJH 146 at 12:15 with Robert Dutton
discussing the joint CS/EE major.
-------
∂18-Feb-86 0943 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Nils Nilsson
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 09:43:06 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 09:24:12-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Nils Nilsson
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184381067.14.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Nils Nilsson lost his calender in a storm in the Sierras this weekend. We
are now in the process of trying to reconstruct it so if you think you have
an appointment scheduled with him please let me know.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1030 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa meeting tomorrow
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 10:30:48 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 18 Feb 86 10:19:46 pst
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 86 10:19:46 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: meeting tomorrow
To: nail@diablo
Moshe will report on recent results concerning undecidable subcases
of the recursion elimination problem.
If there is time, I would like to do some thinking about *new*
research directions.
∂18-Feb-86 1246 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar in Logic and Foundations
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 12:44:04 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Feb 86 12:41:50-PST
Date: 18 Feb 86 1232 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar in Logic and Foundations
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Speaker: Dr. Giovanna Corsi, University of Florence
Title: Conditions for the completeness of some intermediate logics
Time: Monday, February 24, 4:15-5:30.
Place: Math. Dept., 3d floor lounge, 383-N, Stanford
S. Feferman
[Apologies to those of you on both the logic@csli and mtc mailing lists
this will be fixed soon (hopefully)]
∂18-Feb-86 1311 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:guibas@decwrl.DEC.COM Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 13:11:34 PST
Received: from decwrl.DEC.COM by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Feb 86 13:03:20-PST
Received: from magic.ARPA (magic) by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA19333; Tue, 18 Feb 86 13:08:44 pst
Received: by magic.ARPA (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA20680; Tue, 18 Feb 86 13:09:40 pst
From: guibas@decwrl.DEC.COM (Leo Guibas)
Message-Id: <8602182109.AA20680@magic.ARPA>
Date: 18 Feb 1986 1309-PST (Tuesday)
To: tenured@score
Cc: guibas@decwrl.DEC.COM
Subject: Genesereth
Unfortunately I too will be unable to come to the meeting today, therefore
this message. After some reflection, I have made up my mind to vote in favor
of granting Mike tenure.
The most serious criticism of Mike's work voiced in our last meeting
was that his work had dealt with only "toy problems". Yet, after
looking his papers over one more time, it seemed to me that some serious
lessons were learned from implementing these examples and that the task
of finding and testing a cohesive theoretical farmework for AI was
adequately served. Even though by some standards his work is not
spectacular, the bulk of it aims in a consistent direction that is
clearly worrth pursuing and which might yield more stellar results in
the future.
If I had to judge on research contributions alone my vote would be
uncertain, but when I take all of Mike's other contributions to the
department into account, as well as the potential for synergy with
Nilsson and possibly other new faculty in the foundational AI areas, I
feel convinced that we are better served by having Mike stay.
L.
∂18-Feb-86 1505 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA No meeting this Wednesday
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 15:04:50 PST
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1986 15:02 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12184442726.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: No meeting this Wednesday
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
There will be no AAP meeting this Wednesday (tomorrow). A volunteer
is sought to speak at the February 26 meeting.
-- Byron
∂18-Feb-86 1502 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Lovasz Talk
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 15:02:40 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Feb 86 14:55:41-PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 14:55:05-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Lovasz Talk
To: aflb.local@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184441303.37.PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Sorry if this is a repetition, but today at 4:15 Laszlo Lovasz is
speaking at the Departmental Colloquium on Lattice Algorithms,
in Skilling.
---CHP
-------
∂18-Feb-86 1539 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #11
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 15:38:59 PST
Date: 18 Feb 86 1523-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #11
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 18 Feb 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Response to Debugging Survey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Friday, 14 February 1986 17:15-PST
From: dunigan at ORNL-MSR.ARPA (Tom Dunigan 576-2522)
Subject: Response to debugging survey
Response to PARSYM Survey on Debugging
>> 1. Briefly describe the hardware architecture (MIMD/SIMD, number of
>> processors, distributed vs. shared memory), programming system
>> (language, interpreted vs. compiled), and application.
We have Intel iPSC d6 (MIMD -- 64 node hypercube) and use C and
FORTRAN for developing parallel numerical algorithms. We also make
extensive use of simulators for both shared and distributed memory
architectures. We will be acquiring a shared-memory parallel
processor (Sequent) next week.
>> 2. Are your bugs typically "serial" or "concurrent"; i.e., do they
>> occur in the midst of sequential code running on a single processor,
>> or do they have to do with communication, timing, or network resource
>> conflict?
Typically "serial"; most bugs are caused by a single process, and are
mundane subscript violations, improper lengths for messages,
misconceptions about the content or format of data structures, etc.
Deadlocks or synchronization bugs are less frequent but more difficult
to isolate or even reproduce. Using simulators does yield repeatable
results and so aids in finding synchronization problems. Usually,
deadlocks are caused by message-type mismatch or message-type
overloading (the application assumes messages will arrive in certain
sequences and chooses not to use different message types for different
phases of the computation). Processes sometimes crash because the
application has overloaded the communication system (deadlock) --
whether the fault lies with the application or the operating system is
still a matter of local debate.
>> 3. What kind of output does your program have so that you can detect a
>> bug? How do bugs manifest themselves?
Correctness is usually determined by magnitude of residuals reported
in final steps by host process. Bug manifestations are either wrong
answers, process crashes (arithmetic exceptions, subscript violation),
or deadlock (synchronization bugs or message-subsystem failure).
>> 4. What kinds of debugging tools do you have?
Process crashes produce a stack-trace to the host log file on the
actual cube. Print statements are inserted to write debugging
information to the log file. Initial debugging is usually done on the
simulators which provide detailed event traces with options for
tabular or graphical display. The simulators also permit altering
cube message parameters (message size, startup time,
compute-to-communication speed ratio) which can alter the sequence of
message arrivals and often uncover synchronization bugs. The
simulator also permits the use of symbolic debuggers. Each node also
has a red and green LED (usually used to indicated waiting or
computing) that can sometimes provide real-time feedback on application
performance. A facility for post-mortem and in vivo symbolic
debugging would be most useful.
>> 5. What literature references, including your own, would you recommend
>> for learning about debugging parallel programs?
I will defer to the references provided by other respondees.
>> How can graphics be used to help debug parallel programs? How can we
>> graphically represent the execution of parallel programs to help us
>> understand and debug them?
Graphical display of the simulator trace files proves very helpful
in identifying optimization points in an application. We have
plots of concurrency (number of processes active vs. time) and
process activity (process-busy times vs. time). The displays
make it very easy to identify load imbalance or serial dependencies.
The LEDs provide a real-time display of processor state.
Real-time display of expanded state information would be helpful.
>> How best can multiple windows be managed to display the behavior of
>> parallel programs? Which is better: fixed windows or pop-up windows?
Having windows for debugging output from designated processes would
be desirable.
>> What programming language features would help?
>> How do we debug complex parallel processes in the real world? For
>> example, how does a corporation or university recognize that one of
>> its departments is "faulty" or that communication between departments
>> is faulty? How does a football team recognize and repair its "bugs"?
Output from the parallel subsystems needs to be checked -- the amount
of checking proportional to the value of the information. Each
subsystem should be "proven" correct and the interfaces to the other
subsystems well defined. Verfication of the parallel subsystems
should follow the same principles used in verifying modules
(subroutines) in a serial application.
>> In parallel systems, the presence of a debugging tool or a spy program
>> may induce a Heisenberg effect, causing the bug to disappear or a new
>> one to appear. How can this problem be minimized?
We definitely have experienced the Heisenberg effect from both intrusive
debugging techniques and spy-processes -- both affect execution times
and message load and sequence. The simulators often provide
the best debugging tool since execution/message sequence can
be maintained even as additional trace information is accumulated.
Tom Dunigan, Oak Ridge National Lab
dunigan@ornl-msr.arpa
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂18-Feb-86 1909 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Tomorrow's Planlunch
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 19:08:59 PST
Date: Tue 18 Feb 86 19:06:40-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Tomorrow's Planlunch
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
AN ARCHITECTURE FOR INTELLIGENT REACTIVE SYSTEMS
OR
HOW NOT TO BE EATEN BY A TIGER
Leslie Kaelbling
SRI International AI Center and Stanford University
11:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, February 19
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
In this talk I will present an architecture for intelligent reactive
systems. The ideas are fairly general, but are intended for use in
programming Flakey to carry out complex tasks in a dynamic environment.
Many previous robots simply 'closed their eyes' while a time-consuming
system, such as a planner or vision system, was invoked, allowing
perceptual inputs either to be lost or saved for later processing. In a
truly dynamic world, things might change to such an extent that the
results of the long calculation would no longer be useful. Worse yet,
the robot might run into a wall or be eaten by a tiger. This
architecture will allow the robot to remain aware during long
computations, and to behave plausibly in novel situations.
This talk represents work in progress, so much of the seminar will
be devoted to general discussion.
-------
∂18-Feb-86 2123 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Logic seminar: title change
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Feb 86 21:23:14 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Feb 86 21:18:53-PST
Date: 18 Feb 86 2110 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Logic seminar: title change
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
The title for the seminar by Dr. Giovanna Corsi on 2/24/86 is changed to:
"A logic characterized by the class of linear Kripke models with nested
domains."
∂19-Feb-86 1109 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 11:09:13 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 11:04:01-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The consensus seems to be that we should have happy hours every
week until the money is gone and then collect again. So -- don't
miss the next gala Happy Hour this Friday at the ever-improving
time of 4:00 in the Greenberg Room. (We can look forward to at least
three more gala happy hours after that one.)
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1437 JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA New phone system
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 14:36:31 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 14:28:37-PST
From: Jamie Marks <JAMIE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New phone system
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Stanford has a new phone system. Both old and new systems
will work until sometime in March when the old phones will be
removed.
The new phone system uses different numbers. In most cases, only the
prefix has changed from 497- to 723- (e.g., the new number for the
front desk is 723-0628; the old 497-0628). However, in some cases,
entirely new numbers (which begin with a 725 - prefix) had to be assigned.
We've just published a new phone list which you should check to be
sure. If you don't already have a copy, you can pick up one at SRI
from Elsie Chappell, at PARC from Denise Pawson, and at Stanford from
Suzy Parker.
If you have difficulty dialing out on one of the new phones, check
beneath it for an instruction card.
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1649 HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA BATS at IBM on Friday, Feb. 28th
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 16:49:00 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 16:40:43-PST
From: BATS coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: BATS at IBM on Friday, Feb. 28th
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184722675.16.HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday,
February 28:
Return-Path: <upfal@su-aimvax.arpa>
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Feb 86 16:19:35-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 19 Feb 86 16:26:22 pst
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 86 16:26:22 pst
From: Eliezer Upfal <upfal@diablo>
To: haddad@sushi
9:45 Coffee Tee and Muffins
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
M.O. Rabin, Harvard University / Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
D. Haussler, University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLARANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT
TOLERANCE PROTOCOLS
A. Wigderson, MSRI
A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
In a joint wowith D. Tygar, we formulate a new the study
and implementation of security of operating systems. Our approach
involves the creation of a number of algorithmic and operating
system constructs which together form an integrated toolkit for
operating system security (ITOSS).
ITOSS enables us to implement a secure operating system and
will allow users to tailor the security of a file system to reflect
the security requirements of any particular site. a self contained
description of ITOSS will be given.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
The current emphasis on knowledge-based software has created
a broader interest in algorithms that learn knowledge structures
or concepts from positive and negative examples. Using the
learning model recently proposed by Valiant, we have attempted to
determine which classes of concepts have efficient (i.e. polyno-
mial time) learning algorithms. As noticed earlier by Pearl and
by Devroye and Wagner, a simple combinatorial property of concept
classes, the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, plays an important
role in learning and pattern recognition. We clarify the rela-
tionship between this property and Valiant's theory of learnabil-
ity. Our results lead to the design of efficient learning algo-
rithms that employ a variant of Occam's Razor. Illustrations are
given for certain classes of conjunctive concepts and for con-
cepts that are defined by various types of regions in feature
space. The work reported was done jointly with Anselm Blumer,
Andrzej Ehrenfeucht and Manfred Warmuth of the Universities of
Denver, Colorado and California at Santa Cruz respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
Achieving processor cooperation in the presence of faults is a major
problem in distributed systems. Traditional paradigms like Byzantine
agreement require that all nonfaulty components cooperate correctly.
This requirement is very stringent, and is known to imply strong
assumptions on the network; particularly, in order to tolerate t faults,
the network has to be at least t-connected. This seems to render the
solution infeasible, as in forseeable technologies the number of faults
will grow with the size of the network while the degree will remain
practically fixed.
We raise the question whether it is possible to avoid this limitation by
slightly lowering our expectations. In many practical situations we may
be willing to "lose" some correct processors, and settle for cooperation
between the vast majority of the processors. Surprisingly, this
slightly weaker type of cooperation can be achieved with rather low
connectivity , e.g., for "almost all" regular networks of degree
7 or more. In particular we present an explicit communication protocol
achieving such behaviour for the (4 degree) butterfly.
(this is joint work with C. Dwork, N. Pippenger and E. Upfal)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
Interactive proof systems were proposed by Goldwasser, Micali and Rackoff,
and by Babai. The richness and importance of such systems will be
demonstrated by two theorems, the flavor of which is given below:
(1) No short NP (non-interactive) proof is known for graph non-isomrphism.
We will show that there are short interactive prrofs for membership in
this language. (Hence, graph non-isomorphism is in non-uniform NP).
(2) Assume trap-door functions exist. Assume Alice knows the combination
that opens a vault, and that Bob can only play with the dial. Then Alice,
without giving Bob a hint about the combination,
and without opening the door, can convince him that
she can open the vault. (such proofs exist for membership in any NP
language!).
Applications to fault tolerant protocols will be given.
(Joint work with O. Goldreich and S. Micali).
-------
∂19-Feb-86 1702 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:upfal@su-aimvax.arpa
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 17:00:55 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Feb 86 16:44:17-PST
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Feb 86 16:43:46-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 19 Feb 86 16:19:08 pst
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 86 16:19:08 pst
From: Eliezer Upfal <upfal@diablo>
To: aflb.all@score
BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday,
February 28.
9:45 Coffee Tee and Muffins
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
M.O. Rabin, Harvard University / Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
D. Haussler, University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLARANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT
TOLERANCE PROTOCOLS
A. Wigderson, MSRI
A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
In a joint wowith D. Tygar, we formulate a new the study
and implementation of security of operating systems. Our approach
involves the creation of a number of algorithmic and operating
system constructs which together form an integrated toolkit for
operating system security (ITOSS).
ITOSS enables us to implement a secure operating system and
will allow users to tailor the security of a file system to reflect
the security requirements of any particular site. a self contained
description of ITOSS will be given.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
The current emphasis on knowledge-based software has created
a broader interest in algorithms that learn knowledge structures
or concepts from positive and negative examples. Using the
learning model recently proposed by Valiant, we have attempted to
determine which classes of concepts have efficient (i.e. polyno-
mial time) learning algorithms. As noticed earlier by Pearl and
by Devroye and Wagner, a simple combinatorial property of concept
classes, the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, plays an important
role in learning and pattern recognition. We clarify the rela-
tionship between this property and Valiant's theory of learnabil-
ity. Our results lead to the design of efficient learning algo-
rithms that employ a variant of Occam's Razor. Illustrations are
given for certain classes of conjunctive concepts and for con-
cepts that are defined by various types of regions in feature
space. The work reported was done jointly with Anselm Blumer,
Andrzej Ehrenfeucht and Manfred Warmuth of the Universities of
Denver, Colorado and California at Santa Cruz respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
Achieving processor cooperation in the presence of faults is a major
problem in distributed systems. Traditional paradigms like Byzantine
agreement require that all nonfaulty components cooperate correctly.
This requirement is very stringent, and is known to imply strong
assumptions on the network; particularly, in order to tolerate t faults,
the network has to be at least t-connected. This seems to render the
solution infeasible, as in forseeable technologies the number of faults
will grow with the size of the network while the degree will remain
practically fixed.
We raise the question whether it is possible to avoid this limitation by
slightly lowering our expectations. In many practical situations we may
be willing to "lose" some correct processors, and settle for cooperation
between the vast majority of the processors. Surprisingly, this
slightly weaker type of cooperation can be achieved with rather low
connectivity , e.g., for "almost all" regular networks of degree
7 or more. In particular we present an explicit communication protocol
achieving such behaviour for the (4 degree) butterfly.
(this is joint work with C. Dwork, N. Pippenger and E. Upfal)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
Interactive proof systems were proposed by Goldwasser, Micali and Rackoff,
and by Babai. The richness and importance of such systems will be
demonstrated by two theorems, the flavor of which is given below:
(1) No short NP (non-interactive) proof is known for graph non-isomrphism.
We will show that there are short interactive prrofs for membership in
this language. (Hence, graph non-isomorphism is in non-uniform NP).
(2) Assume trap-door functions exist. Assume Alice knows the combination
that opens a vault, and that Bob can only play with the dial. Then Alice,
without giving Bob a hint about the combination,
and without opening the door, can convince him that
she can open the vault. (such proofs exist for membership in any NP
language!).
Applications to fault tolerant protocols will be given.
(Joint work with O. Goldreich and S. Micali).
∂19-Feb-86 1725 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar February 20, No. 4
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 17:25:48 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 17:20:04-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar February 20, No. 4
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
February 20, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 4
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, February 20, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Cresswell's Got a Real Attitude Problem
Conference Room Discussion led by David Israel, (israel@su-csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Lexical Representation and Lexical Rules
Trailer Classroom Mark Gawron (Gawron@su-csli)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Ventura Hall The Quest for Inheritance and Polymorphism
Trailer Classroom Luca Cardelli, Digital Systems Research Center
(Abstract on page 2)
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, February 27, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall The Aspectual Effect of Mass Term and
Conference Room Bare Plural Arguments
by Erhard Hinrichs
Discussion led by Godehard Link (Link@su-csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Lexical Representation and Lexical Rules
Trailer Classroom Paul Kiparsky (Kiparsky@su-csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Logic of Pointers and Evaluations---
The Solution to the Self-referential Paradoxes
Haim Gaifman, Hebrew University
--------------
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar February 20, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
THIS WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
The Quest for Inheritance and Polymorphism
Luca Cardelli, Digital Systems Research Center
Inheritance and polymorphism are two central concepts in
programming languages, with the common purpose of increasing program
flexibility and reusability. They can be understood and used in
untyped languages, but their utility is more apparent in typed
languages.
Our ideas about inheritance and polymorphism have been evolving
rapidly in the past few years, and we start understanding mechanisms
by which these concepts can be generalized and unified.
This talk will explain why, in the context of typed languages, an
extensive treatment of (multiple) inheritance requires polymorphism.
A notation is presented which accounts for a wide range of phenomena
in object-oriented, functional and system-modeling languages.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
The Aspectual Effect of Mass Term and Bare Plural Arguments
by Erhard Hinrichs
Discussion led by Godehard Link
This is the last section of the author's dissertation ``A
Compositional Semantics for Aktionsarten and NP Reference in English''
(Ohio State 1985) in which a tripartite Carlson style ontology for
events is developed and applied to the analysis of aspects in
English. In the present section, a compositional semantics of the
influence of mass term and plural arguments on the aspectual class of
the VP (accomplishment vs. activity) is offered, as in
(1) John ate (a cake)/cake/cakes.
To start the discussion, I will briefly summarize the basic ideas in
the rest of the dissertation as far as they bear on the issue at hand.
The complete fragment of English that the author provides is included
in the handout.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Lexical Rules and Lexical Representations
Mark Gawron, Paul Kiparsky, Annie Zaenen
February 20, 27, and March 6
This is the second of a series of talks reflecting the ongoing
elaboration of a model of lexical representation. In the first, Mark
Gawron discussed a frame-based lexical semantics and its relationship
to a theory of lexical rules. In this one, Paul Kiparsky will propose
a theory of the linking of thematic roles to their syntactic
realizations, emphasizing its interactions with a theory of
morphology; and in the third, a sub-workgroup of the lexical project
will sketch a unification based representation for the interaction of
the different components of the lexical representation and both syntax
and sentence semantics.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar February 20, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
AFA MEETING
Friday, February 21, 2:00-3:30
Ventura Conference Room
The informal group studying Peter Aczel's set theory with the Anti-
Foundation Axiom (AFA) will resume its meetings. On Friday, Jon
Barwise and John Etchemendy will start working through their draft
monograph on self-reference, where they use AFA to model various
approaches to self-referring propositions in an attempt to understand
Liar-like paradoxes. The group will meet on alternate Fridays.
--------------
PIXELS AND PREDICATES
Principles of Graphical User-Interface Design
Bill Verplank, Xerox
1:00 pm, Wednesday, February 26, CSLI trailers
User-interfaces are becoming increasingly graphical with windows,
icons, pup-up menus, what-you-see-is-what-you-get, etc. I believe
that one key to success with these new user interfaces is good graphic
design. It's a new kind of graphics: ``graphics with handles''.
From my experience with the Xerox Star user interface, these seems
to be the critical graphical challenges:
---to create the illusion of manipulable objects
---to reveal hidden structure
---to establish a consistent graphic vocabulary
---to match the medium
---to provide visual order and user focus
--------------
LOGIC SEMINAR
A Logic Characterized by the Class of Linear Kripke Models
with Nested Domains
Giovanna Corsi, University of Florence
4:15, Monday, February 24, Math Faculty Lounge
--------------
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING
12:00, Monday February 24, Ventura trailer classroom
(Abstract in last week's newsletter)
--------------
FUTURE COLLOQUIA
Logic of Pointers and Evaluations---
The Solution to the Self-referential Paradoxes
Haim Gaifman,
Department of Mathematics, Hebrew University, Israel
February 27
``Logical Specifications for
Feature Structures in Unification Grammars''
William C. Rounds and Robert Kasper
University of Michigan
March 6
``Self Reference and Self Consciousness''
Raymond Smullyan,
Department of Philosophy, Indiana University
March 13
!
Page 4 CSLI Calendar February 20, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Talk on Practical Reasoning
Hector-Neri Castaneda,
Department of Philosophy, Indiana University
April 17
--------------
FUTURE SEMINARS
Lexical Rules and Lexical Representations
Mark Gawron, Paul Kiparsky, Annie Zaenen
February 27 and March 6
Phil Cohen
March 13
The Structural Meaning of Clause Type: Capturing Cross-modal
and Cross-linguistic Generalizations
Dietmar Zaefferer
March 20
Reflexivisation:
Some Connections Between
Lexical, Syntactic, and Semantic Representation
Annie Zaenen, Peter Sells, Draga Zec
March 27
Representation
Brian Smith, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy, Ken Olson, John Perry
April 3, 10, 17, and 24
Visual Communication
Sandy Pentland, Fred Lakin, Guest Speakers
May 1, 8, and 15
Events and Modes of Representing Change
Carol Cleland
May 22
Why Language isn't Information
Terry Winograd
May 29
Ivan Blair
June 5
Numbers, Relations, and Situations
Chris Menzel
June 12
!
Page 5 CSLI Calendar February 20, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEW CSLI REPORTS
Report No. CSLI-85-34, ``Applicability of Indexed Grammars to
Natural Languages'' by Gerald Gazdar, Report No. CSLI-85-39, ``The
Structures of Discourse Structure'' by Barbara Grosz and Candace L.
Sidner, and Report No. CSLI-85-44, ``Language, Mind, and Information''
by John Perry, have just been published. These reports may be
obtained by writing to Trudy Vizmanos, CSLI, Ventura Hall, Stanford,
CA 94305 or Trudy@SU-CSLI.
-------
∂19-Feb-86 2101 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:ELY@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 21:01:23 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Feb 86 20:52:07-PST
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Feb 86 20:50:54-PST
Date: 19 Feb 86 13:49:18 PST
From: ELY@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: aflb.all@su-score.arpa
BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday,
February 28.
9:45 Coffee Tee and Muffins
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
M.O. Rabin, Harvard University / Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
D. Haussler, University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLARANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT
TOLERANCE PROTOCOLS
A. Wigderson, MSRI
A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
In a joint wowith D. Tygar, we formulate a new the study
and implementation of security of operating systems. Our approach
involves the creation of a number of algorithmic and operating
system constructs which together form an integrated toolkit for
operating system security (ITOSS).
ITOSS enables us to implement a secure operating system and
will allow users to tailor the security of a file system to reflect
the security requirements of any particular site. a self contained
description of ITOSS will be given.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
The current emphasis on knowledge-based software has created
a broader interest in algorithms that learn knowledge structures
or concepts from positive and negative examples. Using the
learning model recently proposed by Valiant, we have attempted to
determine which classes of concepts have efficient (i.e. polyno-
mial time) learning algorithms. As noticed earlier by Pearl and
by Devroye and Wagner, a simple combinatorial property of concept
classes, the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, plays an important
role in learning and pattern recognition. We clarify the rela-
tionship between this property and Valiant's theory of learnabil-
ity. Our results lead to the design of efficient learning algo-
rithms that employ a variant of Occam's Razor. Illustrations are
given for certain classes of conjunctive concepts and for con-
cepts that are defined by various types of regions in feature
space. The work reported was done jointly with Anselm Blumer,
Andrzej Ehrenfeucht and Manfred Warmuth of the Universities of
Denver, Colorado and California at Santa Cruz respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
Achieving processor cooperation in the presence of faults is a major
problem in distributed systems. Traditional paradigms like Byzantine
agreement require that all nonfaulty components cooperate correctly.
This requirement is very stringent, and is known to imply strong
assumptions on the network; particularly, in order to tolerate t faults,
the network has to be at least t-connected. This seems to render the
solution infeasible, as in forseeable technologies the number of faults
will grow with the size of the network while the degree will remain
practically fixed.
We raise the question whether it is possible to avoid this limitation by
slightly lowering our expectations. In many practical situations we may
be willing to "lose" some correct processors, and settle for cooperation
between the vast majority of the processors. Surprisingly, this
slightly weaker type of cooperation can be achieved with rather low
connectivity , e.g., for "almost all" regular networks of degree
7 or more. In particular we present an explicit communication protocol
achieving such behaviour for the (4 degree) butterfly.
(this is joint work with C. Dwork, N. Pippenger and E. Upfal)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
Interactive proof systems were proposed by Goldwasser, Micali and Rackoff,
and by Babai. The richness and importance of such systems will be
demonstrated by two theorems, the flavor of which is given below:
(1) No short NP (non-interactive) proof is known for graph non-isomrphism.
We will show that there are short interactive prrofs for membership in
this language. (Hence, graph non-isomorphism is in non-uniform NP).
(2) Assume trap-door functions exist. Assume Alice knows the combination
that opens a vault, and that Bob can only play with the dial. Then Alice,
without giving Bob a hint about the combination,
and without opening the door, can convince him that
she can open the vault. (such proofs exist for membership in any NP
language!).
Applications to fault tolerant protocols will be given.
(Joint work with O. Goldreich and S. Micali).
∂19-Feb-86 2146 HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Tidyed up BATS abstract
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Feb 86 21:45:51 PST
Date: Wed 19 Feb 86 21:39:00-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Tidyed up BATS abstract
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184776978.28.HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Several people have complained about the last version of the abstracts
for BATS. Apparently, the file had been created (I assume with
Scribe?) with spaces padding each line to 82+ characters. Hence, if
your terminal wraps around on line overflow, the message was difficult
to read. At the risk of upsetting people by giving them another copy
(as I see that Eli also sent a copy with the too-long lines to
aflb.all), here is a version that should be more readable from any 80
character wide screen.
Incidently, Eli has said that since we'll be fed at an IBM cafeteria,
he doesn't need a head count.
==========
BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday,
February 28.
9:45 Coffee Tee and Muffins
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
M.O. Rabin, Harvard University / Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
D. Haussler, University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLARANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT
TOLERANCE PROTOCOLS
A. Wigderson, MSRI
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
In a joint wowith D. Tygar, we formulate a new the study
and implementation of security of operating systems. Our approach
involves the creation of a number of algorithmic and operating
system constructs which together form an integrated toolkit for
operating system security (ITOSS).
ITOSS enables us to implement a secure operating system and
will allow users to tailor the security of a file system to reflect
the security requirements of any particular site. a self contained
description of ITOSS will be given.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
The current emphasis on knowledge-based software has created
a broader interest in algorithms that learn knowledge structures
or concepts from positive and negative examples. Using the
learning model recently proposed by Valiant, we have attempted to
determine which classes of concepts have efficient (i.e. polyno-
mial time) learning algorithms. As noticed earlier by Pearl and
by Devroye and Wagner, a simple combinatorial property of concept
classes, the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, plays an important
role in learning and pattern recognition. We clarify the rela-
tionship between this property and Valiant's theory of learnabil-
ity. Our results lead to the design of efficient learning algo-
rithms that employ a variant of Occam's Razor. Illustrations are
given for certain classes of conjunctive concepts and for con-
cepts that are defined by various types of regions in feature
space. The work reported was done jointly with Anselm Blumer,
Andrzej Ehrenfeucht and Manfred Warmuth of the Universities of
Denver, Colorado and California at Santa Cruz respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
Achieving processor cooperation in the presence of faults is a major
problem in distributed systems. Traditional paradigms like Byzantine
agreement require that all nonfaulty components cooperate correctly.
This requirement is very stringent, and is known to imply strong
assumptions on the network; particularly, in order to tolerate t faults,
the network has to be at least t-connected. This seems to render the
solution infeasible, as in forseeable technologies the number of faults
will grow with the size of the network while the degree will remain
practically fixed.
We raise the question whether it is possible to avoid this limitation by
slightly lowering our expectations. In many practical situations we may
be willing to "lose" some correct processors, and settle for cooperation
between the vast majority of the processors. Surprisingly, this
slightly weaker type of cooperation can be achieved with rather low
connectivity , e.g., for "almost all" regular networks of degree
7 or more. In particular we present an explicit communication protocol
achieving such behaviour for the (4 degree) butterfly.
(this is joint work with C. Dwork, N. Pippenger and E. Upfal)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
Interactive proof systems were proposed by Goldwasser, Micali and Rackoff,
and by Babai. The richness and importance of such systems will be
demonstrated by two theorems, the flavor of which is given below:
(1) No short NP (non-interactive) proof is known for graph non-isomrphism.
We will show that there are short interactive prrofs for membership in
this language. (Hence, graph non-isomorphism is in non-uniform NP).
(2) Assume trap-door functions exist. Assume Alice knows the combination
that opens a vault, and that Bob can only play with the dial. Then Alice,
without giving Bob a hint about the combination,
and without opening the door, can convince him that
she can open the vault. (such proofs exist for membership in any NP
language!).
Applications to fault tolerant protocols will be given.
(Joint work with O. Goldreich and S. Micali).
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
∂20-Feb-86 0905 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 09:04:54 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 08:51:54-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184899475.29.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Fundamental Algorithms For Computer Graphics. by Bresenham, Earnshaw,
and Pitteway. NATO ASI Series F Computer and Systems Sciences.
QA76.6F855 1985.
Microarchitecture of VLSI Computers. ed. by Antognetti, Anceau and Vuillemin.
NATO ASI Series E Applied Sciences. QA76.9.A73N38 1984.
Pascal--The Language and Its Implementation. ed. by D. W. Barron.
QA76.73.P2.P2.
Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea. by John Haugeland. MIT Press.
Q335.H38 1985 c.2
A Practical Guide To UNIX System V. by Mark Sobell. QA76.76.O63S6 1985.
Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Microcomputer and Microprocessor
Application. Budapest October 1983. Volumes 1 and 2. (8606342)
Planning English Sentences. Studies in Natural Language Processing.
by Douglas Appelt. P98.A67 1985 c.2
Emotion and Focus. by Helen Nissenbaum. CLSI Lecture Notes. P51.C18 no. 2
H. Llull
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1130 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CS 500 Colloquium Spring Quarter
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 10:56:45 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 10:49:02-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CS 500 Colloquium Spring Quarter
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184920799.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tom Binford has volunteered to be in charge of the CS 500 Colloquium for
Spring Quarter. If you have any suggestions for colloquia speakers please
send them to Binford@Whitney.
Thanks,
-Anne
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1247 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Does L/a inherit PFP?
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 12:46:56 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Feb 86 12:36:06 pst
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 12:36:06 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Does L/a inherit PFP?
To: nail@diablo
Following up on our discussion in the nail meeting about undecidability
of PFP, using Greibach's theorem:
Lemma: PFP for a grammar G is closed under /a.
Proof:
Let G be the grammar for L, and let the program corresponding to G have PFP.
Let p be the start symbol of G, or top level goal.
Let G/a be a grammar for L/a and let s be the start symbol for G/a.
For any EDB, suppose s(0,8) is derivable by the program corresponding to G/a,
where 0 and 8 are any two constants.
Consider all fringes F of proofs of s(0,8).
Add to the EDB one new tuple, a(8,9) where 9 is a new constant symbol.
For all F, F,a(8,9) is the fringe of a proof of p(0,9) by definition of /a.
There are no other proofs of p(0,9) because 9 is a new symbol.
(I.e., every proof of p(0,9) must have a fringe ending with a(8,9).)
One of them is short, hence some F is short. QED
Lemma: Not-P-completeness is closed under /a.
Proof: Let G, p, s be as above, where the program corresponding to G
has the property of being not-P-complete. Suppose G/a is P-complete.
Reduce any problem in P to a pair (EDB, s(0,8)?) Again, add a(8,9)
to the EDB and pose the query ``p(0,9)?'' QED
Theorem: PFP is undecidable for chain rule programs.
Proof: PFP holds for regular languages, and is closed under /a, so by
Greibach's theorem, is undecidable. QED
Theorem: Not-P-completeness is undecidable for chain rule programs if
P not = NC.
Proof: Not-P-completeness holds for regular languages, assuming P not = NC,
and is closed under /a, so by Greibach's theorem, is undecidable. QED
Conjecture: Not-P-completeness is undecidable for chain rule programs.
Handwave: Not-P-completeness is closed under /a, so by Greibach's theorem,
is undecidable, PROVIDED THAT
Not-P-completeness holds for regular languages.
It remains to show that a regular language R cannot be P-complete,
perhaps by exhibiting a series of circuits that it cannot correctly
simulate.
∂20-Feb-86 1523 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Conjecture retracted
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 15:23:31 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:11:19 pst
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:11:19 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Conjecture retracted
To: nail@diablo
Proving not-P-completeness holds for regular languages without proving
P not = logspace is hopeless, as Jeff's following message details.
This is a very tall order, although not as tall as proving P not = NC.
Conceivably, assuming P not = logspace is enough to prove that
not-P-completeness is undecidable. This is a little weaker than the
assumption P not = NC, as NC is generally believed to be > logspace.
From ullman Thu Feb 20 13:39:03 1986
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Feb 86 13:38:59 pst
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 13:38:59 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Re: Does L/a inherit PFP?
To: avg@diablo
Good idea.
However, at the end, you run off the rails.
You didn't define what "P-complete" means, but suppose
you mean "complete for P with respect to log-space reductions."
Suppose also that it happens P= LOGSPACE.
Then any nontrivial regular set is P-complete.
Proof: Let R be a nontrivial reg. set, with w1 in R and w2 not in R.
Let L be an arbitrary language in P.
Then L has a log-space recognizer, by assumption.
Reduce L to R by simulating this recognizer;
if it says "yes" print w1, and if it says "no", print w2.
(Of course we can modify the recognizer to count moves
on its log-space tape and shut itself off with a "no" if the
number of moves is so large that it is surely in a loop.)
---jeff
∂20-Feb-86 1527 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 25 (F. Reif)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 15:26:58 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 20 Feb 86 15:17:50-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA00396; Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:17:34 PST
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:17:34 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602202317.AA00396@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 25 (F. Reif)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 25, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Interpretation of Scientific and Mathematical Concepts:
Cognitive Issues and Instructional Implications''
F. Reif
Department of Physics and School of Education,
University of California at Berkeley
Scientific and mathematical concepts are significantly dif-
ferent from everyday concepts and are notoriously difficult to
learn. A cognitive analysis shows that the values of scien-
tific concepts can be identified or found by several different
modes of concept interpretation. Some of these modes use for-
mally explicit knowledge and thought processes; others rely
more on various kinds of compiled knowledge. Each mode has
distinctive consequences in terms of attainable precision,
likely errors, and ease of use. An attempt is made to formu-
late an "ideal" model of scientific concept interpretation;
such a model uses a combination of modes to interpret concepts
in manner that achieves reliable scientific effectiveness as
well as processing efficiency. This model can be compared with
the actual concept interpretations of expert scientists or
novice students. All these remarks can be well illustrated in
the specific case of the physics concept "acceleration". The
preceding discussion helps reveal both cognitive and metacogni-
tive reasons why the learning of scientific or mathematical
concepts is particularly difficult. It also suggests instruc-
tional methods for teaching such concepts more effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyck, Education and Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlota Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas
(currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 18: John Haviland, Anthropology, Austrailian National
University (currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bjorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
∂20-Feb-86 1529 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 25 (F. Reif)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 15:28:40 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.9)
id AA00396; Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:17:34 PST
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:17:34 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602202317.AA00396@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--Feb. 25 (F. Reif)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, February 25, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Interpretation of Scientific and Mathematical Concepts:
Cognitive Issues and Instructional Implications''
F. Reif
Department of Physics and School of Education,
University of California at Berkeley
Scientific and mathematical concepts are significantly dif-
ferent from everyday concepts and are notoriously difficult to
learn. A cognitive analysis shows that the values of scien-
tific concepts can be identified or found by several different
modes of concept interpretation. Some of these modes use for-
mally explicit knowledge and thought processes; others rely
more on various kinds of compiled knowledge. Each mode has
distinctive consequences in terms of attainable precision,
likely errors, and ease of use. An attempt is made to formu-
late an "ideal" model of scientific concept interpretation;
such a model uses a combination of modes to interpret concepts
in manner that achieves reliable scientific effectiveness as
well as processing efficiency. This model can be compared with
the actual concept interpretations of expert scientists or
novice students. All these remarks can be well illustrated in
the specific case of the physics concept "acceleration". The
preceding discussion helps reveal both cognitive and metacogni-
tive reasons why the learning of scientific or mathematical
concepts is particularly difficult. It also suggests instruc-
tional methods for teaching such concepts more effectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 4: Curtis Hardyck, Education and Psychology, UCB
Mar 11: Carlota Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas
(currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 18: John Haviland, Anthropology, Austrailian National
University (currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bjorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
∂20-Feb-86 1533 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Re: Conjecture retracted
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 15:33:27 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:23:21 pst
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 15:23:21 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Re: Conjecture retracted
To: avg@diablo, nail@diablo
There's more to it.
One could define "P-complete" to mean "with respect to NC reductionsπ
In that case, proving something in P not to be P-complete
is EXACTLY as hard as proving P != NC.
∂20-Feb-86 1543 rpg%brown.csnet%CSNET-RELAY.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Would like to be on list
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 15:40:55 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 20 Feb 86 18:33-EST
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 20 Feb 86 18:33:25 EST
Received: from brown by csnet-relay.csnet id ai15532; 20 Feb 86 18:09 EST
Received: from with MMDF via PhoneNet
by Brown.CSnet; 20 Feb 86 16:16-EDT
Message-Id: <8602202116.AA00960@mailhost.CS.Brown.CSNet>
Date: 20 Feb 86 (Thu) 16:16:28 EST
From: Robert Goldman <rpg%brown.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: phil-sci@mc.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Would like to be on list
Hope this is the right e-mail address to send to. Sorry if not.
∂20-Feb-86 1632 LB@SU-CSLI.ARPA HOUSING WANTED
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 16:25:44 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 16:17:49-PST
From: Leslie Batema <LB@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: HOUSING WANTED
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
TEL: (415) 497-9007
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Wanted: 2 or 3 bedroom apartment
When: March through May, 1986
Prof. Peter G. Peterson from the Linguistics Department of
the University of New South Wales, Australia will be spending
this spring semester at Stanford as a Visiting Scholar. He and his
family would like to find an apartment close to the campus.
If you know of an available apartment, please send me a
message or call me at 723-9007.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1642 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA UG Major Approved
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 16:41:04 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 16:29:05-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: UG Major Approved
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12184982701.42.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The Faculty Senate today unanimously approved our proposed CS
undergraduate major. Jeff Ullman and I attended in case there
were questions. There were. (We must have given the right
answers.) Jim Rosse commented during the discussion that he
and SOE were committed to provide the resources needed to ensure
the quality of the program. I expect next week's campus report
will have a transcript of the proceedings for those interested
in more details. -Nils
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1809 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next MONDAY's Planlunch: Martha Pollack
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 18:06:15 PST
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 18:04:16-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next MONDAY's Planlunch: Martha Pollack
To: planlunch.dis: ;
INFERRING DOMAIN PLANS IN QUESTION-ANSWERING
Martha E. Pollack (POLLACK@SRI-AI)
AI Center, SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, February 24
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The importance of plan inference (PI) in models of conversation has been
widely noted in the computational-linguistics literature, and its
incorporation into question-answering systems has enabled a range of
cooperative behaviors. The PI process in each of these systems, however, has
assumed that the questioner (Q) whose plan is being inferred and the
respondent (R) who is drawing the inference have identical beliefs about the
actions in the domain. In this talk I will argue that this assumption is too
strong, and often results in failure not only of the PI process, but also of
the communicative process that PI is meant to support. In particular, it
precludes the principled generation of appropriate responses to queries that
arise from invalid plans. I will present a model of PI in conversation that
distinguishes between the beliefs of the questioner and the beliefs of the
respondent. This will rest on an account of plans as mental phenomena:
"having a plan" will be analyzed as having a particular configuration of
beliefs and intentions. Judgements that a plan is invalid will be associated
with particular discrepancies between the beliefs that R ascribes to Q, when
R believes Q has some particular plan, and the beliefs R herself holds.
An account of different types of plan invalidities will be given, and shown
to provide an explanation for certain regularities that are observable in
cooperative responses to questions.
-------
-------
∂20-Feb-86 1933 PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: Conjecture retracted
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Feb 86 19:33:18 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Feb 86 19:20:47 pst
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 19:06:21-PST
From: C. Papadimitriou <PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Conjecture retracted
To: avg@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Cc: nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>" of Thu 20 Feb 86 15:15:53-PST
Message-Id: <12185011333.10.PAPA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
BUT all regular sets are NOT images of CVP under first-order reductions.
---Christos.
-------
∂21-Feb-86 0846 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Journals: VLSI Systems Design now up-to-date, Special Issue Annals of the Hist. Comp.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 08:45:58 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 08:38:52-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Journals: VLSI Systems Design now up-to-date, Special Issue Annals of the Hist. Comp.
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185159247.27.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have just received our back issues of VLSI Systems Design up to January
1986. We have been having problems with our subscription and if in the past
you have come to the library and we have not had them, they are on the new
journal shelf now and will be back in the office after a week.
Annals Of The History Of Computing, January 1986, is a special issue on the
IBM 650. Cuthbert Hurd is the editor for this issue. Contributors to this
issue include John Herriot and Don Knuth along with Allen Newell, Herbert
Simon, Alan Perlis and others.
The Technology Review issue for January 1986 is in the Engineering Library
in Terman. This is the issue with the article "Why Computers May Never Think
Like People" by Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus.
Harry Llull
-------
∂21-Feb-86 0901 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Near West Campus
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 09:01:23 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 08:51:23-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Near West Campus
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185161525.19.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a review of the Near West Campus work to date for EE Faculty
on February 28 from 9:00 - 11:00 in Durand 450. For those who were unable
to attend the review in December, this is your chance!
-------
∂21-Feb-86 0952 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Scientific DataLink Index To Artificial Intelligence Research 1954-1984--Math/CS Library
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 09:52:09 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 09:42:28-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Scientific DataLink Index To Artificial Intelligence Research 1954-1984--Math/CS Library
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185170823.27.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have just added the four volume set of the Scientific DataLink Index To
Artificial Intelligence Research 1954-1984. The four volumes including two
abstract volumes, a subject volume, and an author index, are shelved with
the serial indexes. These volumes index the Scientific DataLink microfiche
collections for the following research institutions in AI: Bolt Beranek
and Newman, CMU, University of Illinois, ISI, University of Massachusetts,
MIT, University of Pennsylvania, University of Rochester, Rutgers, SRI,
Stanford AI and HPP, University of Texas Austin, Xerox Parc, and Yale.
The subject volume is based on the AI classification as published in AI
Magazine Spring 1985. I have included a photocopy of that article in
the back of the subject volume.
ACM is almost up-to-date with its ACM Guide To Computing Literature an
annual index to the computer science literature. We have received up to
1984 and the 1985 volume is expected to be out this summer. ACM expects
to have future annual volumes out by the summer of the following year
covered by the volume. This annual index not only includes all entries
from Computing Reviews Index but additional computer science articles
not included in the monthly Computing Reviews. Monographs, proceedings,
and journal articles are included in the index.
Harry Llull
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1131 PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 11:30:39 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 11:25:46-PST
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Joseph Almog will talk about semantic interpretation on Tuesday, February
25, from 11-12, in the Ventura Seminar Room and informally from 12-1 in
the Philosophy Lounge. All are welcome.
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1217 MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA W. Paul's visit
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 12:15:56 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 12:08:55-PST
From: Ernst W. Mayr <MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: W. Paul's visit
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185197485.24.MAYR@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Wolfgang Paul from IBM Research at San Jose will be giving the colloquium
coming Tuesday. He'll be here probably around noon. If you'd like to talk
to him in the afternoon (before the colloquium) please let me know!
-ernst
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1605 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Socrates: New Version, Folio Network, People With Accounts Please Read
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 16:04:48 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 15:23:39-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Socrates: New Version, Folio Network, People With Accounts Please Read
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185232934.17.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There is a new version of Socrates up today. Along with a few changes in
Socrates there is the introduction of Folio--the network on which Socrates
and other academic and institutional data resources is available. The first
file to go up which is not a library file is called Odyssey and is a listing
of available internships and research opportunities for students. Terminals
in the Math/CS Library are automatically logged ontime Socrates the online
catalog. The personal accounts you picked up from the Math/CS and other
libraries will log you on to Folio from which you can choose to search
Socrates the online catalog or Odyssey, the first of the other Folio files.
If you do not choose a file but hit the return you will automatically go
into the Socrates Headings file. As I review the new version of Socrates
I will send out additional messages pointing out things in which I think you
may have an interest.
Would be glad to hear any comments concerning the new Socrates and/or Folio
system.
Harry Llull
-------
∂22-Feb-86 1052 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Common Lisp with Explorers and 36xx's
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Feb 86 10:52:50 PST
Date: Sat 22 Feb 86 10:53:41-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Common Lisp with Explorers and 36xx's
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185445934.41.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
One of the barriers to using Common Lisp with Explorers and 36xx's
has been reduced--the Explorer now understands Symbolics attribute
list syntax (ie. "-*- Mode:Lisp; Syntax:Common-Lisp -*-").
-- Rich
-------
∂22-Feb-86 1958 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Today's DATALOG quiz
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Feb 86 19:58:27 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 22 Feb 86 19:55:44 pst
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 86 19:55:44 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Today's DATALOG quiz
To: nail@diablo
Write a DATALOG sort program. You need some ground rules. Here they are.
EDB relations:
1. monadic relation e(X), specifying the items to be sorted.
2. size(N), giving number of tuples in e(←). (DATALOG can't count.)
3. less(X, Y), a total order on e(←). If X and Y are in e and
are distinct, then either less(X, Y) or less(Y, X) holds.
4. The integers with normal arithmetic. Technically, this can
expressed in terms of the relations zero(Z) and succ(M, N), which
are guaranteed to behave correctly. But let's give ourselves the
Prolog "is", allowing "N is 2 * M + 3" as a subgoal of a rule.
For full points, the integers used should be a reasonable size.
IDB goal relation:
rank(X, K) that holds where X is the K-th smallest tuple of e.
K ranges from 1 to the size of e.
IDB predicates may be added as needed, of course. Try for "pure" DATALOG,
meaning no "not"s, etc.
I have an NC solution (no big surprise).
--------------------------------------------------------
An interesting extension is the case where less(X, Y) is only a
"semi-total" order on e(←). What I mean by this is:
If neither less(X, Y) nor less(Y, X) holds,
(where X and Y are in e of course), then X and Y have "equal keys,"
so that less(X, Z) <=> less(Y, Z), etc.
Example:
If
size = {4}
e = {a, b1, b2, c}
less = {(a,b1), (a,b2), (b1,c), (b2,c)}
then
rank = {(a, 1), (b1, 2), (b1, 3), (b2, 2), (b2, 3), (c, 4)}.
It is unclear whether this is possible in pure DATALOG. Also, I don't
see how to do it even if you add an eq(X,Y) to round out the total order.
(You would have eq(b1, b2) and eq(b2, b1) in the above example.)
∂22-Feb-86 2327 PSI%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU%XX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Prisoner's dilemma tournament mailing list
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 22 Feb 86 23:27:34 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Feb 86 02:22-EST
Received: from OZ.AI.MIT.EDU by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 FEB 86 02:21:04 EST
Date: 23 Feb 1986 02:17 EST (Sun)
Message-ID: <PSI.12185581376.BABYL@MIT-OZ>
From: "Joseph J. Mankoski" <PSI%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: MEGIDDO@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Cc: AILIST@SRI-AI.ARPA, ARMS-D@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,
ARPANET-BBOARDS@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, EVOLUTION@KESTREL.ARPA,
MsgGroup@BRL.ARPA, NA@SU-SCORE.ARPA, PHIL-SCI@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU,
POLI-SCI@RED.RUTGERS.EDU, PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
psi%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU, Theory@RSCH.WISC.EDU
Reply-to: psi at mit-ai.ARPA
Subject: Prisoner's dilemma tournament mailing list
In-reply-to: Msg of 15 Feb 1986 21:43-EST from MEGIDDO at IBM-SJ.ARPA
Please add me to your list.
***PSI***
∂23-Feb-86 1144 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Stanford Mathematics Department Colloquium
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 11:43:53 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Sun 23 Feb 86 11:38:49-PST
Date: 23 Feb 86 1122 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Stanford Mathematics Department Colloquium
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Speaker: Professor Ian Richards, University of Minnesota
Title: "An axiomatic approach to computability in analysis"
Time: Thursday, FEb. 27, 1986 at 4:15 P.M.
Place: Room 380-W, Math. Bldg. 380, Stanford
Tea will be served starting at 3:30 P.M. before the talk. There will
be a dinner with the speaker after the talk.
∂23-Feb-86 1240 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD affiliation
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 12:40:29 PST
Date: Sun 23 Feb 86 12:35:54-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD affiliation
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185726684.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
When CSD and EE agreed last year to run CSL as a "joint lab," Bob
White and I sent a letter to all CSL faculty asking them if they
would like to adjust their departmental affiliations. None decided
to make any adjustments at the time. John Hennessy and I have recently
talked about him becoming a joint CSD/EE faculty member. He is now
currently fully in EE. If he were to become 50% CSD, this would be covered
by EE transferring us half a billet.
My guess is that such a transfer would be welcomed by our faculty? If it
happened, it would be nice to have it happen in time to affect the write-up
in next years "Courses and Degrees." We could have a Sr. Faculty meeting
to discuss this on March 4 (the first Tuesday of the month--the ordinary
time for sr. faculty mtgs); or we could handle the matter by having any
negative votes delivered to me personally over the course of the next week
or so (getting none of these, I would assume the idea meets with your
approval). If anyone thinks we need a faculty mtg to discuss it, please
let me know by net mail (or otherwise) soon. If it turns out there is no
opposition, it's a shame to take time to have a meeting; but I don't want
to discourage a meeting that anyone feels to be important.
Incidentally, Hennessy has been recommended by EE (and approved by the
School of Engineering) for a promotion from Associate to Full Professor.
If we moved partially into our department, it would be at that rank
(if approved by the university).
(Unless we have a sr. faculty mtg to discuss this, I know of no other
reason to have the Mar 4 mtg, and we would cancel it.)
-Nils
-------
∂23-Feb-86 1245 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA UG Committee
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 12:45:17 PST
Date: Sun 23 Feb 86 12:39:35-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: UG Committee
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185727354.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Jeff Ullman has agreed to chair the committee on the undergraduate
major. Since this year's curriculum committee, with Jeff as chair,
did such extensive work in setting up the requirements for the major,
we think that the new ug committee's role would be largely setting policy,
handling unusual cases, etc. Note: joining this committee is not the
same as volunteering for extra "advising" work. I would hope that the
whole faculty would share equally in advising chores.
Any volunteers for the new ug major committee?
-Nils
-------
∂23-Feb-86 2127 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Monday's planlunch: Martha Pollack
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 23 Feb 86 21:26:53 PST
Date: Sun 23 Feb 86 21:23:48-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Monday's planlunch: Martha Pollack
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
INFERRING DOMAIN PLANS IN QUESTION-ANSWERING
Martha E. Pollack (POLLACK@SRI-AI)
AI Center, SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, February 24
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The importance of plan inference (PI) in models of conversation has been
widely noted in the computational-linguistics literature, and its
incorporation into question-answering systems has enabled a range of
cooperative behaviors. The PI process in each of these systems, however, has
assumed that the questioner (Q) whose plan is being inferred and the
respondent (R) who is drawing the inference have identical beliefs about the
actions in the domain. In this talk I will argue that this assumption is too
strong, and often results in failure not only of the PI process, but also of
the communicative process that PI is meant to support. In particular, it
precludes the principled generation of appropriate responses to queries that
arise from invalid plans. I will present a model of PI in conversation that
distinguishes between the beliefs of the questioner and the beliefs of the
respondent. This will rest on an account of plans as mental phenomena:
"having a plan" will be analyzed as having a particular configuration of
beliefs and intentions. Judgements that a plan is invalid will be associated
with particular discrepancies between the beliefs that R ascribes to Q, when
R believes Q has some particular plan, and the beliefs R herself holds.
An account of different types of plan invalidities will be given, and shown
to provide an explanation for certain regularities that are observable in
cooperative responses to questions.
-------
-------
∂24-Feb-86 0910 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar update
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 09:10:33 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 09:04:40-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar update
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
Two late notices of events for this week.
CSLI COLLOQUIUM
LOGIC OF POINTERS AND EVALUATIONS:
THE SOLUTION TO THE SELF-REFERENTIAL PARADOXES
Haim Gaifman
Mathematics Department The Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel
Visiting at SRI
February 27, 1986
Ventura Hall
Imagine the following exchange:
Max: What I am saying at this very moment is nonsense.
Moritz: Yes, what you have just said is nonsense.
Evidently Max spoke nonsense and Moritz spoke to the point. Yet Max
and Moritz appear to have asserted the same thing, namely: that Max
spoke nonsense. Or consider the following two lines:
line 1: The sentence written on line 1 is not true.
line 2: The sentence written on line 1 is not true.
Our natural intuition is that the self-referring sentence on line 1 is
not true (whatever sense could be made of it). Therefore the sentence
on line 2, which asserts this very fact, should be true. But what is
written on line 2 is exactly the same as what is written on line 1.
I shall argue that the unavoidable conclusion is that truth values
should be assigned here to sentence-tokens and that any system in
which truth is only type-dependent (e.g., Kripke's system and its
variants) is inadequate for treating the self-referntial situation.
Since the truth value of a token depends on the tokens to which it
points, whose values depend in their turn on the tokens to which they
point,and so on, the whole network of pointings (which might include
complicated loops) must be taken into account.
I shall present a simple formal way of representing such networks and
an algorithm for evaluating the truth values. On the input 'the
sentence on line 1' it returns GAP but on the input 'the sentence on
line 2' it returns TRUE. And it yields similarly intuitive results in
more complicated situations. For an overall treatment of
self-reference the tokens have to be replaced by the more general
pointers. A pointer is any obgect used to point to a sentence-type (a
token is a special case of pointer it points to the sentence of which
it is a token). Calling a pointer is like a procedural call in a
program, eventually a truth valye (TRUE, FALSE or GAP) is returned -
which is the output of the algorithm.
I shall discuss some more recent work (since my last SRI talk) -
variants of the system and its possible extensions to mathematical
powerful languages. Attempts to make such comprehensive systems throw
new light on the problem of constructing "universal languages".
-------
STANFORD MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT COLLOQUIUM
Professor Ian Richards, University of Minnesota
"An axiomatic approach to computability in analysis"
Thursday, FEb. 27, 1986 at 4:15 P.M.
Room 380-W, Math. Bldg. 380, Stanford
Tea will be served starting at 3:30 P.M. before the talk. There will
be a dinner with the speaker after the talk.
-------
-------
∂24-Feb-86 1055 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 10:54:54 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 10:44:12-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA, maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185968493.11.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow's topic and speaker for the Tuesday lunch series will be Robert Byer
on the Near West Campus at 12:15 in MJH 146.
-------
∂24-Feb-86 1059 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Most popular Forum buttons
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 10:59:03 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 10:51:42-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Most popular Forum buttons
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185969860.23.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Jim Bell of H-P suggested we count our remaining buttons from the
Annual Meeting to determine which category was most popular.
The outcome surprised me. Distributed Systems and Architecture
tied for 5/6.
Theory
Networks
Algorithms
Programming Languages
Distributed Systems and Architecture
Verification
Databases
Programming Environments
Expert Systems
Office Systems
Human Interfaces
VLSI
Robotics
CAD
Reliability
Computer Graphics
Natural Languages
Compilers
Numerical Analysis
-------
∂24-Feb-86 1439 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: Calendar update
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 24 Feb 86 14:38:11 PST
Date: Mon 24 Feb 86 14:29:35-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: Calendar update
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
The CSLI Colloquium by Haim Gaifman is at 4:15 on Thursday, February 27.
-------
∂25-Feb-86 0609 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 06:09:17 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 06:09:29-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186180629.8.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
In addition to the two regular AFLBs this week and next, there's a
special one next Monday. Here are all three abstracts.
---------------------------------
27-Feb-86 : Nick Pippenger (IBM-Almaden)
Recurrence Relations Based on Minimization
In a paper with the same title as this talk, M. L. Fredman and
D. E. Knuth solved, among others, a problem that may be paraphrased
as follows: find the largest real-valued function f satisfying the
inequalities f(1) <= 1 and f(i+j) <= 2f(i)+3f(j) for all positive
integers i and j. In this talk we shall consider some multiplicative
analogues of this problem. The simplest of these is to find the
largest real-valued function f satisfying f(z) <= z and f(xy) <=
2f(x)+3f(y) for all reals x, y and z not less than 1. Another case
arises when x, y and z range over integral powers of 2, and still
another arises when they range over positive integers. Our goal in
this talk is to describe the analytic and combinatorial devices
needed to deal with these analogues; the talk will be self-contained,
and no knowledge of the work of Fredman and Knuth will be assumed.
***** Time and place: February 27, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
3-Mar-86 (Monday) : Gyula Katona (UCSD & Math Institute, Hungarian Acad Sci)
Convex Hulls of Certain Hypergraph Classes
Let X be a set of n elements. A family F of its subsets (that is, F is
contained in 2↑X) is called a hypergraph. Consider a class C of
hypergraphs on X (e.g., C = {F: F←1, F←2 in F implies F←1 doesn't
contain F←2}). A traditional extremal theorem determines the family F
minimizing or maximizing |F| in C (e.g., by the Sperner theorem,
max|F| = {n \choose floor(n/2)} for the C above). In some applications,
however, we need to maximize |F←i| summed over all F←i in F; or in
general, to maximize the sum of f(|F←i|), where f is a fixed function.
The latter sum can be expressed as p←i(F) f(i) summed over 0 <= i <= n,
where p←i(F) denotes the number of i-element members of F. This is a
linear function of the p←i's; therefore, to solve this problem we have
to find the extreme points of the set of vectors (p←0, p←1, ..., p←n)
for the given class C. We do this for several classes. Many
traditional extremal problems and inequalities are consequences.
***** Time and place: March 3, 12:30 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) ******
6-Mar-86 : Jeff Vitter (MSRI & Brown)
Design and Analysis of Dynamic Huffman Coding
Variable length coding is becoming more and more popular in network
communication and file compression applications. One problem with the
classical Huffman algorithm is its large amount of overhead. It requires two
passes over the message: one pass to collect frequency counts, and another
pass to encode the message.
We introduce an efficient new algorithm for dynamic (one-pass) Huffman coding
that allows coding and transmission in real-time, and uses an optimum number
of bits to encode the message, in the worst case among all one-pass schemes.
We also analyze the dynamic Huffman algorithm due to Faller, Gallager, and
Knuth. In each algorithm, both the sender and the receiver maintain
equivalent dynamically varying Huffman trees. The processing time required to
encode and decode a letter whose node in the dynamic Huffman tree is currently
on the d-th level is O(d); hence, the processing can be done in real time. We
show that the number of bits transmitted by the new algorithm for a message
containing t letters is at most t bits more than that used by the conventional
two-pass Huffman coding, independent of the alphabet size. This is best
possible, for any one-pass scheme. Tight upper and lower bounds are derived.
Empirical tests show that the new algorithm performs quite well in practice,
often better than the two-pass method.
***** Time and place: March 6, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂25-Feb-86 0904 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 09:04:46 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 08:52:13-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: maslin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186210253.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Unfortunately, Robert Byer will be unable to attend our lunch today as
originally planned. However, there will still be discussion of the Near
West Campus. MJH 146 at 12:15!
-------
∂25-Feb-86 0942 FALESCHINI@SU-CSLI.ARPA Housing
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 09:42:26 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 09:34:50-PST
From: Kelly Faleschini <FALESCHINI@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Housing
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA
HOUSING NEEDED IN STANFORD AREA
I will haev an appointment at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences from September to June 87 and I need to find
INEXPENSIVE housing.
I will be single. Possibilities include:
Furnished Room with Board
Furnished Room with kitchen privileges
Participation in a communal living arrangement.
House-sitting (willing to care for pets and or plants)
If you can help, please contact at UCLA.
William (Bill) Bright
Professor of Linguistics and Anthropology
UCLA
Department of Linguistics
Los Angeles, CA 90024
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1053 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa papers received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 10:53:11 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 10:41:17 pst
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 10:41:17 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@diablo
"Formal Semantics of a Relational Knowledge Base"
M. Murakami, Haruo Yokuta, H. Itoh
"Deductive DB System Based on Unit Resolution"
H. Yokuta K. Sakai H. Itoh
"A Model and Architecture for a Relational Knowledge Base"
H. Yokuta, H. Itoh
All of these are from ICOT, Mita Kokusai Bldg. 21F,
4-28 Mita I-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108, Japan.
The interesting idea here is letting the domain of an attribute
be the set of full Prolog terms. (They make the distinction:
logical rules + flat data = "deductive DB"; logical rules + terms
as data = "knowledge base").
In particular, a domain could be treated as clauses or, as they do,
a pair of attributes (Head, Body) could represent clauses.
Then, there is a natural "join" operation in which a body of
the form Q1&Q2&...&Qn and a head H with associated body P1&...&Pk
are smashed together to yield a body P1'&...&Pk'&Q2&...&Qn,
where Pi' is Pi after the substitution that unifies H with Q1.
The result is that they can write rules on term-data that act as meta-rules.
For example, a simple recursive rule applied to this data can
perform all top-down inferences a la Prolog.
I'm not sure whether this is "merely" an interesting idea or whether
it opens up a new direction for research.
The questions we have been asking for datalog, e.g., termination
of recursions, or recursion elimination, are undoubtedly too hard
to answer in this framework, because they are really questions
about deductions. However, we might start looking at some
simple things, e.g., what operations are needed to implement
Henschen-Naqvi in meta rules?
---jeff
∂25-Feb-86 1325 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA EAF->NAE
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 13:24:52 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 13:09:27-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: EAF->NAE
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186257081.27.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm proud to be able to announce that Ed Feigenbaum received
word yesterday that he as been elected a member of the
National Academy of Engineering. Congratulations, Ed!
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1416 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:HADDAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA BATS Reminder & Directions
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 14:16:38 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Feb 86 14:15:09-PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 14:04:17-PST
From: Ramsey Haddad <HADDAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: BATS Reminder & Directions
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186267061.55.HADDAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The BATS will be at IBM Almaden this Friday.
Directions:
"Visitors, please arrive 15 minutes early. IBM's new Almaden Research
Center (ARC) is located adjacent to Santa Teresa County Park, between
Almaden Expressway and U.S. 101, about 10 miles south of Interstate
280. From U.S. 101, exit at Bernal Road, and follow Bernal Road west
past Santa Teresa Blvd. into the hills (ignoring the left turn for
Santa Teresa Park). Alternatively, follow Almaden Expressway to its
southern terminus, turn left onto Harry Road, then go right at the ARC
entrance (about a quarter of a mile later) and go up the hill. For
more detailed directions, please phone the ARC receptionist at (408)
927-1080."
If people who need (can give) rides send me a note, I'll circulate
that list of names to those people who can give (need) rides.
Ramsey.
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1442 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:pratt@su-navajo.arpa Re: CSD affiliation
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 14:42:06 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Feb 86 14:31:54-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 14:41:59 pst
Date: 25 Feb 1986 1441-PST (Tuesday)
From: Vaughan Pratt <pratt@su-navajo.arpa>
To: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Cc: tenured@score
Subject: Re: CSD affiliation
In-Reply-To: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA> /
Sun 23 Feb 86 12:35:54-PST.
<12185726684.26.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If having 50% of Hennessy in CSD is a step towards glueing the EE and
CSD halves of computer science together I'm all for it.
-v
∂25-Feb-86 1608 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa tomorrow's meeting
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 16:08:22 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 15:55:39 pst
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 15:55:39 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: tomorrow's meeting
To: nail@diablo
TOmorrow, I'd like to open a discussion of "useless-free"
logic manipulation algorithms.
The following message discusses some points.
If I have time, I'll also talk about some things AVG
mentioned before leaving for Washington (the state).
**********************************************************************
This note is a summary of some thoughts that Dave Maier, Shuky Sagiv,
AVG, and I had regarding a problem first posed
by Francois Bancilhon: Provide a reasonable definition of
when an algorithm for processing Datalog is free of useless operations.
A good part of the problem is defining "useless."
In our view, the steps we concentrate on are database lookups,
on the assumption that these are secondary storage operations,
while inferences are likely to be performed in main memory.
Consider a Datalog query, say for the tuples p(X,Y) satisfying
some rules. As a thought experiment, consider all the derivation
trees for tuples p(a,b); in each tree the leaves are atoms whose
predicates are database relations, whether or not they are in the
current EDB. the interior nodes represent instantiated applications
of rules, in the obvious way.
As some algorithm to find all the answers to p(X,Y) runs, at all times
we can classify this infinite set of trees into four groups:
1. TRUE. Interrogations of the EDB have already determined that every
leaf is in the EDB, and therefore the root is part of the answer to the
query.
2. FALSE. Interrogations of the EDB have determined that at least
one leaf is not in the EDB.
3. INTERESTING. No interrogation of the EDB has discovered that some
leaf of this tree is not in the EDB, *and* no other tree with the
same root has been found to be TRUE.
4. UNINTERESTING. All others. i.e., trees with no leaf found not
to be in the EDB, at least one leaf whose presence in the EDB
has not been determined, but there is already some other tree with the
same root in the TRUE class.
Define an algorithm to be USELESS-FREE (UF) if every database
interrogation resolves the presence or absence in the EDB of
at least one leaf in at least one interesting tree.
The notion of a DB "interrogation" probably should be made more
precise, since we need to know what presence/absence inferences
can be made by looking at the result of an interrogation.
For our purposes, an *interrogation* is a selection on one
DB relation, i.e., it asks for all those tuples in some predicate
r that have specified constants in zero or more components.
e.g., if we ask r(1,X), and we get the answer {(1,2), (1,4)}
then we know that leaves r(1,2) and r(1,4) are true, and
r(1,3), r(1,5),... are false.
If memory serves, we convinced ourselves that modified versions
of magic sets and Henschen-Naqvi were UF. The key modification
is that the algorithms must store the result of any DB interrogation
in scratch memory, so we can look it up without doing another
interrogation! Apparently, many algorithms forget things they've
already looked up; this may even make sense, since cluttering
up "local" or "main" memory with facts that may or may not be
needed is not necessarily a good (or bad) idea.
Don't ask me to reproduce the proofs.
Anyway, I'm not sure how good this model is, but it
suggests some problems. How general can we make our queries
before it is impossible to answer them in a UF way?
What if we are not permitted to "modify" our algorithms
to store EDB tuples outside the EDB?
Can one (efficiently) modify any algorithm to be UF?
---jeff
∂25-Feb-86 1803 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 18:03:02 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 17:56:52-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Happy Hour as usual, in the Greenberg Room on Friday at
4:00 (complete with beer, wine, and all the trimmings)
-------
∂25-Feb-86 2050 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Tina -> Oligon
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 20:50:01 PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 20:51:24-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Tina -> Oligon
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186341175.48.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
As was hinted in previous messages Tina is now Oligon (Serial) and Poligon
(Parallel). The old systems Tina, Old-Tina, Tina-Language and
Old-Tina-Language will continue to exist for a while.
The new systems released today are called :-
New-Oligon - the experimental serial run-time system.
New-Poligon-Language - the experimental common Oligon/Poligon compiler.
All futuree releases will be to these systems or the non-new versions, when
the new-* versions have settled down.
The new release has a number of changes from the last one. A new version
of the manual will follow in a couple of days. The main change is in the
class structure which has been generalised considerably. The new language
is as upwards compatible as possible but a few changes in the syntax have
been made. These fall into the following catagories :-
i) Class declarations. - These are quite a bit different.
ii) Form Instance of. - This no longer exists. Use New Instance.
iii) Class-Field:, Node-Field:, Superclass-Field:
- These have been replaced by an extended
mechanism.
iv) Class/Superclass rules. - The way in which you denote these has
changed because of i) and iii)
v) System defined fields - There a number of new ones, which are not
important for upwards compatibility.
Supersystem is now called Supersystems
and is a list.
Porting @i[should] be a relatively simple matter.
I will send a message describing where to look in the new manual for the
deltas when the new manual comes out.
Rice.
-------
∂25-Feb-86 2135 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Wednesday meeting?
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 21:35:12 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1986 21:36 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12186349353.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: Wednesday meeting?
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
No one volunteered to speak this Wednesday. Unless there's a demand
early Wednesday morning for a meeting, there won't be one.
-- Byron
∂25-Feb-86 2216 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #12
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 22:16:27 PST
Date: 25 Feb 86 2204-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #12
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Wednesday, 26 Feb 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Connectionist Summer Workshop Reminder
Request for Parallel Lisp Programs
Argonne Facility and Class
Argonne Job Openings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 18 February 1986 17:04-PST
From: Dave.Touretzky at A.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: connectionist summer workshop reminder
Connectionist Summer Workshop Reminder
This is a reminder that the deadline for applying to attend the connectionist
summer workshop to be held June 20-29 at Carnegie Mellon is March 1st.
Applications are welcomed from graduate students and recent Ph.D.'s and
M.D.'s who are actively involved in connectionist research.
---> This is not just a summer school for training new
connectionists, as a previous announcement may have
implied. We plan to organize small working groups and hold
lively discussions with visiting speakers. New research
will be presented and people are encouraged to bring their
software for demos; we'll supply the machines.
To apply, send a copy of your vita and one relevant paper, technical
report, or research proposal to: Dr. David Touretzky, Computer Science
Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 19 February 1986 17:20-PST
From: Benjamin Zorn <zorn at renoir.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Request for Parallel Lisp Programs
The SPUR project at UC Berkeley is an effort to design, build, and
program multiprocessor Lisp machine workstations. We have implemented
a sequential version of Common Lisp for the SPUR machine and are now
in the process of adding extensions for multiprocessing. We currently
plan to support constructs like Multilisp futures and Q-lisp QLAMBDA.
We have a simulator for our machine (the actual machine should be
ready in a year or so) and are planning to investigate the performance
of parallel Lisp programs on our machine. We are very interested in
any programs that have been written that use parallel features so that
we can get a better understanding of the behavior of these programs.
If you have or are aware of any parallel programs that are either
written in Lisp, or are considered important in their own right and
could be ported to parallel Lisp, please send us information about
them. We will make all the information that we get available to this
mailing list when the results are in. Thank you.
Ben Zorn
Jim Larus
George Taylor
Kinson Ho
Paul Hilfinger
e-mail to zorn@renoir.berkleley.edu
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 24 February 1986 22:12-PST
From: lusk at anl-mcs.ARPA (Rusty Lusk)
Subject: argonne facility and class
Argonne National Laboratory has set up a research facility for the
study of parallel computing. It currently includes a 20-processor
Encore Multimax, a 12-processor Sequent Balance 8000, and (to be
delivered tomorrow) an 8-processor Alliant. Planned enhancements over
the next few months are an upgrade to the Sequent and the addition of
machine with a hypercube architecture. Local projects utilizing the
ACRF (Advanced Computing Research Facility) include parallel logic
programming, parallel linear algebra, and the development of portable
parallel programming methodologies.
The ACRF is intended to be a user facility to support research in
parallel computing. Those interested in using the facility in their
research should contact either
Jack Dongarra or Rusty Lusk
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL 60439
dongarra@anl-mcs.arpa
lusk@al-mcs.arpa
The first class for those wishing to use the Argonne Advanced
Computing Research Facility will be held on March 17-19. The class
will cover parallel programming on the Encore and Sequent, and (if
all goes according to plan) the Alliant as well. This will be a
hands-on class. At its completion participants will have written and
run a number of programs on each machine, and should be familiar with
the ACRF environment. The third day of the class will be devoted to
consideration of each attendee's particular project.
This first class will emphasize C as the primary example programming
language, although FORTRAN will also be discussed. A later class will
reverse the roles of these two languages. Those interested in the March
class should contact
Rusty Lusk
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL 60439
(312) 972-7852
lusk@anl.mcs.arpa
There will be no charge for this class, nor is any financial support
for attendees available.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 24 February 1986 22:22-PST
From: lusk at anl-mcs.ARPA (Rusty Lusk)
Subject: Openings
JOB OPENINGS AT
ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY
The Mathematics and Computer Science Division of Argonne
National Laboratory is expanding its program in advanced comput-
ing research. This program is aimed at developing algorithms,
software, and programming techniques for both numerical and sym-
bolic computations on computers with advanced architectures. Our
research emphasizes two aspects:
1) fundamental computations for both numerical and symbolic
work that can be used as building blocks in modeling pro-
grams and specific applications; and
2) portability of the resulting algorithms, software, and pro-
gramming methodologies among a wide variety of parallel com-
puters.
Among the current areas of activity are numerical linear algebra,
numerical optimization, numerical integration, partial differen-
tial equations, special functions, automated reasoning systems,
logic programming, and program transformation systems.
In conjunction with this research program, we have esta-
blished an Advanced Computing Research Facility (ACRF) that
operates a variety of computers with advanced architectures. By
early 1986, the ACRF is expected to have four or five parallel
systems in place, including one with parallel-vector capability,
several shared-memory systems, and one with a hypercube architec-
ture.
There are several job opportunities in connection with the
ACRF.
1) Short and long term visitors with research interests in
algorithms and software for computers with advanced archi-
tectures. We are particularly interested in visitors whose
research interests are in areas that could benefit our
existing research projects. People who are already active
investigators in parallel computing research will be given
the highest priority.
2) Permanent staff members to manage and operate the ACRF.
People are needed who have a strong background in scientific
computing and an interest in parallel computing. Their
responsibilities will include advising ACRF users on how to
use the computers in the facility, teaching short courses on
parallel computing and ACRF services and software, writing
documentation, and providing local enhancements to systems
as needed to support our research activities. Knowledge of
UNIX (TM) is desirable.
For more information, contact:
Jack Dongarra or Rusty Lusk
Advanced Computing Research Facility
Mathematics and Computer Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, Illinois 60439
(312) 972-7163
ACRF@ANL-MCS.ARPA (ARPANET and MILNET), or
ACRF%ANL-MCS.ARPA@CSNET-RELAY.CSNET (CSNET), or
ACRF%ANL-MCS.ARPA@WISCVM.ARPA (BITNET)
Argonne is an Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action employer.
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂25-Feb-86 2251 vardi@su-aimvax.arpa PTIME completeness of monadic recursion
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 22:51:13 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Feb 86 22:42:33 pst
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 22:42:33 pst
From: Moshe Vardi <vardi@diablo>
Subject: PTIME completeness of monadic recursion
To: nail@diablo
Both my proof of last week and the proof by Papadimitriou and van Gelder
show the PTIME completeness of binary recursion is undecidable.
Using inequality I can prove the the problem is undecidable even for monadic
recursion.
Moshe
∂26-Feb-86 0841 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA Seminar in Logic and Foundations of Mathematics
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 08:41:15 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Feb 86 08:40:00-PST
Date: 26 Feb 86 0832 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar in Logic and Foundations of Mathematics
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA
Speaker: Dr. Samuel Buss, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
Title: "The polynomial time hierarchy and fragments of bounded arithmetic."
Time: Monday, March 3, 4:15-5:30 PM
Place: Room 383-N, 3d floor lounge, Math. Dept., Stanford
There will be a dinner with the speaker following the talk.
S. Feferman
∂26-Feb-86 0902 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:upfal@su-aimvax.arpa
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 09:01:58 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Feb 86 09:01:08-PST
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Feb 86 09:00:48-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Feb 86 09:02:01 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 09:02:01 pst
From: Eliezer Upfal <upfal@diablo>
To: aflb.all@score
This month's Bay Area Theory Seminar will be held this Friday at
IBM Almaden Research Center. This is the new IBM Research Lab.
Here are driving directions:
Go south on U.S. 101 pass the Blossom Hill, (82) exit (the exit
to the old site). The next exit is Bernal Rd., take this exit
and take right (west) on Bernal.
Follow Bernal rd. west past Santa Teresa Blvd., into the hills
and the Santa Teresa County Park.
Drive up the hill about 5 miles until you reach the IBM gate.
∂26-Feb-86 1007 JODY@SU-CSLI.ARPA New Qume keyboards
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 10:07:19 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 09:58:12-PST
From: Joe Zingheim <JODY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New Qume keyboards
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Only fifteen of 45 Qume keyboard serial numbers have been received:
this is going to be a one-time swap for the new and improved keyboards; without
the serial numbers for the remaining keyboards (located on the bottom of the
keyboard), it will be hard to make the deal. If only fifteen arrive, they will
be given only to those who responded.
Send me those serial numbers now, and if not by Friday, forever hold
your peace.
-------
∂26-Feb-86 1422 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA [<CN.MCS@SU-Forsythe.ARPA>:]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 14:22:42 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 14:21:28-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [<CN.MCS@SU-Forsythe.ARPA>:]
To: : ;
Message-ID: <12186532335.39.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The attached is a notice sent out by the Engineering Library concerning
a new index for Japanese journals. I thought you might be interested in
case you missed it on the general bulletin board.
Harry Llull
---------------
Return-Path: <CN.MCS@Lindy>
Received: from Lindy by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Feb 86 13:57:02-PST
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 13:54:03 PST
From: <CN.MCS@SU-Forsythe.ARPA>
To: LIBRARY@SCORE
17:14:03 02/25/86 FROM ENG-LIBRARY@SU-SIERRA.ARPA: New Indexes to Japanese Research
From ENG-LIBRARY@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Tue, 25 Feb 86 16:38:28 pst
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by Lindy with TCP; Tue, 25 Feb 86 16:38:30 pst
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 16:41:17-PST
From: Engineering Library <ENG-LIBRARY@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: New Indexes to Japanese Research
To: su-bboards@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
Cc: cn.eng@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, cn.mcs@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA,
physicslib@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, cn.chm@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA,
cn.ear@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, cn.bio@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
The Engineering Library has just received the first issues of a new pair of
indexes covering Japanese scientific and technical literature: Japanese
Technical Abstracts, which abstracts articles from about 750 Japanese
journals, and Japanese Current Research, a "Current Contents" service
containing tables of contents of the journals abstracted. About half of
the journals covered were never indexed by any Western-language index
before. The indexes cover all areas of engineering and applied sciences,
but should be especially useful for electrical engineering, computer science,
materials science and engineering, mechanical engineering, and industrial
engineering.
I hope that researchers will take the opportunity sometime over the next
few weeks to examine this new index and let me know whether they find it
useful. Thank you.
Charles Early
Engineering Library
-------
-------
∂26-Feb-86 1621 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 4 (Curtis Hardyck)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 16:18:24 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA05011; Wed, 26 Feb 86 15:54:31 PST
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 15:54:31 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602262354.AA05011@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 4 (Curtis Hardyck)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 4, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``COGNITIVE MODELS OF HUMAN CEREBRAL LATERALIZATION:
A TUTORIAL REVIEW''
Curtis Hardyck
Department of Psychology and School of Education,
University of California at Berkeley
Models of human cerebral functioning have ranged from
notions of extreme anatomical specificity to beliefs in global
functioning.
Within the field of cerebral lateralization, opinions have
ranged from positions favoring extreme lateralization (almost
all functions localized in one hemisphere) to bilateralization
(almost all functions existing in both hemispheres). Intermin-
gled with these positions have been promulgations of hemispher-
icity as polar opposites, e.g. right brain (creative insight-
fulness) vs left brain (lackluster drudgery), which have been
adopted into popular culture.
I will provide a brief historical review of this problem
and a discussion of current cognitive models of lateralization
appropriate for examination within a cognitive science frame-
work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 11: Carlota Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas
(currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 18: John Haviland, Anthropology, Austrailian National
University (currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 25: Martin Braine, Psychology, NYU (currently at Stan-
ford)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"orn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday, March 3, Prof. Robert Siegler of the Psychology
Department at Carnegie-Mellon will give a talk entitled "Stra-
tegy choice procedures: how do children decide what to do?"
from noon to 2:00 p.m. in the Beach Room, 3105 Tolman Hall.
∂26-Feb-86 1626 mairson@su-aimvax.arpa
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 16:26:43 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Feb 86 16:07:05 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 16:07:05 pst
From: Harry Mairson <mairson@diablo>
To: nail@diablo
The "strong" version of boundedness for Datalog programs is also
undecidable. Here "strong" means that the intial database could
also contain IDB tuples.
To show this we patch the "weak" version of the proof by Gaifman
in its "counter machine" version by Vardi.
EDB predicate: succ (successor), so succ(a,b) means b succeeds a.
IDB predicate: ID, where
ID(a,b,z,t,s,c1,c2)
means constant z is zero, a and b are bigger than zero, and the
2-counter machine is in state s at time t with counters c1 and c2.
We add some new rules:
(i) ID(A,A,Z,T,S,C1,C2) :- ID(P,Q,Z,T,S,C1,C2), succ(Z,A)
i.e., reset the "greater than" columns
(ii) ID(P,B,Z,T,S,C1,C2) :- ID(A,B,Z,T,S,C1,C2), succ(A,P)
i.e., increase first "greater than" column
(iii) ID(A,P,Z,T,S,C1,C2) :- ID(A,B,Z,T,S,C1,C2), succ(B,P)
i.e., increase second "greater than" column
We can now express things like "the counter machine is in state n
at time T, counter 1 is zero, and counter 2 is greater than zero":
ID(A,C2,Z,T,n,Z,C2),succ(Z,1),succ(1,2),...,succ(n-1,n)
where 1,2,3,...,n-1,n are variables. We need two extra columns
ID(A,B,...) so as to represent when counters 1 and 2 are both
greater than zero: ID(C1,C2,Z,T,n,C1,C2).
Suppose the counter machine runs k steps and halts. If the
fixed point of the initial data base under the program is unbounded
(sorry, I'm jumbling up a bunch of database talk I only barely
understand), then there has to be a long successor chain, i.e.,
succ(V1,V2),succ(V2,V3), ... , succ(Va-1,Va)
can be matched, substituting constants in the DB for the variables,
where, say, a=(k+length of logic program)↑2=constant.
Then there is "enough successor" to run the computation from the
ID representing the initial state of the counter machine, where
the zero Z=V1.
If the counter machine diverges, then the DB that has no bounded
fixed point is just
succ(0,1),succ(1,2),...,succ(y-1,y)
If you think this is garbled, remember this is about databases,
and remember I know very little about the subject, truly a
double whammy. But Shuky Sagiv, with whom I worked this out, is
only bound by the first disclaimer.
∂26-Feb-86 1853 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar February 27, No. 5
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 18:51:26 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 17:15:20-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar February 27, No. 5
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
February 27, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 5
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, February 27, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall The Aspectual Effect of Mass Term and
Conference Room Bare Plural Arguments
by Erhard Hinrichs
Discussion led by Godehard Link (Link@su-csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Lexical Representation and Lexical Rules
Trailer Classroom Paul Kiparsky (Kiparsky@su-csli)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Ventura Hall Logic of Pointers and Evaluations---
Trailer Classroom The Solution to the Self-Referential Paradoxes
Haim Gaifman, Hebrew University
(Abstract on page 2)
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, March 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things
Conference Room by George Lakoff
Discussion led by Douglas Edwards (Edwards@sri-ai)
(Abstract on page 3)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Lexical Representation and Lexical Rules
Trailer Classroom Annie Zaenen (Zaenen.pa@xerox)
(Abstract on page 3)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Logical Specifications for Feature Structures in
Unification Grammars
William C. Rounds and Robert Kasper
University of Michigan
(Abstract on page 3)
--------------
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar February 27, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
THIS WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
Logic of Pointers and Evaluations:
The Solution to the Self-Referential Paradoxes
Haim Gaifman
Mathematics Department, The Hebrew University
Imagine the following exchange:
Max: What I am saying at this very moment is nonsense.
Moritz: Yes, what you have just said is nonsense.
Evidently Max spoke nonsense and Moritz spoke to the point. Yet Max
and Moritz appear to have asserted the same thing, namely: that Max
spoke nonsense. Or consider the following two lines:
line 1: The sentence written on line 1 is not true.
line 2: The sentence written on line 1 is not true.
Our natural intuition is that the self-referring sentence on line 1 is
not true (whatever sense could be made of it). Therefore the sentence
on line 2, which asserts this very fact, should be true. But what is
written on line 2 is exactly the same as what is written on line 1.
I shall argue that the unavoidable conclusion is that truth values
should be assigned here to sentence-tokens and that any system in
which truth is only type-dependent (e.g., Kripke's system and its
variants) is inadequate for treating the self-referential situation.
Since the truth value of a token depends on the tokens to which it
points, whose values depend in their turn on the tokens to which they
point, and so on, the whole network of pointings (which might include
complicated loops) must be taken into account.
I shall present a simple formal way of representing such networks
and an algorithm for evaluating the truth values. On the input `the
sentence on line 1' it returns GAP but on the input `the sentence on
line 2' it returns TRUE. And it yields similarly intuitive results in
more complicated situations. For an overall treatment of
self-reference the tokens have to be replaced by the more general
pointers. A pointer is any object used to point to a sentence-type (a
token is a special case of pointer it points to the sentence of which
it is a token). Calling a pointer is like a procedural call in a
program, eventually a truth value (TRUE, FALSE, or GAP) is
returned---which is the output of the algorithm.
I shall discuss some more recent work (since my last SRI
talk)---variants of the system and its possible extensions to
mathematical powerful languages. Attempts to make such comprehensive
systems throw new light on the problem of constructing ``universal
languages''.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar February 27, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
A discussion of pragmatic effects in `there'-constructions
from George Lakoff's ``Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things''
led by Douglas Edwards
Lakoff analyzes `there'-constructions intensively in an appendix
(itself book-length) to his ``Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things.'' He
argues that the `syntactic' behavior of `there'-constructions is
dependent upon the semantic interpretation, and even the pragmatic
force, associated with them. He uses the expression ``grammatical
construction'' to refer to such an association of a set of conditions
on syntactic form with a set of conditions on meaning.
Lakoff derives some fairly subtle behaviors of embedded `there'-
constructions from the following pragmatic principle: ``Clauses
expressing a reason allow speech act constructions that convey state-
ments, and the content of the statement equals the reason expressed.''
In spite of the pragmatic nature of this principle, the unacceptability
of sentences violating it seems (to Lakoff?) to be indistinguishable
from the unacceptability of sentences that are syntactically ill-formed.
Are sentences violating Lakoff's principle intuitively
distinguishable from those that are ill-formed for purely syntactic
reasons? If not, can a theory that avoids the primitive notion of
``grammatical construction'' (and perhaps tries for a relatively
autonomous syntax) account for Lakoff's phenomena?
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Lexical Rules and Lexical Representations
Mark Gawron, Paul Kiparsky, Annie Zaenen
February 20, 27, and March 6
This is the third of a series of talks reflecting the ongoing
elaboration of a model of lexical representation. In the first, Mark
Gawron discussed a frame-based lexical semantics and its relationship
to a theory of lexical rules. In the second, Paul Kiparsky proposed a
theory of the linking of thematic roles to their syntactic realizations,
emphasizing its interactions with a theory of morphology; and in this
one, a sub-workgroup of the lexical project will sketch a unification
based representation for the interaction of the different components
of the lexical representation and both syntax and sentence semantics.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
Logical Specifications for Feature Structures
in Unification Grammars
William C. Rounds and Robert Kasper, University of Michigan
In this paper we show how to use a simple modal logic to give a
complete axiomatization of disjunctively specified feature or record
structures commonly used in unification-based grammar formalisms in
computational linguistics. The logic was originally developed as a logic
to explain the semantics of concurrency, so this is a radically different
application. We prove a normal form result based on the idea of Nerode
equivalence from finite automata theory, and we show that the satisfi-
ability problem for our logical formulas is NP-complete. This last
result is a little surprising since our formulas do not contain negation.
Finally, we show how the unification problem for term-rewriting systems
can be expressed as the satisfiability problem for our formulas.
!
Page 4 CSLI Calendar February 27, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
PIXELS AND PREDICATES
Sam: A Text Editor Based on Structural Regular Expressions
Rob Pike, Bell Labs
1:00 pm, Monday, March 3, CSLI trailers
(This meeting is Monday not Wednesday, the usual meeting date)
This talk will assume some familiarity with the `cut and paste'
model of editing supported by the mouse interface, and will focus on
the command language.
`Sam' has two interfaces: a mouse-based language very similar to
`jim'(9.1), and a command language reminiscent of `ed'(1). `Sam' is
based on `structural regular expressions': the application of regular
expressions to describe the form of a file. Conventional Unix tools
think of their input as arrays of lines. The new notation makes it
easy to make changes to files regardless of their structure, to define
structure within the elements (e.g., the pieces of a line), and to
change the apparent shape of a file according to the change being
made.
The use of structural regular expressions makes it possible for the
mouse and command languages to operate on the same objects, so that
editing commands from the mouse and keyboard may be mixed comfortably
and effectively. Of course, either mouse or keyboard may be used
exclusively of the other, so `sam' can be used as if it were `jim',
`ed' or even `sed'---a `stream' version of `sam' is forthcoming.
--------------
LOGIC SEMINAR
The Polynomial Time Hierarchy and Fragments of Bounded Arithmetic
Dr. Samuel Buss
Mathematical Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
4:15, Monday, March 3, Math Faculty Lounge
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1037 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA logic and theory of computation mailing lists
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 10:35:06 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 10:31:35-PST
Date: 27 Feb 86 1018 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: logic and theory of computation mailing lists
To: "@DIS.DIS[1,CLT]"@SU-AI.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
I have made the logic and theory of computation mailing list a proper
mailing address at SAIL. If you wish an announcement to be distributed to
this list you can mail it to LOGMTC@SU-AI. To have your name added or
removed from this list send a message to LOGMTC-REQUEST@SU-AI
There is a new distribution list, intended for the announcement of logical
events, talks, logic lunch, etc. The address LOGIC@CSLI.
People who would like to be on it should send their name to REQUEST@CSLI.
LOGIC@CSLI is a sublist of LOGMTC@SU-AI. If you sign up for LOGIC@CSLI
and do not want two copies of messages you should not be explicitly
entered in LOGMTC@SU-AI. Also you should not mail to both lists.
∂27-Feb-86 1110 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sr. Faculty Meeting/March
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 11:10:41 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 11:10:59-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting/March
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186759802.37.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
As there are no agenda items, there will NOT be a sr. faculty meeting in
March.
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1201 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Gaifman's talk today
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 11:57:25 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 11:54:46-PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 11:49:45 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 11:46:50-PST
From: GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Gaifman's talk today
To: logmtc@SU-AI.ARPA, friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I tried to avoid a clash but found no alternative. So the talk
entitled:
Logic of pointers and evaluations:
The solution to the self-referential paradoxes.
Will take place as scheduled today Feb 27, 16:15 Ventura Hall (the colloquium
hall in the trailers).
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1218 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Randy Smith
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 12:18:43 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 12:15:35-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Randy Smith
To: planlunch.dis: ;
REPRESENTATION AND ESTIMATION OF SPATIAL UNCERTAINTY
Randy Smith (SMITH@SRI-AI)
Robotics Lab, SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 3
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
Current work on a method for geometrical reasoning under uncertainty
will be presented. Such a reasoning component will be important to
planning systems for many robotic applications, including autonomous
navigation and industrial automation.
A general method will be described for estimating the values and
estimated errors in the relationship between objects whose locations
are represented by coordinate frames. The elements in the
relationship may be described by bounding intervals, or may be
described by means and covariances, if a statistical model is
available. The relationship between the frames (objects) may not be
explicitly given, but known only indirectly through a series of
spatial relationships, each with its associated error. This
estimation method can be used to answer such questions as whether a
camera attached to a robot is likely to have a particular object in
its field of view. More generally, this method makes it possible to
decide in advance if an uncertain relationship is known accurately
enough for some task to be accomplished, and if not, how much of an
improvement in locational knowledge a proposed sensing action will
provide. The calculated estimates agree very well with those from an
independent Monte Carlo simulation. The method presented can be
generalized to six degrees of freedom, and provides a practical means
of estimating the relationships (position and orientation) between
objects as well as the uncertainty associated with the relationship.
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1223 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: Qualifying Exams
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 12:23:07 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 12:20:24-PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 12:07:11-PST
From: Grace Smith <GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Qualifying Exams
To: CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, sec@SU-SCORE.ARPA, GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12172063479.30.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12186770033.26.GSMITH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Victoria,
I've also sent you a hard copy of the following message. Kim McCall gave
me the estimate of 14; is it now time for you to send out the announce-
ment, arrange the signup list and reserve rooms? I hope I'm doing
this in the right order for you.
Grace
@device(Imp300)
@make(KSLmemo,
To= "T. Binford, E. A. Feigenbaum, M. Genesereth, J. McCarthy, N.
Nilsson, P. Rosenbloom, T. Winograd ",
From= "B. G. Buchanan ",
Subject= "AI Qualifying Exams ")
@comment[BODY OF TEXT HERE]
It appears that there will be approximately 14 candidates taking the AI qual
this year. Because of scheduling difficulties, we will administer half the
quals on Tuesday morning, May 20th and the second half on Friday morning, May
23rd.
@begin[format]
@u[5/20/86]
Buchanan
Feigenbaum
Rosenbloom
Winograd
@u[5/23/86]
Binford
Genesereth
McCarthy
Nilsson
@end[format]
@Signed(Bruce G. Buchanan)
@Begin(Notations)
CC:@\V. Cheadle
@\A. Waleson
@End(Notations)
BGB:gks
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1231 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:HADDAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rides to BATS
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 12:31:41 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 12:31:12-PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 12:30:50-PST
From: Ramsey Haddad <HADDAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rides to BATS
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186774337.17.HADDAD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
So far, 4 people have indicated that they need rides to BATS. No one
has said that they could offer one. Are all of you sure that you
don't have a spare seat that you could offer?
Ramsey.
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1427 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:yutaka@su-whitney.arpa mail-list
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 14:26:51 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 13:57:10-PST
Received: from SU-WHITNEY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 13:50:00 PST
Received: by su-whitney.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:49:31 pst
Date: 27 Feb 1986 1349-PST (Thursday)
From: Yutaka Kanayama <yutaka@su-whitney.arpa>
To: LOGMTC@SU-AI
Cc: yutaka@su-whitney.arpa
Subject: mail-list
Please add my name. Yutaka Kanayama
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1507 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar Addition
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 15:07:50 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 15:04:04-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar Addition
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPEMNT TALK
The Perspective Concept in Computer Science
Kristen Nygaard (University of Oslo)
Monday, March 3, 12:15pm
CSLI Trailer Classroom (in front of Ventura Hall)
Notions like functional programing, logic programming, and
object-oriented programming embed different ways of understanding the
computing process---different perspectives. Also, methods for system
development will reflect different perspectives upon the nature of
organizations and society. It is important for computer scientists to
be aware of these perspectives and to take them into account in their
professional work. The lecture examines the nature of the perspective
concept and discusses a number of examples.
-----
Nygaard was one of the inventors of SIMULA, the first object-oriented
programming language. --Terry Winograd
-------
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1510 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:dennis@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 15:10:48 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 15:08:57-PST
Received: from CSNET-SH.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 15:08:21-PST
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 86 15:39:19 PST
From: Eli Upfal <"Upfal LOG A0"@CSNET-SH.ARPA>, H, P, $WlmL@CSNET-SH.ARPA, l0,
HH, "Gb0/λO8 pS"@CSNET-SH.ARPA
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CSNET-SH.ARPA
@ibm-sj.csnet>
To: aflb.all@su-score.arpa
Subject: Coming BATS
CC: upfal@su-diablo.ARPA
Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 17:58:58 EST
Resent-From: dennis@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Resent-To: aflb.all@su-score.ARPA, upfal@su-diablo.ARPA
The coming BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday
February 28. Following is the list of talks. Abstract and driving
direction will be sent latter.
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY.
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
David Peleg
IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND
FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
∂27-Feb-86 1515 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:dennis@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 15:15:52 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 15:08:57-PST
Received: from CSNET-SH.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 15:08:21-PST
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 86 15:39:19 PST
From: Eli Upfal <"Upfal LOG A0"@CSNET-SH.ARPA>, H, P, $WlmL@CSNET-SH.ARPA, l0,
HH, "Gb0/λO8 pS"@CSNET-SH.ARPA
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CSNET-SH.ARPA
@ibm-sj.csnet>
To: aflb.all@su-score.arpa
Subject: Coming BATS
CC: upfal@su-diablo.ARPA
Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 17:58:58 EST
Resent-From: dennis@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Resent-To: aflb.all@su-score.ARPA, upfal@su-diablo.ARPA
The coming BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday
February 28. Following is the list of talks. Abstract and driving
direction will be sent latter.
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY.
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
David Peleg
IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND
FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
∂27-Feb-86 1529 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 4 (Curtis Hardyck)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 15:29:22 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 15:22:44-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA05011; Wed, 26 Feb 86 15:54:31 PST
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 15:54:31 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8602262354.AA05011@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 4 (Curtis Hardyck)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 4, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``COGNITIVE MODELS OF HUMAN CEREBRAL LATERALIZATION:
A TUTORIAL REVIEW''
Curtis Hardyck
Department of Psychology and School of Education,
University of California at Berkeley
Models of human cerebral functioning have ranged from
notions of extreme anatomical specificity to beliefs in global
functioning.
Within the field of cerebral lateralization, opinions have
ranged from positions favoring extreme lateralization (almost
all functions localized in one hemisphere) to bilateralization
(almost all functions existing in both hemispheres). Intermin-
gled with these positions have been promulgations of hemispher-
icity as polar opposites, e.g. right brain (creative insight-
fulness) vs left brain (lackluster drudgery), which have been
adopted into popular culture.
I will provide a brief historical review of this problem
and a discussion of current cognitive models of lateralization
appropriate for examination within a cognitive science frame-
work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 11: Carlota Smith, Linguistics, University of Texas
(currently at the Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 18: John Haviland, Anthropology, Austrailian National
University (currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 25: Martin Braine, Psychology, NYU (currently at Stan-
ford)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"orn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday, March 3, Prof. Robert Siegler of the Psychology
Department at Carnegie-Mellon will give a talk entitled "Stra-
tegy choice procedures: how do children decide what to do?"
from noon to 2:00 p.m. in the Beach Room, 3105 Tolman Hall.
∂27-Feb-86 1548 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA Gaifman's talk today
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 15:47:09 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 15:37:44-PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 11:46:50-PST
From: GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Gaifman's talk today
To: logmtc@SU-AI.ARPA, friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I tried to avoid a clash but found no alternative. So the talk
entitled:
Logic of pointers and evaluations:
The solution to the self-referential paradoxes.
Will take place as scheduled today Feb 27, 16:15 Ventura Hall (the colloquium
hall in the trailers).
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1620 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa report available
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 16:20:20 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Feb 86 16:08:50 pst
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 16:08:50 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: report available
To: nail@diablo
"Parallel Implementation of Logical Query languages" by
Ullman and Van Gelder. Please send mail to rfn@sail
if you would like a copy.
---jeff ullman
∂27-Feb-86 1626 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rooms for finals
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 16:26:04 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 16:23:57-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rooms for finals
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186816776.57.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please let me know as soon as possible:
1) if you do not plan on giving a final exam, OR
2) if you will give a final exam: will you need
additional space in order to provide alternate
seating. Please let me know such details as whether
you need entirely new rooms, or just your current room
plus additional room(s), or if you will be offering
an alternate exam in addition to the regularly scheduled
one.
Note: the registrar's office wishes me to pass on to you this
useful tid-bit of information: "Classes meeting at unusual
times (i.e. 2:30pm or 2:45pm) move to the earliest hour for
their final examination, so the final examination in the
examples above would be given under the 2pm time slot."
-Gina
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1626 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Rooms for finals
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 16:26:04 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 16:23:57-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Rooms for finals
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186816776.57.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please let me know as soon as possible:
1) if you do not plan on giving a final exam, OR
2) if you will give a final exam: will you need
additional space in order to provide alternate
seating. Please let me know such details as whether
you need entirely new rooms, or just your current room
plus additional room(s), or if you will be offering
an alternate exam in addition to the regularly scheduled
one.
Note: the registrar's office wishes me to pass on to you this
useful tid-bit of information: "Classes meeting at unusual
times (i.e. 2:30pm or 2:45pm) move to the earliest hour for
their final examination, so the final examination in the
examples above would be given under the 2pm time slot."
-Gina
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1700 @SU-CSLI.ARPA,@SU-AI.ARPA:LINK@SU-CSLI.ARPA LOGMTC@SU-AI mailing list
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 16:59:04 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 16:47:34-PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 16:41:06 PST
Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 14:22:26-PST
From: Godehard Link <LINK@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: LOGMTC@SU-AI mailing list
To: logmtc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: link@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Please enter me in the above list. - Thanks, Godehard
-------
∂27-Feb-86 1700 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:MDIXON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Hubert Dreyfus in Chemistry Gazebo, 12.05 on 2/28
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 16:56:46 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 16:44:31-PST
Return-Path: <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Feb 86 15:40:04-PST
Date: 26 Feb 86 1534 PST
From: Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Hubert Dreyfus in Chemistry Gazebo, 12.05 on 2/28
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
ReSent-Date: Thu 27 Feb 86 16:39:32-PST
ReSent-From: Mike Dixon <MDixon@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
ReSent-To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
ReSent-Message-ID: <12186819614.46.MDIXON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
In light of what I expect will be department-wide interest in the
following talk, this week's reserach meeting/seminar of the KSL will
instead be a department-wide event.
The talk will run from 12.05 until 1.00 on February 28 and will be held
in the Chemistry Gazebo. The room is fairly small, so anyone interested
in attending would be well advised to arrive early.
Matt Ginsberg
A B S T R A C T
FROM SOCRATES TO EXPERT SYSTEMS: THE LIMITS OF
CALCULATIVE RATIONALITY
BY
Hubert L. Dreyfus
University of California
Berkeley
An examination of the general epistemological assumptions behind
Artificial Intelligence research with special reference to recent
work in the development of expert systems. All AI work assumes that
knowledge must be represented in the mind as symbolic descriptions.
Expert system builders further assume that expertise consists in
problem-solving and that problem-solving consists in analyzing a
situation in terms of objective features and then finding a situation-
action rule which determines what to do.
I will argue that expert system builders fail to recognize the real
character of expert intuitive understanding. Expertise is acquired
in a five-step process: The BEGINNER does, indeed, pick out objective
features and follow strict rules like a computer. The ADVANCED BEGINNER,
however, responds to meaningful aspects of the situation which are
recognized as similar to prototypical cases, without similarity being
analyzed into objective features. At the next stage, the COMPETENT
performer learns to figure out a strategy and to pay attention only
to features and aspects which are relevant to his plan. The fourth
stage, PROFICIENCY, is achieved when the performer no longer has to
figure out his strategy but immediately sees the appropriate strategy.
Finally, the EXPERT, after many years of experience, is able to do what
works without facing a problem and without having to make any logical
calculations. Experts presumably do this by storing many whole situations
and associated actions in memory and responding to their current situation
in terms of its overall similarity to a situation already successfully
dealt with.
On the basis of this model one can see that expert systems based
on rules extracted from experts do not capture the expert's expertise
and so cannot be expected to perform at expert level.
A review of the successes and failures of various expert systems confirms
this analysis.
∂27-Feb-86 1719 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:dennis@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 17:19:38 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 17:18:03-PST
Received: from CSNET-SH.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 17:17:33-PST
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 86 11:54:01 PST
From: Eli Upfal <"Upfal LOG A0"@CSNET-SH.ARPA>, H, P, $WlmL@CSNET-SH.ARPA, l0,
HH, "Gb0/λO8 pS"@CSNET-SH.ARPA
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CSNET-SH.ARPA
@ibm-sj.csnet>
To: aflb.all@su-score.arpa
Subject: BATS
CC: ely%ibm-sj.csnet@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 17:59:49 EST
Resent-From: dennis@CSNET-SH.ARPA
Resent-To: aflb.all@su-score.ARPA, ely%ibm-sj.csnet@CSNET-SH.ARPA
BATS will take place at IBM Almaden Research Center on Friday,
February 28.
9:45 Coffee Tee and Muffins
10:00 A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
M.O. Rabin, Harvard University / Hebrew University
11:00 LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
D. Haussler, University of Denver
1:00 FAULT TOLARANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
D. Peleg, IBM Almaden Research Center
2:00 MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT
TOLERANCE PROTOCOLS
A. Wigderson, MSRI
A TOOLKIT FOR COMPUTER SECURITY
Michael O. Rabin
Harvard University/ Hebrew University
In a joint wowith D. Tygar, we formulate a new the study
and implementation of security of operating systems. Our approach
involves the creation of a number of algorithmic and operating
system constructs which together form an integrated toolkit for
operating system security (ITOSS).
ITOSS enables us to implement a secure operating system and
will allow users to tailor the security of a file system to reflect
the security requirements of any particular site. a self contained
description of ITOSS will be given.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LEARNABILITY AND THE VAPNIK-CHERVONENKIS DIMENSION
David Haussler
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Denver
The current emphasis on knowledge-based software has created
a broader interest in algorithms that learn knowledge structures
or concepts from positive and negative examples. Using the
learning model recently proposed by Valiant, we have attempted to
determine which classes of concepts have efficient (i.e. polyno-
mial time) learning algorithms. As noticed earlier by Pearl and
by Devroye and Wagner, a simple combinatorial property of concept
classes, the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, plays an important
role in learning and pattern recognition. We clarify the rela-
tionship between this property and Valiant's theory of learnabil-
ity. Our results lead to the design of efficient learning algo-
rithms that employ a variant of Occam's Razor. Illustrations are
given for certain classes of conjunctive concepts and for con-
cepts that are defined by various types of regions in feature
space. The work reported was done jointly with Anselm Blumer,
Andrzej Ehrenfeucht and Manfred Warmuth of the Universities of
Denver, Colorado and California at Santa Cruz respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------
FAULT TOLERANCE IN BOUNDED DEGREE NETWORKS
Achieving processor cooperation in the presence of faults is a major
problem in distributed systems. Traditional paradigms like Byzantine
agreement require that all nonfaulty components cooperate correctly.
This requirement is very stringent, and is known to imply strong
assumptions on the network; particularly, in order to tolerate t faults,
the network has to be at least t-connected. This seems to render the
solution infeasible, as in forseeable technologies the number of faults
will grow with the size of the network while the degree will remain
practically fixed.
We raise the question whether it is possible to avoid this limitation by
slightly lowering our expectations. In many practical situations we may
be willing to "lose" some correct processors, and settle for cooperation
between the vast majority of the processors. Surprisingly, this
slightly weaker type of cooperation can be achieved with rather low
connectivity , e.g., for "almost all" regular networks of degree
7 or more. In particular we present an explicit communication protocol
achieving such behaviour for the (4 degree) butterfly.
(this is joint work with C. Dwork, N. Pippenger and E. Upfal)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MINIMUM INFORMATION INTERACTIVE PROOF AND FAULT TOLERANT PROTOCOLS
Avi Wigderson
MSRI, Berkeley
Interactive proof systems were proposed by Goldwasser, Micali and Rackoff,
and by Babai. The richness and importance of such systems will be
demonstrated by two theorems, the flavor of which is given below:
(1) No short NP (non-interactive) proof is known for graph non-isomrphism.
We will show that there are short interactive prrofs for membership in
this language. (Hence, graph non-isomorphism is in non-uniform NP).
(2) Assume trap-door functions exist. Assume Alice knows the combination
that opens a vault, and that Bob can only play with the dial. Then Alice,
without giving Bob a hint about the combination,
and without opening the door, can convince him that
she can open the vault. (such proofs exist for membership in any NP
language!).
Applications to fault tolerant protocols will be given.
(Joint work with O. Goldreich and S. Micali).
∂27-Feb-86 2317 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu summer school and conference on logic and applications
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 23:16:53 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 23:13:15-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Feb 86 23:12:40-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 28 Feb 86 00:25:34 CST
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 11:51:40 CST
From: sherryw@rsch.wisc.edu (Sherry Wasilewski)
Message-Id: <8602271751.AA11399@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 27 Feb 86 11:51:40 CST
To: udi@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: summer school and conference on logic and applications
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 28 Feb 86 00:14:29 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
This is the updated call for papers. It is sent by request
of Solomon Passy.
First announcement and Call for papers
ADVANCED INTERNATIONAL SUMMER SCHOOL AND CONFERENCE
on
MATHEMATICAL LOGIC AND ITS APPLICATIONS
Dedicated to the 80th Anniversary of Kurt Godel
September 24 - October 3, 1986
Druzhba, Bulgaria
Organized by
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences,
Sofia University "Kliment Okhridski"
International Foundation `Ljudmila Zhivkova'.
TOPICS: Logic and the foundations of mathematics - set-theoretical
mathematics, constructive mathematics, intuitionism, proof theory, etc.
Logic and computer science - theories of computability,
abstract recursion theory, semantics of programming languages,
logics of programs, logical programming, etc.
Logic, philosophy and the study of language - model and
other intensional logics, non-monotonic logic, logical issues
in linguistics, etc.
INVITED LECTURERS: J.F.A.K. van Benthem, D. Bridges, O. Demuth,
A.G. Dragalin, A.P. Ershov, Yu.L. Ershov, S.S. Goncharov, H. Jervell,
Y.N. Moschovakis, N.M. Nagornij, V.A. Nepomnjashchij, H. Rasiowa,
G. Sambin, K. Segerberg, N.A. Shanin, A. Skowron, V. Stoltenberg-Hansen,
B.A. Trakhtenbrot, V.A. Uspenskij.
PAPERS: three copies of a draft full paper (in English) not longer
than 10-15 double-spaced pages should be sent to the chairman of
program committee
Dimitar G. Skordev
Section of Logic
Faculty of Mathematics
Sofia University
bul. Anton Ivanov 5
1126 Sofia, Bulgaria
Deadline for submission March 31, 1986
Notification of acceptance/rejection June 30, 1986
Accepted papers in final form August 15, 1986
The PROGRAM COMMITTEE currently consists of:
H. Barendregt (Utrecht) S. Goncharov (Novosibirsk)
J. van Benthem (Amsterdam) H. Jervell (Olso)
J. Bergstra (Amserdam) N. Nagornij (Moscow)
D. Bridges (Buckingham) V. Nepomnjashchij (Novosibirsk)
O. Demuth (Prague) H. Rasiowa (Warsaw)
A. Dragalin (Debrecen) K. Segerberg (Auckland)
Yu. Ershov (Novosibirsk) D. Skordev (Sofia)
J. Fenstad (Oslo) A. Skowron (Charlotte)
N. Georgieva (Sofia) B. Trakhtenbrot (MIT)
R. Goldblatt (Stanford) D. Vakarelov (Sofia)
Some additional members are expected.
The Proceedings of the Conference (to be published by Plenum Press)
should appear by the end of 1986.
FURTHER INFORMATION: The Meeting will take place in Druzhba, a resort at
the Black Sea coast near Varna, as a part of the INTEGRATED SUMMER SCHOOL
ON ALGEBRA AND LOGIC.
Official languages: English and Russian.
Registration fee: 60 leva, or 60 roubles, or $60
(to be paid upon arrival).
Full board (lodging and meals) will cost approx. 20 leva per day.
More details will be found in the Second Announcement
due in the spring of 1986.
If you are interested, please detach the response card and mail it back
to the Secretary of the Organizing Committee
G.K. Gargov
Sector of Mathematical Logic
Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics
blvd. A. Ivanov 5
1126 Sofia, Bulgaria
PLEASE POST
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESPONSE CARD
Name and address: ............................
I intend to submit a paper ...................
I plan to attend .......
I will be accompanied by ..... persons
Date ........ Signature ..................
--------------
TN Message #27
--------------
∂28-Feb-86 1201 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa papers received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 12:01:44 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 28 Feb 86 11:57:17 pst
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 86 11:57:17 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: papers received
To: nail@diablo
"Restricted AND-Parallelism" D. DeGroot
"A comparison of two and-parallel execution models" DeGroot and Chang
"Some MEthods of And-Parallel Execution of Logic Programs" DeGroot
∂28-Feb-86 1201 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:ANDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA theory talks at msri
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 12:01:42 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 12:00:32-PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 12:00:16-PST
From: Richard Anderson <ANDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: theory talks at msri
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187030919.27.ANDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Here are next weeks theory talks at MSRI. The titles are approximate.
Tuesday, March 4
11 am Fan Chung
Universal graphs
2 pm Paul Wright
More remarks on powering for eigen value computation
4 pm Vijay Vazarani
Random reducibilities
Thursday, March 6
2 pm Yoram Moses
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1522 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:CLT@SU-AI.ARPA mailing list reorganization
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 15:22:50 PST
Received: from SU-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 15:21:36-PST
Date: 28 Feb 86 1321 PST
From: Carolyn Talcott <CLT@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: mailing list reorganization
To: research@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The RESEARCH@CSLI mailing list has in the past been a sublist of the logic
and theory of computation mailing list. It seems that this is really not
appropriate so the RESEARCH@CSLI will no longer be included as a sublist
of LOGMTC. If you wish to continue to get logic and mtc announcements you
should make sure that you are on the LOGIC@CSLI list (send a msg to
REQUEST@CSLI) or the LOGMTC@SU-AI mailing list (send a msg to
LOGMTC-REQUEST@CSLI).
∂28-Feb-86 1711 EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA Frivolous broken ?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 16:59:26 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 16:41:41-PST
From: Eric Muller <EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Frivolous broken ?
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187082149.24.EM@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
When I try to boot Frivolous, there an error during the load of the world
("sparse compare error") and "Lisp stopped itself" after the "start"
command (with "Reason 0(8)").
Any hint on what to do ?
thanks in advance,
eric.
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1732 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 17:21:06 PST
Date: Fri 28 Feb 86 17:20:28-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gray Tuesday meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12187089210.45.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Gray Tuesday has been scheduled for Thursday, March 20, in MJH 252,
from 2:15-5:00. In the next week or so, I will send you a list of
your current advisees and their status. Please mark any
changes/corrections and return them to me as quickly as possible.
Victoria
-------
∂28-Feb-86 1931 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Program - Structure in Complexity Theory
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Feb 86 19:31:29 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 19:29:52-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 19:27:39-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 28 Feb 86 20:18:09 CST
Message-Id: <8602280638.AA24987@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 28 Feb 86 00:38:37 CST
Received: from iowa-state by csnet-relay.csnet id af26049; 28 Feb 86 1:22 EST
Received: by isucs1.UUCP (4.12.01/2.02)
id AA24429; Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:07:06 cst
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:07:06 cst
From: Alan Selman <selman%iowa-state.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: theory%rsch.wisc.edu@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Program - Structure in Complexity Theory
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 28 Feb 86 20:06:38 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
SESSION 1: Monday, June 2, 8:45-12:30 p.m.
Chair: Juris Hartmanis, Cornell University
8:45 a.m. Expanders, Randomness, or Time vs. Space,
M. Sipser, University of California, Berkeley
9:45 a.m. Depth-Size Tradeoff for Boolean Circuits with Unbounded Fan-In,
J. Lynch, Clarkson Univ.
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. With Probability One, a Random Oracle Separates PSPACE
from the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy,
J. Cai, Cornell University
11:45 a.m. On Nonuniform Polynomial Space,
J. Balcazar, J. Diaz, and J. Gabarro,
Facultat d'Informatica de Barcelona
SESSION 2: Monday, June 2, 2:00-5:30 p.m.
Chair: Peter Van Emde Boas, Univ. of Amsterdam
2:00 p.m. Bounded Oracles and Complexity Classes Inside Linear Space,
C. Tretkoff, Brooklyn College
2:45 p.m. Two Lower Bound Arguments with ``Inaccessible'' Numbers,
M. Dietzfelbinger, W. Maass, University of Illinois at Chicago
3:30 p.m. Beverage Break
4:00 p.m. Parallel Computation with Threshold Functions,
I. Parberry, G. Schnitger, Penn. State Univ.
4:45 p.m. The Complexity of Optimization Problems,
M. Krentel, Cornell University
SESSION 3: Tuesday, June 3, 8:45-12:30 p.m.
Chair: Alan L. Selman, Iowa State University
8:45 a.m. Diagonalization Methods in a Polynomial Setting,
L. Torenvliet, P. Van Emde Boas, Univ. of Amsterdam
9:45 a.m. The Boolean Hierarchy: Hardware over NP,
J. Cai, L. Hemachandra , Cornell University
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. Relativized Alternation,
J. Buss, M.I.T.
11:45 a.m. Parallel Computation and the NC Hierarchy Relativized,
C. Wilson, University of Oregon
SESSION 4: Tuesday, June 3, 2:00-5:30 p.m.
Chair: Michael Sipser, Univ. of California, Berkeley
2:00 p.m. An Optimal Lower Bound for Turing
Machines with One Work Tape and a Two-Way Input Tape,
W. Maass, University of Illinois at Chicago;
G. Schnitger, Pennsylvania State University
2:45 p.m. The Power of Queues,
M. Li, Ohio State;
L. Longpre,U. of Washington;
and P. Vitanyi, Centre for Math. & Comp. Science, the Netherlands
3:30 p.m. Beverage Break
4:00 p.m. What Is a Hard Instance of a Computational Problem?,
K. Ko, U. of Houston;
P. Orponen, U. of Helsinki;
U. Schoning, EWH Koblenz
4:45 p.m. Resource-Bounded Kolmogorov Complexity of Hard Languages,
D. Huynh, Iowa State University
SESSION 5: Wednesday, June 4, 8:45-12:30 p. m.
Chair: Harry Lewis, Harvard University
8:45 a.m. Localized Nondeterminism and Separation Results,
K. McAloon, Brooklyn College of CUNY
9:45 a.m. The Topology of Provability in Complexity Theory,
K. Regan, Merton College, Oxford
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. The Polynomial Hierarchy and Intuitionistic Bounded Arithmetic,
S. Buss, Math. Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
11:45 a.m. Exponential Time and Bounded Arithmetic,
P. Clote, Boston College;
G. Takeuti, University of Illinois at Urbana
SESSION 6: Wednesday, June 4, 2:00-5:00 p.m.
Chair: Kenneth McAloon, Brooklyn College
2:00 p.m. Kolmogorov Complexity and Computational Complexity,
J. Hartmanis, Cornell University
3:00 p.m. Optimal Approximations of Complete Sets,
D. Russo, U. of California, Santa Barbara
3:45 p.m. Beverage Break
4:15 p.m. The Complexity of Sparse Sets in P,
E. Allender, Rutgers University
SESSION 7: Thursday, June 5, 8:45-12:30 p.m.
Chair: Steven Mahaney, AT&T Bell Labs
8:45 a.m. Promise Problems, One-Way Functions, and Public-Key Cryptography,
A. Selman, Iowa State Univ.
9:45 a.m. One-Way Functions and Circuit Complexity,
R. Boppana, M.I.T.;
J. Lagarias, AT&T Bell Labs
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. Isomorphisms and 1-L Reductions,
E. Allender, Rutgers Universtiy
11:45 a.m. A Note on One-Way Functions and Polynomial-Time Isomorphisms,
K. Ko, U. of Houston;
T. Long, Ohio State Univ.;
and D. Du, Math. Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
SESSION 8: Thursday, June 5, 2:00-5:00 p.m.
Chair: Paul Young, University of Washington
2:00 p.m. Randomness, Relativizations, and Polynomial Reducibilities,
K. Ambos-Spies, Universitat Dortmund
2:45 p.m. Probabilistic Game Automata,
A. Condon, R. Ladner, University of Washington
3:30 p.m. Beverage Break
4:00 p.m. Probabilistic Quantifiers and Games: An Overview,
S. Zachos, Brooklyn College of CUNY
CONFERENCE INFORMATION
LOCATION: Conference activities will be at the Dwight/Derby
Complex of the University of California at Berkeley.
This is at 2600 Warring St., between Dwight and Derby Sts.,
about a quarter mile southeast of the main campus area.
The Dwight/Derby Complex is the former campus of the
California School for the Deaf and Blind. The buildings
have been recently renovated to provide attractive
and comfortable student housing. On site are a swimming
pool, tennis courts, a running track and a weight room.
A nominal charge for use of athletic facilities can
be paid at the time of the conference.
The housing units offered to participants of this conference
at Dwight/Derby are in the form of suites.
These typically consist of two bedrooms, a living room
and a shared bathroom.
Either one or two persons may occupy a bedroom.
(Only single beds are available.)
Because of contractual agreement with the university,
participants lodging at Dwight/Derby
must elect to arrive Saturday, May 31, or Sunday, June 1,
and must pay to stay through Friday, June 6.
Selection of Saturday arrival is recommended for persons
staying over after the STOC conference.
Rates are indicated on the Advance Registration Form.
Participants should try to check into Dwight/Derby
housing before 9pm, when the entrance to the main
building will be locked. With some inconvenience, it
will be possible to check in at a later hour by calling
the number posted at the entrance. Please indicate
on your advance registration form if you plan to arrive
later than 9pm.
Conference participants will be expected to pay their Dwight/Derby
room charges at the time they check in. Only
cash, personal checks or traveler's checks can be accepted,
since there will be no provision for accepting credit
cards.
ALTERNATIVE HOUSING: Conference participants desiring
the greater flexibility of
hotel housing are advised to make reservations at the
Hotel Durant, 2600 Durant Ave., about a quarter mile
from the Dwight/Derby Complex. A block of rooms has
been reserved at the special conference rate of $62 for single
occupancy and $72 for double occupancy plus 10% tax, provided reservations
are made in advance of May 1.
Continental breakfast is included in the room charge.
Conference participants should
make their own reservations by calling
800-2DURANT, 800-5DURANT, or 415-845-8981 and
informing the hotel that they will be attending the
``Computer Science'' Conference.
TRANSPORTATION: The best way to get to Berkeley
from the San Francisco Airport is by means of
the shuttle service called the Airport Connection,
for a charge of $12, compared with a taxi fare of
$30-35. This service ordinarily stops
at the Hotel Durant, but the driver may be persuaded
to stop at Dwight/Derby. Be sure to make
a reservation in advance of traveling by calling
1-800-AIRPORT.
>From the Oakland airport, one may take either a taxi
directly to Berkeley for about $20, or else take
the shuttle bus from the airport to the Coliseum
station of BART, the BART train to the Berkeley
station, and a taxi from the Berkeley station, for
a total cost of about $6.
REGISTRATION: A registration desk will be open
Sunday night at Dwight/Derby from 6pm to 9pm and
during the day Monday from 8:30am to 12:30pm.
Registration fees for nonstudents and students
include the technical sessions, a copy of the proceedings,
coffee and beverage breaks, the Sunday evening reception,
and lunch Monday through Thursday.
Student registration fees are subsidized with funds provided
by a grant from the National Science Foundation.
RECEPTION: A reception will be held Sunday evening, June 1,
from 8pm to 11pm at the Dwight/Derby Complex.
CLIMATE: The weather will probably be pleasant
and sunny during the day, but cool in the evening.
First time visitors to San Francisco may find the city
surprisingly chilly.
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM
Make checks payable to STRUCTURE CONFERENCE.
Please pay in U.S. funds. (Separate Checks are required
for payment of registration fees for ACM STOC and for
this conference.) Send check and completed form to:
Structure Conference
c/o E.L. Lawler
Computer Science Division
573 Evans Hall
University of California
Berkeley CA 94720
Registration Fees: By May 14 After May 14
Nonstudent $ 75 [ ] $125 [ ]
Student $ 40 [ ] $ 70 [ ]
Preference for lodging at Dwight/Derby:
Dwight/Derby room charges are payable at time of check-in by
cash or check (no credit cards) payable to STRUCTURE CONFERENCE.
Room charges include breakfast each morning; Saturday arrivals
are entitled to Sunday brunch.
Accompanying persons not registered at the conference may wish to
purchase a luncheon ticket good for four days at $30.00. These
will not be available at the conference and must be paid in advance
with this form.
[ ] Single occupancy, arrival Saturday, May 31, $262.50
[ ] Double occupancy, arrival Saturday, May 31, $187.50 per person
[ ] Single occupancy, arrival Sunday, June 1, $218.75
[ ] Double occupancy, arrival Sunday, June 1, $156.25 per person
[ ] Number of luncheon tickets at $30.00 per ticket.
All lodging rates are calculated with Friday, June 6, departure.
Lodging and meals at Dwight/Derby cannot be guaranteed for late
registrants.
I wish to share double occupancy of a room with:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Name:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
City:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←State:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←Zip:←←←←←←←←←←←
Country (if not USA):←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Telephone:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Net address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Special dietary requirements:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
--------------
TN Message #28
--------------
∂01-Mar-86 1831 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Filing in the Future
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 86 18:30:59 PST
Date: Sat 1 Mar 86 18:31:35-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Filing in the Future
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187364300.48.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Folks,
This is a memo describing the current plan of action for file service
for KSL Symbolics and TI Lisp Machine users in the KSL.
Currently, KSL machines live in Margaret Jacks Hall (MJH), in Whelan
bldg. Con Welch Rd. (WR), and in the Medical Center (MedCtr). The MJH
machines depend on Ignorant, a 3600 with a large disk owned by Formal
Reasoning, for storing system files, and other files are mostly stored
on various 3600s, Sushi, or Diablo. At WR system files are stored on S2
(another large disk 3600), along with most of the large software
packages in use. Most other files are kept on 3600s and Explorers, with
the 3600s holding mostly shared files. The one MedCtr machine is
isolated, and tries to be self-sufficient. Backups are done in an ad
hoc fashion for all systems.
First we will put in place a backup facility that will allow a user
to backup files on a LispM to another (presumably safer) file system
easily. WR users will use Ardvax and MJH users will most likely use
Diablo, though the software should work for any file system (eg. Sushi
or LaBrea). CHAOSnet code is now running on Ardvax. This should not be
strictly necessary for backup, but it will almost certainly help, and so
it might become necessary to bring up CHAOSnet on Diablo and/or Safe as
well.
Second we will begin to move system software from S2 to Ardvax at WR.
There are one or two potential pitfalls here, but if it works, we'll
probably start to move large, shared systems to Ardvax. This might lead
to difficulties because LispM's like file systems with version numbers,
and Unix doesn't do that scene. This problem will be relieved by use of
the Source Code Control System written by James Rice and the fact that
the file server on the vax uses the convention of renaming old files to
oldname~. Similarly, MJH users might want to migrate shared files to a
common file server. At this point most shared files should be easy to
find, and users with their own files on the LispMs that they use will be
able to keep track of all their files. This will also free up S2 to be
a simulation machine for the AAP, after S8 takes over namespace duties.
These actions address the near-term problem of file storage and
backup. In the medium term, we'd like to facilitate backup and file
access. If possible, a backup system that *automatically* brings
changed files off of all LispMs will be produced. Also we are planning
to produce implementations of a file access protocol called NFILE on top
of TCP for various machine types, allowing improved access, and the
possibility of consolidating our system sources. Along with this we
hope to layer extentions to the Unix file system between the file system
and NFILE so that LispM users will be able to use version numbers, case
independance, and arbitrary properties on Unix based file servers.
In the longer term we hope to take advantage of file current research
to form a uniform file namespace with replication, automatic backup
(perhaps utilizing optical disk technology), automatic load balancing,
etc., on heterogenous hardware. Needless to say, we have a great deal
of respect for the researchers...
-- Rich
-------
∂01-Mar-86 1834 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA File Backup
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Mar 86 18:34:38 PST
Date: Sat 1 Mar 86 18:35:37-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: File Backup
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187365032.48.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
This message announces the backup facility mentioned in the previous
message. This utility helps copy files from Lisp Machine to some more
stable, tape backed up, file system. Anyone using an Explorer or 36xx
at KSL (and particulary Welch Rd.) should consider using this package.
It is intended that Ardvax be used for backup at Welch Rd., so if
you want to backup files at Welch Rd., you should contact me
(Acuff@Sumex) to get an account on Ardvax. Safe, Diablo, Sumex,
Sushi, etc., will also work with this package, but since Ardvax runs
Chaos it will work much better, allowing more information about file
properites to be exchanged as well as facilitating operations on
directories.
Note that NO regular tape backups will be done of Symbolics or TI
machines at Welch Rd. Each user will be responsible for backing up
his/her own files.
The documentation for this package is stored in
Sumex:<LispM>FS-to-FS-Backup.*. Please print a copy on an Imagen
printer, or peruse it on-line. Contact me if you have any questions,
bugs, or sage advice.
-- Rich
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1049 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lantz@su-navajo.arpa University Research Initiative
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 10:49:05 PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 2 Mar 86 10:00:01-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 2 Mar 86 10:00:50 pst
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 86 10:00:50 pst
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-navajo.arpa>
Subject: University Research Initiative
To: faculty@score
Cc: csl-faculty@sierra
First, sorry for any duplicates. Some day I have to find out who IS on
csl-faculty@sierra but ISN'T on faculty@score! Anyway...
As a result of the discussion at the last CS faculty lunch about DoD's new
University Research Initiative, I thought it worth making the following
"proposal". Rather than reconstruct arguments from scratch, I quote from
the introduction to a document I put together for GMD:
"The proliferation of personal workstations and computer networks has
enabled users to develop or otherwise access an ever wdier range of
applications. Unfortunately, user interface design and implementation has
not kept pace with the available hardware, nor with the aspirations of many
users. Major advances are required with respect to the `style' of
man-machine interaction -- advances in graphical techniques as well as other
communications media. Moreover, this `style' should be a consistent as
possible across applications. Much work remains to be done in achieving this
consistency in the face of the wide variety of applications currently
available. At the implementation level, much work remains to be done to
accommodate heterogeneous hardware and software bases. For example, to what
extent can we ensure the applications can run as well distributed over
low-speed lines as over high-speed local area networks? How might we
implement the user interface software in such a way as to be easily ported
to a variety of operating systems, not just to a variety of machines running
the same operating system?
Many of these questions have been addressed in the context of specific
application environments. While it is certainly necessary to have viable
applications to `drive' research in user interfaces, many of the
application-specific approaches have not been extensible beyond the scope of
the intended application. We, on the other hand, propose to address these
and related issues in the context of a `center for user interface research'.
We will focus on basic principles of user interface design, as applied in a
variety of environments. That is, the basic goal of the center is to
ascertain those principles that apply in a variety of enviroments. We
believe the the application of these principles should increase the
productivity of both end-users and applications programmers. Moreover,
developing these principles to begin with requires basic research in
specific environments, which should in turn yield a number of interesting
applications. Consequently, we see the center as ultimately encouraging the
participation of application domain experts, graphics designers, and
cognitive scientests, as well as computer scientists."
*****
I think that such an effort is a good match for the `spirit' of the
university research initiative. It constitutes a `new' research focus (in
the sense of user interface first, applications second) and it requires
collaboration between disciplines. What I'm proposing is something that
only a few universities have -- the major ones I'm certain of being MIT (the
Center for Arts and Media Technology), Brown, and Toronto. As implied
above, MANY universities, including Stanford, are engaged in user interface
research, BUT solely in the context of a particular application domain and
usually a particular department. (Some of CSLI's work comes closer to what
I'm talking about).
As support for the need for greater collaboration, and added ammunition for
my assertion that user interface research to date has been too narrow, I
quote William Buxton of Toronto:
"The problem with many universities is that the built-in reward mechanism
seems to favor increased specialization, rather than interdisciplinary
collaboration. Similarly, funding agencies are structured in such a way
that their mandates are narrow, defined in terms of discipline-specific
domains. Neither provides the much need catalyst to stimulate the
interdisciplinary research needed today. Industry has shown the power of
collaborative work on specific projects. Universities and funding agencies
must adapt to facilitiate and encourage such cooperative work in the general
research environment...
Each of the respective disciplines has its own research methodologies. Each
differs in approach and rigour, and each contributes a different type of
knowledge. We need to reconcile these different approaches (such as the
formal experimentation of the behavioral psychologist vs. the comparatively
informal benchmarking of the computer scientist), and learn to exploit each
to best advantage..."
Of course, CSLI and CIS are two local examples of collaborative ventures.
What is proposed here is another such venture, one which would no
doubt interact/overlap with CSLI in particular. (Note that the term
`center' was used only for lack of something better. I am/was not
necessarily proposing yet another CSLI or CIS, but rather a collaborative
effort by a reasonable number of faculty with a common focus.)
So I offer this `vision' as one possible focal point for a university
research initiative proposal, solicit expressions of interest, and
I volunteer to coordinate that (piece of a) proposal. In fact, I do so
independent of the university research initiative; that is, if you would
like to collaborate on a proposal in this vein for submission to any other
agencies or companies, please contact me.
Keith
∂02-Mar-86 1112 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Staff Evaluations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 11:12:04 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 11:10:20-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Staff Evaluations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187546117.11.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
As has been mentioned earlier, Provost Jim Rosse is especially
concerned about how the university evaluates performance. Betty
and LaDonna have circulated "staff performance evaluation forms"
to faculty and staff who have staff people working for them--including
research associates, programmers, secys, administrators, etc. It will
be very difficult to get the raises that we want to get for these
people this year unless their files are complete including an evaluation
from the person most concerned with their performance, namely their
faculty supervisors. Actually, these forms were due last Friday, and I
should have sent out this reminder notice earlier. Please take a few
moments Monday to fill out the ones you need to fill out and see that
they get to LaDonna and/or Betty as appropriate. Thanks, -Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1136 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA JMC
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 11:36:22 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 11:33:07-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: JMC
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187550263.11.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm proud to be able to announce that John McCarthy has just learned
that he will be getting an honorary doctorate from Linkoeping
University (Sweden) this Spring. (The CSD's collection of fancy
"top hats" will double!) Congratulations, John! -Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1318 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Les Earnest
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 13:18:39 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 13:14:55-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Les Earnest
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187568796.11.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Les Earnest has been helping me out increasingly with various important
tasks that I haven't had enough time for. I'd like even more of his
help, so beginning Mar 1 Les will start halftime as an "Associate
Chairman." (He will continue to spend halftime working for John
McCarthy as as a Senior Research Associate.)
Les will deal principally with long range and strategic
matters concerning 1) space (both the NWC new CSD building and more
immediate, temporary CSD space needs), 2) equipment and facilities,
3) department finances, and 4) department-wide research issues.
Les's experience with our department, with our research projects,
and with computer science will be a great benefit to CSD as we
plan our future.
-Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1424 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Re: University Research Initiative
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 14:24:29 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Sun 2 Mar 86 14:22:35-PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 14:24:45-PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: University Research Initiative
To: lantz@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-faculty@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Keith Lantz <lantz@su-navajo.arpa>" of Sun 2 Mar 86 10:06:33-PST
Message-ID: <12187581507.43.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
I support Keith Lantz's vision Gio
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1437 BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Mini-fragments requested.
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 14:37:34 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 14:36:15-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Mini-fragments requested.
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA, researchers@SU-CSLI.ARPA
On Tuesday morning I am giving a talk to senior honors math students
at Gunn High about mathematics as used to study human languages. It
is part of an international week thing. So I would like to have more
than one language to illustrate the basic ideas. Part of what I want
to do is to talk about context free grammars and illustrate them by
giving a baby fragment of English, and fragments for the "same"
fragment in some other languages. If I have time, I want to discuss
the semantics, as well. Since I know only English, this is a bit of a
problem. I have a version of this in Japanese, but I would like some
others as well. Especially something mildly exotic. Any fragments
before noon on MOnday are gratefully received.
Here is my fragment:
S --> NP VP | S and S
NP --> Fido | it | Det N
N --> dog | cat | N that VP
VP --> died | V NP
V --> bit | kicked
Det --> a | the | every
So we get exciting things like
Every dog that bit a cat kicked every cat that bit a dog that
bit Fido.
The dog bit a cat and it died.
I realize that some of these things are handled in very different ways
in other languages. That is one point I would like to make. So
please annotate your fragments to explain to me what is going on.
Jon
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1807 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA ONR/DARPA Block Programs
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 18:07:12 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 18:06:01-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: ONR/DARPA Block Programs
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187621788.15.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I talked with Alan Meyerowitz Friday about the Block
Programs (Ref: ONR/DARPA "Broad Agency Announcement
University Research Initiative Program," Jan. '86, copies
circulated to faculty). He encouraged PI's at Stanford to
submit proposals. He said that he didn't think this program
was appropriate for omnibus research programs straddling
several areas. It probably doesn't give us the freedom that
the GMD initiative would have (as Jeff Ullman suspected in
a previous net msg). Meyerowitz said that the proposals ought
to be focussed within the areas mentioned (CS, robotics, or AI, or
...); a "disjointed proposal" would not be acceptable.
Thus, we would be better off to have several strong proposals
submitted from those research groups in a position to do so.
The Department will make every effort to help PI's shape their
proposals in accordance with the requirements of the RFP, but
people should take note of the fact that proposals are due
in ONR (or DARPA) at the close of business on April 15 and that
there are several extra requirements such as "management plans,"
industrial and Navy "collaboration," etc. that will need time
to work out. People should read the RFP carefully; Betty Scott
will have copies. PIs fortunate enough to have Rindfleisch/Earnest/Engelmore
style management help might want to start thinking about the management
aspects of the proposal early. Perhaps some boilerplate can be shared
with others.
Meyerowitz said that in the AI area, they were especially interested
in proposals dealing with "real time systems, reasoning with uncertain
information, distributed systems, and learning." (I may have just
the proposal for them!)
-Nils
-------
∂02-Mar-86 2058 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Poligon/Oligon release and new docs.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 20:58:08 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 20:59:40-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Poligon/Oligon release and new docs.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187653401.54.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Well here it is folks, the new Poligon docs are out so here is a breif
list of the deltas for you to look for.
i) Initialisation has cleaned up a lot. All of that nasty "Do ..."
has gone away.
ii) Models now have names. This is defined along with the classes.
iii) There are new system defined fields and some of the old ones
have changed their meanings.
iv) The language keywords "Field/Fields" are now fully synonymous with
"Slot/Slots".
v) Property inheritance has been generalised a lot.
vi) The syntax of Class declarations has changed a lot.
vii) Any defined class can now have an arbitrary number of Superclasses.
viii) Any defined class can now have an arbitrary number of Metaclasses.
ix) The class of node with which a rule is to be associated now has to
be stated explicitly. A "Class Rule" for the class Observation
cannot now be declared by :-
Class : Observsation
Slot : some-slot-on-the-class-node
It must refer to the class of the class node, in this case by default
Meta-Observation.
x) The Input Handler Class declaration is now different.
xi) "Form Instance Of" no longer exists, use "New Instance Of" instead.
xii) The syntax of "New Instance Of" has changed.
xiii) The name "Tina" has now disappeared altogether. Please substitute
Poligon in all places except the name of the system that you load.
This should be Oligon {Serial} or Poligon {Parallel} as is appropriate.
xiv) The restriction that Definitions parts were not supported in the
Otherwise and Timeout parts of rules has been removed.
xv) The new manual now has, in an appendix, a small but nevertheless
syntactically correct and complete model showing a reasonable subset
of the features of the language.
The manual (4.0) can be found in hard-copy (from me) and in on-line versions.
It is twenty-two pages longer than version 3.0 so there might be some new
details in there for you. The on-line version is in :-
3602:>System-Software>Poligion>Poligon-Users-Manual.On-Line
The
3602:>System-Software>Poligion>Poligon-Users-Manual.Document
is the (very) pre-Scribed version.
I have now confirmed my flights to Britain. I will leave in the evening on
Friday 18 April and will be back on Sunday 18 May. You would be well advised
to convert to the new system well before my departure or not at all until
my return since the Poligon system will be unsupported over this period.
I will be glad to assist in the convertion of existing models to the new
format.
Rice
-------
∂02-Mar-86 2237 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminder-- tomorrow's planlunch
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Mar 86 22:37:14 PST
Date: Sun 2 Mar 86 22:33:56-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Reminder-- tomorrow's planlunch
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
REPRESENTATION AND ESTIMATION OF SPATIAL UNCERTAINTY
Randy Smith (SMITH@SRI-AI)
Robotics Lab, SRI International
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 3
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
Current work on a method for geometrical reasoning under uncertainty
will be presented. Such a reasoning component will be important to
planning systems for many robotic applications, including autonomous
navigation and industrial automation.
A general method will be described for estimating the values and
estimated errors in the relationship between objects whose locations
are represented by coordinate frames. The elements in the
relationship may be described by bounding intervals, or may be
described by means and covariances, if a statistical model is
available. The relationship between the frames (objects) may not be
explicitly given, but known only indirectly through a series of
spatial relationships, each with its associated error. This
estimation method can be used to answer such questions as whether a
camera attached to a robot is likely to have a particular object in
its field of view. More generally, this method makes it possible to
decide in advance if an uncertain relationship is known accurately
enough for some task to be accomplished, and if not, how much of an
improvement in locational knowledge a proposed sensing action will
provide. The calculated estimates agree very well with those from an
independent Monte Carlo simulation. The method presented can be
generalized to six degrees of freedom, and provides a practical means
of estimating the relationships (position and orientation) between
objects as well as the uncertainty associated with the relationship.
-------
∂03-Mar-86 0604 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Special AFLB reminder
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 06:04:33 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 06:04:19-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Special AFLB reminder
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187752552.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Besides the special AFLB today, there's a Logic and Foundations of
Mathematics seminar of AFLB interest:
Speaker: Dr. Samuel Buss, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
Title: "The polynomial time hierarchy and fragments of bounded arithmetic."
Time: Monday, March 3, 4:15-5:30 PM
Place: Room 383-N, 3d floor lounge, Math. Dept., Stanford
And here is today's special AFLB (note the room change):
--------------------------------------
3-Mar-86 (Monday) : Gyula Katona (UCSD & Math Institute, Hungarian Acad Sci)
Convex Hulls of Certain Hypergraph Classes
Let X be a set of n elements. A family F of its subsets (that is, F is
contained in 2↑X) is called a hypergraph. Consider a class C of
hypergraphs on X (e.g., C = {F: F←1, F←2 in F implies F←1 doesn't
contain F←2}). A traditional extremal theorem determines the family F
minimizing or maximizing |F| in C (e.g., by the Sperner theorem,
max|F| = {n \choose floor(n/2)} for the C above). In some applications,
however, we need to maximize |F←i| summed over all F←i in F; or in
general, to maximize the sum of f(|F←i|), where f is a fixed function.
The latter sum can be expressed as p←i(F) f(i) summed over 0 <= i <= n,
where p←i(F) denotes the number of i-element members of F. This is a
linear function of the p←i's; therefore, to solve this problem we have
to find the extreme points of the set of vectors (p←0, p←1, ..., p←n)
for the given class C. We do this for several classes. Many
traditional extremal problems and inequalities are consequences.
***** Time and place: March 3, 12:30 pm in MJ252 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂03-Mar-86 0830 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 08:30:45 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 08:29:32-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187778987.18.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow's CSD Lunch (March 4) topic will be "Proposed Changes in the CSD
PhD Program" with Terry Winograd at 12:15 in MJH 146.
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1112 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:AKL@SRI-CSL.ARPA paper
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 11:07:07 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Mar 86 11:02:40-PST
Received: from SRI-CSL.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Mar 86 11:01:26-PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 10:57:54-PST
From: Akl Selim <AKL@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
Subject: paper
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Has anyone seen or heard of a paper by Ted Swart (Feb. 86) intitled (and
presumably proving) P = NP?
Selim Akl.
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1126 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Review of CS PhD program
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 11:26:20 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Mar 86 11:10:11-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 1222 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Record first 6 months for Forum
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 12:22:36 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 11:52:02-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Record first 6 months for Forum
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, csl-faculty@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
Forum-Committee: ;
Message-ID: <12187815852.43.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
During the first six months of 1985/86 the Forum has brought in
$617,090. This is $108,494 more than last year. This will be our
million dollar year!!
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1245 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:Bush@SRI-KL.ARPA housing
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 12:45:15 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 4 Mar 86 12:59:22-PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 11:11:33-PST
From: Marcia Bush <Bush@SRI-KL>
Subject: housing
To: friends%SU-CSLI@SRI-KL
cc: Bush@SRI-KL, Kopec@SRI-KL
Gary Kopec and I need a place (1 bedroom or larger, preferably
Palo Alto or north) to housesit or rent for the months of May
and June. We are both non-smokers with no pets. Any leads
would be appreciated.
Marcia Bush
Bush@sri-kl
496-4603
Gary Kopec
Kopec@sri-kl
496-4606
-------
∂03-Mar-86 1330 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New Poligon Manual.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 13:30:32 PST
Date: Mon 3 Mar 86 13:28:17-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New Poligon Manual.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12187833374.51.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
There are a few hard copies of the new Poligon Manual on my desk. If you
don't get one of this batch and still want one please send me Email.
Rice.
-------
∂03-Mar-86 2009 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 20:09:12 PST
Received: from ames-vmsb.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 3 Mar 86 20:07:24-PST
Date: 3 Mar 86 19:01:00 PST
From: welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: super@su-score.arpa
Reply-To: welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Meetings on the first Wednesday of each month at 7:30 PM. Speakers
who can give insights to various aspects of SUPERCOMPUTING are
featured each month.
Next meeting: Wednesday, March 5, 1986, 7:30 PM
Speaker: Ken Kennedy/Visiting Professor - Stanford
Topic: Compiling Conventional Programming Languages
for Multiple Processor Architectures
Location: AXIOM Systems
1589 Centre Pointe Drive
Milpitas, CA
Directions: 17 South to Montague Expressway East. Left from
Montague onto Centre Point (before Capitol).
or 17 South to Capitol Expressway East. Right from
Capitol onto Centre Point (before Montague).
or 680 South to Montague Expressway West. Right from
Montague onto Centre Point (after Capitol).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tape-recordings of most of the previous may be obtained
in exchange for a tape cassette or $5.00 by contacting:
Mary Fowler (415)261-4058 (rec)
Supercomputing #192, BOX 2787
Alameda, CA. 94501-0787
For information contact Mary Fowler, Chairperson (415) 839-6547
or Mike Austin, Publ. Chair (415) 423-8446
------
∂03-Mar-86 2042 avg@su-aimvax.arpa reports received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Mar 86 20:42:21 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 3 Mar 86 20:38:31 pst
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 86 20:38:31 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: reports received
To: nail@diablo
Reports backing up Gupta's recent talk have been received by me.
∂04-Mar-86 0918 CHRIS@SU-CSLI.ARPA Honda civic with lights on.
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 09:18:18 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 09:14:00-PST
From: Chris Menzel <CHRIS@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Honda civic with lights on.
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
License #792 VJY.
-------
∂04-Mar-86 0942 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 09:41:55 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 09:39:45-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188053915.10.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Lunch today in MJH 146 at 12:15!!
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1248 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Slight change to Poligon.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 12:48:20 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 12:49:43-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Slight change to Poligon.
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188088496.38.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Due to an error on my part I have had to make a slight change to the
Poligon language documented in the new manual. The @i[Supersystems]
language keyword in the @i[New Instance Of] construct has been changed
to @i[Subsystem Of]. This is to avoid a clash with the system defined
slot called @i[Supersystems]. To bring your manuals up to date please
mod the program examples on pages 14, 64 and 67.
The worked example shown in the manual works and is available for you
to play with. You will find it in :-
3602:>System-Software>Poligon>Worked-Example-1.Poligon
and
3602:>System-Software>Poligon>Worked-Example-2.Poligon
These have been compiled through the two compilers so you can load it
right away if you like. There is a noddy signal data file for it called
3602:>System-Software>Poligon>Farm-Yard.Input
Rice.
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1314 DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA No meeting Wednesday March 5
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 13:13:56 PST
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1986 13:11 PST
Message-ID: <DAVIES.12188092412.BABYL@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
From: DAVIES@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
To: AAP@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: No meeting Wednesday March 5
cc: Davies@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
There will be no Architectures Meeting tomorrow.
-- Byron
∂04-Mar-86 1444 WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA Unix System Support
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 14:43:53 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 14:39:33-PST
From: Deborah Woodward <WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Unix System Support
To: Academic-council@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188108491.22.WOODWARD@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
To: Those Responsible for UNIX Systems
From: Len Bosack
Subject: UNIX System Support Service
Many projects now depend on UNIX-based systems for their work. Support
of these systems has been taking a substantial effort on the part of the
various research groups. Starting this spring, CSDCF will be offering a
"UNIX System Support Service" that should be of interest to those
responsible for UNIX systems. Initially, both hardware and software
will be supported on the VAX 750 and only software support on the VAX 780.
In exchange for a monthly fee (set to recover only the costs of the
service), we propose to do the following tasks:
*Commissioning of New Systems - Assist with orders, Site Prep,
Acceptance and Software Installation.
*System Upgrades - Test and Install new Hardware and Software.
*Monitoring - Monitor the systems for hardware and software errors.
*Disaster Recovery - Recover from the inevitable filesystem disasters.
*Software - maintain a "standard" UNIX kernel and utilities, including
bug fixes and such changes that are required to meet our users' needs.
We would like to stay close to "vanilla" UNIX (currently 4.2BSD) while
still meeting our requirements. Deal with the various software
suppliers and user groups.
*Documentation - maintain online documentation to match the standard UNIX.
*Hardware - Maintenance of the CPU and it's periphery.
*Network - Serve as technical liaison with the various network groups.
The cost of the service depends on how many systems and naturally their
configuration. Our estimates vary from $500/month to $650/month per system.
The lower limit corresponds to 6-7 systems (one person) or 14-16 systems
(two people), the upper limit corresponds to 8 systems (two people).
The money pays for the people and associated benefits, a 'back room'
750 to act as repository of sources and standalone use, EM&S, etc.
If you are interested in this service or have further questions, please
contact TOM@SCORE or BOSACK@SCORE. You may also telephone 723-1767 or
723-0445.
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1531 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA "I'm talking nonsense" -supervaluations
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 15:31:13 PST
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 4 Mar 86 15:28:33-PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 15:27:39-PST
From: GAIFMAN@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: "I'm talking nonsense" -supervaluations
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
_
This is intended for those who stayed for the discussion after my
"Logic of pointers " -talk.
Etchemendy and Barwise (and Israel?) would prefer to treat the
"I'm talking nonsense" sentence not as nonsense but as false (where
'nonsense' is by definition 'neither true nor false'). The sentence
does indeed come out as false if instead of the strong Kleene table
one uses supervaluatins. In this procedure, if a sentence comes out
as true (false) under all assignments of standard (T,F) truth values
to the pointers, then every pointer to this sentence gets T (F).
Thus "p is neither true nor false" comes out as false. There is an
obvious supervaluation variant to my algorithm (just as there is the
supervaluation variant of Kripke's model) and in this variant the
sentence is evaluated F.
My own intuition is that it is nonsense, so in this case I would
prefer the strong Kleene evaluation. In any case this appears now
to be a side issue.
-------
-------
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1635 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Evaluations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 16:35:05 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 16:22:27-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Evaluations
To: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188127222.32.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please stop by my office (030 MJH) to pick up evaluation forms for
your class. The filled-out forms should be returned to me as soon
as possible -- please have a TA or student volunteer collect them
from the students and bring them to me (or leave them in my box).
-Gina
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1635 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Evaluations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 16:35:05 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 16:22:27-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Evaluations
To: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188127222.32.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please stop by my office (030 MJH) to pick up evaluation forms for
your class. The filled-out forms should be returned to me as soon
as possible -- please have a TA or student volunteer collect them
from the students and bring them to me (or leave them in my box).
-Gina
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1730 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Volunteer?
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 17:29:31 PST
Date: Tue 4 Mar 86 17:28:11-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Volunteer?
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188139190.15.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Jutta has informed me that the MS committee badly needs at least
one additional faculty member on it. Anyone out there interested?
-Nils
-------
∂04-Mar-86 1752 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu LICS Program
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 4 Mar 86 17:52:21 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 4 Mar 86 17:50:30-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 4 Mar 86 17:48:04-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 4 Mar 86 16:51:23 CST
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 4 Mar 86 15:40:10 CST
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1986 16:39 EST
Message-Id: <MEYER.12188097633.BABYL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
From: MEYER@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: udi@RSCH.WISC.EDU (Udi Manber)
Subject: LICS Program
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 04 Mar 86 16:42:06 CST (Tue)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
4 March 1986
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM: IEEE SYMPOSIUM ON
LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS, USA, JUNE 16-18, 1986
If not already on the mailing list for the LICS call-for-papers, write to:
Prof. A. J. Kfoury
LICS Local Arrangements Chairman
Dept. of Computer Science
Boston University
Boston, MA 02215, USA
phone: (617) 353-8911
CSNET: KFOURY at BOSTONU
If you plan to attend, It would be helpful if you would immediately send
net-mail to CSNET: KFOURY at BOSTONU with a cc to ARPANET: MEYER at MIT-XX so
indicating.
MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1986
INVITED SPEAKER, 9:00AM--9:55AM, CHAIR: A. Chandra
- 9:00--Robinson, J.A., Merging functional with relational programming
in a reduction setting.
COFFEE BREAK, 9:55AM--10:15AM
SESSION I, 10:15AM-12:15PM, CHAIR: W. Damm
- 10:15--Csirmaz, L. and B. Hart, Program correctness on finite fields.
- 10:40--German, S.M., E.M. Clarke and J.Y. Halpern, True relative
completeness of an axiom system for the language L4.
- 11:05--Jonsson, B., Z. Manna and R. Waldinger, Towards deductive
synthesis of data flow networks.
- 11:30--Rounds, W.C. and R. Kasper, A complete logical calculus for
record structures representing linguistic information.
- 11:55--Meyer, A.R., Floyd-Hoare logic defines semantics.
LUNCH, 12:15PM--2:00PM
SESSION II, 2:00PM--3:35PM, CHAIR: M. Hennessy
- 2:00--Beckman, L, R. Gustavsson and A. Waern, An algebraic model of
parallel execution of logic programs.
- 2:25--Brookes, S.D., A semantically based proof system for partial
correctness and deadlock in CSP.
- 2:50--Monteiro, L.F. and F.C.N. Pereira, Outline of a sheaf-theoretic
approach to concurrency.
- 3:15--Benson, D.B. and O. Ben-Shachar, Strong bisimulation of state
automata.
COFFEE BREAK, 3:35PM--3:50PM
SESSION III, 3:50PM--5:25PM, CHAIR: D. Scott
- 3:50--Mohring, C., Algorithm development in the theory of
constructions.
- 4:15--Schlipf, J.S. Decidability and definability with
circumscription.
- 4:40--Shultis, J., The design and implementation of INTUIT.
- 5:05--Mason, I.A., Equivalence of first order LISP programs. Proving
properties of destructive programs via transformation.
TUESDAY, JUNE 17
INVITED SPEAKER, 9:00AM--9:55AM, CHAIR: A.R. Meyer
-9:00--Friedman, Harvey, Title to be Announced.
COFFEE BREAK, 9:55AM--10:15AM
SESSION IV, 10:15AM--12:20PM, CHAIR: J. Reynolds
- 10:15--Amadio, R., K.B. Bruce and G. Longo, The finitary projection
model for second order lambda calculus and solutions to higher order
domain equations.
- 10:40--Felleisen, M., D.P. Friedman, E. Kohlbecker and B. Duba,
Reasoning with continuations.
- 11:05--Gunter, C.A., The largest first-order axiomatizable cartesian
closed category of domains.
- 11:30--Halpern, J.Y., J.H. Williams and E.L. Wimmers, Good rewrite
strategies for FP.
- 11:55--Plaisted, D.A., The denotational semantics of nondeterministic
recursive programs using coherent relations.
LUNCH, 12:20PM--2:00PM
SESSION V, 2:00PM--3:40PM, CHAIR: R. Waldinger
- 2:00--Abadi, M. and Z. Manna, A timely resolution.
- 2:25--Chou, S-C. and H-P. Ko, On mechanical theorem proving in
Minkowskian plane geometry.
- 2:50--Despeyroux, J., Proof of translation in natural semantics.
- 3:15--Kirchner, C., Computing unification algorithms.
COFFEE BREAK, 3:40PM--3:55PM
SESSION VI, 3:55PM--5:35PM, CHAIR: J. Mitchell
- 3:55--Coppo, M. and M. Zacchi, Type inference and logical relations.
- 4:20--Coquand, T., An analysis of Girard's paradox.
- 4:45--Knoblock, T.B. and R.L. Constable, Formalized metareasoning in
type theory.
- 5:10--Mendler, N., P. Panangaden, R.L. Constable, Infinite objects in
constructive type theory.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18
INVITED SPEAKER, 9:00AM--9:55AM, CHAIR: A. Meyer
-9:00--To be announced.
COFFEE BREAK, 9:55AM--10:15AM
SESSION VII, 10:15AM--12:20PM, CHAIR: D. Gries
- 10:15--Browne, M.C., An improved algorithm for the automatic
verification of finite state systems using temporal logic.
- 10:40--Emerson, E.A. and C-L Lei, Efficient model checking in
fragments of the propositional Mu-calculus.
- 11:05--Halpern, J.Y. and Y. Shoham, A propositional modal interval
logic.
- 11:30--Makowsky, J.A. and I. Sain, On the equivalence of weak second
order and nonstandard time semantics for various program verification
systems.
- 11:55--Schupp, P.E. and D. Perrin, Automata on the integers,
recurrence, distinguishability, and the equivalence and decidability
of monadic theories.
LUNCH, 12:20PM--2:00PM
SESSION VIII, 2:00PM--3:35PM, CHAIR: D. Kozen
- 2:00--Rosner, R. and A. Pnueli, A choppy logic.
- 2:25--Parikh, R., Levels of knowledge in distributed computing.
- 2:50--Pnueli, A. and L. Zuck, Probabilistic verification by tableaux.
- 3:10--Vardi, M.Y. and P. Wolper, An automata-theoretic approach to
automatic program verification.
COFFEE BREAK, 3:35PM--3:50PM
SESSION IX, 3:50PM--5:25PM, CHAIR: G. Huet
- 3:50--Bachmair, L., N. Dershowitz and J. Hsiang, Orderings for
equational proofs.
- 4:15--Jouannaud, J-P and E. Kounalis, Automatic proofs by induction
in equational theories without constructors.
- 4:40--Kapur, D. and D.R. Musser, Inductive reasoning with incomplete
specifications.
- 5:05--Statman, R., On translating lambda terms into combinators; the
basis problem.
DEMONSTRATIONS, times to be announced
Demonstrations related to the papers by Chou/Ko, Constable et al.,
Kapur/Musser, and Shultis are currently planned.
END OF SYMPOSIUM
--------------
TN Message #29
--------------
∂05-Mar-86 0911 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Mailing lists
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 09:10:58 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 09:08:42-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Mailing lists
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
A reminder about the use of mailing lists.
The FRIENDS mailing list is for announcements of CSLI (and related)
events of interest to the public (i.e., colloquia, public seminars,
changes in schedule ...). Please note that this list is WIDELY
distributed. Please also note that CSLI announcements should be sent
to newsletter instead of friends unless the event will occur too soon
to be published in the newsletter.
The FOLKS mailing list contains those people closely associated with
CSLI (both staff and researchers). Please note that the list contains
people at all three sites.
The VENTURA mailing list contains those people who work at Ventura Hall
including IMSSS people. It is probably the best list for announcements
relating to Ventura Hall (such as ant spraying).
BBOARD@CSLI is for general messages. Please note that it automatically
gets copies of all FRIENDS mail.
Besides these, there are also many specialized mailing lists (for the
different areas, for visitors, research assistants, postdocs, staff...).
Private mailing lists can also be created. A list of the public mailing
lists can be found in <mail>mailing-lists.txt and the members of each
list can be found by using mmailbox.
Emma Pease
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1126 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Explorer feedback to TI
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 11:26:20 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 10:47:35-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Explorer feedback to TI
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188328405.29.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Folks,
Here's your chance to flame. TI (Ken and co.) would like to listen
and respond to the KSL community's experience with Explorer software
They would like answers to the following questions within a day or two
so that they can be used in a planing session that will have a large
influence on the future of the Explorer software environment. As a
result, constructive feedback is sought.
Please either print of fill out on-line the following brief
questionaire and return to Rich Acuff. Please critque and roast as
appropriate:
Explorer user experience and "wish list" questionaire
-----------------------------------------------------
NAME:
PROJECT:
LISP MACHINE ACTIVITY (what do you do while working on an Explorer?
Eg. Edit, compile, run, debug, telnet, etc. Please rank tasks in order of
frequency.)
What components of the environment do you use most often?
(e.g. editor, inspector, window system, peek, debugger, glossary,
suggestions etc.)
Which, if any, of the toolkits would you use if they were portable to
other machines?
What facilities/tools would you like to see that we have not provided?
(what have you had to build yourself?)
What has your experience been with the Explorer's performance, both as a
specialized LISP engine and programmer productivity environment?
Thank you for your time,
Ken Kershner
Texas Instruments
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1131 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 11:30:55 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 11:26:05-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Happiness as usual this Friday at 4:00 in the Greenberg Room.
Wine and beer. Poetry optional.
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1600 avg@su-aimvax.arpa query budget proposal
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 15:55:53 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 5 Mar 86 15:47:26 pst
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 86 15:47:26 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: query budget proposal
To: nail@diablo
How much work must we expect to do in answering a query over a given IDB?
In this flame I propose a measure, called ``budget,'' and attempt
to argue that it is ``the right measure of query size.''
The goal is to characterize the complexity of various queries relative
to their size. That is, if f is a function, then a query Q
``has complexity f'' if
cost(Q) =< f(budget(Q))
for all EDBs. (cost reflects computation time.)
Let an IDB (set of rules) and a query Q be given.
Consider EDB a variable; it is the extensional database, a set of relations.
Assume constants in the EDB may range over a countably infinite domain,
but any EDB instance is finite.
Define XEDB to be the result of applying the CWA to EDB, i.e., we
conceptually have exactly one of {r(a,b), not r(a,b)} in XEDB for every
pair (a,b) of actual EDB constants. (If we have some typing, we can
make a more precise definition of XEDB.)
Define the ``budget'' for Q as a function of the EDB as
B(EDB) = |Answer| + |Useful XEDB|
where
``Useful XEDB'' is the union of all ``minimal useful XEDB''
and
``minimal useful XEDB'' is any minimal subset of XEDB that is
sufficient to prove that
(a) Every answer tuple is sound, and
(b) No additional tuples are in the answer.
My proposal is to measure the efficiency of a query evaluation algorithm
acting on Q as a function of B. Say we define the cost of executing
the algorithm on (Q, EDB) as the sum of EDB tuples retrieved, plus
lengths of intermediate relations, plus length of answer.
(Maybe we need to charge 1 for an EDB lookup that returns the empty
relation, but probably we don't need this refinement.)
The goal is to identify a function f such that
cost(Q, EDB) =< f(B(EDB))
For simplicity of notation, suppress the parameter EDB, and write
cost(Q) =< f(B)
E.g., a favorable situation is the linear case,
cost(Q) = O(B)
Livable is
cost(Q) = O(B↑2)
But look out for
cost(Q) = infinity(B)
meaning there is no function of B that gives an upper bound on the cost.
(Recall that EDB is an implicit variable here.)
EXAMPLE:
The IDB has one rule
r(X,Y) :- a(X,U), b(U,Y)
and the query is r↑{ff}.
Say the EDB has n constants with no typing, and there are xyc
answer tuples, where x is the number of values in column 1 of the answer,
y is the number of values in column 2 of the answer, and 0 < c =< 1.
A minimal useful XEDB has at least
c max(x,y) + min(x,y) = (1 - c) min(x,y) + (x + y)c
positive tuples, to justify the answer tuples.
But it also must have a certain number
of ``negative'' tuples to support the exclusion of non-answers.
There are (n↑2 -xyc)n pairs of tuples that would prove an
additional answer tuple if both were present. Our useful set must
include one negative tuple from each pair. This involves at least
(n↑2 - xyc) negative tuples needed in the minimal useful XEDB, as
one negative tuple serves to eliminate at most n pairs.
Thus the size of a minimal useful XEDB is at least
n↑2 - xyc + (1 - c) min(x,y) + (x + y)c
Since the budget also includes the answer size, xyc, we have
B >= n↑2.
But the size of the whole whole database is O(n↑2), and no larger
intermediate relations are formed, so
cost = O(B)
END EXAMPLE
∂05-Mar-86 1647 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- John McCarthy
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 16:47:32 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 16:44:14-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- John McCarthy
To: planlunch.dis: ;
SITUATION CALCULUS PLANNING IN BLOCKS AND RELATED WORLDS
John McCarthy (JMC@SU-AI)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 10
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
This talk will present mainly ideas rather than completed work.
Situation calculus is based on the equation s' = result(e,s),
where s and s' are situations and e is an event. Provided
one can control the deduction adequately, this is a more powerful
formalism than STRIPS. Planning a sequence of actions, or more
generally, a strategy of actions to achieve a situation with
specified properties, admits a variety of heuristics which
whittle away at the problem. In many practical situations, these
heuristics, which don't guarantee a full solution but leave a
reduced problem, are sufficient. Humans appear to use many of them
and so should computer programs. The talk therefore will concern both
epistemological and heuristic aspects of planning problems.
-------
∂05-Mar-86 1709 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar, March 6, No. 6
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 5 Mar 86 17:08:19 PST
Date: Wed 5 Mar 86 16:57:49-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar, March 6, No. 6
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
March 6, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 6
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, March 6, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things
Conference Room by George Lakoff
Discussion led by Douglas Edwards (Edwards@sri-ai)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall CANCELLED
Trailer Classroom to be rescheduled
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Logical Specifications for Feature Structures in
Unification Grammars
William C. Rounds and Robert Kasper
University of Michigan
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, March 13, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Brains, Behavior, and Robotics
Conference Room by James Albus
Discussion led by Pentti Kanerva (Kanerva@riacs.arpa)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Attempts and Performances: A Theory of Speech Acts
Trailer Classroom Phil Cohen (Pcohen@sri-ai)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Turing Auditorium Self Reference and Self Consciousness
Raymond Smullyan, Indiana University
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Please note that the March 6 seminar on Lexical Representation and
Lexical Rules has been cancelled; it will be rescheduled at a later
date.
Also note that next week's colloquium will be in Turing Auditorium
which is in the Earth Sciences building next to Terman Engineering.
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar March 6, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Brains, Behavior, and Robotics
by James S. Albus
Discussion led by Pentti Kanerva (Kanerva@riacs.arpa)
In 1950, Alan Turing wrote, ``We may hope that machines will
eventually compete with men in all purely intellectual fields. But
which are the best ones to start with? . . . Many people think that
a very abstract activity, like the playing of chess, would be best.
It can also be maintained that it is best to provide the machine with
the best sense organs that money can buy, and then teach it to
understand. . . . This process could follow the normal teaching of a
child. Things would be pointed out and named, etc. Again I do not
know what the right answer is, but I think that both approaches should
be tried.'' (Quoted by Albus on p. 5.)
``Brains, Behavior, and Robotics'' takes this ``Turing's second
approach'' to artificial intelligence, the first being the pursuit of
abstract reasoning. The book combines over a decade of research by
Albus. It is predicated on the idea that to understand human
intelligence we need to understand the evolution of intelligence in
the animal kingdom. The models developed are mathematical
(computational), but one of their criteria is neurophysiological
plausibility. Although the research is aimed at understanding the
mechanical basis of cognition, Albus also discusses philosophical and
social implications of his work.
--------------
AFA SEMINAR
A Proof Using AFA That Maximal Fixed Points are Final
Peter Aczel, University of Manchester, Visiting CSLI
2-3:30, March 7, Ventura Conference Room
--------------
LOGIC SEMINAR
Interpretations in Arithmetic
Dr. Alex Wilkie, University of Oxford, visiting UC Berkeley
12:00, Monday, March 10, Math Faculty Lounge
(Note the change of time for this particular meeting.)
--------------
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPMENT TALK
The Perspective Concept in Computer Science
12:15, Monday, March 10, Ventura Conference Room
Our topic next Monday (March 10) will be a continued discussion
(introduced by Jens Kaasboll) of the issues raised by Kristen Nygaard
in his talk about perspectives on the use of computers:
Regardless of definitions of ``perspective'', there exist many
perspectives on computers. Computers are regarded as systems, tools,
institutions, toys, partners, media, symbols, etc. Even so, there
exist system description languages but no tool, or institution, or
... languages. What do the other perspectives reflect, which make
them less attractive for language designers? Suggestive answer: The
system perspective is the definite computer science perspective in
which the processes inside the computers are regarded as the goal of
our work. Viewed through some of the other perspectives, the computer
is seen as a means for achieving ends outside the computer, i.e., the
needs of people using the computers.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar March 6, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SUMMARY OF THE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPMENT TALK
The Perspective Concept in Computer Science
Kristen Nygaard (University of Oslo)
Monday, March 3
Notions like functional programing, logic programming, and
object-oriented programming embed different ways of understanding the
computing process---different perspectives. Also, methods for system
development will reflect different perspectives upon the nature of
organizations and society. It is important for computer scientists to
be aware of these perspectives and to take them into account in their
professional work. The lecture examined the nature of the perspective
concept and discussed a number of examples.
-------
∂06-Mar-86 0142 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #9
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 01:40:24 PST
Date: Monday, February 17, 1986 4:35AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #9
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Tuesday, 18 Feb 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 9
Today's Topics:
Puzzle - Burr,
Query - Predicate Behavior,
Implementation - Median Algorithm & Distfix
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10-FEB-1986 14:34
From: Premerlani
Subject: Burr
Puzzle fans:
This program was written as an aid in solving a burr puzzle
that appeared in a column in the October 1985 issue of
Scientific American. The column described a three dimensional
puzzle made with 6 interlocking wooden pieces. I built the
puzzle and tried to solve it unsuccessfully. The column said
that there was only one way for the pieces to fit. I suspected
that maybe there were several stable configurations, only one
of which could be assembled. I wrote a PROLOG program to search
for possibilities. It found 2 combinations, neither of which
could be disassembled. I contacted Bill Cutler and found out
that there was a mistake in the column; one of the pieces (piece
number 6) had been drawn incorrectly. With the correct
pieces, the program produced a list of 24 unique
configurations. I started at the end of the list and
worked backwords. I soon found a configuration that I
could assemble.
The program identifies configurations of the pieces in
which there is no interference between any pair of
pieces; no check is made to see if the configuration can
be dissasembled.
Piece number 6 is incorrectly drawn in the article. The
description of burr number 6 in the program below is
correct. The pieces are described as they are oriented
in the article. The x axis is out of the page, the y axis
is to the right and z axis points up. Placement of the
pieces is specified by location and orientation. There are
6 locations and 2 orientations for each piece.
Piece number 3 has two properties that distinguish it from
the other pieces. It is the only piece that might be rotated
about its long axis (y) to produce another configuration for
consideration. This was not done by the program. It is also
the only piece that is unchanged after a rotation of 180
degrees about its z axis.
Rotation of piece 3 about its own axis was not done by the
program. I ran the program 3 times with the piece described
in three orientations: as shown in the article, facing down
and facing sideways. I found the solution with the piece
facing as shown in the article. The following program lists
possiblities for that orientation.
Because of the symmetry of piece 3, each possibility is
listed twice. Here is the program:
% BURR puzzle solver.
% Written by William Premerlani.
%
% Solves Bill Cutler's Baffling Burr Puzzle.
%
% pick←location(Item, Inlist, Orientation, Outlist)
%
% picks a location, Item, and orientation, Orientation, from
% Inlist. Unused items are in Outlist.
%
pick←location(X, [X, ..Y], 0, Y).
pick←location(X, [X, ..Y], 1, Y).
pick←location(X, [H, ..T1], O, [H, ..T2]) :- pick←location
(X, T1, O, T2).
% piece←fits is true if Piece will fit at Location with
% Orientation, with the list of Occupied places in the puzzle
% matrix occupied
piece←fits(Occupied, Piece, Location, Orientation) :-
burrs(Piece, Burrlist),
add←burrs([], Burrlist←T, Burrlist, Location, Orientation),
piece←safe(Burrlist←T, Occupied).
% piece←safe(List1, List2) is true if the intersection of packed
% vectors in List1 and List2 is the null set.
piece←safe([], ←).
piece←safe(←, []).
piece←safe(Puzzle, [V2, ..R2]) :-
burr←safe(Puzzle, V2),
piece←safe(Puzzle, R2).
% burr←safe(List, Vector) is true if Vector is not in List
burr←safe([], ←).
burr←safe([V1, ..R1], V2) :-
not(match(V1, V2)),
burr←safe(R1, V2).
% use the built in unification algorithm to check for a match.
match(V, V).
% build←puzzle adds Piece at Location with Orientation to puzzle.
% Inlist is the list of occupied vectors before the addition;
% Outlist is the result
build←puzzle(Inlist, Outlist, Piece, Location, Orientation) :-
burrs(Piece, Burrlist),
add←burrs(Inlist, Outlist, Burrlist, Location,
Orientation).
% burrs(Piece, List) is true when List is the list of coordinates
% of the cells in Piece.
burrs(1, [
-1, -1, -2,
-1, 1, -2
]).
burrs(2, [
-1, -2, -1,
-1, 1, -2,
1, -1, -2,
1, 1, -2
]).
burrs(3, [
-1, -2, -1,
-1, 2, -1,
1, -2, -1,
1, 2, -1,
-1, -1, -2,
-1, 1, -2,
1, -1, -2,
1, 1, -2
]).
burrs(4, [
-1, -1, -1,
-1, -1, -2,
-1, 1, -2
]).
burrs(5, [
-1, -2, -1,
1, 1, -1,
1, 2, -1,
-1, -1, -2,
-1, 1, -2
]).
burrs(6, [
-1, 1, -1,
-1, -1, -2,
-1, 1, -2,
-1, -1, -2,
1, -1, -2
]).
% add←burrs(Inlist, Outlist, Burrlist, Location, Orientation)
% adds list of cells in Burrlist at Location with Orientation
% to Inlist, producing Outlist
add←burrs(Inlist, Outlist,
[X, Y, Z, ..Burr←tail], Location, Orientation) :-
orient(Location, Orientation, X, Y, Z, V),
add←burrs([V, ..Inlist], Outlist, Burr←tail,
Location, Orientation).
add←burrs(List, List, [], ←, ←).
% orient(Location, Orientation, X, Y, Z, V) performs coordinate
% transformations on cell at X,Y,Z to put it a Location with
% Orientation. result is packed into a special data type, V.
% for specifying burr cells.
orient(Location, Orientation, Xin, Yin, Zin, Vout) :-
flip(Orientation, Xin, Yin, Zin, Xf, Yf, Zf),
rotate(Location, Xf, Yf, Zf, Xout, Yout, Zout),
pack(Xout, Yout, Zout, Vout).
% pack packs vector into a special format. Used to avoid
% stack overflow.
pack(Xout, Yout, Zout, Vout) :- Vout is (100*Xout)+(10*Yout)
+Zout.
% flip rotates piece 180 degrees
flip(0, X, Y, Z, X, Y, Z).
flip(1, X, Y, Z, -X, -Y, Z).
% rotate transforms coordinates of piece into 1 of 6 locations
rotate(1, X, Y, Z, X, Y, Z).
rotate(2, X, Y, Z, -X, Y, -Z).
rotate(3, X, Y, Z, Y, Z, X).
rotate(4, X, Y, Z, -Y, -Z, X).
rotate(5, X, Y, Z, -Z, -X, Y).
rotate(6, X, Y, Z, Z, X, Y).
% place←pieces(Input, Output, Pieces, Locations, Occupied)
% places list of pieces, Pieces into list of locations,
% Locations. Input is a list of pieces already placed. Output
% is the list of piece locations and orientations. Occupied is
% a list of puzzle cells already occupied by pieces already
% placed.
place←pieces(Input, Output, [Piece, ..P], Locations, Occupied) :-
pick←location(Location, Locations, Orientation, Loc),
piece←fits(Occupied, Piece, Location, Orientation),
build←puzzle(Occupied, New←occupied, Piece, Location,
Orientation),
place←pieces([piece(Piece, Location, Orientation), ..Input],
Output, P, Loc, New←occupied).
place←pieces(L, L, [], ←, ←).
% print←pieces prints out solutions
print←pieces([piece(P, L, O), ..R]):-
prin(P),prin(L),prin(O),prin(' '),
print←pieces(R).
print←pieces([]).
% inlist generates an input list of integers
inlist(1, L, [1, ..L]).
inlist(X, L1, L2) :- X > 1,
Y is X - 1,
inlist(Y, [X, ..L1], L2).
% solve←burr(N, M, Solution) solves puzzle by
% placing N pieces in M locations, producing Solution
% N and M were used in debugging the program
solve←burr(N, M, Solution) :- inlist(N, [], [←, ..L1]),
inlist(M, [], [←, ..L2]),
build←puzzle([], Start←occupied,
1, 1, 0),
place←pieces([piece(1, 1, 0), ..[]],
Solution, L1, L2, Start←occupied).
% burr(N, M) looks for solutions with N pieces placed in M
% locations. Excute program by typing burr(6, 6)?
burr(N, M) :- solve←burr(N, M, S), print←pieces(S), nl, fail.
burr(←, ←).
------------------------------
Date: 13 Feb 86 07:29:52 GMT
From: Toba@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Toshiya Toba, DEC-Japan)
Subject: Behavior of recorda,recorded,erase
Does anyone here faced the following problem?
If key of the recorda(K,T,R) is same name as build in
predicate, one can not erase(R) this Term, though it should
have different R number than Prolog build in predicate and
this one should erase such a Term.
I have tried DEC-10 prolog, C-Prolog, and Quintus Prolog.
Both DEC-10 and Quintus can erase that term correctly but
C-Prolog does not. (original programs were cross referencer,
written in DEC-10 Prolog)
--------program follows-------
test:-recorda(arg(A,B,C), '$caller'(arg(A,B,C),empty,2,'
test.dat')),
recorded(arg(A,B,C),'$caller'(arg(A,B,C),X,Y,Z),R),
erase(R).
-------trace log follows-----
|?-test.
(1) 1 Call: test ?
.........
........
(4) 2 Call: recorded(arg(←0,←1,←2),$caller(arg(←0,←1,←2),←3,←4,←5),
←3435 ?
(4) 2 Exit: recorded(arg(←0,←1,←2),$caller(arg(←0,←1,←2),empty,2,
test.dat),
a00246e) ?
(5) 2 Call: erase(a000264e) ?
! Attempt to erase a system object
-------end log---------
-- Toshiya Toba
------------------------------
Date: 11 Feb 1986 23:28-CST
From: Kale@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU
Subject: Median Algorithm: No mistake
In response to Allen VanGelder's note regarding a `mistake'
in the median algorithm:
The code I gave IS correct. `choose' first calls `medians'
to get a list of all the medians of the 7-element lists.
The length of this list is returned in Length←S. This length
is already 1/7th the length of the original list. To find the
`median of medians' one has to call `select' with half this
length. Hence the division by 2. (By the way, I am sure you
will agree that my rounding-off code is ok for dividing by 2.
I agree with Allen, of course, about division by some arbitrary
K).
-- Kale
------------------------------
Date: 10 Feb 86 10:34:00 EST
From: ADRIAN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Subject: Distfix
It's good to see the discussion on distfix operators,
and to know that Richard O'Keefe has an implementation
for Prolog.
We have found a kind of distfixing very useful in work
on a system called Syllog (as in syllogism). Our system
was first implemented in 1980 in the Setl language (1),
then later in Prolog (2). The idea is to be able to
write syllogisms like
site eg←number has eg←type rock in suitable form
eg←group fossils have been found at site eg←number
eg←group fossils are characteristic of the eg←p period
there are known reserves in eg←type rock from the eg←p
period
------------------------------------------------------------
suggest spatial study for oil bearing formations at site
eg←number
The syllogism has the usual kind of meaning: if each sentence
above the line is true, then so is the one below. The words
prefixed with 'eg←' are variables, used as in Prolog. The other
words in a line make up a distfix operator. (We do allow adjacent
eg←'s, but there must be at least one item per line that is not
prefixed by an eg← .)
There's an obvious translation of syllogisms into Prolog rules.
However, when one writes a few syllogisms for some subject, the
syllogisms seem to take on a declarative life of their own.
Direct execution in Prolog can be something of a disappointment.
For example, the syllogism
eg←assembly has eg←i of the part eg←subpart at level eg←l
eg←subpart has eg←j of the part eg←subsubpart at level eg←m
eg←i * eg←j = eg←k
eg←l + eg←m = eg←n
------------------------------------------------------------
eg←assembly has eg←k of the part eg←subsubpart at level eg←n
is about the well known Parts Explosion in manufacturing (3),
but it won't execute in Prolog because it is left recursive.
And there are other problems with less obvious solutions (4).
So we have been looking at some alternative methods of
executing syllogisms so as to retain the declarative meaning
(5). This has raised the question of what the declarative
meaning of a set of syllogisms really is! In the absence of
negation, there seems to be general agreement that this is the
minimal model of the corresponding set of Horn clauses. But
with Prolog-style 'strong' negation, it's not so easy to
describe a suitable model theory. For example, the two rules
a if not b
b if not a
can cause problems. However, for a well-defined subset of
syntactically correct Prolog programs with negation, we have
recently been able to describe a model theory that assigns a
satisfactory declarative meaning (6).
So what has all this to do with distfixing ? Well, while
distfixing can be thought of as a kind of syntactic sugar,
it tends to remind one that it would be good to bring about a
further approchement between the declarative and procedural
readings of logic, so opening a door on some rather fundamental
ideas about Prolog and logic programming.
-- Adrian Walker
REFERENCES
(1) A. Walker. Syllog: a knowledge-based data management
system. Report No. 34, Department of Computer Science, New
York University, 1981.
(2) A. Walker. Syllog: an approach to Prolog for non
-programmers. In "Logic Programming and its Applications",
M. van Caneghem and D. H. D. Warren (Eds.), Ablex, 1986.
(3) C. Fellenstein, C. Green, L. Palmer, A. Walker and D.
Wyler. A Prototype Manufacturing Knowledge Base in Syllog.
IBM Journal of Research and Development, July 1985.
(4) A. Walker. Prolog/Ex1, an inference engine which explains
both yes and no answers. Proc. 8th Int. Joint Conf. Artificial
Intelligence, 1983.
(5) D. Brough and A. Walker. Some practical properties of logic
programming interpreters. Proc Japan FGCS84 Conf., Tokyo, 1984,
149-156.
(6) K. Apt, H. Blair and A. Walker. Towards a Theory of
Declarative Knowledge. Report, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center,
1986.
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-86 0611 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 06:11:17 PST
Date: Thu 6 Mar 86 06:09:35-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188539941.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Here are today's and next week's AFLBs:
------------------------------------
6-Mar-86 : Jeff Vitter (MSRI & Brown)
Design and Analysis of Dynamic Huffman Coding
Variable length coding is becoming more and more popular in network
communication and file compression applications. One problem with the
classical Huffman algorithm is its large amount of overhead. It requires two
passes over the message: one pass to collect frequency counts, and another
pass to encode the message.
We introduce an efficient new algorithm for dynamic (one-pass) Huffman coding
that allows coding and transmission in real-time, and uses an optimum number
of bits to encode the message, in the worst case among all one-pass schemes.
We also analyze the dynamic Huffman algorithm due to Faller, Gallager, and
Knuth. In each algorithm, both the sender and the receiver maintain
equivalent dynamically varying Huffman trees. The processing time required to
encode and decode a letter whose node in the dynamic Huffman tree is currently
on the d-th level is O(d); hence, the processing can be done in real time. We
show that the number of bits transmitted by the new algorithm for a message
containing t letters is at most t bits more than that used by the conventional
two-pass Huffman coding, independent of the alphabet size. This is best
possible, for any one-pass scheme. Tight upper and lower bounds are derived.
Empirical tests show that the new algorithm performs quite well in practice,
often better than the two-pass method.
***** Time and place: March 6, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
13-Mar-86 : Yoram Moses (MIT)
Knowledge, Common Knowledge, and Simultaneous Actions
in the Presence of Faults
We show that any protocol that guarantees to perform a particular
action simultaneously at all sites of a distributed system must
guarantee that the sites attain common knowledge of particular facts
when such an action is performed. We analyze what facts become common
knowledge at various points in the execution of protocols in a simple
model of a system in which processors are liable to crash. We obtain
a new protocol for Simultaneous Byzantine Agreement that is optimal in
all of its runs. That is, rather than achieving the worst case
behavior, every run of the protocol halts at the earliest possible
time, given the pattern in which failures occur. This may happen as
early as after two rounds. We characterize precisely what failure
patterns require the protocol to run for k rounds, 1<k<t+2,
generalizing and simplifying the lower bound proof for Byzantine
agreement. We also show a non-trivial simultaneous action for which
popular belief would suggest that t+1 rounds would be required in the
worst case, and use our analysis to design a protocol for it that
always halts in two rounds. This work sheds considerable light on many
heretofore mysterious aspects of the Byzantine Agreement problem. It
is one of the first examples of how reasoning about knowledge can be
used to obtain improved solutions to problems in distributed computing.
This is joint work with Cynthia Dwork of IBM Almaden.
***** Time and place: March 13, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂06-Mar-86 0838 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #10
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 08:38:13 PST
Date: Wednesday, March 5, 1986 5:43AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #10
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 6 Mar 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
Announcement - 3rd ICLP Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 86 12:48:22 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <udi%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: 3rd ICLP Program
Third International Conference on Logic Programming
July 14-18, 1986
Imperial College of Science and Technology London, UK
Preliminary Program
Monday, July 15
Tutorials and exhibition
Tuesday, July 15
Morning:
Keynote address: K. Fuchi, ICOT
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Afternoon:
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Invited talk: Jean-Luis Lassez, IBM
Theory of logic programming
Wednesday, July 16
Morning:
Invited talk: Akikazu Takeuchi, ICOT
Concurrent logic programming languages
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Thursday, July 17
Morning:
Invited talk: Michael McCord, IBM
Logic programming and natural language processing
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Afternoon:
Session 5a: Program analysis
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
Invited talk: Takashi Chikayama, ICOT
Prolog programming environments
Friday, July 18
Morning:
Invited talk: Jeffery D. Ullman, Stanford University
Logic programming and databases
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Session 6b: Theory and negation
Afternoon:
Session 7a: Compilation
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Panel: Programming vs. uncovering parallelism
Chair: Keith Clark, Imperial College
Timetable
Morning:
9:30-10:30 Invited talk
10:30-10:50 Coffee break
10:50-12:30 Morning parallel sessions (a & b)
12:30-14:00 Lunch break
Afternoon:
14:00-15:40 Afternoon parallel sessions (a & b)
15:40-16:00 Coffee break
16:00-17:00 Invited talk/Panel discussion
Sessions
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin
An abstract machine for restricted AND-parallel execution
of logic programs
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin & Roger I. Nasr, MCC
Efficient management of backtracking in AND-Pprallelism
Vipin Kumar, U. of Texas at Austin
An intelligent backtracking algorithm for parallel execution
of logic programs
Luis Moniz Pereira, Luis Monteiro, Jose Cunha & Joaquim N. Aparicio,
U. Nova de Lisboa
Delta Prolog: a distributed backtracking extension with events
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Hasao Tamaki, Ibaraki U.
OLD resolution with tabulation
P. Stepanek & O. Stepankova, MFF Prague
Logic programs and alternation
D.A. Wolfram, Syracuse U.
Intractable unifiability problems and backtracking
Heikki Mannila & Esko Ukkonen, U. of Helsinki
On the complexity of unification sequences
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Peter Kursawe, GMD & U. of Karlsruhe
How to invent a Prolog machine
Ian Foster, Steve Gregory, Graem Ringwood, Imperial College
& Ken Satoh, Fujitsu Ltd.
A sequential implementation of Parlog
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A GHC abstract machine and instruction set
Ian Robinson, Schlumberger Palo Alto Res.
A Prolog processor based on a pattern matching memory device
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Matthew Huntbach, U. of Sussex
An improved version of Shapiro's model inference system
Kazuhisa Kawai, Riichiro Mizoguchi, Osamu Kakusho & Jun'ichi Toyoda,
Osaka U.
A framework for ICAI systems based on inductive inference
and logic programming
Luis Moniz Pereira, U. Nova de Lisboa
Rational debugging in logic programming
Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo, Koichi Furukawa, ICOT & David Poole,
U. of Waterloo
Using definite clauses and integrity constraints as the basis for
a theory formation approach to diagnostic reasoning
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Rong Yang & Hideo Aiso, Keio U.
P-Prolog: a parallel language based on exclusive relation
Kazunori Ueda, ICOT
Making exhaustive search programs deterministic
Michael Codish & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
Compiling OR-parallelism into AND-parallelism
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A framework for the implementation of Or-parallel languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Joxan Jaffar & Peter J. Stuckey, Monash U.
Logic program semantics for programming with equations
Gudmond Frandsen, Aarhus U.
A denotational semantics for logic programming
Alberto Martelli & Gianfranco Rossi, U. di Torino
On the sematics of logic programmming languages
Lennart Beckmann, Uppsala U.
Towards a formal semantics for concurrent logic programming
languages
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Hideo Masuzawa, Kouichi Kumon, Akihiro Itashiki, Ken Satoh &
Yukio Sohma, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd.
Kabu-wake parallel inference mechanism and its evaluation
Ralph Butler, Ewing Lusk, William McCune & Ross Overbeek,
Argonne Natl. Lab.
Parallel logic programming for numeric applications
Harvey Abramson, U. of British Columbia
Deterministic logic grammers
Yuji Matsumoto, ICOT
A parallel parsing system for natural language analysis
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Michael J. Maher, U. of Melbourne
Equivalence of logic programs
Phil Vasey, Imperial College
Qualified answers and their application to transformation
M.A. Nait Abdallah, U. of W. Ontario
Procedures in Horn-clause programming
Dale A. Miller & Gopalan Nadathur, U. of Pennsylvania
Higher-order logic programming
Session 5a: Program analysis
C.S. Mellish, U. of Sussex
Abstract interpretation of Prolog programs
Tadashi Kanamori, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. & Hirohisa Seki,
ICOT
Verification of Prolog programs using an extension of execution
Saumya K. Debray & David S. Warren, SUNY at Stony Brook
Detection and optimisation of functional computations in Prolog
Katsuhiko Nakamura, Tokyo Denki U.
Control of logic program execution based on the functional
relations
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
A. Richard Helm & Kirn Marriott, U. of Melbourne
Declarative graphics
Rajiv Gupta, SUNY at Stony Brook
Test-pattern generation for VLSI circuits in a Prolog
environment
C.J. Rawlings, W.R. Taylor, J. Nyakairu, J. Fox & M.J.E. Sternberg,
Imperial Cancer Res. Fund & Birkbeck College
Using Prolog to represent and reason about protein structure
Oded Maler, Zahava Scherz & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
A New approach for introducing Prolog to naive users
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Kotagiri Ramamohanarao & John Shepherd, U. of Melbourne
A superimposed codeword indexing scheme for very large Prolog
databases
D.S. Moffat & P.M.D. Gray, U. of Aberdeen
Interfacing Prolog to a persistent data store
P. Boizumault, CNRS
General model for implementing DIF and FREEZE
Martin Nilsson & Hidehiko Tanaka, U. of Tokyo
Cyclic tree traversal
Session 6b: Theory and negation
R. Barbuti, U. di Pisa
Completeness of the SLDNF-resolution for a class of
logic programs
Paul J. Voda, U. of British Columbia
Choices in, and limitations of, logic programming
Lee Naish, U. of Melbourne
Negation and quantifiers in NU-Prolog
David L. Poole & Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo
Gracefully adding negation and disjunction to Prolog
Session 7a: Compilation
Evan Tick, Stanford U.
Memory performance of Lisp and Prolog programs
Kenneth A. Bowen, Kevin A. Buettner, Ilyas Cicekli & Andrew Turk,
Syracuse U.
The design and implementation of a high-speed incremental
portable Prolog compiler
Andrew K. Turk, Syracuse U.
Compiler optimizations for the WAM
Kevin A. Buettner, Syracuse U.
Fast decompiling of compiled Prolog clauses
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Christopher T. Haynes, Indiana U.
Logic continuations
Chris Moss, Imperial College
Cut & Paste - defining the impure primitives of Prolog
M. Fujita, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd., S. Kono, H. Tanaka & T. Moto-oka,
U. of Tokyo
Tokio: logic programming language based on temporal logic and
its compilation to Prolog
Sun Chengzheng & Tzu Yungui, Changsha Inst.
The OR-woods description of the execution of logic programs
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂06-Mar-86 0943 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar update
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 09:43:15 PST
Date: Thu 6 Mar 86 09:37:00-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar update
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
The following arrived after the Calendar was sent out.
CSLI SEMINAR
Attempts and Performances: A Theory of Speech Acts
Phil Cohen (Pcohen@sri-ai)
2:15, Thursday, March 13, Ventura Trailer Classroom
I will present a theory of speech acts, developed with Hector
Levesque, in which illocutionary acts are defined as ATTEMPTS---as
actions done with certain beliefs and goals. The basis on which the
agent holds the relevant beliefs and goals derives from a theory of
rational interaction. However, there is no primitive notion of an
illocutionary act. The theory meets a number of adequacy criteria for
theories of speech acts. In particular, I will show how it handles
performatives.
-------
∂06-Mar-86 1011 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 11 (Carlota Smith)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 10:11:23 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA29379; Thu, 6 Mar 86 09:56:27 PST
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 86 09:56:27 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8603061756.AA29379@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 11 (Carlota Smith)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 11, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``A speaker-based approach to aspect''
Carlota Smith
University of Texas and
Institute for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
I will present a general account that focusses on how
aspect contributes to the point of view of a sentence, and on
differences between aspectual systems. In this approach aspec-
tual systems have two components, situation aspect and
viewpoint aspect. The components are developed in terms of
idealizations that underlie the familiar Aristotelian classifi-
cation of situations. The idealizations specify the distin-
guishing characteristics of situations and viewpoints but
underdetermine the temporal properties of each. This allows
both for similarities and rather subtle differences in the way
languages realize basic aspectual notions. I will discuss some
of these differences in the perfective and imperfective
viewpoints, using examples from Mandarin Chinese, Japanese,
French, and English. I will also discuss variations in the way
languages realize basic situation types. Within the pattern of
their language speakers choose the situation and viewpoint
aspect of a sentence, presenting an actual situation as an
exemplar of a particular situation type.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 18: John Haviland, Anthropology, Austrailian National
University (currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 25: Martin Braine, Psychology, NYU (currently at Stan-
ford)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"λorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday, March 10, Prof. Joseph Campos of the Psychology
Department of the University of Denver will speak on "The
importance of self-produced locomotion for psychological
development" from noon to 2:00 p.m. in the Beach Room, 3105
Tolman Hall.
On Tuesday, March 11, Prof. Linda A. Waugh of the Departments
of Modern Languages and Linguistics and of Comparative Litera-
ture at Cornell University (currently at the Stanford Humani-
ties Center) will speak on "Tense-aspect and discourse func-
tion: The French simple past in journalistic discourse" at the
Linguistics Group meeting at 8:00 p.m. in 117 Dwinelle Hall.
∂06-Mar-86 1011 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 11 (Carlota Smith)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 10:11:45 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 6 Mar 86 10:03:45-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA29379; Thu, 6 Mar 86 09:56:27 PST
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 86 09:56:27 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8603061756.AA29379@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 11 (Carlota Smith)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 11, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``A speaker-based approach to aspect''
Carlota Smith
University of Texas and
Institute for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
I will present a general account that focusses on how
aspect contributes to the point of view of a sentence, and on
differences between aspectual systems. In this approach aspec-
tual systems have two components, situation aspect and
viewpoint aspect. The components are developed in terms of
idealizations that underlie the familiar Aristotelian classifi-
cation of situations. The idealizations specify the distin-
guishing characteristics of situations and viewpoints but
underdetermine the temporal properties of each. This allows
both for similarities and rather subtle differences in the way
languages realize basic aspectual notions. I will discuss some
of these differences in the perfective and imperfective
viewpoints, using examples from Mandarin Chinese, Japanese,
French, and English. I will also discuss variations in the way
languages realize basic situation types. Within the pattern of
their language speakers choose the situation and viewpoint
aspect of a sentence, presenting an actual situation as an
exemplar of a particular situation type.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 18: John Haviland, Anthropology, Austrailian National
University (currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Mar 25: Martin Braine, Psychology, NYU (currently at Stan-
ford)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"λorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday, March 10, Prof. Joseph Campos of the Psychology
Department of the University of Denver will speak on "The
importance of self-produced locomotion for psychological
development" from noon to 2:00 p.m. in the Beach Room, 3105
Tolman Hall.
On Tuesday, March 11, Prof. Linda A. Waugh of the Departments
of Modern Languages and Linguistics and of Comparative Litera-
ture at Cornell University (currently at the Stanford Humani-
ties Center) will speak on "Tense-aspect and discourse func-
tion: The French simple past in journalistic discourse" at the
Linguistics Group meeting at 8:00 p.m. in 117 Dwinelle Hall.
∂06-Mar-86 1231 NUNBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA Harry Caray Day: May 3
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 12:31:38 PST
Date: Thu 6 Mar 86 12:26:53-PST
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Harry Caray Day: May 3
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Now is the time to make plans for CSLI day at Candlestick, Saturday,
May 3, when we will be watching the Giants take on the Cubs (game time
is 1:05 p.m.). In order to get a block of seats in a good location, we
must order them by the end of this month; the deadline for requests is
March 24. Tickets are nine dollars; you can give the money to Suzy at
the front desk.
Geoff Nunberg
-------
-------
-------
∂06-Mar-86 1854 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Transition to release 6.1 at Welch Rd.
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 6 Mar 86 18:50:47 PST
Date: Thu 6 Mar 86 18:51:53-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Transition to release 6.1 at Welch Rd.
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188678714.16.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
6.1 has been running on S8 for some time now with only one or two
problems which I now believe to be resolved. I've made new 6.1 bands
and have put them on S2, S6, S7, and S8. There is only 6.1 on S7
and S8. 6.0 is still on S2 and S6, but it will go away soon unless
someone talks to me. I am unaware of any major incompatibilities
other than cosmetic ones. Please talk to me if you have any problems
you thingk might be related to 6.1.
We are still working to get 6.1 and TCP 29.13 for ALL Symbolics
machines.
-- Rich
-------
∂07-Mar-86 1045 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA class notes service
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 10:45:14 PST
Date: Fri 7 Mar 86 10:42:18-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: class notes service
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: sec@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
Message-ID: <12188851733.43.REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There is a new copy service being started here on campus by the ASSU in
Tressider. Many of you may know that starting last year many of the local
copy shops in Palo Alto started offering a service where instructors can hand
over one copy of a set of class notes and they will reproduce it and sell it to
students. The advantage of this service is that the Copy Shops handle the money
rather than TAs or secretaries. The problem with these services has been that
students have to go off campus to buy the class readers. Now the ASSU is
offering a better service. You give one copy of your reader to the ASSU, and
they make the copies and charge your students basically at cost (3 cents/page,
75 cents for binding, $1 for admin). They will come to your class three times
in a row to sell copies and will have extras available in their Tressider office
here on campus.
I think we should start using this service whenever possible, since it makes
things easier for the TAs and for Betty's people who then don't have to handle
checks for notes. The classes that won't be able to use this service are those
where the notes are handed out in installments as the quarter progresses.
For more information, contact Steve Hellman, 941-1187.
-------
∂07-Mar-86 1146 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Care and rel-6.1
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 11:39:08 PST
Date: Fri 7 Mar 86 11:39:55-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Care and rel-6.1
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188862221.66.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The system sources for rel-6.1 are on Ardvax. This is great but some
of the Care sources have to be there too. Thus in order to load Care
on a Symbolics under 6.1 you will need an account on Ardvax. If you
do not have one Rich Acuff should be able to set one up for you.
Rice.
-------
∂07-Mar-86 1243 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Release 6.1 again
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 12:38:56 PST
Date: Fri 7 Mar 86 12:31:32-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Release 6.1 again
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12188871619.79.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Anyone using 6.1 at WR will likely need an account on Ardvax to access
fonts and docs that are stored there. Please see me to get such an account.
-- Rich
-------
∂07-Mar-86 1736 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:wolper@su-navajo.arpa seminar announcement: Mike Merritt, 3/14.
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 17:36:11 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Mar 86 17:33:04-PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Mar 86 17:32:58-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 7 Mar 86 17:30:39 pst
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 86 17:30:39 pst
From: Pierre Wolper <wolper@su-navajo.arpa>
Subject: seminar announcement: Mike Merritt, 3/14.
To: aflb.all@score, contreras@score, su-bboards@su-navajo.arpa
Special Seminar:
Friday March 14, 10:00 am, MJ 301
Sailing Through Byzantia:
Easy Impossibility Proofs for Distributed Consensus Problems
Michael Merritt
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Several different consensus problems, most notably the ubiquitous
Byzantine Agreement and Clock Synchronization, are known to be
impossible in communication graphs in which a third of the processors
may fail, or in which the connectivity is not more than twice the
number of possible failures. Previous proofs of these results
involved detailed constructions and complex models that obscured
the underlying intuitions. In this talk, easy proofs of these results
will be presented. These proofs are carried out in very general,
simple models, which considerably strengthens the results, particularly
in the case of Clock Synchronization. More importantly, they
clarify the underlying intuition and motivate the specific bounds
on number of processors and on connectivity, which are known to be tight.
This is joint work with Michael Fischer, Yale University, and
Nancy Lynch, MIT.
∂07-Mar-86 1832 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu MIT VLSI Conference
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 18:32:31 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Mar 86 18:29:54-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 7 Mar 86 18:24:15-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 7 Mar 86 19:57:27 CST
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 7 Mar 86 09:49:50 CST
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1986 10:45 EST
Message-Id: <CEL.12188819501.BABYL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
From: CEL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: theory@RSCH.WISC.EDU
Subject: MIT VLSI Conference
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 07 Mar 86 19:48:34 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Below is the agenda for the Fourth MIT Conference on Advanced Research
in VLSI. Invitations can be obtained from:
Mr. Paul Church, Room 39-321
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
Telephone: (617) 253-8138
Network address: CHURCH at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.ARPA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ADVANCED RESEARCH IN VLSI
The Fourth MIT Conference
April 7-9, 1986
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts
The field of VLSI is an interrelated set of technical disciplines
including semiconductor devices, circuit design, systems architecture,
and complexity theory. This conference seeks to promote interaction
among research workers in the various disciplines that relate to
integrated circuits. In recognition of the growing role of VLSI in
modern computer systems, this year's conference features invited
speakers who are leaders in the theory and practice of parallel
computation.
AGENDA
Monday, April 7, 1986
8:45 Introduction and Welcome, Paul Penfield, Jr., Charles E.
Leiserson
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session I. Silicon Compilation. Chairman: Henry Fuchs,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
9:00 "Miss Manners: A Specialized Silicon Compiler for Synchronizers,"
T. S. Balraj and M. J. Foster, Columbia University
9:30 "ALPS: A Generator of Static CMOS Layout from Boolean
Expressions," Bertrand Serlet, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
10:00 Coffee Break
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session II. Invited Talks. Chairman: Richard E. Zippel, MIT
10:30 "Mosaic: A Fine-Grain Homogeneous Message-Passing System,"
Charles L. Seitz, California Institute of Technology
11:00 "Shared Memory Parallel Processors: The Butterfly and the
Monarch," R. D. Rettberg," BBN Laboratories
11:30 "Data Flow: Computer Architecture Attuned to VLSI," Jack B.
Dennis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
12:00 Lunch in the Sala de Puerto Rico
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session III. Microarchitecture. Chairman: Lance A. Glasser, MIT
2:00 "A Parallel, General Purpose CAM Architecture," Stuart J. Adams,
The C. S. Draper Laboratory; Mary Jane Irwin and Robert M. Owens, The
Pennsylvania State University
2:30. "An Instruction Cache Design for Use with a Delayed Branch,"
Andrew R. Pleszkun and Matthew K. Farrens, University of Wisconsin
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
3:00. Snack Break
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session IV. Testing. Chairman: Jack Raffel, Lincoln Laboratory, MIT
3:30. "Partitioning Circuits for Improved Testability," Sandeep N.
Bhatt, Yale University; Fan R. K. Chung, Bell Communications Research;
and Arnold L. Rosenberg, Duke University
4:00. "Provably Good Pattern Generators for Random Pattern Test,"
Thomas H. Spencer, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Evening: Banquet at The Great Hall, Faneuil Hall Marketplace. Banquet
speaker, Carver Mead, California Institute of Technology.
Tuesday, April 8, 1986
Session V. Design Automation. Chairman: John L. Wyatt, Jr., MIT
9:00. "Exclusion Constraints, A New Application of Graph Algorithms to
VLSI Design," Kevin Karplus, Cornell University
9:30. "Minimal Area Sizing of Power and Ground Nets for VLSI
Circuits," S. Chowdhury and M. A. Breuer, University of Southern
California
10:00. "Area-Delay Optimization of Programmable Logic Arrays," David
P. Marple, Stanford University, and Abbas El Gamal, Stanford
University and LSI Logic Corporation
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
10:30. Coffee Break
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session VI. Invited Talks. Chairman: Richard J. Lipton, Princeton
University
11:00. "The Complexity of Parallel Computation," Richard M. Karp,
University of California at Berkeley
11:30. "Interconnection Patterns for Parallel Computers," L. G.
Valiant, Harvard University
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
12:00. Lunch in Sala de Puerto Rico
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session VII. Applications. Chairman: Christopher J. Terman, MIT
2:00. "A New Systolic Array for the Singular Value Decomposition,"
David E. Schimmel and Franklin T. Luk, Cornell University
2:30. "Dynamic Delay Adjustment: A Technique for High-Speed
Asynchronous Communication," Paul D. Bassett, BBN Laboratories, Lance
A. Glasser, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Randy D.
Rettberg, BBN Laboratories
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
3:00. Snack Break
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session VIII. Invited Talks. Chairman: Thomas F. Knight, Jr., MIT
3:30. "VLSI in the Massively Parallel Processor," Kenneth E.
Batcher, Goodyear Aerospace Corporation
4.00. "The Application of the Connection Machine to VLSI Design," W.
Daniel Hillis, Thinking Machines Corporation
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
8:30. Discussion. Moderator: Bernard Chern, National Science
Foundation. "The Future of University-Sponsored VLSI Conferences,"
for those interested. Marriott Hotel, Salon D on the fourth floor.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Wednesday, April 9, 1986
Session IX. Layout. Chairman: F. Thomson Leighton, MIT
9:00. "An Integer Based Hierarchical Representation for VLSI," Telle
Whitney and Carver Mead, California Institute of Technology
9:30. "Optimal Two-Terminal Wire Routing," J. P. Cohoon and D. S.
Richards, University of Virginia
10:00. "Optimal Multilayer Channel Routing with Overlap," Martin L.
Brady and Donna J. Brown, University of Colorado
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
10:30. Coffee Break
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Session X. Invited Talks. Chairman: Paul Penfield, Jr., MIT
11:00. "Using VLSI to Reduce Serialization and Memory Traffic in
Shared Memory Parallel Computers," Allan Gottlieb with Susan Dickey
and Richard Kenner, Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New
York University
11:30. "The NON-VON Project: Experiments with Massively Parallel
Machines," David Elliot Shaw, Columbia University
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
12:00. Lunch in the Sala de Puerto Rico
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
--------------
TN Message #30
--------------
∂08-Mar-86 1450 avg@su-aimvax.arpa pods roommate needed
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 8 Mar 86 14:49:52 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 8 Mar 86 14:45:50 pst
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 86 14:45:50 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: pods roommate needed
To: nail@diablo
I have no room reservation yet, and am looking for a roommate.
∂09-Mar-86 2141 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Weds. meeting
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 21:41:24 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 9 Mar 86 21:35:35 pst
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 86 21:35:35 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Weds. meeting
To: nail@diablo
I'm going to be away this week.
The meeting is cancelled unless someone else would like
to provide a topic.
---jeff
∂09-Mar-86 2204 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Fast parallel logic
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 22:04:23 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Sun, 9 Mar 86 21:59:29 pst
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 86 21:59:29 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Fast parallel logic
To: nail@diablo, paco@diablo
I've been thinking about the algorithm that Allen Van G. came
up with for parallel execution of "Datalog" programs, which
Allen tells me can be summarized as:
Apply unit resolution and transitivity of implication
as fast as you can.
That is, if we have estabished A <- B1, B2,...,Bn and we
have established Bi, then infer A <- B1,...,B(i-1), B(i+1),...,Bn
AND, if we have established A <- B and B <- C, then infer A <- C.
We can test whether a given atom, say p(a,b) follows from
a given database and a fixed set of rules (Horn clauses with
no function symbols) in parallel time that is polylog in the
size of the database and the "fringe," i.e., the number of
leaves in the shortest proof tree for p(a,b). Thus, if the
set of rules has the "polynomial fringe property" (fringe
is always polynomial in the DB size) then there is an NC
algorithm to test whether p(a,b) can be inferred.
While the algorithm stated in TR 1089 uses some silly (but polynomial)
number of processors, it seems we can, by carefully indexing
the facts we have already inferred, implement the algorithm
with any fixed number of processors so that the running time
of the algorithm is as good as any known algorithm using
that number of processors PROVIDED that what we are really looking
for is all facts inferrable from the rules and DB,
not just one particular fact.
The question that comes up, therefore, is what happens when we
really want to decide only one fact, or a limited family of
facts, and therefore, we have serial algorithms that have
a lot more "focus", i.e., they don't even look at the whole DB.
A good example is probably the "same generation" problem,
where we have rules
sg(X,X).
sg(X,Y) <- par(X,X') & par(Y,Y') & sg(X',Y')
and we want to find sg(`joe', X), i.e., all of Joe's cousins.
Suppose that wee are given p processors for some p, which may even
grow with the size of the DB, but is not "any polynomial in the size."
Can you come up with a way to utilize p processors to speed up
the calculation by some factor close to p, below the time that
a serial algorithm would take. Of course, there is the problem
that we don't know what the best serial algorithm is for this
problem, but I guess I'm really asking whether the known algorithms
(Henschen-Naqvi, magic sets, etc.) can be parallelized.
---jeff
∂09-Mar-86 2359 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA planlunch reminder -- McCarthy, Monday, 11AM
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Mar 86 23:58:59 PST
Date: Sun 9 Mar 86 23:58:34-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: planlunch reminder -- McCarthy, Monday, 11AM
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
SITUATION CALCULUS PLANNING IN BLOCKS AND RELATED WORLDS
John McCarthy (JMC@SU-AI)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 10
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
This talk will present mainly ideas rather than completed work.
Situation calculus is based on the equation s' = result(e,s),
where s and s' are situations and e is an event. Provided
one can control the deduction adequately, this is a more powerful
formalism than STRIPS. Planning a sequence of actions, or more
generally, a strategy of actions to achieve a situation with
specified properties, admits a variety of heuristics which
whittle away at the problem. In many practical situations, these
heuristics, which don't guarantee a full solution but leave a
reduced problem, are sufficient. Humans appear to use many of them
and so should computer programs. The talk therefore will concern both
epistemological and heuristic aspects of planning problems.
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0832 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 08:29:56 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 08:17:00-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189611712.15.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow's CSD lunch will be with Gordon Kino and Richard Pantell on "EE
in the Near West Campus" at 12:15 in MJH 146.
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0839 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA SOE Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 08:36:23 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 08:25:01-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: SOE Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189613172.15.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This is to reconfirm that the SOE will be having a faculty meeting on
Wednesday, March 12 from 3:00 - 5:00 in the Oak Lounge at Tressidor.
There will be discussion of the organization of the school, of opportunities
in the school and of new research in the school. There will also be a
question and answer period, special presentations, and recognition for faculty
who have been at Stanford 25 years. Coffee and cookies will be served
at 3:00 and wine and cheese will be served at 5:00.
-Anne
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0845 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #10
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 08:40:38 PST
Date: Thursday, March 6, 1986 4:20AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #10
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Thursday, 6 Mar 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
Announcement - 3rd ICLP Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 86 12:48:22 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <udi%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: 3rd ICLP Program
Third International Conference on Logic Programming
July 14-18, 1986
Imperial College of Science and Technology London, UK
Preliminary Program
Monday, July 15
Tutorials and exhibition
Tuesday, July 15
Morning:
Keynote address: K. Fuchi, ICOT
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Afternoon:
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Invited talk: Jean-Luis Lassez, IBM
Theory of logic programming
Wednesday, July 16
Morning:
Invited talk: Akikazu Takeuchi, ICOT
Concurrent logic programming languages
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Thursday, July 17
Morning:
Invited talk: Michael McCord, IBM
Logic programming and natural language processing
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Afternoon:
Session 5a: Program analysis
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
Invited talk: Takashi Chikayama, ICOT
Prolog programming environments
Friday, July 18
Morning:
Invited talk: Jeffery D. Ullman, Stanford University
Logic programming and databases
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Session 6b: Theory and negation
Afternoon:
Session 7a: Compilation
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Panel: Programming vs. uncovering parallelism
Chair: Keith Clark, Imperial College
Timetable
Morning:
9:30-10:30 Invited talk
10:30-10:50 Coffee break
10:50-12:30 Morning parallel sessions (a & b)
12:30-14:00 Lunch break
Afternoon:
14:00-15:40 Afternoon parallel sessions (a & b)
15:40-16:00 Coffee break
16:00-17:00 Invited talk/Panel discussion
Sessions
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin
An abstract machine for restricted AND-parallel execution
of logic programs
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin & Roger I. Nasr, MCC
Efficient management of backtracking in AND-Pprallelism
Vipin Kumar, U. of Texas at Austin
An intelligent backtracking algorithm for parallel execution
of logic programs
Luis Moniz Pereira, Luis Monteiro, Jose Cunha & Joaquim N. Aparicio,
U. Nova de Lisboa
Delta Prolog: a distributed backtracking extension with events
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Hasao Tamaki, Ibaraki U.
OLD resolution with tabulation
P. Stepanek & O. Stepankova, MFF Prague
Logic programs and alternation
D.A. Wolfram, Syracuse U.
Intractable unifiability problems and backtracking
Heikki Mannila & Esko Ukkonen, U. of Helsinki
On the complexity of unification sequences
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Peter Kursawe, GMD & U. of Karlsruhe
How to invent a Prolog machine
Ian Foster, Steve Gregory, Graem Ringwood, Imperial College
& Ken Satoh, Fujitsu Ltd.
A sequential implementation of Parlog
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A GHC abstract machine and instruction set
Ian Robinson, Schlumberger Palo Alto Res.
A Prolog processor based on a pattern matching memory device
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Matthew Huntbach, U. of Sussex
An improved version of Shapiro's model inference system
Kazuhisa Kawai, Riichiro Mizoguchi, Osamu Kakusho & Jun'ichi Toyoda,
Osaka U.
A framework for ICAI systems based on inductive inference
and logic programming
Luis Moniz Pereira, U. Nova de Lisboa
Rational debugging in logic programming
Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo, Koichi Furukawa, ICOT & David Poole,
U. of Waterloo
Using definite clauses and integrity constraints as the basis for
a theory formation approach to diagnostic reasoning
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Rong Yang & Hideo Aiso, Keio U.
P-Prolog: a parallel language based on exclusive relation
Kazunori Ueda, ICOT
Making exhaustive search programs deterministic
Michael Codish & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
Compiling OR-parallelism into AND-parallelism
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A framework for the implementation of Or-parallel languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Joxan Jaffar & Peter J. Stuckey, Monash U.
Logic program semantics for programming with equations
Gudmond Frandsen, Aarhus U.
A denotational semantics for logic programming
Alberto Martelli & Gianfranco Rossi, U. di Torino
On the sematics of logic programmming languages
Lennart Beckmann, Uppsala U.
Towards a formal semantics for concurrent logic programming
languages
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Hideo Masuzawa, Kouichi Kumon, Akihiro Itashiki, Ken Satoh &
Yukio Sohma, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd.
Kabu-wake parallel inference mechanism and its evaluation
Ralph Butler, Ewing Lusk, William McCune & Ross Overbeek,
Argonne Natl. Lab.
Parallel logic programming for numeric applications
Harvey Abramson, U. of British Columbia
Deterministic logic grammers
Yuji Matsumoto, ICOT
A parallel parsing system for natural language analysis
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Michael J. Maher, U. of Melbourne
Equivalence of logic programs
Phil Vasey, Imperial College
Qualified answers and their application to transformation
M.A. Nait Abdallah, U. of W. Ontario
Procedures in Horn-clause programming
Dale A. Miller & Gopalan Nadathur, U. of Pennsylvania
Higher-order logic programming
Session 5a: Program analysis
C.S. Mellish, U. of Sussex
Abstract interpretation of Prolog programs
Tadashi Kanamori, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. & Hirohisa Seki,
ICOT
Verification of Prolog programs using an extension of execution
Saumya K. Debray & David S. Warren, SUNY at Stony Brook
Detection and optimisation of functional computations in Prolog
Katsuhiko Nakamura, Tokyo Denki U.
Control of logic program execution based on the functional
relations
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
A. Richard Helm & Kirn Marriott, U. of Melbourne
Declarative graphics
Rajiv Gupta, SUNY at Stony Brook
Test-pattern generation for VLSI circuits in a Prolog
environment
C.J. Rawlings, W.R. Taylor, J. Nyakairu, J. Fox & M.J.E. Sternberg,
Imperial Cancer Res. Fund & Birkbeck College
Using Prolog to represent and reason about protein structure
Oded Maler, Zahava Scherz & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
A New approach for introducing Prolog to naive users
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Kotagiri Ramamohanarao & John Shepherd, U. of Melbourne
A superimposed codeword indexing scheme for very large Prolog
databases
D.S. Moffat & P.M.D. Gray, U. of Aberdeen
Interfacing Prolog to a persistent data store
P. Boizumault, CNRS
General model for implementing DIF and FREEZE
Martin Nilsson & Hidehiko Tanaka, U. of Tokyo
Cyclic tree traversal
Session 6b: Theory and negation
R. Barbuti, U. di Pisa
Completeness of the SLDNF-resolution for a class of
logic programs
Paul J. Voda, U. of British Columbia
Choices in, and limitations of, logic programming
Lee Naish, U. of Melbourne
Negation and quantifiers in NU-Prolog
David L. Poole & Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo
Gracefully adding negation and disjunction to Prolog
Session 7a: Compilation
Evan Tick, Stanford U.
Memory performance of Lisp and Prolog programs
Kenneth A. Bowen, Kevin A. Buettner, Ilyas Cicekli & Andrew Turk,
Syracuse U.
The design and implementation of a high-speed incremental
portable Prolog compiler
Andrew K. Turk, Syracuse U.
Compiler optimizations for the WAM
Kevin A. Buettner, Syracuse U.
Fast decompiling of compiled Prolog clauses
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Christopher T. Haynes, Indiana U.
Logic continuations
Chris Moss, Imperial College
Cut & Paste - defining the impure primitives of Prolog
M. Fujita, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd., S. Kono, H. Tanaka & T. Moto-oka,
U. of Tokyo
Tokio: logic programming language based on temporal logic and
its compilation to Prolog
Sun Chengzheng & Tzu Yungui, Changsha Inst.
The OR-woods description of the execution of logic programs
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂10-Mar-86 0940 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA evaluations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 09:40:28 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 09:33:44-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: evaluations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189625681.13.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Just a reminder that evaluation forms are available in
my office.
-Gina (MJH 030)
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0940 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA evaluations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 09:40:28 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 09:33:44-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: evaluations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189625681.13.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Just a reminder that evaluation forms are available in
my office.
-Gina (MJH 030)
-------
∂10-Mar-86 0949 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 09:48:44 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 09:34:30-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189625822.15.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow will be the *last* CSD lunch for the quarter. (We will NOT have a
lunch finals week.) Lunches will begin again on April 1!
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1014 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 10:13:58 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 10:09:13-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189632141.44.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
British National Conference on Databases. (BNCOD4) Fourth. Proceedings.
British Computer Society Workshop Series. University of Keele, July 1985.
edited by A.F. Grundy. QA76.9.D3B75 1985
British National Conference on Databasess. Jesus College Cambridge, July
1981. edited by Deen and Hammersley. QA76.9.D3B75 1981.
La Linguistica Computazionale. ed. by Bruno G. Bara. P98.L542 1983.
Using The TEX Typesetting Language by Richard Gauthier. Z253.4.T47G38 1984
MacPascal Programming. Tab Books. by Drew Berentes. QA76.8.M3B47 1985.
Software Lifecycle Management: The Incremental Method. by William Cave
and Gilbert Maymon. QA76.6.C39 1984.
Robotics. edited by Marvin Minsky. TJ211.R557 1985 c.3
Artificial Intelligence in Maintenance. Noyes Publications. edited by
Jeffrey Richardson. UG479.A78 1985.
Fortran 77: A practical Approach. fourth edition. by Wilfred Rule.
QA76.73.F35.R84 1983.
Exploring the PICK Operationg System. by Jonathan Sisk and Steve
VanArsdale. QA76.76.O63S57 1985.
Exploring the UNIX System. by Stephen G. Kochan and Patrick Wood.
AT&T Bell publication. QA76.76O63K63 1984.
H. Llull
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1102 AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA [AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: Student Support Proposal]
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 10:51:27 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 10:42:44-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: [AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>: Student Support Proposal]
To: officers: ;
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12189638244.19.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Mail-From: AAAI-OFFICE created at 10-Mar-86 10:40:31
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 10:40:30-PST
From: AAAI <AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Student Support Proposal
To: aaai-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Telephone: (415) 328-3123
Postal-Address: 445 Burgess Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Message-ID: <12189637838.19.AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The financial committee has proposed supporting students to attend
this year's conference in Philadelphia. The AAAI would support
transportation and rooming expenses (they would naturally receive a
free registration), and each recipient would be required to work as a
student volunteer during the conference. On an average, we expect to
support about $700 to $900 per student.
The proposed nomination procedure would begin with each Council member
nominating two candidates. Then, the office would cull this
information and distributing all the nominations to the COuncil to
vote upon.
We would like to see candidates who would not have otherwise been
financially supported ("true hardship cases") either through a
research contract (with travel funds) or sent by their company.
We would like to hear your comments before we initiate the nomination
process.
Regards,
Claudia
-------
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1111 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa ICLP Program
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 10:43:24 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Mar 86 10:24:25 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 86 10:24:25 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: ICLP Program
To: nail@diablo
Third International Conference on Logic Programming
July 14-18, 1986
Imperial College of Science and Technology London, UK
Preliminary Program
Monday, July 15
Tutorials and exhibition
Tuesday, July 15
Morning:
Keynote address: K. Fuchi, ICOT
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Afternoon:
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Invited talk: Jean-Luis Lassez, IBM
Theory of logic programming
Wednesday, July 16
Morning:
Invited talk: Akikazu Takeuchi, ICOT
Concurrent logic programming languages
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Thursday, July 17
Morning:
Invited talk: Michael McCord, IBM
Logic programming and natural language processing
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Afternoon:
Session 5a: Program analysis
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
Invited talk: Takashi Chikayama, ICOT
Prolog programming environments
Friday, July 18
Morning:
Invited talk: Jeffery D. Ullman, Stanford University
Logic programming and databases
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Session 6b: Theory and negation
Afternoon:
Session 7a: Compilation
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Panel: Programming vs. uncovering parallelism
Chair: Keith Clark, Imperial College
Timetable
Morning:
9:30-10:30 Invited talk
10:30-10:50 Coffee break
10:50-12:30 Morning parallel sessions (a & b)
12:30-14:00 Lunch break
Afternoon:
14:00-15:40 Afternoon parallel sessions (a & b)
15:40-16:00 Coffee break
16:00-17:00 Invited talk/Panel discussion
Sessions
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin
An abstract machine for restricted AND-parallel execution
of logic programs
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin & Roger I. Nasr, MCC
Efficient management of backtracking in AND-Pprallelism
Vipin Kumar, U. of Texas at Austin
An intelligent backtracking algorithm for parallel execution
of logic programs
Luis Moniz Pereira, Luis Monteiro, Jose Cunha & Joaquim N. Aparicio,
U. Nova de Lisboa
Delta Prolog: a distributed backtracking extension with events
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Hasao Tamaki, Ibaraki U.
OLD resolution with tabulation
P. Stepanek & O. Stepankova, MFF Prague
Logic programs and alternation
D.A. Wolfram, Syracuse U.
Intractable unifiability problems and backtracking
Heikki Mannila & Esko Ukkonen, U. of Helsinki
On the complexity of unification sequences
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Peter Kursawe, GMD & U. of Karlsruhe
How to invent a Prolog machine
Ian Foster, Steve Gregory, Graem Ringwood, Imperial College
& Ken Satoh, Fujitsu Ltd.
A sequential implementation of Parlog
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A GHC abstract machine and instruction set
Ian Robinson, Schlumberger Palo Alto Res.
A Prolog processor based on a pattern matching memory device
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Matthew Huntbach, U. of Sussex
An improved version of Shapiro's model inference system
Kazuhisa Kawai, Riichiro Mizoguchi, Osamu Kakusho & Jun'ichi Toyoda,
Osaka U.
A framework for ICAI systems based on inductive inference
and logic programming
Luis Moniz Pereira, U. Nova de Lisboa
Rational debugging in logic programming
Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo, Koichi Furukawa, ICOT & David Poole,
U. of Waterloo
Using definite clauses and integrity constraints as the basis for
a theory formation approach to diagnostic reasoning
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Rong Yang & Hideo Aiso, Keio U.
P-Prolog: a parallel language based on exclusive relation
Kazunori Ueda, ICOT
Making exhaustive search programs deterministic
Michael Codish & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
Compiling OR-parallelism into AND-parallelism
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A framework for the implementation of Or-parallel languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Joxan Jaffar & Peter J. Stuckey, Monash U.
Logic program semantics for programming with equations
Gudmond Frandsen, Aarhus U.
A denotational semantics for logic programming
Alberto Martelli & Gianfranco Rossi, U. di Torino
On the sematics of logic programmming languages
Lennart Beckmann, Uppsala U.
Towards a formal semantics for concurrent logic programming
languages
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Hideo Masuzawa, Kouichi Kumon, Akihiro Itashiki, Ken Satoh &
Yukio Sohma, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd.
Kabu-wake parallel inference mechanism and its evaluation
Ralph Butler, Ewing Lusk, William McCune & Ross Overbeek,
Argonne Natl. Lab.
Parallel logic programming for numeric applications
Harvey Abramson, U. of British Columbia
Deterministic logic grammers
Yuji Matsumoto, ICOT
A parallel parsing system for natural language analysis
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Michael J. Maher, U. of Melbourne
Equivalence of logic programs
Phil Vasey, Imperial College
Qualified answers and their application to transformation
M.A. Nait Abdallah, U. of W. Ontario
Procedures in Horn-clause programming
Dale A. Miller & Gopalan Nadathur, U. of Pennsylvania
Higher-order logic programming
Session 5a: Program analysis
C.S. Mellish, U. of Sussex
Abstract interpretation of Prolog programs
Tadashi Kanamori, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. & Hirohisa Seki,
ICOT
Verification of Prolog programs using an extension of execution
Saumya K. Debray & David S. Warren, SUNY at Stony Brook
Detection and optimisation of functional computations in Prolog
Katsuhiko Nakamura, Tokyo Denki U.
Control of logic program execution based on the functional
relations
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
A. Richard Helm & Kirn Marriott, U. of Melbourne
Declarative graphics
Rajiv Gupta, SUNY at Stony Brook
Test-pattern generation for VLSI circuits in a Prolog
environment
C.J. Rawlings, W.R. Taylor, J. Nyakairu, J. Fox & M.J.E. Sternberg,
Imperial Cancer Res. Fund & Birkbeck College
Using Prolog to represent and reason about protein structure
Oded Maler, Zahava Scherz & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
A New approach for introducing Prolog to naive users
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Kotagiri Ramamohanarao & John Shepherd, U. of Melbourne
A superimposed codeword indexing scheme for very large Prolog
databases
D.S. Moffat & P.M.D. Gray, U. of Aberdeen
Interfacing Prolog to a persistent data store
P. Boizumault, CNRS
General model for implementing DIF and FREEZE
Martin Nilsson & Hidehiko Tanaka, U. of Tokyo
Cyclic tree traversal
Session 6b: Theory and negation
R. Barbuti, U. di Pisa
Completeness of the SLDNF-resolution for a class of
logic programs
Paul J. Voda, U. of British Columbia
Choices in, and limitations of, logic programming
Lee Naish, U. of Melbourne
Negation and quantifiers in NU-Prolog
David L. Poole & Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo
Gracefully adding negation and disjunction to Prolog
Session 7a: Compilation
Evan Tick, Stanford U.
Memory performance of Lisp and Prolog programs
Kenneth A. Bowen, Kevin A. Buettner, Ilyas Cicekli & Andrew Turk,
Syracuse U.
The design and implementation of a high-speed incremental
portable Prolog compiler
Andrew K. Turk, Syracuse U.
Compiler optimizations for the WAM
Kevin A. Buettner, Syracuse U.
Fast decompiling of compiled Prolog clauses
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Christopher T. Haynes, Indiana U.
Logic continuations
Chris Moss, Imperial College
Cut & Paste - defining the impure primitives of Prolog
M. Fujita, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd., S. Kono, H. Tanaka & T. Moto-oka,
U. of Tokyo
Tokio: logic programming language based on temporal logic and
its compilation to Prolog
Sun Chengzheng & Tzu Yungui, Changsha Inst.
The OR-woods description of the execution of logic programs
∂10-Mar-86 1111 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #11
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 10:58:31 PST
Date: Friday, March 7, 1986 4:21AM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 326-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #11
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 10 Mar 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Implementation - Predicate behavior & LIPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Feb 86 15:37:35 PST (Tue)
From: TSung@Aero
Subject: behavior of recorda, recorded, erase
Yes, I tried on CProlog 1.5, and what you said was true.
Here's what I found.
First, define:
t1(Key,T) :- recorda(Key,T,R), erase(R).
t2(Key,T) :- recordz(Key,T,R), erase(R).
trying with different predefined predicates, I found that:
a) recorda and recordz behaves the same in this respect.
b) if you write out the key fully, e.g.
Key = arg(A,B,C)
listing,
atom(A),
true,
then there is a problem with erasing as stated.
c) if the built-in predicate takes arguments, and you only
write the principal functor, e.g.
Key = arg,
atom,
assert,
then CProlog1.5 will erase ok. (The 1.5 manual specifically
says that, in recorda and recordz, only the principal functor
of the Key is significant (p.32). This shows that there is
a difference).
d) After trying to erase unsuccessfully thus, the interpreter
turns on the debug switch. e.g.
?- t1(arg(A,B,C),a).
! Attempt to erase a system object.
?- nodebug.
?- Debug mode switched off.
(if debug switch were not on, it would just say "yes")
I found this out when trying to do a second unsuccessful
t1(...), it goes into debugger after the error message.
But then, I think debug is switch on after every system error
message.
In short, it seems definitely a bug in the CProlog interpreter.
-- Fu-Sheng
------------------------------
Date: 14 Feb 86 17:28:45 GMT
From: Sundar R. Lyengar <Sundar@ucbvax.berkeley.edu>
Subject: recorda,recorded,erase--behavior
I tested the problem in our Cprolog←1.5 on Vax (bsd4.2).
Yes, the erase does fail if the key used in a corresponding
'recorda' is an evaluable predicate. However, the erase works
just fine if the Key is a simple atom. Since the key used is
only the functor of the first argument to 'recorda', you don't
have to use the entire term. So a temporary fix for your
problem would be,
recorda(arg,...,R),
recorded(arg,...X),
erase(R).
However, I don't what is causing the problem. I hope this
helps.
-- Sundar R. Iyengar
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 86 14:23:09 -0100
From: Micha Meier <unido!ecrcvax!Micha@seismo.CSS.GOV>
Subject: LIPS again
The speed of the current Prolog systems is still measured
using the naive reverse example with a list of 30 elements. I
guess that anybody who has tried this with a system that runs
over 10 kLIPS has seen the inconvenience - the time spent in
executing this example is too short to be measured correctly.
The other drawback is that many implementors concentrate on
optimizing this very example and the like, i.e. deterministic
procedures processing lists and the results for other types of
programs may be totally different (e.g. there is a Prolog system
running 'quicksort' 20 times slower than 'nreverse').
Below, I include the listing of a test program which tries
to solve these problems: first, it includes a procedure which
measures LIPS on naive reverse of an arbitrary list. Second, a
procedure that measures LIPS on quicksort of a list in descending
order; third, measuring of LIPS by quicksort of an ordered list.
I suppose that indexing prevents choices in concatenate and in
partition([], ←, ←, ←).
The first case is purely deterministic - no choice points and
no failures.
In the second case, the number of inferences is o(n*n/2) and
the same for choice points created. In the last example, the
number of inferencesis o(n*n), for choices and failures it is
o(n*n/2).
The quicksort example better reflects the speed of a Prolog
system: it creates some choice points, uses the cut and calls an
evaluable predicate. When the implementors try to optimize the
first clause for 'partition/4' to yield something like
partition([X|L], Y, [X|L1], L2) :- X < Y, !, partition(L, Y, L1, L2).
get list A1
unify variable X5
unify variable X1
get list A3
unify value X5
unify variable A3
put value X5, A1
escape </2
neckcut
execute partition/4
then the whole system is likely to run fast even on
nondeterministic examples with some arithmetic.
-- Micha
% File : LIPS.PL
% Author : Micha Meier
% Purpose : Testing the speed of naive reverse and quicksort of
% an arbitrary long list.
% On systems without reals it is necessary to multiply I
% (inferences no.) by the time unit, e.g. 1000 if cputime
% is in miliseconds.
test :- write('list length : '),
read(X),
conslist(X, List),
T1 is cputime,
nreverse(List, ←),
T2 is cputime,
T is T2 - T1,
I is (X*(X+3))/2 + 1,
LIPS is I/T,
write(' LIPS of naive reverse: '),
write(LIPS),
nl,
T3 is cputime,
qsort(List, ←, []),
T4 is cputime,
TT is T4 - T3,
II is (X*(X+5))/2 + 1,
LIPS1 is II/TT,
write(' LIPS of quicksort (reverse order): '),
write(LIPS1),
nl,
T5 is cputime,
qsort1(List, ←, []),
T6 is cputime,
TTT is T6 - T5,
III is (X+1)*(X+1),
LIPS2 is III/TTT,
write(' LIPS of quicksort (ordered): '),
write(LIPS2),
nl.
nreverse([], []).
nreverse([X|L0],L) :- nreverse(L0, L1),
concatenate(L1, [X], L).
concatenate([], L, L).
concatenate([X|L1], L2, [X|L3]) :- concatenate(L1, L2, L3).
conslist(0, []) :- !.
conslist(N, [N|L]) :-
N1 is N-1,
conslist(N1, L).
qsort([X|L], R, R0) :-
partition(L, X, L1, L2),
qsort(L2, R1, R0),
qsort(L1, R, [X|R1]).
qsort([], R, R).
partition([X|L], Y, [X|L1], L2) :-
X < Y,
!,
partition(L, Y, L1, L2).
partition([X|L], Y, L1, [X|L2]) :-
partition(L, Y, L1, L2).
partition([], ←, [], []).
qsort1([X|L], R, R0) :-
partition1(L, X, L1, L2),
qsort1(L2, R1, R0),
qsort1(L1, R, [X|R1]).
qsort1([], R, R).
partition1([X|L], Y, [X|L1], L2) :-
X > Y,
!,
partition(L, Y, L1, L2).
partition1([X|L], Y, L1, [X|L2]) :-
partition1(L, Y, L1, L2).
partition1([], ←, [], []).
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂10-Mar-86 1344 PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA colloquium
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 13:43:46 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 13:37:53-PST
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: colloquium
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Howard Wettstein
University of Notre Dame
"Bringing Belief Down to Earth"
Wednesday, March 19, 3:00 p.m.
Ventura Trailers Classroom (Trailer C-D)
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1551 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA end quarter reports...
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 15:20:49 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 15:14:00-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: end quarter reports...
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189687627.12.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
...are here. Please pick yours up from my office, or send
me mail if you want it (them) in your box or through the
ID mail.
-Gina
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1551 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA end quarter reports...
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 15:20:49 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 15:14:00-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: end quarter reports...
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189687627.12.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
...are here. Please pick yours up from my office, or send
me mail if you want it (them) in your box or through the
ID mail.
-Gina
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1603 NUNBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA Harry Caray is alive and living in Palm Springs, Part II
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 15:49:53 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 15:39:34-PST
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Harry Caray is alive and living in Palm Springs, Part II
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In response to inquiries: there is no discount for children, senior
citizens, or mutiles de guerre at Candlestick. If we order more than
25 tickets, however, the price comes down from $9 to $8. In that case,
people who have paid the higher price can have a choice of getting a
refund, or of having their money donated to the Keith Hernandez Legal
Action Committee.
-------------
Reminder: The game is on Saturday, May 3, at 1:30 P.M. Deadline for
giving ticket money to Susi is March 24.
-------
∂10-Mar-86 1652 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa paper received
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 16:47:35 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Mon, 10 Mar 86 16:35:17 pst
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 86 16:35:17 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: paper received
To: nail@diablo
"Towards a Theory of Declarative Knowledge" by
K. R. Apt, H. Blair, and A. Walker, IBM Yorktown.
This talks about "stratified negation," as in NAIL!, where
negated terms may not be connected recursively to the rule head.
∂10-Mar-86 1736 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA teaching evaluation
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 17:36:21 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 17:33:19-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: teaching evaluation
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189712988.17.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
All faculty who are teaching this quarter should be picking up
course evaluation forms from Gina Modica in MJH030 so they
can be handed out this week in class. Thanks, -Nils
-------
∂10-Mar-86 2132 SCHOEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Wednesday, March 12 Advanced Architectures Meeting
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 21:32:03 PST
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 21:33:55-PST
From: Eric Schoen <Schoen@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Wednesday, March 12 Advanced Architectures Meeting
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189756789.45.SCHOEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
There WILL be a meeting this Wednesday, at 10:15. I will discuss the
implementation of the current CAOS system, as well as a new implementation
which runs under the latest CARE architecture. The Welch-Road-Gateway
willing, there will be copies of a paper describing the system available
on the table in A1105 (gateway unwilling, you'll probably not read this
message in time).
Eric
-------
∂11-Mar-86 0602 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLBs
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 06:01:57 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 05:59:07-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLBs
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189848758.15.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
These are the next two AFLBs:
-----------------------------------
13-Mar-86 : Yoram Moses (MIT)
Knowledge, Common Knowledge, and Simultaneous Actions
in the Presence of Faults
We show that any protocol that guarantees to perform a particular
action simultaneously at all sites of a distributed system must
guarantee that the sites attain common knowledge of particular facts
when such an action is performed. We analyze what facts become common
knowledge at various points in the execution of protocols in a simple
model of a system in which processors are liable to crash. We obtain
a new protocol for Simultaneous Byzantine Agreement that is optimal in
all of its runs. That is, rather than achieving the worst case
behavior, every run of the protocol halts at the earliest possible
time, given the pattern in which failures occur. This may happen as
early as after two rounds. We characterize precisely what failure
patterns require the protocol to run for k rounds, 1<k<t+2,
generalizing and simplifying the lower bound proof for Byzantine
agreement. We also show a non-trivial simultaneous action for which
popular belief would suggest that t+1 rounds would be required in the
worst case, and use our analysis to design a protocol for it that
always halts in two rounds. This work sheds considerable light on many
heretofore mysterious aspects of the Byzantine Agreement problem. It
is one of the first examples of how reasoning about knowledge can be
used to obtain improved solutions to problems in distributed computing.
This is joint work with Cynthia Dwork of IBM Almaden.
***** Time and place: March 13, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
20-Mar-86 : Hiroto Yasuura (Kyoto University & Berkeley)
Redundant Coding for Local Computability
We show that an operation of any finite Abelian (commutative) group
can be computed by a constant depth circuit (fan-in restricted model)
under a redundant coding scheme.
We introduce a concept of `Local Computability' for designing high-speed
parallel algorithms on fan-in restricted models. A function F:{0,1}↑n ->
{0,1}↑m is r-local computable if each subfunction f of F depends on only
at most r input variables. If r is a constant independent of n, we can
make a parallel algorithm with constant depth.
Avizienis pointed out the advantage of redundant coding schemes to
design locally computable circuits for arithmetic operations [Aviz61].
In a practical application of redundant coding, we designed a high-speed
multiplier [TYY85] using 12-local adders. Namely, each digit of the sum
is determined by only 12 input variables and no carry propagation occurs.
Winograd showed that we can not construct a constant depth adder using
any nonredundant coding scheme [Wino65]. So redundancy is essential
in any local computation of addition.
The main result of this talk is that an operation of any finite
Abelian group is k-local computable, using a redundant coding,
where k is independent of the size of the group.
This is joint work with N. Takagi and S. Yajima of Kyoto Univ.
***** Time and place: March 20, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂11-Mar-86 0820 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 08:20:45 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 08:11:15-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189872811.12.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Last lunch of the quarter today at 12:15 in MJH 146!
-------
∂11-Mar-86 0903 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA TINLAP-3
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 09:03:42 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 08:55:50-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: TINLAP-3
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Does anyone know the exact dates of TINLAP-3? I understand it will be
next January, but I need to know more precisely, so as to avoid conflicting
plans. If you don't know the dates, but do know the electronic address
for Yorick Wilks (the organizer), I would appreciate that information.
Thanks.
Tom
-------
∂11-Mar-86 1453 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Chien
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 14:53:08 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 14:49:09-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Chien
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189945245.45.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Y.T. Chien of NSF will be visiting the Stanford CSD Department on April 8
and will be our guest at the CSD lunch on that day. Additionally, I am
helping him to arrange his schedule to meet with various people in the
department. His time is somewhat limited; he will only be here in the p.m.
Should you have something high priority you would like to discuss with him
please let me know and I will try to schedule a time for you to visit with
him.
-Anne
-------
∂11-Mar-86 1607 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:acuff@su-ardvax.arpa Explorer survey should be in
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 16:07:49 PST
Received: from su-ardvax.arpa by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Tue 11 Mar 86 16:03:51-PST
Received: by su-ardvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 11 Mar 86 12:53:44 pst
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 12:53:44 pst
From: Richard Acuff <acuff@su-ardvax.arpa>
Subject: Explorer survey should be in
To: ksl-lispm@sumex
Ken Kershner will be picking up the survey results Wednesday
at around noon, so get them in soon if you intend to answer!
-- Rich
∂11-Mar-86 1611 @SUMEX-AIM.ARPA:acuff@su-ardvax.arpa TCP Finger for Explorers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 16:10:52 PST
Received: from su-ardvax.arpa by SUMEX-AIM.ARPA with TCP; Tue 11 Mar 86 16:04:36-PST
Received: by su-ardvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 11 Mar 86 12:51:51 pst
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 12:51:51 pst
From: Richard Acuff <acuff@su-ardvax.arpa>
Subject: TCP Finger for Explorers
To: ksl-lispm@sumex
I've added TCP-Finger to the utilities available with Load-Tools. It
allows the user to finger hosts that don't use ChaosNet, such as Sumex or
Diablo, from an Explorer. This, if you want to see if you have mail on
Sumex, for instance, you could type "TERM 1 f" and then "username@sumex" on
an Explorer with this tool loaded and get the finger report on "username"
from Sumex.
-- Rich
∂11-Mar-86 1615 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #13
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 16:15:42 PST
Date: 11 Mar 86 1542-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #13
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 11 Mar 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 13
Today's Topics:
Comment on Debugging Survey
Seminar: Persistent Memory (SU)
Announcement: Third International Conference on Logic Programming
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 26 February 1986 07:41-PST
From: dimitrov at nyu-csd2.arpa (Isaac Dimitrovsky)
Just a short thought about your debugging survey. You ask what
percentage of bugs were, so to speak, inherently parallel. I don't
think number of bugs is a good indicator of the difficulty of
debugging parallel programs. For example, you could say that most
pascal bugs are caught by the compiler, concluding that getting pascal
programs to work correctly is not much more difficult than getting
them to compile. A better question might be: What percentage of your
debugging time is spent on inherently parallel bugs? My personal
feeling, unsupported by much experience, is that debugging low-level
parallel algorithms can be a real pain, especially on shared-memory
mimd machines, and even more especially for algorithms that try to
allow as much parallelism as possible (for example, those that involve
sharing a common structure in memory using as few critical sections as
possible).
I'm currently writing a parallel LISP for the NYU Ultracomputer, a
shared memory mimd machine (references available on request). My
approach to debugging it is to program the kernel of the system
(written in C) and the low-level LISP stuff very defensively. I also
intend to supply well-verified parallel algorithms for common shared
structures like queues, stacks, etc. Hopefully, LISP code can then
use mostly these algorithms and be less subject to irreproducible
bugs. Hoping to contribute more on this soon,
Isaac Dimitrovsky 251 Mercer Street, New York NY 10012 (212) 674-8652
allegra!cmcl2!csd2!dimitrov (l in cmcl2 is letter l not number 1)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 86 23:02:40 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton at su-pescadero.arpa>
Re: Seminar - Persistent Memory (SU)
[Forwarded from AIList by SASW@MIT-MC.ARPA]
PERSISTENT OBJECT SYSTEM FOR SYMBOLIC COMPUTERS
Satishe Thatte
Texas Instruments
Thurs. Feb 27th at 4:15 pm.
MJH 352
(Part of Distributed Systems Group Project meeting)
The advent of automatically managed, garbage-collected virtual memory
was crucial to the development of today's symbolic processing. No
analogous capability has yet been developed in the domain of
"persistent" objects managed by a file system or database. As a
consequence, the programmer is forced to flatten rich structures of
objects resident in virtual memory before the objects can be stored in
a file system or conventional database. This task puts a great burden
on the programmer and adversely affects system performance.
A persistent object system that extends the automatic storage
management concepts of a symbolic computer to the domain of persistent
objects will be presented. The system supports long-term, reliable
retention of richly structured objects in virtual memory itself,
without resorting to a file system. Therefore, the system requires a
crash recovery scheme at the level of virtual memory.
The persistent object system is based on a uniform memory abstraction,
which eliminates the distinction between transient objects (data
structures) and persistent objects (files and databases), and
therefore, allows the same set of powerful and flexible operations
with equal efficiency on both transient and persistent objects from a
programming language such as Lisp or Prolog, without requiring a
special-purpose database language. It is expected that the
exploitation of such a capability will lead to significant
breakthroughs in knowledge/data base management.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 86 12:49:12 -0200
From: Ehud Shapiro <udi%wisdom.bitnet at WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: 3rd ICLP Program
Third International Conference on Logic Programming
July 14-18, 1986
Imperial College of Science and Technology London, UK
Preliminary Program
Monday, July 15
Tutorials and exhibition
Tuesday, July 15
Morning:
Keynote address: K. Fuchi, ICOT
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Afternoon:
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Invited talk: Jean-Luis Lassez, IBM
Theory of logic programming
Wednesday, July 16
Morning:
Invited talk: Akikazu Takeuchi, ICOT
Concurrent logic programming languages
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Thursday, July 17
Morning:
Invited talk: Michael McCord, IBM
Logic programming and natural language processing
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Afternoon:
Session 5a: Program analysis
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
Invited talk: Takashi Chikayama, ICOT
Prolog programming environments
Friday, July 18
Morning:
Invited talk: Jeffery D. Ullman, Stanford University
Logic programming and databases
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Session 6b: Theory and negation
Afternoon:
Session 7a: Compilation
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Panel: Programming vs. uncovering parallelism
Chair: Keith Clark, Imperial College
Timetable
Morning:
9:30-10:30 Invited talk
10:30-10:50 Coffee break
10:50-12:30 Morning parallel sessions (a & b)
12:30-14:00 Lunch break
Afternoon:
14:00-15:40 Afternoon parallel sessions (a & b)
15:40-16:00 Coffee break
16:00-17:00 Invited talk/Panel discussion
Sessions
[Sessions 1a, 2a, 3a, and 4a seem of likely interest to PARSYM
readers. -- BD]
Session 1a: Parallel implementations
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin
An abstract machine for restricted AND-parallel execution
of logic programs
Manuel V. Hermenegildo, U. of Texas at Austin & Roger I. Nasr, MCC
Efficient management of backtracking in AND-parallelism
Vipin Kumar, U. of Texas at Austin
An intelligent backtracking algorithm for parallel execution
of logic programs
Luis Moniz Pereira, Luis Monteiro, Jose Cunha & Joaquim N. Aparicio,
U. Nova de Lisboa
Delta Prolog: a distributed backtracking extension with events
Session 1b: Theory and complexity
Hasao Tamaki, Ibaraki U.
OLD resolution with tabulation
P. Stepanek & O. Stepankova, MFF Prague
Logic programs and alternation
D.A. Wolfram, Syracuse U.
Intractable unifiability problems and backtracking
Heikki Mannila & Esko Ukkonen, U. of Helsinki
On the complexity of unification sequences
Session 2a: Implementations and architectures
Peter Kursawe, GMD & U. of Karlsruhe
How to invent a Prolog machine
Ian Foster, Steve Gregory, Graem Ringwood, Imperial College
& Ken Satoh, Fujitsu Ltd.
A sequential implementation of Parlog
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A GHC abstract machine and instruction set
Ian Robinson, Schlumberger Palo Alto Res.
A Prolog processor based on a pattern matching memory device
Session 2b: Inductive inference and debugging
Matthew Huntbach, U. of Sussex
An improved version of Shapiro's model inference system
Kazuhisa Kawai, Riichiro Mizoguchi, Osamu Kakusho & Jun'ichi Toyoda,
Osaka U.
A framework for ICAI systems based on inductive inference
and logic programming
Luis Moniz Pereira, U. Nova de Lisboa
Rational debugging in logic programming
Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo, Koichi Furukawa, ICOT & David Poole,
U. of Waterloo
Using definite clauses and integrity constraints as the basis for
a theory formation approach to diagnostic reasoning
Session 3a: Concurrent logic languages
Rong Yang & Hideo Aiso, Keio U.
P-Prolog: a parallel language based on exclusive relation
Kazunori Ueda, ICOT
Making exhaustive search programs deterministic
Michael Codish & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
Compiling OR-parallelism into AND-parallelism
Jacob Levy, Weizmann Inst.
A framework for the implementation of Or-parallel languages
Session 3b: Theory and semantics
Joxan Jaffar & Peter J. Stuckey, Monash U.
Logic program semantics for programming with equations
Gudmond Frandsen, Aarhus U.
A denotational semantics for logic programming
Alberto Martelli & Gianfranco Rossi, U. di Torino
On the sematics of logic programmming languages
Lennart Beckmann, Uppsala U.
Towards a formal semantics for concurrent logic programming
languages
Session 4a: Parallel applications and implementations
Hideo Masuzawa, Kouichi Kumon, Akihiro Itashiki, Ken Satoh &
Yukio Sohma, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd.
Kabu-wake parallel inference mechanism and its evaluation
Ralph Butler, Ewing Lusk, William McCune & Ross Overbeek,
Argonne Natl. Lab.
Parallel logic programming for numeric applications
Harvey Abramson, U. of British Columbia
Deterministic logic grammers
Yuji Matsumoto, ICOT
A parallel parsing system for natural language analysis
Session 4b: Theory and higher-order functions
Michael J. Maher, U. of Melbourne
Equivalence of logic programs
Phil Vasey, Imperial College
Qualified answers and their application to transformation
M.A. Nait Abdallah, U. of W. Ontario
Procedures in Horn-clause programming
Dale A. Miller & Gopalan Nadathur, U. of Pennsylvania
Higher-order logic programming
Session 5a: Program analysis
C.S. Mellish, U. of Sussex
Abstract interpretation of Prolog programs
Tadashi Kanamori, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. & Hirohisa Seki,
ICOT
Verification of Prolog programs using an extension of execution
Saumya K. Debray & David S. Warren, SUNY at Stony Brook
Detection and optimisation of functional computations in Prolog
Katsuhiko Nakamura, Tokyo Denki U.
Control of logic program execution based on the functional
relations
Session 5b: Applications and teaching
A. Richard Helm & Kirn Marriott, U. of Melbourne
Declarative graphics
Rajiv Gupta, SUNY at Stony Brook
Test-pattern generation for VLSI circuits in a Prolog
environment
C.J. Rawlings, W.R. Taylor, J. Nyakairu, J. Fox & M.J.E. Sternberg,
Imperial Cancer Res. Fund & Birkbeck College
Using Prolog to represent and reason about protein structure
Oded Maler, Zahava Scherz & Ehud Shapiro, Weizmann Inst.
A New approach for introducing Prolog to naive users
Session 6a: Implementations and databases
Kotagiri Ramamohanarao & John Shepherd, U. of Melbourne
A superimposed codeword indexing scheme for very large Prolog
databases
D.S. Moffat & P.M.D. Gray, U. of Aberdeen
Interfacing Prolog to a persistent data store
P. Boizumault, CNRS
General model for implementing DIF and FREEZE
Martin Nilsson & Hidehiko Tanaka, U. of Tokyo
Cyclic tree traversal
Session 6b: Theory and negation
R. Barbuti, U. di Pisa
Completeness of the SLDNF-resolution for a class of
logic programs
Paul J. Voda, U. of British Columbia
Choices in, and limitations of, logic programming
Lee Naish, U. of Melbourne
Negation and quantifiers in NU-Prolog
David L. Poole & Randy Goebel, U. of Waterloo
Gracefully adding negation and disjunction to Prolog
Session 7a: Compilation
Evan Tick, Stanford U.
Memory performance of Lisp and Prolog programs
Kenneth A. Bowen, Kevin A. Buettner, Ilyas Cicekli & Andrew Turk,
Syracuse U.
The design and implementation of a high-speed incremental
portable Prolog compiler
Andrew K. Turk, Syracuse U.
Compiler optimizations for the WAM
Kevin A. Buettner, Syracuse U.
Fast decompiling of compiled Prolog clauses
Session 7b: Models of computation and implementation
Christopher T. Haynes, Indiana U.
Logic continuations
Chris Moss, Imperial College
Cut & Paste - defining the impure primitives of Prolog
M. Fujita, Fujitsu Labs. Ltd., S. Kono, H. Tanaka & T. Moto-oka,
U. of Tokyo
Tokio: logic programming language based on temporal logic and
its compilation to Prolog
Sun Chengzheng & Tzu Yungui, Changsha Inst.
The OR-woods description of the execution of logic programs
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂11-Mar-86 1635 SCHOEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Wednesday Meeting time
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 16:35:06 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 16:35:18-PST
From: Eric Schoen <Schoen@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Wednesday Meeting time
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12189964570.23.SCHOEN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Sorry, I meant 10:45, not 10:15, as has been pointed out to me.
]
Eric
-------
∂11-Mar-86 2249 RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Poligon/Cage/L100
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 22:48:57 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 22:50:49-PST
From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Poligon/Cage/L100
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190032932.25.RICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Today I released a new instance of the L100 compiler and new Poligon
and Cage compilers that are compatible with this. This means that
New-Oligon and New-Poligon-Language are the systems to use, likewise
New-Cage-Language.
The Tina, Old-Tina, Tina-language and Old-Tina-Language systems are
now not supported. They will probably be deleted tomorrow.
The new L100 language base has a couple of syntactic changes. These
are inherited by L100 derived languages and are as follows :-
i) You should now no longer put a lozenge or bang after the arglist
or docstring of a function or lambda expression. The presence
of this separator tended to cause confusion.
ii) If you supply a docstring for a function or lambda expression
then you should precede it with the keyword "documentation".
Thus an L100 function could be defined as follows :-
Define a-function (an-arg, another-arg)
Documentation "This is a very long "&
"docstring."
an-arg + another-arg
EnDefine
A new L100 manual will soon be available. This will document a the
above and a number of extensions to the ZMacs interface. It is now
possible to have any number of L100 like compilers loaded, unlike
before. This has necessitated the addition of an extra argument to
the "Parse" procedure. This is a :keyword denoting the name of the
language being compiled. Thus to compile a Poligon file you should do
the following :-
(Parse "a-pathname" :Poligon)
The following commands, amongst others are now supported in L100
derived language modes in ZMacs. They have, I hope, the obvious
effects and are documented in the new L100 manual.
i) C-S-a
ii) C-S-d
M-x commands
i) Compile Region
ii) Parse Region
iii) Compile Buffer
iv) Parse Buffer
v) Compile File
vi) Compile and Load File
vii) Compile Changed Sections
Rice.
-------
∂11-Mar-86 2332 OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA CommonLOOPS
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 23:32:25 PST
Date: Tue 11 Mar 86 23:30:20-PST
From: Hiroshi G. Okuno <OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: CommonLOOPS
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
cc: ksl-dolphins@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190040126.33.OKUNO@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
CommonLOOPS is available on TI-Explorer. To install PCL (Portable
CommonLOOPS), do
(make-system 'pcl).
[Note] The porting of PCL to TI-Explorer is not completed; that is,
(run-super) won't work in compiled codes. PCL works well on
Symbolics CL, Xerox CL, Vax Lisp, Lucid CL and KCL.
The source programs and documents are stored in the following
directories:
Sumex-aim ps:<okuno.pcl>
TI-Explorer x10:okuno.pcl;
Good Huck.
- Gitchang -
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1015 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Tomorrow's CSLI colloquium
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 10:15:42 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 10:03:19-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Tomorrow's CSLI colloquium
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
The colloquium tomorrow at 4:15 by Raymond Smullyan of Indiana
University will NOT be in Turing Auditorium as stated in last week's
CSLI Calendar. It will instead be in Jordan Hall (Bldg. 420 in the
Quad), room 040.
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1608 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next week's PLANLUNCH -- cancelled.
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:08:26 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 16:06:41-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next week's PLANLUNCH -- cancelled.
To: planlunch.dis: ;
Due to a last minute cancellation, there will be no PLANLUNCH next
week. We will resume, however, on Monday March 24.
-Amy Lansky
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1608 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library: Cancellation of Subscription to Computers & Structures An International Journal
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:08:02 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 16:03:20-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library: Cancellation of Subscription to Computers & Structures An International Journal
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190220896.47.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Both the Math/CS Library and the Engineering Library have subscriptions
to Computers & Structures from volume one. In my review of the collections,
I discovered that this journal is actually more related to structural
engineering and applied math. I would like to cancel our subscription in
the Math/CS Library. I checked the 19 bound volumes we have from 1971
and only one CS faculty member has checked one volume out once. Six
other volumes have been used once each all by non-CS users. By ending
our subscription we can save $850. If anyone has any objections to my
removing this title from our collection let me know. Keep in mind this
a duplicate subscription and Engineering will be keeping their copy.
Harry
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1641 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar, March 13, No. 7
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:40:58 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 16:31:56-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar, March 13, No. 7
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
March 13, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 7
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, March 13, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Brains, Behavior, and Robotics
Conference Room by James Albus
Discussion led by Pentti Kanerva (Kanerva@riacs.arpa)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Attempts and Performances: A Theory of Speech Acts
Trailer Classroom Phil Cohen (Pcohen@sri-ai)
(Abstract on page 2}
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Jordan Hall Self-Reference and Self-Consciousness
Room 040 Raymond Smullyan, Indiana University
(Abstract on page 2)
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, March 20, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Models, Metaphysics and the Vagaries of Empiricism
Conference Room by Marx W. Wartofsky
Discussion led by Ivan Blair (Blair@su-csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall The Structural Meaning of Clause Type: Capturing
Trailer Classroom Cross-modal and Cross-linguistic Generalizations
Dietmar Zaefferer (G.Zaeff@su-csli)
(Abstract on page 3)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No Colloquium this week
--------------
ANNOUNCEMENT
Please note that tomorrow's colloquium will NOT be in Turing
Auditorium as stated in last week's CSLI Calendar. It will instead be
in Jordan Hall (Bldg. 420 in the Quad), room 040.
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar March 13, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
THIS WEEK'S SEMINAR
Attempts and Performances: A Theory of Speech Acts
Phil Cohen (Pcohen@sri-ai)
I will present a theory of speech acts, developed with Hector
Levesque, in which illocutionary acts are defined as ATTEMPTS---as
actions done with certain beliefs and goals. The basis on which the
agent holds the relevant beliefs and goals derives from a theory of
rational interaction. However, there is no primitive notion of an
illocutionary act. The theory meets a number of adequacy criteria for
theories of speech acts. In particular, I will show how it handles
performatives.
--------------
THIS WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
Self-Reference and Self-Consciousness
Raymond Smullyan
Oscar Owing Professor of Philosophy, Indiana University
Professor Emeritus
City-University of New York-Lehman College and Graduate center
We consider some epistemic versions of Godel's Incompleteness
Theorem---e.g., conditions under which a logician cannot believe he or
she is consistent without losing his or her consistency. A related
theorem of Lob gives information about beliefs that of their own
nature are necessarily self-fulfilling.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Models, Metaphysics and the Vagaries of Empiricism
by Marx W. Wartofsky
Discussion led by Ivan Blair (Blair@su-csli)
In the introduction to the collection of his articles from which
the paper for this TINlunch is taken, Wartofsky says that his concern
is with `the notion of representation, and in particular, the role and
nature of the model, in the natural sciences, in theories of
perception and cognition, and in art.' In `Meaning, Metaphysics and
the Vagaries of Empiricism,' he explores the existential commitment
that should accompany the creation and use of a model, from the
perspective of a critical empiricism. Wartofsky considers six grades
of existential commitment, or ways of construing the ontological
claims of a model, ranging from the ad hoc analogy to a true
description of reality. Critical of the attempt by empiricists to
reduce theoretical statements to assertions about sense perception,
Wartofsky seeks to ground existence claims in what he calls the common
understanding, which is associated with everyday language
representations of experience.
I intend the issues addressed in this article to provide the
framework for a general discussion of the relation between ontology
and epistemology.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar March 13, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
The Structural Meaning of Clause Type:
Capturing Cross-modal and Cross-linguistic Generalizations
Dietmar Zaefferer (G.Zaeff@su-csli)
Theories of speech acts usually take notions like declarative
sentence, imperative sentence, etc. as input, i.e., they treat notions
of sentence mood (form type), as primitives, and then try to correlate
them adequately with notions of illocution type (function type).
Linguists, on the other hand, are interested in taking the former
apart and determining the grammatical properties of the sentence moods
as form types.
I will argue, against the assumption that sentence type indicators
have no meaning at all, (a) that they do have some (although weak)
structural meaning that is relevant for the illocutionary potential of
the sentence, and (b), that in determining this structural meaning, it
is crucial to account for at least three kinds of connections sentence
types are involved in:
(i) The place of the sentence types in the larger family of clause
types (e.g., relation of (main) yes-no interrogatives and
(subordinate) whether-interrogatives)
(ii) The occurrence of construction types in different clause types
(e.g., wh-constructions in relatives, interrogatives, exclamatives,
no-matter-conditional antecedents)
(iii) Cross-linguistic similarities in the internal structure of
clause types (e.g., the distinction between a yes-no interrogative
with an indefinite and a wh-interrogative seems to result frequently
from different combinations of the same elements: an indefinite and an
interrogative marker)
--------------
LINGUISTICS DEPARTMENT COLLOQUIUM
Empty Categories and Configuration
Kenneth Hale
Ferrari P. Ward Professor of Linguistics at MIT
3:30 p.m., Tuesday, March 18
History (Bldg. 200) Rm. 217, Stanford University
followed by a reception in Linguistics (Bldg. 100)
Some putative non-configurational languages exhibit certain
problematic disparities between overt phonologically realized phrase
structure and the abstract grammatical structure projected from the
lexicon. This paper will examine one such disparity in an attempt to
formulate a preliminary conception of non-configurationality within a
general theory of grammar.
This talk is sponsored by the Linguistics Department of Stanford
University and is part of the 1985-86 Ferguson/Greenberg Lecture
Series on Language Universals and Sociolinguistics.
-------
∂12-Mar-86 1643 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 18 (John Haviland)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:43:01 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA08454; Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:33:14 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:33:14 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8603130033.AA08454@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 18 (John Haviland)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 18, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Complex Referential Gestures in Guugu Yimidhirr''
John B. Haviland
Dept. of Anthropology, Australian National University
(currently at Institute for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Abstract
Ordinary talk depends on interlocutors' abilities to
construct and maintain some degree of shared perspective over
some domain of shared knowledge, given some negotiated
understanding of what the circumstances are. Aspects of per-
spective, references to universes of discourse, and
pointers to context are, of course, encoded in utterances.
Routinely, though, what is uttered interacts with what
remains unsaid: what is otherwise indicated, or what is
implicated by familiar conversational principles. I will
begin by examining the elaborate linguistic devices one Aus-
tralian language provides for talking about location and
motion. I will then connect the linguistic representation of
space (and the accompanying knowledge speakers must have of
space and geography) to non-spoken devices --- pointing ges-
tures --- that contribute to the bare referential content of
narrative performances. I will show that simply parsing a nar-
rative, or tracking its course, requires attention to the ges-
ticulation that forms part of the process of utterance. More-
over, I will show how, in this ethnographic context, the
meaning of a gesture (or of a word, for that matter) may
depend both on a practice of referring (only within which can
pointing be pointing at something) and on the construction of
a complex and shifting conceptual (often social) map. Finally
I will discuss ways that the full import of a gesture
(again, like a word) may, in context, go well beyond merely
establishing its referent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 25: Martin Braine, Psychology, NYU (currently at Stanford)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"λorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
May 6: Paul Rosenbloom, Computer Science and Psychology,
Stanford
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday, March 17, at the Anthropology Department Seminar,
Rick Shweder of the Committee on Human Development, University
of Chicago, and the Center for Advanced Study in Palo Alto,
will speak on "Symbolic and irrationalist interpretations of
other cultures: Is there a rationalist alternative?" from 3 to
5 p.m. in 160 Kroeber.
∂12-Mar-86 1652 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 18 (John Haviland)
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:51:59 PST
Received: from cogsci.berkeley.edu ([128.32.130.5].#Internet) by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 12 Mar 86 16:38:37-PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA08454; Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:33:14 PST
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:33:14 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8603130033.AA08454@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 18 (John Haviland)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 18, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``Complex Referential Gestures in Guugu Yimidhirr''
John B. Haviland
Dept. of Anthropology, Australian National University
(currently at Institute for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Abstract
Ordinary talk depends on interlocutors' abilities to
construct and maintain some degree of shared perspective over
some domain of shared knowledge, given some negotiated
understanding of what the circumstances are. Aspects of per-
spective, references to universes of discourse, and
pointers to context are, of course, encoded in utterances.
Routinely, though, what is uttered interacts with what
remains unsaid: what is otherwise indicated, or what is
implicated by familiar conversational principles. I will
begin by examining the elaborate linguistic devices one Aus-
tralian language provides for talking about location and
motion. I will then connect the linguistic representation of
space (and the accompanying knowledge speakers must have of
space and geography) to non-spoken devices --- pointing ges-
tures --- that contribute to the bare referential content of
narrative performances. I will show that simply parsing a nar-
rative, or tracking its course, requires attention to the ges-
ticulation that forms part of the process of utterance. More-
over, I will show how, in this ethnographic context, the
meaning of a gesture (or of a word, for that matter) may
depend both on a practice of referring (only within which can
pointing be pointing at something) and on the construction of
a complex and shifting conceptual (often social) map. Finally
I will discuss ways that the full import of a gesture
(again, like a word) may, in context, go well beyond merely
establishing its referent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Mar 25: Martin Braine, Psychology, NYU (currently at Stanford)
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bj"λorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
May 6: Paul Rosenbloom, Computer Science and Psychology,
Stanford
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday, March 17, at the Anthropology Department Seminar,
Rick Shweder of the Committee on Human Development, University
of Chicago, and the Center for Advanced Study in Palo Alto,
will speak on "Symbolic and irrationalist interpretations of
other cultures: Is there a rationalist alternative?" from 3 to
5 p.m. in 160 Kroeber.
∂12-Mar-86 2311 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Printing on Imagen printers from Explorers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 23:11:47 PST
Date: Wed 12 Mar 86 23:12:54-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Printing on Imagen printers from Explorers
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190299094.14.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
It is now possible to print on Imagen printers with KSL Explorers.
Load the tool NET-IMAGEN (as well as KSL-PATCHES) and then you will be
able to print from your Explorer.
To print files, use the function PRINT-FILE, or one of the Zmacs
m-X Print commands such as Print File or Print Buffer. M-Sh-P (Quick
Print Buffer) is also useful.
To print bitmaps use the function PRINT-BITMAP, which takes a
window or array, or use TERM Q to get a menu of screen hardcopy
options.
The System Menu option Hardcopy Menu can also be used to get a menu
interface.
Currently, printers are named "Imagen-0", "Imagen-1", etc., to
coorespond with the unit numbers used on Sumex, so specifying
"Imagen-1" will get the 12/300 in Whelan A-1105, etc. It should not
normally be necessary to give a printer name since the nearest printer
is the default (usually Imagen-1). If you want to change the default,
see the variables si:*default-printer* and si:*defaul-screen-printer*.
The software will attempt to follow font instructions given in the
mode line of a file. Font mappings aren't perfect, though, so some
experimentation might be in order. Also, one or two fonts have
incorrect interline spacing. If you want to use one of these, let me
know and I'll try to fix it.
If you need another printer added, or have any other questions or
comments, please contact me.
-- Rich
-------
∂13-Mar-86 0920 INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA Garage Sale
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 09:19:31 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 09:09:19-PST
From: Ingrid Deiwiks <INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Garage Sale
To: Friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
*****************************************
G I A N T G A R A G E S A L E
*****************************************
MARCH 15 AND 16 -- 10 AM TO 5 PM
Furniture, Clothes, Motor Lawn Mower, Appliances, TV Sets, Lamps,
Books, China, and much more.
173 Santa Margarita Avenue, Menlo Park.
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1027 @SU-CSLI.ARPA:JROBINSON@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA Re: Garage Sale
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 10:27:36 PST
Received: from SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA by SU-CSLI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Mar 86 10:15:26-PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 10:17:33-PST
From: Jane (aka) Jrobinson <JROBINSON@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Garage Sale
To: INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Cc: Friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA, JROBINSON@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA
Message-ID: <VAX-MM(180)+TOPSLIB(115)+PONY(0) 13-Mar-86 10:17:33.SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Ingrid Deiwiks <INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA>" of Thu
13 Mar 86 09:09:19-PST
REPLY-TO: JRobinson@SRI-AI
The use of the ARPA net to advertise private sales is a big no-no, and
people have been kicked off the net for it, and it endangers the
use of the net by the organization those people belong to. It CAN
happen.
J
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1046 POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA Re: Garage Sale
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 10:46:12 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 10:37:23-PST
From: Bill Poser <POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Garage Sale
To: JRobinson@SRI-AI.ARPA
cc: INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "Jane (aka) Jrobinson <JROBINSON@SRI-WARBUCKS.ARPA>" of Thu 13 Mar 86 10:19:22-PST
Roughly the same effect can be obtained by sending just to the local bboards,
which I believe is legit so long as the messages don't go out over the
ARPAnet.
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1059 INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA Garage Sale
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 10:58:57 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 10:39:01-PST
From: Ingrid Deiwiks <INGRID@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Garage Sale
To: Friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Sorry, I won't do it again!
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1202 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library serials collection and Engineering Library--Overlap
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 12:02:16 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 11:25:08-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library serials collection and Engineering Library--Overlap
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190432394.12.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Thanks for your responses concerning Computers and Strutures. I will go
ahead and cancel. Gio pointed out that the overlapping interest for
serial titles will grow. This is true and I want to encourage you to
send me any requests/suggestions concerning new serials for the Math/CS
Library. At times I have announced some of my decisions concerning titles
I thought would go to Engineering. I will continue to do this. You need
to be aware that if I order a journal to duplicate in Math/CS, I will need
to have written recommendations from those most concerned (electronic
messages are fine, I can print them for documentation).
As a recent example, Artificial Intelligence In Engineering both the new
journal and the proceedings are on order for the Engineering Library.
This is probably the first AI journal that I thought was more appropriate
for Engineering then Math/CS Library. If you are doing research in
AI, do you agree with this decision? Or would you recommend a duplicate
subscription in Math/CS.
Harry
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1429 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Yes I am ordering Discrete + Computational Geometry
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 14:29:36 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 13:50:17-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Yes I am ordering Discrete + Computational Geometry
To: Su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190458819.12.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
This new journal is being orderer for the Math/CS Library.
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1512 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Monday's PLANLUNCH -- UNcancelled!
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 15:11:56 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 15:09:52-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Monday's PLANLUNCH -- UNcancelled!
To: planlunch.dis: ;
We had a last minute volunteer:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SEMANTICS OF FIRST ORDER LISP
Ian Mason (IAM@SU-AI)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 17
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
In this talk we describe various equivalence relations between expressions
in first order LISP. This fragment of LISP includes the destructive
operations rplaca and rplacd. A distinction is made between intensional
relations and extensional relations. The former class turn out to have
a much more managable theory than the latter. The principle intensional
relation studied is strong isomorphism. Its properties allow for
elegant verification proofs in a style similar to that of pure Lisp.
Examples will be given if time permits.
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1753 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA reports
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 17:52:47 PST
Date: Thu 13 Mar 86 17:49:21-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: reports
To: ac@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190502338.9.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If you haven't yet filled out a form entitled something like
"faculty accomplishment report" and sent it up the line
(through Anne Richardson) toward the Dean's office, NOW is the
time. Actually, they were due last December, most of you
already filled out this form, but the Dean's office tells me
that there are still some missing. It's a simple form that the
Dean's office refers to when deciding on salary increases, etc.
Most of the information on it is info that you would ordinarily
be keeping track of anyway just to keep your cv up to date.
You will recall that there is an online version of the form.
(I think Anne has an online copy.) Thanks, -Nils
-------
∂13-Mar-86 1821 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:wolper@su-navajo.arpa special seminar friday 3/14 at 10 am
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 18:21:13 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Mar 86 18:17:08-PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 13 Mar 86 18:09:34-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 13 Mar 86 18:11:14 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 18:11:14 pst
From: Pierre Wolper <wolper@su-navajo.arpa>
Subject: special seminar friday 3/14 at 10 am
To: aflb.all@score, su-bboards@su-navajo.arpa
Special Seminar:
Friday March 14, 10:00 am, MJ 301
Sailing Through Byzantia:
Easy Impossibility Proofs for Distributed Consensus Problems
Michael Merritt
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Several different consensus problems, most notably the ubiquitous
Byzantine Agreement and Clock Synchronization, are known to be
impossible in communication graphs in which a third of the processors
may fail, or in which the connectivity is not more than twice the
number of possible failures. Previous proofs of these results
involved detailed constructions and complex models that obscured
the underlying intuitions. In this talk, easy proofs of these results
will be presented. These proofs are carried out in very general,
simple models, which considerably strengthens the results, particularly
in the case of Clock Synchronization. More importantly, they
clarify the underlying intuition and motivate the specific bounds
on number of processors and on connectivity, which are known to be tight.
This is joint work with Michael Fischer, Yale University, and
Nancy Lynch, MIT.
∂14-Mar-86 0729 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa Dynamic Logic lecture (reminder)
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 07:28:53 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Mar 86 07:26:19-PST
Received: from su-navajo.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 14 Mar 86 07:15:42-PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 14 Mar 86 07:18:29 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA01193; Fri, 14 Mar 86 07:17:45 pst
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 07:17:45 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8603141517.AA01193@coraki.uucp>
To: aflb.all@su-score.ARPA, conmod@su-navajo.ARPA, csd-bboard@su-navajo.ARPA,
su-bboards@su-navajo.ARPA
Subject: Dynamic Logic lecture (reminder)
Today (Friday March 14) from 1:15 to 2:45 in MJ352 I will give a
general-interest lecture on dynamic logic.
-v
∂14-Mar-86 0858 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Power & grades
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 08:58:14 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 08:51:59-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Power & grades
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190666659.25.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Hi,
most of you have probably noticed the signs posted all around MJH
warning us of the electric power shutdown that will take place the
week-end of March 22 & 23. Grades are due back to me by the end of
the day on March 24. This may present a problem for those of you
who were counting on assigning grades that week-end, since all the
computers in MJH will down.
Now you know....so please try to get your grade sheets to me on time
in spite of the obstacles....
-Gina
-------
∂14-Mar-86 0858 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA Power & grades
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 08:58:14 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 08:51:59-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Power & grades
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190666659.25.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Hi,
most of you have probably noticed the signs posted all around MJH
warning us of the electric power shutdown that will take place the
week-end of March 22 & 23. Grades are due back to me by the end of
the day on March 24. This may present a problem for those of you
who were counting on assigning grades that week-end, since all the
computers in MJH will down.
Now you know....so please try to get your grade sheets to me on time
in spite of the obstacles....
-Gina
-------
∂14-Mar-86 0944 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA happy hour
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 09:44:01 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 09:36:51-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: happy hour
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Thanks to the efforts of Kristin Hanson there will be a happy
hour today at 4:00 in the Greenberg Room. Come one, come
all to the last hh of the quarter!
Mary
-------
∂14-Mar-86 1056 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA contact at BB&N
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 10:56:32 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 10:50:22-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: contact at BB&N
To: Faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Diaz@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190688210.30.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
One of our students wants to send a resume to BB&N. The last Forum
contacts were in 1982 with Paul Elkin and 1983 with Gilbert Falk.
Do any of you have a more recent contact? Would appreciate any
information.
Thanks,
Carolyn
-------
∂14-Mar-86 1109 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 11:09:36 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 11:03:21-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190690573.39.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Computer Interpretation Of Natural Language Descriptions. Ellis Horwood
Series in AI. by C. S. Mellish. P98.M37 1985.
Computations From The English: A Procedural Logic Approach For Representing
And Understatnding English Text. Including HCPRVR and its Documentation
by Daniel Chester. by Robert F. Simmons. PE1074.5.S5 1984
Structured Fortan 77 Programming. by Seymour Pollack. QA76.73.F25P64 1982.
Soviet Cybernetic Technology: A Timeline, Researcher's Data Base, and
Guide to Professional Literature From Early First Generation Through
Third Generation. compiled and edited by George Weinberger.
2 volumes. Q310.W375 1985 volume 2.
How To Write A Usable User Manual. by Edmond Weiss QA76.165W45 1985 c.2
Programming The IBM Personal Computer: Pascal by Neill Graham
QA76.8.I2594G73 1983.
Weighted Random Mappings; Properties and Applications. Dissertation
by Andrei Broder . 3781 1985 B c. 2
Compiling Pascal Programs Into Silicon. Dissertation by Howard Trickey.
3781 1985
H. Llull
-------
∂14-Mar-86 1906 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA structures registration form
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 19:06:21 PST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 19:04:24-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: structures registration form
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190778146.24.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Can someone send me a copy of the registration form for the
Structures in Complexity conference in Berkeley? I know that
it was sent to theory@wisc, but I don't remember exactly when.
Thanks,
Joan
(jf@sushi)
-------
∂15-Mar-86 0929 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:avg@su-aimvax.arpa Re: structures registration form
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 86 09:29:08 PST
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Sat 15 Mar 86 09:23:49-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Sat, 15 Mar 86 09:27:36 pst
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 86 09:27:36 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Re: structures registration form
To: JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
From @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Fri Feb 28 19:43:46 1986
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 28 Feb 86 19:39:30 pst
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 19:29:52-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Feb 86 19:27:39-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 28 Feb 86 20:18:09 CST
Message-Id: <8602280638.AA24987@rsch.wisc.edu>
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 28 Feb 86 00:38:37 CST
Received: from iowa-state by csnet-relay.csnet id af26049; 28 Feb 86 1:22 EST
Received: by isucs1.UUCP (4.12.01/2.02)
id AA24429; Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:07:06 cst
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 13:07:06 cst
From: Alan Selman <selman%iowa-state.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: theory%rsch.wisc.edu@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Program - Structure in Complexity Theory
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 28 Feb 86 20:06:38 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
SESSION 1: Monday, June 2, 8:45-12:30 p.m.
Chair: Juris Hartmanis, Cornell University
8:45 a.m. Expanders, Randomness, or Time vs. Space,
M. Sipser, University of California, Berkeley
9:45 a.m. Depth-Size Tradeoff for Boolean Circuits with Unbounded Fan-In,
J. Lynch, Clarkson Univ.
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. With Probability One, a Random Oracle Separates PSPACE
from the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy,
J. Cai, Cornell University
11:45 a.m. On Nonuniform Polynomial Space,
J. Balcazar, J. Diaz, and J. Gabarro,
Facultat d'Informatica de Barcelona
SESSION 2: Monday, June 2, 2:00-5:30 p.m.
Chair: Peter Van Emde Boas, Univ. of Amsterdam
2:00 p.m. Bounded Oracles and Complexity Classes Inside Linear Space,
C. Tretkoff, Brooklyn College
2:45 p.m. Two Lower Bound Arguments with ``Inaccessible'' Numbers,
M. Dietzfelbinger, W. Maass, University of Illinois at Chicago
3:30 p.m. Beverage Break
4:00 p.m. Parallel Computation with Threshold Functions,
I. Parberry, G. Schnitger, Penn. State Univ.
4:45 p.m. The Complexity of Optimization Problems,
M. Krentel, Cornell University
SESSION 3: Tuesday, June 3, 8:45-12:30 p.m.
Chair: Alan L. Selman, Iowa State University
8:45 a.m. Diagonalization Methods in a Polynomial Setting,
L. Torenvliet, P. Van Emde Boas, Univ. of Amsterdam
9:45 a.m. The Boolean Hierarchy: Hardware over NP,
J. Cai, L. Hemachandra , Cornell University
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. Relativized Alternation,
J. Buss, M.I.T.
11:45 a.m. Parallel Computation and the NC Hierarchy Relativized,
C. Wilson, University of Oregon
SESSION 4: Tuesday, June 3, 2:00-5:30 p.m.
Chair: Michael Sipser, Univ. of California, Berkeley
2:00 p.m. An Optimal Lower Bound for Turing
Machines with One Work Tape and a Two-Way Input Tape,
W. Maass, University of Illinois at Chicago;
G. Schnitger, Pennsylvania State University
2:45 p.m. The Power of Queues,
M. Li, Ohio State;
L. Longpre,U. of Washington;
and P. Vitanyi, Centre for Math. & Comp. Science, the Netherlands
3:30 p.m. Beverage Break
4:00 p.m. What Is a Hard Instance of a Computational Problem?,
K. Ko, U. of Houston;
P. Orponen, U. of Helsinki;
U. Schoning, EWH Koblenz
4:45 p.m. Resource-Bounded Kolmogorov Complexity of Hard Languages,
D. Huynh, Iowa State University
SESSION 5: Wednesday, June 4, 8:45-12:30 p. m.
Chair: Harry Lewis, Harvard University
8:45 a.m. Localized Nondeterminism and Separation Results,
K. McAloon, Brooklyn College of CUNY
9:45 a.m. The Topology of Provability in Complexity Theory,
K. Regan, Merton College, Oxford
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. The Polynomial Hierarchy and Intuitionistic Bounded Arithmetic,
S. Buss, Math. Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
11:45 a.m. Exponential Time and Bounded Arithmetic,
P. Clote, Boston College;
G. Takeuti, University of Illinois at Urbana
SESSION 6: Wednesday, June 4, 2:00-5:00 p.m.
Chair: Kenneth McAloon, Brooklyn College
2:00 p.m. Kolmogorov Complexity and Computational Complexity,
J. Hartmanis, Cornell University
3:00 p.m. Optimal Approximations of Complete Sets,
D. Russo, U. of California, Santa Barbara
3:45 p.m. Beverage Break
4:15 p.m. The Complexity of Sparse Sets in P,
E. Allender, Rutgers University
SESSION 7: Thursday, June 5, 8:45-12:30 p.m.
Chair: Steven Mahaney, AT&T Bell Labs
8:45 a.m. Promise Problems, One-Way Functions, and Public-Key Cryptography,
A. Selman, Iowa State Univ.
9:45 a.m. One-Way Functions and Circuit Complexity,
R. Boppana, M.I.T.;
J. Lagarias, AT&T Bell Labs
10:30 a.m. Coffee Break
11:00 a.m. Isomorphisms and 1-L Reductions,
E. Allender, Rutgers Universtiy
11:45 a.m. A Note on One-Way Functions and Polynomial-Time Isomorphisms,
K. Ko, U. of Houston;
T. Long, Ohio State Univ.;
and D. Du, Math. Sciences Research Institute, Berkeley
SESSION 8: Thursday, June 5, 2:00-5:00 p.m.
Chair: Paul Young, University of Washington
2:00 p.m. Randomness, Relativizations, and Polynomial Reducibilities,
K. Ambos-Spies, Universitat Dortmund
2:45 p.m. Probabilistic Game Automata,
A. Condon, R. Ladner, University of Washington
3:30 p.m. Beverage Break
4:00 p.m. Probabilistic Quantifiers and Games: An Overview,
S. Zachos, Brooklyn College of CUNY
CONFERENCE INFORMATION
LOCATION: Conference activities will be at the Dwight/Derby
Complex of the University of California at Berkeley.
This is at 2600 Warring St., between Dwight and Derby Sts.,
about a quarter mile southeast of the main campus area.
The Dwight/Derby Complex is the former campus of the
California School for the Deaf and Blind. The buildings
have been recently renovated to provide attractive
and comfortable student housing. On site are a swimming
pool, tennis courts, a running track and a weight room.
A nominal charge for use of athletic facilities can
be paid at the time of the conference.
The housing units offered to participants of this conference
at Dwight/Derby are in the form of suites.
These typically consist of two bedrooms, a living room
and a shared bathroom.
Either one or two persons may occupy a bedroom.
(Only single beds are available.)
Because of contractual agreement with the university,
participants lodging at Dwight/Derby
must elect to arrive Saturday, May 31, or Sunday, June 1,
and must pay to stay through Friday, June 6.
Selection of Saturday arrival is recommended for persons
staying over after the STOC conference.
Rates are indicated on the Advance Registration Form.
Participants should try to check into Dwight/Derby
housing before 9pm, when the entrance to the main
building will be locked. With some inconvenience, it
will be possible to check in at a later hour by calling
the number posted at the entrance. Please indicate
on your advance registration form if you plan to arrive
later than 9pm.
Conference participants will be expected to pay their Dwight/Derby
room charges at the time they check in. Only
cash, personal checks or traveler's checks can be accepted,
since there will be no provision for accepting credit
cards.
ALTERNATIVE HOUSING: Conference participants desiring
the greater flexibility of
hotel housing are advised to make reservations at the
Hotel Durant, 2600 Durant Ave., about a quarter mile
from the Dwight/Derby Complex. A block of rooms has
been reserved at the special conference rate of $62 for single
occupancy and $72 for double occupancy plus 10% tax, provided reservations
are made in advance of May 1.
Continental breakfast is included in the room charge.
Conference participants should
make their own reservations by calling
800-2DURANT, 800-5DURANT, or 415-845-8981 and
informing the hotel that they will be attending the
``Computer Science'' Conference.
TRANSPORTATION: The best way to get to Berkeley
from the San Francisco Airport is by means of
the shuttle service called the Airport Connection,
for a charge of $12, compared with a taxi fare of
$30-35. This service ordinarily stops
at the Hotel Durant, but the driver may be persuaded
to stop at Dwight/Derby. Be sure to make
a reservation in advance of traveling by calling
1-800-AIRPORT.
>From the Oakland airport, one may take either a taxi
directly to Berkeley for about $20, or else take
the shuttle bus from the airport to the Coliseum
station of BART, the BART train to the Berkeley
station, and a taxi from the Berkeley station, for
a total cost of about $6.
REGISTRATION: A registration desk will be open
Sunday night at Dwight/Derby from 6pm to 9pm and
during the day Monday from 8:30am to 12:30pm.
Registration fees for nonstudents and students
include the technical sessions, a copy of the proceedings,
coffee and beverage breaks, the Sunday evening reception,
and lunch Monday through Thursday.
Student registration fees are subsidized with funds provided
by a grant from the National Science Foundation.
RECEPTION: A reception will be held Sunday evening, June 1,
from 8pm to 11pm at the Dwight/Derby Complex.
CLIMATE: The weather will probably be pleasant
and sunny during the day, but cool in the evening.
First time visitors to San Francisco may find the city
surprisingly chilly.
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM
Make checks payable to STRUCTURE CONFERENCE.
Please pay in U.S. funds. (Separate Checks are required
for payment of registration fees for ACM STOC and for
this conference.) Send check and completed form to:
Structure Conference
c/o E.L. Lawler
Computer Science Division
573 Evans Hall
University of California
Berkeley CA 94720
Registration Fees: By May 14 After May 14
Nonstudent $ 75 [ ] $125 [ ]
Student $ 40 [ ] $ 70 [ ]
Preference for lodging at Dwight/Derby:
Dwight/Derby room charges are payable at time of check-in by
cash or check (no credit cards) payable to STRUCTURE CONFERENCE.
Room charges include breakfast each morning; Saturday arrivals
are entitled to Sunday brunch.
Accompanying persons not registered at the conference may wish to
purchase a luncheon ticket good for four days at $30.00. These
will not be available at the conference and must be paid in advance
with this form.
[ ] Single occupancy, arrival Saturday, May 31, $262.50
[ ] Double occupancy, arrival Saturday, May 31, $187.50 per person
[ ] Single occupancy, arrival Sunday, June 1, $218.75
[ ] Double occupancy, arrival Sunday, June 1, $156.25 per person
[ ] Number of luncheon tickets at $30.00 per ticket.
All lodging rates are calculated with Friday, June 6, departure.
Lodging and meals at Dwight/Derby cannot be guaranteed for late
registrants.
I wish to share double occupancy of a room with:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Name:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
City:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←State:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←Zip:←←←←←←←←←←←
Country (if not USA):←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Telephone:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Net address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Special dietary requirements:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
--------------
TN Message #28
--------------
∂15-Mar-86 1059 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA staff evaluations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 86 10:56:28 PST
Date: Sat 15 Mar 86 10:52:08-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: staff evaluations
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190950674.16.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
All are reminded that secretaries, research associates, and other
staff working for you need to have you fill out a "performance
evaluation form" on them before yearly salary increase recommendations
can be processed. Please forward these through LaDonna Eppley.
Thanks, -Nils
-------
∂15-Mar-86 1432 JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA no more structures forms, please
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 86 14:32:18 PST
Date: Sat 15 Mar 86 14:28:29-PST
From: Joan Feigenbaum <JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: no more structures forms, please
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190990059.41.JF@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
I now have log n copies of the structures form. thanks for your
responses. please cease and desist.
Joan
-------
∂15-Mar-86 1548 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Explorer Toolkits
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 15 Mar 86 15:48:13 PST
Date: Sat 15 Mar 86 15:49:47-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Explorer Toolkits
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191004860.71.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The responses to the TI survey indicated a general lack of knowledge
of the Explorer toolkits. Therefore, here is a summary of what they
are and what they do (according to the blurb at the beginning of the
manuals). None of them are currently on-line, so if you have any
interest in using them, please let me know and I'll bring what you
like up.
-- Rich
Formatter
---------
This is a subset of Scribe. Unfortunately this does not yet know
how to drive any KSL printers other than LPTs. Also, bibliographies,
indecies, and many other Scribe features used frenquently aren't
supported at this time. This might yet shape up into something more
useful to us.
Graphics
--------
This toolkit provides flavors for mixing-in with window flavors to
be able to draw easily on these windows. Also provided is a graphics
editor for manipulating pictures. It is possible to print bit-map
dumps of such pictures, but not hi-res images. There is also a tree
editor which can be used clumsily as a flavor examiner.
Prolog
------
This is the Explorer's Prolog on Lisp.
Grasper
-------
"Explorer Grasper provides a means for you to represent your
perception of a particular knowledge base, modify that representation
with ease, and create nuances in the way your representation can be
displayed in a network format."
Natural Language Menu Tool
--------------------------
This toolkit is supposed to help build natural language like
interfaces for applications.
Relational Table Management System
----------------------------------
A relational table DBS build on (and available from) Lisp.
-- Rich
-------
∂16-Mar-86 0252 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa meeting 2/12?
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 86 02:52:42 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 6 Feb 86 14:37:55 pst
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 86 14:37:55 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: meeting 2/12?
To: nail@diablo
I'm going to be away from Monday-Thursday of next week.
Karin has (will?) arrange a talk by Peter Gray on Prolog/DB interactions
at 2PM on Wednesday 2/12, I believe. She should announce the
talk and its room if it is to take place.
As for a meeting at the usual 11AM time, somebody else is going
to have to volunteer to run it. If nobody volunteers, I'll see
you on the 19th next.
∂16-Mar-86 0301 avg@su-aimvax.arpa Does L/a inherit PFP?
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Mar 86 03:01:40 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Feb 86 12:36:06 pst
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 86 12:36:06 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: Does L/a inherit PFP?
To: nail@diablo
Following up on our discussion in the nail meeting about undecidability
of PFP, using Greibach's theorem:
Lemma: PFP for a grammar G is closed under /a.
Proof:
Let G be the grammar for L, and let the program corresponding to G have PFP.
Let p be the start symbol of G, or top level goal.
Let G/a be a grammar for L/a and let s be the start symbol for G/a.
For any EDB, suppose s(0,8) is derivable by the program corresponding to G/a,
where 0 and 8 are any two constants.
Consider all fringes F of proofs of s(0,8).
Add to the EDB one new tuple, a(8,9) where 9 is a new constant symbol.
For all F, F,a(8,9) is the fringe of a proof of p(0,9) by definition of /a.
There are no other proofs of p(0,9) because 9 is a new symbol.
(I.e., every proof of p(0,9) must have a fringe ending with a(8,9).)
One of them is short, hence some F is short. QED
Lemma: Not-P-completeness is closed under /a.
Proof: Let G, p, s be as above, where the program corresponding to G
has the property of being not-P-complete. Suppose G/a is P-complete.
Reduce any problem in P to a pair (EDB, s(0,8)?) Again, add a(8,9)
to the EDB and pose the query ``p(0,9)?'' QED
Theorem: PFP is undecidable for chain rule programs.
Proof: PFP holds for regular languages, and is closed under /a, so by
Greibach's theorem, is undecidable. QED
Theorem: Not-P-completeness is undecidable for chain rule programs if
P not = NC.
Proof: Not-P-completeness holds for regular languages, assuming P not = NC,
and is closed under /a, so by Greibach's theorem, is undecidable. QED
Conjecture: Not-P-completeness is undecidable for chain rule programs.
Handwave: Not-P-completeness is closed under /a, so by Greibach's theorem,
is undecidable, PROVIDED THAT
Not-P-completeness holds for regular languages.
It remains to show that a regular language R cannot be P-complete,
perhaps by exhibiting a series of circuits that it cannot correctly
simulate.
∂17-Mar-86 0006 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Reminders -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 00:06:37 PST
Date: Sun 16 Mar 86 23:19:02-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Reminders -- Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
SEMANTICS OF FIRST ORDER LISP
Ian Mason (IAM@SU-AI)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 17
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
In this talk we describe various equivalence relations between expressions
in first order LISP. This fragment of LISP includes the destructive
operations rplaca and rplacd. A distinction is made between intensional
relations and extensional relations. The former class turn out to have
a much more managable theory than the latter. The principle intensional
relation studied is strong isomorphism. Its properties allow for
elegant verification proofs in a style similar to that of pure Lisp.
Examples will be given if time permits.
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1033 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA ICOT Journal and Technical Reports--Math/CS Library
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 10:33:16 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 10:28:07-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: ICOT Journal and Technical Reports--Math/CS Library
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191470591.23.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We have just received several issues of the ICOT Journal. We now have up to
No. 9, 1985. The ICOT Journal includes a number of short articles and news
type informatn. In addition, it lists the ICOT Technical Reports and
ICOT Technical Memoranda. We now receive both these report series.
Some of the ICOT Technical Reports are in Japanese. These reports will
also include an English title which we have been entering into the
technical reports database in Socrates. However the Technical Memorandums
that we are receiving in Japanes do not have a translated title into
English. At this point, we are keeping them but have not entered them
into Socrates. First, are there researchers that want us to keep the
ICOT reports that are in Japanese? Secondly, if we do keep them, is
there anyone who could translate just the titles so that we could
input them into Socrates?
Harry Llull
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1040 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:ANDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA msri talks, thurs. Mar 20
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 10:40:47 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 17 Mar 86 10:35:47-PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 10:34:17-PST
From: Richard Anderson <ANDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: msri talks, thurs. Mar 20
To: aflb.all@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191471713.33.ANDERSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Thursday, March 20, MSRI Lecture Hall
2 pm
Richard Anderson
An RNC Algorithm for Depth First Search
4 pm
Robert Tarjan
Triangulation of Simple Polygons
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1421 PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA summer housing
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 14:16:39 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 14:05:35-PST
From: Marti Lacey <PHILOSOPHY@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: summer housing
To: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I'm looking for a place to `sub-let' or `house-sit' during July and August.
Please telephone or write: John Fischer, Dept. of Philosophy, Yale Univ.,
P>O> Box 3650 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520. (203) 436-1895 or (home)
773-3909. Or leave a message with Marti in Philosophy
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1706 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Friends Mailing List
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 17:06:13 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 16:55:06-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Friends Mailing List
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
From now on all mail sent to FRIENDS@su-csli will be checked for
applicability before being remailed to the actual list.
Messages sent to FRIENDS@su-csli should contain information about
local (mid-peninsula) events sponsored by CSLI or of interest to CSLI
researchers. Examples are the calendar, the monthly, and calendar
updates.
If you wish to receive information about events sponsored by the
Berkeley Cognitive Science Program, please send a message to
admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu asking to be put on the cogsci-friends list.
(The CSLI bboard will continue to get Berkeley Cognitive Science
announcements.)
Yours
Emma Pease
(Emma@su-csli.arpa)
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1750 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI Monthly
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 17:50:18 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 16:58:21-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI Monthly
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
The first issue of the CSLI Monthly will be mailed out tomorrow.
We are sending this message out today to warn you that it is quite
large (about 15 printed pages) and might cause problems, if your mail
file is nearly full. If you absolutely cannot handle this size
message, send me (Emma@su-csli.arpa) a message before noon (of March
18, Pacific time), and I'll drop you from the mailing list this one
time. Future Monthly's will be much smaller and should cause no
problems.
This issue of the CSLI Monthly is stored in <CSLI>CSLI-Monthly.03-86
on su-csli.arpa and can be gotten by ftp as of this afternoon, for
those of you who like to look at things early.
Yours,
Emma Pease
-------
∂17-Mar-86 1823 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA re: CSLI Monthly
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 18:23:08 PST
Date: Mon 17 Mar 86 17:05:24-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: re: CSLI Monthly
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
Hardcopies will be mailed out this Thursday with the CSLI Calendar
and will be available in the Ventura Front Hall.
Emma Pease
-------
∂18-Mar-86 0334 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:pasley@SRI-KL.ARPA AI Seminar Announcement
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 03:34:38 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Mar 86 03:31:48-PST
Mail-From: CHRIS created at 18-Mar-86 00:29:11
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 00:29:11-PST
From: Christine Pasley <pasley@SRI-KL>
Subject: AI Seminar Announcement
To: su-bboards%SU-SCORE@SRI-KL, faculty%SU-SCORE@SRI-KL,
schansen%SU-SIERRA@SRI-KL, cutkosky%SU-WHITNEY@SRI-KL
ReSent-Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 02:01:44-PST
ReSent-From: Christine Pasley <pasley@SRI-KL>
ReSent-To: su-bboards%SU-SCORE@SRI-KL, faculty%SU-SCORE@SRI-KL,
schansen%SU-SIERRA@SRI-KL, cutkosky%SU-WHITNEY@SRI-KL
ANNOUNCEMENT
Subject: Seminar on A.I. in Design and Manufacturing.
Time: Every Wednesday from 4-5:30 during Spring Quarter.
Location: Terman Engineering Center, room 556.
For further information contact:
Jay M. Tenenbaum, Consulting Professor, Computer Science
(415) 496-4699 or Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose: To explore and stimulate the use of A.I. concepts and tools in
engineering.
This seminar will bring together engineers and computer scientists
interested in applying A.I. methods to engineering problems. We will
study the knowledge and reasoning processes used in designing and
manufacturing electronic and mechanical systems, and how they can be
codified for use in intelligent CAD/CAM systems.
Seminar Format:
An initial series of lectures, by distinguished A.I. researchers,
will describe ways in which engineering knowledge can be formalized,
and manipulated by a computer to solve design and manufacturing
problems. Subsequent lectures, by guest lecturers and students, will
present case studies drawn from the domains of electronic and
mechanical design, semiconductor fabrication, and process planning.
Seminal papers will be distributed and discussed in conjunction
with each lecture.
One unit of credit (pass/fail) will be granted for reading papers and
participating in class discussion. Students who elect to do a
programming project or an in-depth ontological study of some
engineering task will receive three units (graded).
Tentative Schedule (Subject to Change)
April 2 Course Introduction (Jay M. Tenenbaum)
Rule-based systems; Application to Heuristic Classification
(William Clancey)
9 Frames and Objects; Application to Modeling and Simulation
(Richard Fikes)
16 Logic; Application to Design Debugging, Diagnosis, And Test
(Michael Genesereth)
23 Prolog: Application to Design Verification (Harry Barrow)
30 Truth Maintainance; Application to Diagnosing Multiple Faults.
(Johann DeKleer)
May 7 Knowledge Engineering as Ontological Analysis (Pat Hayes)
14 Transformational Approaches to Synthesis; Applications to
Electronic and Mechanical Design (Cordell Green).
21 Modeling and Reasoning about Electronic Design:
Paladio (Harold Brown); Helios (Narinder Singh)
28 Modeling and Reasoning about Semiconductor Fabrication
(John Mohammed, M. Klein)
June 4 Applications of AI in Mechanical Design and Manufacture
The PRIDE Design System (Sanjay Mittal);
Video Tape on Expert Systems for Manufacturing (Mark Fox).
(Exam Week) Presentation of Student Projects
-------
∂18-Mar-86 0606 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLB
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 06:06:05 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 06:03:52-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191684628.8.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
This week's is the last AFLB of the quarter:
----------------------------------------
20-Mar-86 : Hiroto Yasuura (Kyoto University & Berkeley)
Redundant Coding for Local Computability
We show that an operation of any finite Abelian (commutative) group
can be computed by a constant depth circuit (fan-in restricted model)
under a redundant coding scheme.
We introduce a concept of `Local Computability' for designing high-speed
parallel algorithms on fan-in restricted models. A function F:{0,1}↑n ->
{0,1}↑m is r-local computable if each subfunction f of F depends on only
at most r input variables. If r is a constant independent of n, we can
make a parallel algorithm with constant depth.
Avizienis pointed out the advantage of redundant coding schemes to
design locally computable circuits for arithmetic operations [Aviz61].
In a practical application of redundant coding, we designed a high-speed
multiplier [TYY85] using 12-local adders. Namely, each digit of the sum
is determined by only 12 input variables and no carry propagation occurs.
Winograd showed that we can not construct a constant depth adder using
any nonredundant coding scheme [Wino65]. So redundancy is essential
in any local computation of addition.
The main result of this talk is that an operation of any finite
Abelian group is k-local computable, using a redundant coding,
where k is independent of the size of the group.
This is joint work with N. Takagi and S. Yajima of Kyoto Univ.
***** Time and place: March 20, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1345 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.ARPA Seminar Announcement
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 13:42:39 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Mar 86 13:40:06-PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 12:44:05-PST
From: Marty Tenenbaum <Tenenbaum@SRI-KL>
Subject: Seminar Announcement
To: ai-engineering: ;
cc: pasley@SRI-KL
ANNOUNCEMENT
Subject: Seminar on A.I. in Design and Manufacturing.
Time: Every Wednesday from 4-5:30 during Spring Quarter.
Location: Terman Engineering Center, room 556.
For further information contact:
Jay M. Tenenbaum, Consulting Professor, Computer Science
(415) 496-4699 or Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpose: To explore and stimulate the use of A.I. concepts and tools in
engineering.
This seminar will bring together engineers and computer scientists
interested in applying A.I. methods to engineering problems. We will
study the knowledge and reasoning processes used in designing and
manufacturing electronic and mechanical systems, and how they can be
codified for use in intelligent CAD/CAM systems.
Seminar Format:
An initial series of lectures, by distinguished A.I. researchers,
will describe ways in which engineering knowledge can be formalized,
and manipulated by a computer to solve design and manufacturing
problems. Subsequent lectures, by guest lecturers and students, will
present case studies drawn from the domains of electronic and
mechanical design, semiconductor fabrication, and process planning.
Seminal papers will be distributed and discussed in conjunction
with each lecture.
One unit of credit (pass/fail) will be granted for reading papers and
participating in class discussion. Students who elect to do a
programming project or an in-depth ontological study of some
engineering task will receive three units (graded).
!
Tentative Schedule (Subject to Change)
April 2 Course Introduction (Jay M. Tenenbaum)
Rule-based systems; Application to Heuristic Classification
(William Clancey)
9 Frames and Objects; Application to Modeling and Simulation
(Richard Fikes)
16 Logic; Application to Design Debugging, Diagnosis, And Test
(Michael Genesereth)
23 Prolog: Application to Design Verification (Harry Barrow)
30 Truth Maintainance; Application to Diagnosing Multiple Faults.
(Johann DeKleer)
May 7 Knowledge Engineering as Ontological Analysis (Pat Hayes)
14 Transformational Approaches to Synthesis; Applications to
Electronic and Mechanical Design (Cordell Green).
21 Modeling and Reasoning about Electronic Design:
Paladio (Harold Brown); Helios (Narinder Singh)
28 Modeling and Reasoning about Semiconductor Fabrication
(John Mohammed, M. Klein)
June 4 Applications of AI in Mechanical Design and Manufacture
The PRIDE Design System (Sanjay Mittal);
Video Tape on Expert Systems for Manufacturing (Mark Fox).
(Exam Week) Presentation of Student Projects
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1356 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA Faculty senate
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 13:56:29 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 18 Mar 86 13:52:05-PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 13:48:19-PST
From: Terry Winograd <WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty senate
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA
I just got a ballot with everybody in the world on it. Is there anyone
actually trying to gather votes? --t
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1410 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Stanford University Phones
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 14:09:58 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 13:58:51-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Stanford University Phones
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
The old 497 numbers will be discontinued as of 6:00 pm, Friday,
March 21. After that time all 497 numbers will receive a recording
directing them to the University Information number 723-2300 (723-4000
for the Hospital).
New numbers for CSLI people at Stanford University can be found in the
file <csli>phones.list on su-csli.
For those of you who have the new phones, the following may be of interest.
* No dial tone, or other malfunction: call 3-1611
* Problems in using the phone and its features: call 5-HELP
* Installation problems: call 5-0511
←←←←←←←←
(I would hate to be an University Operator in the next few weeks.)
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1712 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI Bikes
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 17:12:22 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 16:11:11-PST
From: jamie@su-csli
Subject: CSLI Bikes
Sender: EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA, bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Reply-To: jamie@su-csli.arpa
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
Please help us get the CSLI gold fleet back at Ventura Hall by
Wednesday afternoon for the spring tune up.
-Jamie Marks
----
Please send all replies and queries to Jamie Marks, under penalty of being
thrown into the abyss.
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1711 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI Monthly, part I
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 17:09:43 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 15:59:11-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, part I
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
C S L I M O N T H L Y
---------------------------------------------------------------------
March 15, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A monthly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
---------------------
Editor's note
This is the first issue of CSLI's monthly report of research
activities. This issue introduces CSLI and then characterizes each of
its current research projects; following issues will report on
individual projects in more detail and discuss some of the research
questions raised here.
---------------------
What is CSLI?
CSLI is a research institute devoted to building theories about the
nature of information and how it is conveyed, processed, stored, and
transformed through the use of language and in computation.
Researchers include computer scientists, linguists, philosophers,
psychologists, and workers in artificial intelligence from several San
Francisco Bay Area institutions as well as graduate students,
postdoctoral fellows, and visiting scholars from around the world.
Where is it located?
CSLI's location is one of its more interesting features: it is
discontinuous. CSLI research and activities are conducted at SRI
International, Stanford University, and Xerox PARC. But there is a
headquarters, Ventura Hall at Stanford, where CSLI's central
administration is located, most visitors and students are housed, and the
majority of larger events take place. Most CSLI researchers spend some
part of their time each week at Ventura, talking with students, postdocs,
and researchers from sites other than their own.
What is its research goal?
In using the rich resources language provides for dealing with
information, we all show mastery of a powerful apparatus which
includes concepts of meaning, reference, knowledge, desire, and
intention. CSLI's goal is to develop theories of information that are
explicit and systematic and at least as rich as our implicit
understanding, and to apply these theories to the analysis of
language. The implications of these theories should be far-reaching,
not only for the study of natural languages, but also for the analysis
and design of computer languages.
Current efforts to endow a computer with human information-processing
abilities are being made without benefit of a theory of information
content. This is like trying to design a calculator without a precise
formulation of the laws of arithmetic: some of the pieces will be
right, but their unification into a smoothly running whole is
unlikely, if not impossible. For example, natural language database
query systems can handle restricted uses of language, but may yield
unexpected results when faced with ambiguity, anaphora, or indirect
speech acts. Other artificial intelligence programs count on
similarly limited domains such as characteristics of specific diseases
or rules of game-playing. In real-time applications, unexpected
failures are often the result of our inability to account fully for
interactions of machine-processes with real world events. Even if we
cannot resolve all the intricacies, a full characterization of them
will increase our understanding of the limitations of computer
technology and influence decisions we make about its use.
CSLI researchers conceive of their work as part of the development of
a newly emerging science of information, computation, and cognition.
They are convinced that a theory of information cannot be built by
individuals from any one of the disciplines that have traditionally
studied corners of this science. The endeavor requires the
collaboration of all. The most explicit theories of meaning come from
philosophy and logic, but these cannot be straightforwardly applied to
natural languages. The most explicit and detailed theories of
grammatical structure come from linguistics; these deal well with
phrases and sentences, but cannot be directly applied to larger units
of discourse. Computer scientists can give detailed accounts of
programs, themselves large units of discourse, but the "sentences" out
of which programs are built exhibit far less complexity than those of
natural languages. Action has been studied in various ways by various
disciplines, but the action theories that are well-worked-out
mathematically -- like "choice theory" in economics -- are too simple
to capture real-life applications. And those that seem more promising
-- like Aristotle's theory of "practical reason" -- haven't been
developed to the point where they can really be applied. Logic and
psychology have quite a lot to tell us about inference and reasoning,
each in its different way, but this work has seldom been related to
natural language uses.
CSLI was founded by researchers who wish to work on more than the
corners. Their two and a half years of work together has firmly
committed them to a joint effort.
How does it work?
Since its inception, the Center has included a multitude of mechanisms
to promote formal and informal interaction, including weekly seminars
and colloquia, frequent project meetings, and daily teas. But the
nature of the interaction has changed over time. At first, the main
function was mutual education of a general sort. The researchers
wanted to learn about each others' opinions, methods, approaches,
biases, and experiences. They discovered differences in rather
general metatheoretical questions and in methodology, as well as in
specific issues. They discussed basic questions such as the nature of
evidence, the relationship between theory and formalisms, and the
nature of representation. For many, reading habits changed as well --
"keeping up" now meant reviewing recent research in several
disciplines.
During this time, CSLI was aglow with a multitude of ideas for
interdisciplinary collaboration, and each researcher was trying to
incorporate every one of them into his or her research. They were
tempted to spend all their research time in lively debates on
fundamental issues. It was exciting and draining. But choices had to
be made and some convergent paths selected.
In time, the interactions became more focussed, and new research
constellations were formed. The current research group on situated
automata, for example, is in part the result of a CSLI seminar
organized during the first winter to explore the idea that action
theory in contemporary analytical philosophy and planning research in
AI should have something to say to each other. Discussion focussed on
the assumption, central to most AI work, that the agent's relation to
the world is mediated by logical representations. Philosophers argued
that the assumption was groundless at best, absurd at worst, while
computer scientists argued that in rejecting the "representational"
approach, philosophers were not providing an equally detailed
alternative model for the causal connections between state changes in
agents and in the world. Out of this interaction came a new goal: to
give an account of an agent's place in the world that, on the one
hand, is as detailed and rigorous as the AI accounts, and, on the
other hand, does not start from an a priori assumption of a
representational connection.
CSLI's current research projects represent this sort of convergence of
theories and ideas. Most activities of mutual education are now
connected with the projects. However, the impact of the first two
years has not dissipated. Mechanisms are being put into place to
ensure that new connections are encouraged and strengthened, and the
respect CSLI has for individual differences ensures that vigorous
debates will continue into the foreseeable future.
What is it like to work at CSLI?
Each of the institutions and disciplines involved in CSLI has its own
character. A visitor or student will probably be spending a good bit
of time at the Ventura headquarters, where a sort of indigenous CSLI
culture has developed. Imagine a typical philosopher, a typical
linguist, and a typical computer scientist. The philosopher is happy
with low-key funky surroundings, and can't be bothered with machinery,
relying instead on books, paper, and number 2 pencils. The linguist
is accustomed to low-key funky surroundings, and is content in any
setting where there are other linguists, coffee, and devices
(blackboards, whiteboards, or computers) that can handle trees or
functional diagrams. The computer scientist has become part of the
wonderful new technology s/he has helped to develop, to the extent
that s/he can't even imagine how to communicate with the person at the
next desk when the computer is down.
All of these folk feel right at home at Ventura Hall. It is an old,
onetime residence on the Stanford campus with a carriage house in
back, trailers in the front yard, and flowers carefully planted amid
the freely growing weeds. Inside, there are Dandelions in every nook
and cranny, on one of which sits the marmalade cat Ciseli, enjoying
the warmth. It is no accident that Ventura accommodates all of these
types, for it arose from their shared vision and their need for an
"office away from the office" in which to do their collaborative
research.
What made CSLI possible?
o 40 researchers
o 5 academic disciplines
o 3 separate locations
o 3 different administrations
o 1 common research goal
combined with
o A large grant from the System Development Foundation
o Smaller grants from the National Science Foundation
o Equipment grants from Xerox Corporation and Digital Equipment
Corporation
o The generosity and vision of Stanford University, SRI
International, and Xerox PARC
What keeps it together?
o Commitment to a common goal
o A central administration woven around and through the site
administrations
o A dedicated support staff at all three sites
o Visiting scholars
o Postdoctoral fellows
o Graduate students
o Telephone wires and computer cables
(End of first part)
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1734 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Old Stanford phone numbers
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 17:33:41 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 16:20:26-PST
From: brad
Subject: Old Stanford phone numbers
Sender: EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Reply-To: horak@su-csli.arpa
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
All Stanford University 497 prefix phone numbers will be disconnected
this Friday, March 21 at around 6pm. The new Stanford 723 & 725
phone numbers should be used after this time.
Directory assistance for the new numbers can be reached by calling:
415-723-2300 University
415-723-4000 Hospital
415-723-0628 CSLI
--Brad
-------
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1821 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI Monthly, part II
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 18:20:56 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 16:01:41-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, part II
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
(start of second part)
How do the present projects contribute to the common goal?
One schema for organizing our research activities is the following,
based roughly on sizes of information chunks:
o The nature of information, representation, and action
o Information and meaning in extended discourse
o Information and meaning in sentences
o Information and meaning in words
o Sources of information
As with any schema, this one is useful only as long as it's taken with
a grain of salt. It doesn't, for instance, imply an ordering on the
process of understanding information; it doesn't mean that information
is passed upwards, or from one level to its nearest neighbors; and it
certainly doesn't mean that each project is limited in its efforts or
sphere of influence by its position in the schema. However, any other
schema would be equally invalid, and this one does provide a framework
through which we can make use of parallelisms (present and desired)
between human and computer languages and point to these and other
links among our research projects.
THE NATURE OF INFORMATION, REPRESENTATION, AND ACTION
A full account of the content and transfer of information requires us
to embed theories of meaning and interpretation in the real world. A
first step is to understand how information about the world is
represented. The [Representation and Reasoning] project is developing
a general theory of representation and modelling that will
characterize a variety of representational systems including
sentences, utterances, parse-trees, computer screens, minds, and
computers. The goal is to build the foundations of a theory of
computation that can explain what it is to process, rather than merely
to carry, information.
The group considers the following properties of representation
essential:
o Representation is a more restrictive notion than information,
but a broader one than language. (Representation includes
photographs and other physical simulations, such as model
airplanes, and also uses of non-linguistic symbols like
numbers to represent distances and sets to represent
meanings.)
o Representation is circumstantially dependent, not only because
it is specifically relational, but also because whether A
represents B depends, in general, on the whole context
in which A and B appear.
o There is no reason to suppose that representation is "formal";
it emerges out of partially disconnected physically
embodied systems or processes.
o It matters that "represent" is a verb. Representational
acts are the primary objects of study, and
representational structures, especially those requiring an
independent act of interpretation, are taken as derivative.
Currently, the research falls into these subprojects: developing a
typology of "correspondence" relations that can hold between A and B
if A represents B; analyzing the philosophical foundations of the
representational act; examining the notion of models and modelling (a
species of representation) with particular reference to their use in
the model-theoretic approach to semantics; and examining the
representational foundations of computation and information
processing.
Acts of communication do not occur in a vacuum but among a host of
activities, including other acts of communication. In addition, the
communication often refers to other situations and assumes a certain
state of mind on the part of the receiver. The [Situation Theory and
Situation Semantics] project is a coordinated effort, both to develop
a unified theory of meaning and information content that makes use of
all of these activities and assumptions, and to apply that theory to
specific problems that have arisen within the disciplines of
philosophy, linguistics, computer science, and artificial
intelligence. The guiding idea behind the formation of this group was
to use provisional versions of situation theory to give detailed
analyses of the semantics of natural and computer languages, both to
hone intuitions about the information theoretic structures required by
such analyses, and to provide more constraining criteria of adequacy
on theories of such structures. The aim is to reach the point where
these intuitions and criteria become precise enough to provide the
basis of a mathematically rigorous, axiomatic theory of information
content.
The group has five overlapping semigroups working on concrete
instances of some traditional problems associated with attempts to
develop theories of information content: developing an
information-based theory of inference, developing an information-based
theory of representation, examining problems in the semantics of
natural languages, examining problems in the semantics of computation,
and axiomatizing and modeling situation theory.
This group includes members from every discipline and every
institution represented at CSLI. They rely on their diverse
backgrounds to draw on insights and techniques from all parts of CSLI
in solving the problems they have set for themselves, and they hope
their progress will similarly affect work in the other projects.
The [Situated Automata] project is concerned with the analysis of
dynamic informational properties of computational systems embedded in
larger environments, especially physical environments. The theory
takes as its point of departure a model of physical and computational
systems in which the concept of information is defined in terms of
logical relationships between the state of a process (e.g., a machine)
and that of its surrounding world. Because of constraints between a
process and its environment, not every state of the process-
environment pair is possible, in general. A process x is said to
carry the information that p in a situation where its internal state
is v if p holds in all situations in which x is in state v.
This definition leads directly to models for certain well-known logics
of knowledge. More interestingly, perhaps, it also suggests synthetic
approaches to the design of dynamic information systems.
In order to deal with the enormous number of states typically
encountered in realistic systems, the theory is being extended to
hierarchically constructed machines, the informational characteristics
of which can be rigorously derived in a compositional fashion from
those of its component machines. Theoretical work is also being done
to relate this work to abstract models of concurrent processes.
On the more practical level, the situated automata project has been
developing tools for constructing complex machines with well-defined
informational properties, and has been testing the theory by applying
these tools to software design for robots and other reactive systems.
Planned future work includes applying the situated automata framework
to the analysis of dynamic informational properties of systems engaged
in linguistic interaction.
Although still in the early stages, it appears that the theory will
make a technical contribution to the ongoing debate in AI and
philosophy of mind over the role of interpreted representations
("language of thought") in the semanticity or intensionality of mental
states. The situated automata account indicates how logical
conditions can be assigned systematically to arbitrary computational
states that are not prestructured as interpretable linguistic
entities, and thus it serves as at least prima facie evidence against
the need for a language of thought in order to achieve full
semanticity.
In the [Rational Agency] project, philosophers and researchers in AI
are merging their two traditions in the study of rational behavior to
build a theory of belief, desire, and intention as these attitudes act
collectively, informed by perception, to produce action. They seek
models that take account of the resource limitations of humans and
computers, and formal, automatable theories that can be used to endow
artificial agents with the requisite commonsense reasoning abilities.
They are investigating ways by which planning will fit into their
theory of rationality, e.g., can plans be reduced to some configuration
of other, primitive mental states, or must they also be introduced as
a primitive? Finally, because a main function of planning is the
coordination of an agent's own projects and of interpersonal
activities, they require their theories to account for multiagent
interaction.
Recent developments in philosophy of action have moved beyond the
"belief/desire" architecture and have provided insights about the
nature of "intention formation" and its function as a mechanism
required by a resource-bounded agent in evaluating and making
decisions in a constantly changing world. Recent developments in AI
planning theory have moved beyond a view of plans as sets of actions
for achieving predetermined goals that are guaranteed consistent, and
have provided insights into the nature of intention realization.
Researchers in the Rational Agency project are bringing about a
convergence of these two developments and are looking to it as the
cornerstone of their future work.
The [Semantics of Computer Languages] project is seeking to develop a
theory of semantics of computational languages through the design of a
specific family of languages for system description and development.
The theory will serve as the basis for a variety of constructed
languages for describing, analyzing, and designing real world
situations and systems. It will account for a number of issues that
have not been adequately dealt with, either in work on natural
language semantics, or the semantics of programming languages. For
example, in describing any complex real-world situation, people mix
descriptions at different levels of abstraction and detail. They use
generalization, composition, idealization, analogy, and other
"higher-level" descriptions to simplify in some way the account that
is needed at a "lower" or more detailed level. In working with
programming and specification languages, there is a semantic
discontinuity in moving from one abstraction or approximation to
another. In simple cases there can be a clear mapping, but there is
no theory to deal adequately with more general cases occurring in
either natural language or computing languages.
Similarly, much of the work on computing languages has dealt with the
computer in a mathematical domain of inputs and outputs, ignoring its
embodiment as a physical process. This abstraction is not adequate
for many of the phenomena of real computing such as the temporal,
spatial, and causal constraints that can be described among the
components of physical systems.
The research strategy of this group is to interweave three levels of
research: theory, experiments, and environments. The group is
experimenting with a class of languages called "system description
languages" which share some properties with programming languages, but
have a semantics more in the tradition of model theory and work on
natural languages. Finally, to provide the ease and flexibility they
need for experimenting with description languages, the group is
developing an environment that is a tool kit for designing and working
with formal languages.
Researchers in the closely related [Embedded Computation] project wish
to understand how the local processing constraints, physical
embodiment, and real-time activity of a computer or other
computational system interact with the relational constraints of
representing and conveying information and language. They wish to
account for these interactions in information processing systems that
range in complexity from those with perceptual mechanisms connected
rather directly to their environment such as thermostats and the
sensory transducers of humans, to those able to use language, reason
deliberately, and reflect in a detached way about situations remote in
space, time, or possibility.
Members of the project are searching for system architectures and
theoretical techniques that can adequately analyze this range of
capacities. For example, they wish to account for the full range of
semantic relations between the processes and the embedding context and
to give a semantic analysis focussed on activity and processing.
Currently, they are formulating type theories able to deal with both
procedural and declarative information, developing a theoretical
framework for a full semantical analysis of a simple robot, and
working with CSLI's Situation Theory and Situation Semantics group to
design an "inference engine" for situation theory.
The [Analysis of Graphical Representation] project is concerned with
developing an account of the document as an information-bearing
artifact, a topic which until now has been largely neglected by many
of the fields that count language among their subject matter. Issues
include: the relationship between the concepts of "text" and
"document", an analysis of systems of graphical morphology, and the
nature of writing in relation to representational systems in general.
This project is listed in this section because of its emphasis on
representation and information but could have as easily been listed in
the next section because of its concern for written language as
expression of connected discourse.
(end of second part)
-------
∂18-Mar-86 1913 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI Monthly, part III
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 19:13:01 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 16:02:54-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, part III
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
(start of third part)
INFORMATION AND MEANING IN EXTENDED DISCOURSE
The information content of a statement is only partially determined by
the sentence used. Other tools for interpretation come from the
discourse as a whole, the context of the discourse, and the
states-of-mind of the participating agents.
Members of [Discourse, Intention, and Action] are developing various
components of theories of discourse, emphasizing the use of extended
sequences of utterances to achieve particular effects and the fact
that discourse is an activity of two (or more) participants located in
particular contexts. They are extending the kind of semantic accounts
often given to natural languages in two directions: first, by
accounting for some non-declarative utterances, particularly
interrogatives and imperatives, and second, by dealing with discourses
containing several utterances, possibly produced by several speakers.
The first objective is to be achieved by considering utterances as not
merely describing a situation (type), but as effecting a change in the
mental state of the participants; the second, by studying the
constraints on utterance sequences of the goals of the participants,
the discourse situation, commonsense knowledge, and human attentional
and processing capabilities.
The project is proceeding along three intertwined areas of
investigation:
o Discourse. Research on the nature of discourse includes a study
of the components of discourse structure, the nature of coherence
relations, the derivation of discourse as a product of rational
interaction, and embedded discourse. Another concern is how
patterns in word order and intonation correlate with structure
at the discourse level.
o Sentence-level phenomena. This subproject examines questions of
illocution from the perspective of a theory of rational interaction.
It is concerned with the contribution of utterance mood to such a
theory, with illocutionary act definitions, with indirect speech acts,
and with a theory that can determine what is implicated in an
utterance.
o Subutterance phenomena. In this area, the group is examining the
relation between referring expressions (including indexicals,
pronouns, and descriptions) and speakers' and hearers' beliefs, mutual
beliefs, and intentions.
In thinking about how to make computer languages more like natural
languages, it is useful to view computer programs as examples of
extended discourse. [Linguistic Approaches to Computer Languages] is
a pilot project to investigate the application of methods and findings
from research on natural languages to the design and description of
high-level computer languages. The linguistically interesting
approach to making computer languages resemble natural languages is
not to graft English words or phrases onto the computer language in a
superficial way, but rather to exploit the rich inventory of encoding
strategies that have developed during the evolution of natural
language and that humans appear especially attuned to. The increasing
complexity of computer languages, current progress in formal
linguistics, and the growing importance of ergonomic factors in
computer language design motivate a combined effort between computer
science and linguistics.
Long-term issues in the emerging field will include: temporal
expressions in the communication among parallel processes, the use of
speech acts in message-passing between objects and processors, and the
use of discourse information to support ellipsis.
Currently, the group is investigating the need for and feasibility of
applying linguistic approaches, techniques, and findings to a set of
sample problems:
o The use of partially free word order among the arguments of
functions to allow flexibility in the order of evaluation and to
eliminate the need for the user to memorize arbitrary argument
orders. This requires disambiguation by sort, type, or special
marking.
o The exploitation of parallels between natural language parsing
schemes, based on complex structured representations and type
inference in polymorphically typed computer languages.
o The use of type inheritance systems for imposing a conceptually
transparent structure on the lexicon.
o The introduction of morphology for marking related lexical items as
to type (derivational morphology), thematic structure (relation
changing), or role (case marking).
o The need for less restricted uses of proforms in computer
languages than currently exist.
The goal of the [Grammatical Theory and Discourse Structure] project
is to integrate a particular theory of grammar, the lexical-functional
theory (LFG), with a theory of discourse structure, relating the
project equally to this and the following section. LFG, as a very
explicit and highly modular theory, provides a useful framework from
which to study the interaction between discourse and sentence
phenomena. Moreover, the general architecture of the framework allows
experimentation with different modes of interaction between different
components. Linguistic models up to now, LFG included, have displayed
a marked preference for the serial approach. However, there is no
need for the components of grammars built on unification to interact
in a serial rather than a more parallel fashion. The different
subcomponents can constrain the output without being in linear order.
Current work is advancing in the form of two subprojects: the first is
extending the ideas in Discourse Representation Theory and Situation
Semantics to a richer theory of anaphora and deixis, to account for
such phenomena as logophoric reference, topic, and focus; and the
second is studying the grammaticalization (the way that phenomena are
formally and systematically encoded in the grammars of natural
languages) of such discourse phenomena as logophoricity, topic, and
focus in natural languages, in order to recover from the formal
subsystems of word structure, word order, and prosodic structure a
rich set of empirical constraints on the integrated theory.
INFORMATION AND MEANING IN SENTENCES
Two closely connected projects are looking at representations of
sentence structure from the point of view of several formalisms; they
are searching for commonalities with respect to meaning and
interpretation. One seeks a conceptual foundation for the theories,
and the other seeks representations with direct ties to the semantics.
Specifically, the goal of the [Foundations of Grammar] project is a
better understanding of methods of encoding linguistic information as
systems of rules or constraints, and of how that information can be
used in recognition and generation. The group is developing, not a
particular theory of grammar, but rather a conceptual foundation and a
common frame of reference for such theories. Their current research
involves three efforts which are being carried out in tandem: the
development of a mathematical characterization of techniques of
grammatical description, the study of their computational
ramifications, and an examination of their empirical motivations.
The group is incorporating their results in a computational tool kit
for implementing grammatical theories, and the result will be a
facility for experimentation with various syntactic, semantic, and
morphological theories and processing strategies.
This focus on the common conceptual basis of current linguistic
theories and the design of formal and computational techniques to
further their development will contribute to our understanding of the
relationship between language and information. The research is
concerned, on the one hand, with the ways in which information about
the world is represented in linguistic structures and the
computational techniques for extracting and storing that information,
and, on the other hand, with the way information about language itself
is represented in grammars and how that information is used in
generation and parsing.
The [Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar] project is analyzing the
structure and interpretation of natural language within the HPSG
framework which incorporates theoretical and analytic concepts from
Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Lexical Functional Grammar,
Situation Semantics, Categorial Grammar, and Functional Unification
grammar. The goal is a single-level, constraint-based
characterization of linguistic structures, rules, and principles which
interact through the operation of unification.
Current research is addressing such issues as the analysis of the
syntax and semantics of unbounded dependency constructions,
hierarchical, frame-based models of the structure of the lexicon,
constraints governing the interface of syntactic and semantic
structure, word order variation, discontinuous grammatical
dependencies, agreement and incorporation phenomena in a variety of
languages, the theory of lexical rules, and approaches to semantic
structure that synthesize ideas from Situation Semantics, the theory
of thematic roles, and Discourse Representation Theory. The HPSG
research group is also developing various computational
implementations, in close consultation with ongoing research in the
Foundations of Grammar project.
(end of third part)
-------
∂18-Mar-86 2000 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA CSLI Monthly, part IV
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 19:56:05 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 16:04:05-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: CSLI Monthly, part IV
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
(start of fourth part)
INFORMATION AND MEANING IN WORDS
Two projects are exploring the structure of information in the lexicon
and its relation to larger units of communication.
The goal of the [Lexical Project] is to develop a workable lexicon
that integrates semantic knowledge about lexical items with the
semantic and syntactic frameworks currently under development at CSLI.
The group has sorted its task into a linguistic problem and a
computational problem: the linguistic problem is to determine what the
content of a lexical entry must be, and the computational problem is
to understand how this knowledge can be built into an online lexicon.
Currently, they are addressing four issues connected with the
linguistic problem:
o How do knowledge of the world and lexical meaning link up?
o How should lexical meaning be represented?
o What is the place of lexico-semantic information in the overall
grammar?
o What is the structure of the lexicon?
Although conceptually, the computational problem cannot be solved
without first solving the linguistic problem, the group is addressing
the computational problem simultaneously in an effort to avoid
piecemeal, limited, or unimplementable solutions to the linguistic
problem.
The [AFT Lexical Representation Theory] project is developing three
basic parts of Aitiational Frame Theory, a theory of lexical
representation which gives a rich internal structure to lexical
meanings and is designed to feed into generative syntactic
representations.
The first part says that meanings are only partially specifying
instructions about the referent of the terms. The second concerns the
unification of AFT representations of the meanings of terms joined by
conjunction or disjunction to form complex predicates. The third part
concerns the path from intension to extension; according to AFT, the
meaning specification, together with certain assumptions about human
explanatory schemes, generates a number of contexts, and the extension
is determined only within such contexts.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
For human agents, speech and vision are the primary sources of
information about the world, and we expect similar mechanisms to
accommodate our communication with computers. Three projects at CSLI
are concerned with representing and characterizing information
contained in speech signals and with relating this information to
other aspects of the communication process. A fourth is exploring
comparable aspects of visual information.
The [Phonology and Phonetics] project is investigating the
organization of phonology and its role in language structure, with
particular emphasis on postlexical phonology. The work involves an
investigation of two orthogonal aspects of the organization of the
phonology:
o The divisions between the lexical phonology, the
postlexical phonology, and the phonetics
o The ways in which each of these levels interacts
with syntactic, semantic, and discourse factors
The group ties itself to the representational and semantic aspects of
CSLI's work by assuming that phonetics interprets phonology in much
the same way as semantics interprets syntax, and that the study of
interactions between the phonology and syntax, semantics, and
discourse will constrain the theories of these other components.
The research will suggest ways of incorporating cues to meaning from
the phonological (particularly intonational) realization into natural
language parsing and understanding systems. For example, such an
apparently purely mechanical articulatory phenomenon as the elision in
"Bill is here" --> "Bill's here" is systematically blocked when a
syntactic gap (inaudible in itself) follows: "My dad is stronger than
Bill is" cannot be reduced to "My dad is stronger than Bill's" (which
means something quite different). Even subphonemic differences in
timing, speech rhythm, and syllabification are known to correlate
systematically with semantic interpretation. The group's hypothesis
is that the phonological interpretation of utterances takes place
incrementally within each component of the grammar. Thus, the rules
of word phonology apply in tandem with the rules of morphology in the
lexicon, and sentences formed in the syntax are in turn subject to
postlexical phonological processes.
The [Finite State Morphology] project is bringing a new kind of
dialogue between linguists and computer scientists to CSLI. Until
recently, descriptive and theoretical work in phonology and morphology
has proceeded without parallel mathematical and computational efforts.
In spite of the lively debate on the relative roles of rules,
constraints, and representations in recent years, there has been
relatively little careful formalization of these new theories and few
studies of their mathematical properties. Moreover, there have been
very few attempts to apply these ideas towards generation or
recognition of words.
Finite State Morphology is a framework within computational morphology
which uses finite state devices to represent correspondences between
lexical and surface representations of morphemes. CSLI's FSM group is
working within this framework to:
o Study mathematical properties of phonological rule systems
o Develop an automatic compiler for phonological rules
o Suggest improvements to current methods of handling
morphosyntax
o Attempt to resolve the issues where there is a conflict between
finite state approaches and current phonological theory
o Implement a model for multi-tier phonological descriptions and
hierarchical structures
The goal of the project on [Computational Models of Spoken Language]
is to formally specify, through computational models, the information
projected from speech signals and how that information is represented
and used in speech analysis.
Their point of departure is an exploration of two related hypotheses:
1) that we hear more than we make sense of, that is, that we actively
discard information, and 2) that we add information to that which is
present in the signal, that is, that we fill in what is not there.
The group hopes that their computational exploration of ordinary
speech will lead to a deeper understanding of the nature of
information transference.
Assuming some form of computational processing of internal
representations is controversial both at CSLI and in the general
scientific community. The group is seeking to add some content to
this debate in the form of data and facts regarding the nature of the
speech signal, what must be projected from the signal and what is
judged to be nonlinguistic, and what constitutes the necessary
components in recognizing and parsing the spoken utterance.
Currently, they are investigating four facets of this problem:
symbolic and physicalist analyses of continuous speech, properties of
representations of the English word, properties of representations of
the English phrase, and speech and parsing theory.
The [Visual Communication] project is concerned with mechanisms of visual
communication and visual languages and the identification of visual
regularities that support the distinctions and classes necessary for
general-purpose reasoning. The group assumes that the manner in which
visual languages convey meaning, is, at least in part, fundamentally
different from conventions in spoken language, and, therefore, requires
study beyond the confines of the standard linguistic tradition. They are
testing this hypothesis by examining conventions that have evolved for
various forms of visual communication including visual languages such as
ASL, illustrations, blackboard interactions, and graphic interfaces.
They seek to provide some perceptual underpinnings to theories of meaning
and information through an understanding of the way we parse the world
into meaningful parts ("visual morphemes") and the way we identify those
parts from sensory data.
--Elizabeth Macken
Editor
(end of CSLI Monthly)
-------
∂18-Mar-86 2017 BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: [Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Power & grades]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 18 Mar 86 20:17:17 PST
Date: Tue 18 Mar 86 20:10:40-PST
From: Alexandre Bronstein <BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: [Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Power & grades]
To: MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tas@SU-SCORE.ARPA, instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <12191745940.31.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Message-ID: <12191838785.19.BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
That's OK. TA time is expendable, and with enough paper and pencil, it'll
be just as if we had the computers...
Pass our thanks along to whoever scheduled the shutdown...
Alex
-------
∂19-Mar-86 0823 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA General Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 08:22:50 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 08:19:07-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: General Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191971394.13.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a general faculty meeting on Tuesday, April 1, 1986
at 2:30 in MJH 146. The known agenda items include:
1/ Teaching Loads
2/ Publications
3/ Departmental Reports
4/ Admissions
5/ MS/PhD Candidates
6/ PhD Committee Report (Terry will circulate written document)
If you have any additional agenda items, please forward them to me.
Thanks,
Anne
-------
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1010 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa meeting today
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 10:10:51 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 19 Mar 86 09:58:30 pst
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 86 09:58:30 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: meeting today
To: nail@diablo
We'll meet today at 11AM. I want to talk about Degroot's
work on testing term independence.
We also need to think about a new time for meetings,
since in the Spring quarter, I'm teaching MWF at 10, and
Shukey teaches MWF at 11.
Also, thre will be no meeting next week, because of PODS.
---jeff
∂19-Mar-86 1102 CHRIS@SU-CSLI.ARPA Wettstein talk
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 10:58:17 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 10:47:33-PST
From: Chris Menzel <CHRIS@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Wettstein talk
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Reminder: Howard Wettstein of the University of Notre Dame will be
speaking today in the Ventura trailers classroom at 3:00. His talk
will be entitled "Bringing Belief Down to Earth."
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1138 EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA [LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Telephone Service]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 11:38:36 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 11:03:48-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: [LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>: Telephone Service]
To: CSD-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192001375.27.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Mail-From: EPPLEY created at 19-Mar-86 10:42:56
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 10:42:56-PST
From: LaDonna Eppley <EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Telephone Service
To: CSD@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: Eppley@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12191997575.27.EPPLEY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Service to all 497 numbers will end at 6:00 p.m. Friday, March 21, l986.
A recording will inform the caller that you have a new phone number and
will be referred to the University information number.
Assistance with your new phone may be obtained by calling the following
numbers. Phone malfunction (3-1611) Installation problems (5-0511).
The Director of ITS, Mike Roberts states that they plan to correct
installation discrepancies in 3 to 4 days. And, that the order of
priority is: phone out of order, incomplete or incorrect installation,
and loss of telephone service when the old phone is removed. They will
work on these priorities and have them completed as soon as possible.
Please advise your off campus callers of your new number in order to
reduce the number of calls to the information operators.
Thanks for your patience (it will take alot).
LaDonna
-------
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1200 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Executive Recruiter
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 12:00:20 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 11:57:25-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Executive Recruiter
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192011134.28.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Dr. Jeff Honig of Richards Consultants in NYC called. He is looking for
a very senior level person who received PHD about 10 to 12 years ago.
PHD is a must.
brand new position on east coast; 6 figures; genius; star performer;
background in systems, manufacturing processes, information systems,
technical support of operations.
The company is a world leader in consumer products;
Dr. Honig promised that if anything comes of our assistance, he will
make a contribution to the Department or to the Forum. (at my suggestion)
If you have any leads, please let me know. Or if you wish to call
Dr. Honig -- 212/682-6880
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1432 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 25 (M. Braine)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 14:32:45 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA16008; Wed, 19 Mar 86 13:55:57 PST
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 86 13:55:57 PST
From: admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8603192155.AA16008@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--March 25 (M. Braine)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, March 25, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``A lexical entry for `if' and some data on reasoning
to a conditional conclusion in children and adults''
Martin Braine
Psychology Department, NYU
A psychological theory of a logical particle should have
three parts: (1) a lexical entry, which specifies the informa-
tion about the meaning of the particle carried in semantic
memory; (2) a theory of the pragmatic comprehension processes
that, taken with the lexical entry, lead to construal in con-
text; and (3) a reasoning program that models subjects' typical
modes of reasoning on stimulus materials used in experiments.
A theory of `if' of this sort will be presented, and used to
account for some intuitions and developmental data on infer-
ences, truth judgments, and comprehension errors. In addition,
some experiments will be reported in which children and adults
reason to an `if'-statement as conclusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Apr 1: Elisabeth Bates, Psychology, UCSD
Apr 8: Bjλ"orn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 22: Benjamin Libet, Physiology, UCSF
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
May 6: Paul Rosenbloom, Computer Science and Psychology,
Stanford University
∂19-Mar-86 1618 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:cheriton@su-pescadero.arpa Staff Salaries
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 16:18:31 PST
Received: from su-pescadero.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 19 Mar 86 16:15:59-PST
Received: by su-pescadero.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 19 Mar 86 16:16:02 pst
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 86 16:16:02 pst
From: David Cheriton <cheriton@Pescadero>
Subject: Staff Salaries
To: nilsson@score
Cc: faculty@score
(flame on)
I think it is totally inappropriate for the university to be imposing fixed
limits (especially of only 5.6 percent) on people that I pay out of
soft money. They dont provide any of the funds to pay these people, or
any of the deliverables for the contracts, etc. Wage parity for people
on soft money with people on hard money also seems like a misguided reason
for these controls, plus very unfair. I would like the university to either
provide salary guarantees to people on soft money or else exclude these
salaries from their silly rules.
(flame off)
∂19-Mar-86 1642 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 16:42:14 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 16:38:54-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH
To: planlunch.dis: ;
PROBLEMS OF KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND TIME
Sarit Kraus (joint work with D. Lehmann)
Hebrew University, Jerusalem
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 24
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
(No abstract available).
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1643 BHAYES-ROTH%SUMEX-AIM.ARPA@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU please
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 16:43:27 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 19 Mar 86 19:35-EST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by MC.LCS.MIT.EDU 19 Mar 86 19:34:41 EST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 16:34:52-PST
From: Barbara Hayes-Roth <BHAYES-ROTH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: please
To: philosophy-of-science@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Stanford-Phone: (415) 497-0506
Message-ID: <12192061643.78.BHAYES-ROTH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
add me to the mailing list
thanks,
barbara hayes-roth
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1705 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar, March 20, No. 8
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 17:04:05 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 16:50:31-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar, March 20, No. 8
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 497-3479
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
March 20, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 8
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, March 20, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Models, Metaphysics and the Vagaries of Empiricism
Conference Room by Marx W. Wartofsky
Discussion led by Ivan Blair (Blair@su-csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall The Structural Meaning of Clause Type: Capturing
Trailer Classroom Cross-modal and Cross-linguistic Generalizations
Dietmar Zaefferer (G.Zaeff@su-csli)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No Colloquium this week
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, March 27, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall No TINLunch this week
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Reflexivisation: Some Connections Between
Trailer Classroom Lexical, Syntactic, and Semantic Representation
Annie Zaenen, Peter Sells, Draga Zec
(Abstract on page 2)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No Colloquium this week
--------------
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar March 20, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Reflexivisation:
Some Connections Between
Lexical, Syntactic, and Semantic Representation
Annie Zaenen, Peter Sells, Draga Zec
(Zaenen.pa@xerox, Sells@su-csli, Zec@su-csli)
This presentation will concentrate on cross-linguistic variation in
the expression of simple direct object reflexivisation (as found in
English in a sentence like `John washed himself'). It will be shown
that the counterparts of such sentences in different languages can be
lexically transitive or intransitive, can be expressed in one word or
in two or three, and allow for one or more semantic interpretations
requiring semantic representations that treat the reflexive as a bound
variable in some cases but not in others. The data presented will show
that some simple ideas about the mapping from lexical arguments to
surface structure constituents and/or to semantic arguments are not
tenable.
--------------
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.
-------
∂19-Mar-86 1705 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gray Tuesday Reminder
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 19 Mar 86 17:04:52 PST
Date: Wed 19 Mar 86 17:02:26-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gray Tuesday Reminder
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12192066662.37.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please remember that Gray Tuesday is tomorrow (March 20), at 2:15 pm,
in MJH 252.
See you all there.
Victoria
-------
∂20-Mar-86 0948 NUNBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA Harry Caray Day reminder
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 09:48:42 PST
Date: Thu 20 Mar 86 09:39:02-PST
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Harry Caray Day reminder
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Remember that there remains only a week in which to order tickets for
the CSLI field trip to Candlestick on Saturday May 3 to watch the
Giants-Cubs game (game time 1:30 P.M.). Children, spouses, and Good
and Great friends are of course welcome. Money for tickets (@ $9 a
shot) should be given to Susi at the desk.
-------
∂20-Mar-86 1055 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:avg@su-aimvax.arpa P=NP reference
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 10:55:08 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 20 Mar 86 10:49:14-PST
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 20 Mar 86 10:48:42-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 20 Mar 86 10:51:56 pst
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 86 10:51:56 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: P=NP reference
To: aflb.all@score
Here is the reference that goes with earlier messages. Has anybody seen
this report?
> From: Akl Selim <AKL@SRI-CSL.ARPA>
> To those who asked, the reference is:
> E.R. Swart, "P=NP", Research Report CIS86-02, Department of Computing and
> Information Science, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, February 1986.
> ---SGA.
∂20-Mar-86 1400 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA Bell Fellowship
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 14:00:28 PST
Date: Thu 20 Mar 86 13:57:25-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Bell Fellowship
To: jct@SU-AI.ARPA, singer@SU-SUSHI.ARPA, pieper@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, bergman@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cheadle@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
Lees@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192295124.43.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
We were just notified that Karen Pieper has been chosen for the Bell
Fellowship. All three of you were excellent candidates and it must
have been a difficult choice.
Our congratulations to Karen.
Carolyn Tajnai, Chair
Fellowship Committee
-------
∂20-Mar-86 1711 WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA Summer RAships
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 17:11:15 PST
Date: Thu 20 Mar 86 17:10:33-PST
From: Tom Wasow <WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Summer RAships
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
As was the case last year, CSLI will be able to offer modest financial
support, in the form of Research Assistantships, to a substantial
number of students during the coming summer. These will normally be
50% time for two months, though other arrangements will be considered
if good reasons are given. Stanford students receiving such RAships
during the summer can register for units, which may be important in
some cases for the purpose of satsifying the residency requirement.
To apply, send (or have sent) to me:
1) A BRIEF statement (1 or 2 paragraphs) of your research and/or study
plans for the summer.
2) An even briefer statement of support from one of the long-term
researchers at CSLI (i.e., someone other than a student, postdoc, or
visiting scholar).
These may be sent to me electronically or in hardcopy.
DEADLINE FOR GETTING THESE MATERIALS TO ME: FRIDAY, APRIL 11
Tom Wasow
-------
∂20-Mar-86 1738 kate%violet@BERKELEY.EDU SESAME Colloquium
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 20 Mar 86 17:38:49 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA07092; Thu, 20 Mar 86 17:24:20 PST
Received: by ucbvax.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.11)
id AA02196; Thu, 20 Mar 86 17:23:55 PST
Received: from ucbviolet.Berkeley.Edu (ucbviolet.ARPA)
by ucbjade.Berkeley.Edu (4.19/4.41.3)
id AA25961; Thu, 20 Mar 86 16:48:02 pst
Received: by ucbviolet.Berkeley.Edu (5.31 (CFC 4.21)/4.42)
id AA16479; Thu, 20 Mar 86 16:47:58 PST
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 86 16:47:58 PST
From: kate%violet@BERKELEY.EDU
Message-Id: <8603210047.AA16479@ucbviolet.Berkeley.Edu>
To: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Subject: SESAME Colloquium
SESAME Colloquium
presents
Roy Pea, Senior Research Scientist
and Associate Director, Center for Children and Technology
Bank Street College of Education
Monday, March 31, 1986
4:00 pm
2515 Tolman Hall
"Cognitive Studies of Children Learning to Program"
More than a million pre-college students a year are programming computers
in school. Yet our unerstanding of the developmental and
cognitive connecton for effective learning to program is
minimal. What do studets of different ages learn in relation
to their learning environments? What are the central "buggie"
understandings and "learning plateaus" tht studets experience? What
kinds of pedagogical mediation in support are needed? This paper
will critically synthesize results from a series of cognitive studiesof elemenary, junior high, and high school novices learning to program. Implications
of findings today for new educational activities for programming
instructon, and for new interactive tools for learning
programming will be highlighted.
------------------------
∂21-Mar-86 0116 bansal%case.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Request For Inclusion In Mailing List
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 01:16:43 PST
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 21 Mar 86 01:07:03 pst
Received: from case by csnet-relay.csnet id bl03820; 21 Mar 86 3:28 EST
Received: by cwruecmp.UUCP (4.12/5.30); Thu, 20 Mar 86 19:42:32 est
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 86 19:42:32 est
From: Arvind Kumar Bansal <bansal%case.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: nail%su-aimvax.arpa@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Request For Inclusion In Mailing List
I am a Ph.D student at Case Western Reserve University working
under Prof. Leon Sterling. I am also working on Parallel Logic.
I am very much interested in joining the parallel logic group.
Please include my name in the mailing list.
My network Address :
bansal%case.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.CSNET
My Postal Address
Arvind Bansal
Department Of Computer Science
521, Crawford Hall
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland, OH - 44106.
Thankyou
Arvind Bansal.
∂21-Mar-86 0941 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sr. Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 09:41:49 PST
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 09:40:12-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sr. Faculty Meeting
To: tenured@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192510443.10.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
As there do not appear to be any agenda items, there will not be a
sr. faculty meeting on April 1 following the general faculty meeting.
-------
∂21-Mar-86 0954 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Recent AIList Message About ICOT Reports And The Math/CS Library
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 09:54:44 PST
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 09:52:15-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Recent AIList Message About ICOT Reports And The Math/CS Library
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192512636.30.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If you are a regular reader of the AIList, you may have seen a recent
message involving the Math/CS Library and the translating of the ICOT
Reports. Many of the statements that Eugene Miya made were incorrect and
inappropriate. This type of proposal is being discussed but the network
is not the place to present it. If you have any concerns about the message
or its content please let me know.
Harry Llull
-------
∂21-Mar-86 1131 ullman@su-aimvax.ARPA Re: Request For Inclusion In Mailing List
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 11:31:03 PST
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 21 Mar 86 11:23:20 pst
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by CSNET-RELAY.ARPA id a009372;
21 Mar 86 13:50 EST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 21 Mar 86 10:16:38 pst
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 10:16:38 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@su-aimvax.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Request For Inclusion In Mailing List
To: bansal%case.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA, nail%su-aimvax.arpa@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
OK--will do.
∂21-Mar-86 1203 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA:avg@su-aimvax.arpa P=NP(?) still open
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 12:00:38 PST
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 21 Mar 86 11:57:15-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 21 Mar 86 12:01:34 pst
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 12:01:34 pst
From: Allen VanGelder <avg@diablo>
Subject: P=NP(?) still open
To: aflb.all@su-sushi, akl@sri-csl
I am taking the liberty of forwarding this to the same people to whom
I sent a possibly inflamatory message.
> From: lawler@ernie.berkeley.edu (Eugene Lawler)
> Subject: Swart's paper
> Not surprisingly, it seems to be fatally flawed. Bob Solovay started
> reading it carefully, found gaps in proofs, wrote Swart about them.
> The P=NP question is still with us, I believe. --Gene Lawler
∂21-Mar-86 1324 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:anderson@lbl-ux7 msri talks
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 13:24:29 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 21 Mar 86 13:09:40-PST
Received: from lbl-ux7.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 21 Mar 86 13:10:20-PST
Received: by lbl-ux7.ARPA ; Fri, 21 Mar 86 13:12:35 pst
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 13:12:35 pst
From: Rich Anderson <anderson@lbl-ux7>
Message-Id: <8603212112.AA11369@lbl-ux7.ARPA>
To: aflb.all@score
Subject: msri talks
Cc: anderson@sushi
MSRI Talks
Tuesday, March 25
11:00 am
Michael Merritt
Sailing through byzantia: easy impossibility proofs
for distributed consensus
2:00 pm
M. Kim
Modified newton iteration for the roots of polynomials
4:00 pm
C. Dwork
Efficient parallel algorithms for term matching
Thursday, March 27
11:00 am
Joel Spencer
Balancing sets and simultaneous round off
2:00 pm
Joan Feigenbaum
Product graphs: some algorithmic and combinatorial results
∂21-Mar-86 1457 oshea.pa@xerox.com Re: SESAME Colloquium
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 14:57:15 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA13111; Fri, 21 Mar 86 14:36:58 PST
Received: from Salvador.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 21 MAR 86 14:11:15 PST
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 14:11:25 PST
From: oshea.pa@xerox.com
Subject: Re: SESAME Colloquium
In-Reply-To: <8603210047.AA16479@ucbviolet.Berkeley.Edu>
To: kate%violet@berkeley.edu
Cc: cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu
Message-Id: <860321-141115-1497@Xerox>
Kate
I'd very much like to be on this mailing list please.
--Tim
∂21-Mar-86 1507 JJW MJH power outage
To: MJH-LispM@SU-AI.ARPA
Tom Dienstbier reminded me that the MJH power will be off this
weekend, and someone has to take care of the Lisp machines. It
would probably be best to turn them off before leaving this
afternoon, and on again once the power is back.
∂21-Mar-86 1705 sagiv@su-aimvax.arpa TA needed for CS345
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 17:05:06 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 21 Mar 86 16:53:28 pst
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 16:53:28 pst
From: Yehoshua Sagiv <sagiv@diablo>
Subject: TA needed for CS345
To: nail@diablo
Anybody interested in being a TA for CS345: Databases?
Shuky Sagiv
∂21-Mar-86 1718 JOCK@SU-SCORE.ARPA Lisp Machines
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Mar 86 17:18:11 PST
Date: Fri 21 Mar 86 17:19:21-PST
From: Jock Mackinlay <JOCK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Lisp Machines
To: mjh-lispm@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12192594029.15.JOCK@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'll turn them off this evening.
Jock
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0313 CAROL@SU-CSLI.ARPA New Phone NO.
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:12:26 PST
Date: Sun 23 Mar 86 17:14:50-PST
From: Carol Kiparsky <CAROL@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: New Phone NO.
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: Carol@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Once again, I have a new phone number. Same office though.
It is: 725-2326. At last I have one that spells something. After
the obligatory 72-, you can just dial J BEAM, which has pleasantly
festive overtones.
Please make a note of this, as if you try to reach me at my previous
number you'll disturb Dikran.
For the moment I have no comm line number.
-Carol
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0313 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Planlunch reminder -- Sarit Kraus
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:12:32 PST
Date: Sun 23 Mar 86 18:47:48-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Planlunch reminder -- Sarit Kraus
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
PROBLEMS OF KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND TIME
Sarit Kraus (joint work with D. Lehmann)
Hebrew University, Jerusalem
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 24
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0319 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Ventura Lunch Service
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 03:13:21 PST
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 08:21:29-PST
From: Lunch@su-csli
Subject: Ventura Lunch Service
Sender: EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Reply-To: Lunch@su-csli.arpa.#internet
Tel: 723-3561
LUNCH NEWS
The CSLI lunch hour will be "extended" until 2:30 p.m., which means
that the half-price sale won't begin until that time.
Please send all comments to Lunch@su-csli
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0651 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA End Quarter Reports
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 06:50:31 PST
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 09:51:54-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: End Quarter Reports
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tas@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193299005.26.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Just a reminder that EQRs are due today.
Please bring them by my office, or leave them in my box on
the second floor. Anytime before tomorrow morning is fine.
-Gina
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0651 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA End Quarter Reports
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 06:50:31 PST
Date: Mon 24 Mar 86 09:51:54-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: End Quarter Reports
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: tas@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193299005.26.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Just a reminder that EQRs are due today.
Please bring them by my office, or leave them in my box on
the second floor. Anytime before tomorrow morning is fine.
-Gina
-------
∂25-Mar-86 0654 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:WINOGRAD@SU-CSLI.ARPA AI comp
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 06:54:33 PST
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 24 Mar 86 11:14:42-PST
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 1045 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA AFT Organizational Meeting
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 10:40:53 PST
Date: Tue 25 Mar 86 10:30:46-PST
From: Julius@su-csli
Subject: AFT Organizational Meeting
Sender: EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA
To: phil-all@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Reply-To: Julius@su-csli.arpa.#internet
Tel: 723-3561
The AFT Organizational meeting for Spring Quarter will be on Tuesday,
April 1 at 11 am in the Ventura Conference room.
The meeting will also discuss how AFT accomodates the facts brought out
by Ken Hale's presentation.
Please send all queries to Julius Moravcsik.
-------
∂25-Mar-86 1106 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #14 -- Revised Header
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 11:06:08 PST
Date: 25 Mar 86 1028-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #14 -- Revised Header
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 25 Mar 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 14A
Today's Topics:
[V2 #14 got away before I finished editing the header. Below you see
how the summary of topics should have appeared. -- BD]
Suggested reading list on multiprocessing
Request for a rule-based expert system to be parallelized
Seminars: Parallelism in Production Systems (MIT)
& Communication-Efficient Parallel Graph Algorithms (MIT)
& Parallel Architectures for Knowledge Bases (SMU)
∂25-Mar-86 1140 PARSYM-Request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA PARSYM Digest V2 #14
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 11:32:06 PST
Date: 25 Mar 86 1028-PST
From: Moderator Byron Davies <PARSYM-REQUEST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Reply-to: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Subject: PARSYM Digest V2 #14
To: PARSYM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
PARSYM Digest Tuesday, 25 Mar 1986 Volume 2 : Issue 14
Today's Topics:
Suggested reading list on multiprocessing
Request for rule-based expert system to parallelize
Seminars: Parallelism in Production Systems
&
[BE: Seminar - Thurs. NE43-512A - 3/20/86, Bruce Maggs]
[E1AR0002%SMUVM1.BITNET: Seminar - Parallel Architectures for Knowledge Bases (SMU)]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: eugene@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Eugene Miya)
Date: 22 Mar 1986 2037-PST (Saturday)
Subject: Finally! Suggested reading list on multiprocessing
As promised several months ago, here is a surveyed list of
ten required for any student in parallel processing. There are some
fairly obvious biases: hardware over software, numeric over
symbolic, and so forth. I think this is indicative of the work
done so far. Democracy may not be the best to poll this work.
I polled many people for their opinions including Satya himself,
Jack Dennis, and many others over the past two years.
But first a word from our sponsors. Probably the nicest bibliography
you can find on this subject in print:
%A M. Satyanarayanan
%T Multiprocessing: an annotated bibliography
%J Computer
%V 13
%N 5
%D May 1980
%P 101-116
%X Excellent reference source, but dated.
Text reproduced with the permission of Prentice-Hall \(co 1980.
$Revision: 1.2 $ $Date: 84/07/05 16:58:56 $
A plug for my work which is machine readable:
%A E. N. Miya
%T Multiprocessor/Distributed Processing Bibliography
%J Computer Architecture News
%I ACM SIGARCH
%V 13
%N 1
%D March 1985
%P 27-29
%K Annotated bibliography, computer system architecture, multicomputers,
multiprocessor software, networks, operating systems, parallel processing,
parallel algorithms, programming languages, supercomputers,
vector processing, cellular automata, fault-tolerant computers
%X Notice of this work. Itself. Quality: no comment.
$Revision$ $Date$
THE suggested ten (actually 11) required readings are (for 1986):
%A G. J. Lipovski
%A A. Tripathi
%T A reconfigurable varistructure array processor
%J Proc. 1977 Int. Conf. on Parallel Processing
%D August 1977
%P 165-174
%K Required, U Texas, TRAC
%A W. A. Wulf
%A C. G. Bell
%T C.mmp \(em A multi-mini processor
%J Proc. Fall Joint Computer Conference
%V 41, part II
%I AFIPS Press
%C Montvale, New Jersey
%D December 1972
%P 765-777
%K multiprocessor architecture and operating systems
Required,
parallel processing,
%A George H. Barnes
%A Richard M. Brown
%A Maso Kato
%A David J. Kuck
%A Daniel L. Slotnick
%A Richard A. Stokes
%T The ILLIAC IV Computer
%J IEEE Transactions on Computers
%V C-17
%N 8
%D August 1968
%P 746-757
%K Recommended,
array, computer structures, look-ahead, machine language, parallel processing,
speed, thin-film memory, multiprocessors,
%X This was the original paper on the ILLIAC IV when it was proposed as
a 256 processing element machine, a follow on to the SOLOMON. It was a
very ambitious design.
%A William A. Wulf
%A Roy Levin
%A Samuel P. Harbison
%T HYDRA/C.mmp: An Experimental Computer System
%I McGraw-Hill
%D 1981
%K Required,
CMU, C.mmp, HYDRA OS,
multiprocessor architecture and operating systems
%X * Describes the architecture of C.mmp, and details the goals, design, and
performance of HYDRA, its capability based OS.
%A K. E. Batcher
%T STARAN Parallel Processor System Hardware
%J Proceedings AFIPS National Computer Conference
%D 1974
%P 405-410
%K Required
%X This paper is reproduced in Kuhn and Padua's (1981, IEEE)
survey "Tutorial on Parallel Processing."
%A Richard J. Swan
%A S. H. Fuller
%A Daniel P. Siewiorek
%T Cm* \(em A Modular, Multi-Microprocessor
%J Proceedings AFIPS National Computer Conference
%I AFIPS Press
%V 46
%D 1977
%P 637-644
%K CMU, required
%X This paper is reproduced in Kuhn and Padua's (1981, IEEE)
survey "Tutorial on Parallel Processing."
%A W. J. Bouknight
%A S. A. Denenberg
%A D. E. McIntyre
%A J. M. Randall
%A A. H. Sameh
%A D. L. Slotnick
%T The ILLIAC IV System
%J Proceedings of the IEEE
%V 60
%N 4
%D April 1972
%P 369-388
%K Recommended,
multiprocessors, parallel processing,
%A Utrpal Banerjee
%A Shyh-Ching Chen
%A David J. Kuck
%A Ross A. Towle
%T Time and Parallel Processor Bounds for FORTRAN-like Loops
%J IEEE Transactions on Computers
%V C-28
%N 9
%P 660-670
%D September 1979
%K Recommended,
Analysis of programs, data dependence, Fortran-like loops, parallel
computation, processor bounds, program speedup, recurrence relations,
time bounds,
Parallel processing
%A R. M. Russell
%T The Cray-1 Computer System
%J Comm. ACM
%V 21
%P 63-72
%D 1978
%K Recommended,
%X The original paper describing the Cray-1.
This paper is reproduced in Kuhn and Padua's (1981, IEEE)
survey "Tutorial on Parallel Processing."
%A Robert H. Kuhn
%A David A. Padua, eds.
%T Tutorial on Parallel Processing
%I IEEE
%D August 1981
%K Required
%X This is a collection of noted papers on the subject, collected for
the tutorial given at the 10th conference (1981) on Parallel Processing.
It eases the search problem for many of the obscure papers.
Some of these papers might not be considered academic, others are
applications oriented. Data flow is given short coverage. Still, a
quick source for someone getting into the field.
Where ever possible, paper in this bibliography are noted as being in this
text.
%A Philip C. Treleaven
%A David R. Brownbridge
%A Richard P. Hopkins
%T Data-Driven and Demand-Driven Computer Architecture
%J Computing Surveys
%V 14
%N 1
%D March 1982
%P 93-143
%K Required,
CR Categories and Subject Descriptors: C.0 [Computer System Organization]:
General - hardware/software interfaces; system archiectures; C.1.2
[Processor Architecture]: Multiple Data Stream Architectures
(Multiprocessors); C.1.3 [Processor Architecture]: Other Architecture
Styles - data flow architectures; high level language architectures;
D.3.2 [Programming Languages]: Language Classifications - data-flow
languages; macro and assembly languages; very high-level languages
General Terms: Design
Additional Key Words and Phrases: Demand = driven architecture,
data = driven architecture
%X * The aim of this paper is to identify the concepts and relationships
that exist both within and between the two areas of research of
data-driven and demand-driven architectures.
By way of final comment: the work in parallel symbolic computing is so sparse
that I am reminded of an incident in the 1984 Natl. ACM meeting. At this
meeting Feigenbaum, McCordunk (sp?), the Director of LCS at MIT and others
said that parallel computing is the wave of the future. Then Gordon Bell
got up and said, "Where were all you guys in the 1970s? We built three
and it was hard. You all underestimate the work." I have recorded
quite a number of symbolic computing reports, but it appears none have
made an impression in the field.
Sorry for the delay and the verbosity.
--eugene miya
NASA Ames Research Center
eugene@ames-nas.ARPA
UUCP: ames!eugene
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 86 12:20:17 PST
From: Carey E. Priebe <priebe%cod@nosc.ARPA>
We are searching for an EXISTING rule based expert system.
We intend to implement the selected system on a SIMD machine
using an experimental bit-vector approach to determine the
degree of performance enhancement.
Ideally we would like a time-sensitive, joint services appli-
cation, but any and all proposed systems will be considered.
The one characteristic the system MUST possess is rules. The
closer the system is to a pure-production system the better.
We will recode the inference engine specifically for our parallel
processor.
Anyone with such a system in hand, or pointers to same, should
contact me either via e-mail or by phone. Any help will be
greatly appreciated.
Additionally, anyone with information on any of the following
systems, please drop me a note:
Application of A I to Tactical Operations
Maj. Timothy Campen
Don E Gordon, HRB-Singer,Inc
Expert Systems for Intelligence Fusion
R Peter Bonasso, The MITRE Corp.
Expert System for Tactical I&W Analysis
Douglas Lenat, Stanford
Albert Clarkson, Garo Kiremidjian, ESL/TRW
Thanx,
Carey Priebe
*********************************
* carey priebe *
* *
* priebe@cod.UUCP *
* priebe@noscvax.UUCP *
* priebe@cod.nosc.MIL *
* ucbvax!sdcsvax!noscvax!priebe *
* *
* Naval Ocean Systems Center *
* Code 421 *
* San Diego, CA 92152 *
* *
* Ph. (619) 225-6571 *
*********************************
------------------------------
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 08:56:44-EST
From: "Mary E. Spollen" <SPOLS%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
[Forwarded from the MIT BBoard by SASW@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU]
PARALLELISM IN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
by
ANOOP GUPTA
Department of Computer Science
Carnegie-Mellon University
TODAY (3/14/86)
NE43-512A
3:15 refreshments, 3:30 seminar
ABSTRACT: Production systems (or rule-based systems) are widely used in
Artificial Intelligence for modeling intelligent behavior and building expert
systems. Most production system programs, however, are extremely computation
intensive and run quite slowly. The slow speed of execution has prohibited
the use of production systems in domains requiring high performance and
real-time response. The talk will elaborate on the role of parallelism in
high-speed execution of production systems.
HOST: Professor Gerald Jay Sussman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1986 12:38 EST
From: BE@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
Subject: Seminar - Thurs. NE43-512A - 3/20/86, Bruce Maggs
[Forwarded from the MIT BBoard by SASW@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU]
Date: Thursday, March 20, 1986
Refreshments: 3:45 pm
Talk: 4:00
Place: NE43-512A
Communication-Efficient Parallel Graph Algorithms
Bruce M. Maggs
Laboratory for Computer Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Communication bandwidth is a resource ignored by most parallel
random-access machine (PRAM) models. We show that many graph problems
can be solved in parallel, not only with polylogarithmic performance,
but with efficient communication at each step of the computation. The
communication requirements of an algorithm are measured in a more
restricted PRAM model called the distributed random-access machine
(DRAM), which can be viewed as an abstraction of volume-universal
networks such as fat-trees. In this model, communication cost is
measured in terms of the congestion of memory accesses across cuts of
the underlying network. We demonstrate that the "recursive doubling"
technique frequently used in PRAM algorithms is wasteful of
communication resources, and that "recursive pairing" can be used to
perform many of the same functions more efficiently. We generalize
the prefix on linear lists to trees using a variant of the
tree contraction technique of Miller and Reif, and show that these
"treefix" computations, which can be performed in a communication-efficient
fashion, simplify many parallel graph algorithms in the literature.
This talk presents joint work with Charles E. Leiserson.
HOST: Charles Leiserson
------------------------------
Date: WED, 10 JAN 84 17:02:23 CDT
From: E1AR0002%SMUVM1.BITNET at WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Re: Seminar - Parallel Architectures for Knowledge Bases (SMU)
[Forwarded from AIList by SASW@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU]
Toward Computer Architectures for Database and Knowledge Base Processing
Computer Science and Engineering Seminar, Friday, March 14, 1986
Speaker: Lubomir Bic
University of California at Irvine
Location: 315SIC
Time: 3:00 PM
The importance of parallelism has been recognized in recent years and
a number of multiprocessor architectures claiming suitability to
intelligent data and knowledge base processing have been proposed.
The success of these architectures has been, in most cases, rather
modest. The message conveyed in this talk is that, in order to build
highly-parallel computer architectures, new models of computation
capable of exploiting the potential of large numbers of processing
elments and memory units must first be developed. To support this
claim, two such models -- one for processing queries in a
network-oriented database system and another for extracting
information from a logic-based knowledge representation system -- will
be outlined. Both models are based on the principles of asynchronous
data-driven computation, which eliminate the need for centralized
control and shared memory.
------------------------------
End of PARSYM Digest
********************
∂25-Mar-86 1241 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 1 (Elisabeth Bates)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 12:33:59 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA00845; Tue, 25 Mar 86 12:06:26 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 86 12:06:26 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8603252006.AA00845@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 1 (Elisabeth Bates)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, April 1, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``The Case for Modularity:
A Critical Examination of the Behavioral Evidence''
Elisabeth Bates
Psychology Department, UC San Diego
Abstract
Modularity is without question the buzzword of the 1980's
in cognitive science circles. Claims concerning the empirical
basis of modularity are many, varied--and often contradictory.
In this presentation we will briefly review the major tenets of
the modularity position, with a particular focus on the sup-
posed separation between grammatical and lexical "modules".
Then we will look at the empirical evidence in four domains:
language acquisition (showing that lexical and grammatical
development are inseparable during the early stages of language
learning), aphasia (focusing on recent research inside and out-
side of English that imperils the notion of a central syndrome
called "agrammatism"), lexical access in normal adults (with a
focus on evidence for and against "top down" context effects in
lexical access), and speech perception (where we look at recent
findings in the "eccentric" domain of phoneme perception that
bring into question the idea that we have innate and special-
purpose feature detectors for speech). We conclude that modu-
larity represents a clear and falsifiable version of the old
idea of linguistic autonomy--and that the idea has been at
least partially falsified in several key domains.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Apr 8: Bj"λorn Lindblom, Linguistics, University of Stock-
holm; Peter MacNeilage, Linguistics, University of
Texas; Michael Studdart-Kennedy, Psychology, Queens
College (all currently at the Center for Advanced
Study in the Behavioral Sciences)
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
May 6: Paul Rosenbloom, Computer Science and Psychology,
Stanford
---------------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Monday March 31, from 12-2pm, in 3105 Tolman (Beach Room),
Elisabeth Bates will speak on "What is NOT universal about
child language". This presentation is sponsored jointly by the
Developmental Psychology Colloquium and IHD of the Psych Dept.
∂25-Mar-86 1650 vsingh@SRI-KL.ARPA Paper by Furukawa
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 16:49:30 PST
Received: from SRI-KL.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Tue, 25 Mar 86 15:36:04 pst
Date: Tue 25 Mar 86 11:02:00-PST
From: Vineet Singh <vsingh@SRI-KL>
Subject: Paper by Furukawa
To: mugs%SUMEX-AIM@SRI-KL, nail%su-aimvax@SRI-KL
I'd like to get a copy of the following paper if someone has it.
"Prolog interpreter based on concurrent programming" by K. Furukawa,
K. Nitta, and Y. Matsumoto. It appeared in the proceedings of the 1st
International Logic Programming Conference held at Marseille, France
in 1982.
Any other references to Furukawa's "back-up processes" for
implementing or-parallelism would be appreciated.
(No, the Math and Computer Science library does not have the
proceedings.)
Thanks.
Vineet
-------
∂25-Mar-86 1950 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu LICS Final Announcement and Registration
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Mar 86 19:50:55 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Mar 86 19:50:30-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Mar 86 19:50:21-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Tue, 25 Mar 86 21:13:35 CST
Received: from XX.LCS.MIT.EDU by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 20 Mar 86 13:55:29 CST
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1986 14:46 EST
Message-Id: <MEYER.12192271220.BABYL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
From: MEYER@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: THEORY@RSCH.WISC.EDU
Subject: LICS Final Announcement and Registration
Status: RO
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 25 Mar 86 21:04:15 CST (Tue)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
IEEE Symposium on LOGIC IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
June 16-18, 1986
Registration and Advance Program
LOCATION: Howard Johnson's Conference Center, 777 Memorial
Drive, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA; telephone (617) 492-7777.
RESERVATIONS: A block of rooms has been reserved at the
Howard Johnson's Hotel (until May 25, 1986) at the daily
rate of $68.00 for a single and $78.00 for a double. After
May 25 rooms will be provided only on a space-available
basis and are subject to increased rates. Please make
reservations directly with the hotel, using the form below.
FIRST NIGHT DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED. (Cancellation policy: loss
of deposit unless notice of cancellation is received by
hotel 2 days prior to scheduled arrival.)
---------------------------------------------------------
HOTEL RESERVATION FORM
Please mail to: LICS Symposium
Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge
777 Memorial Drive
Cambridge, MA 02139
USA
phone:(617) 492-7777
FIRST NIGHT DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED:
Please reserve* ←←←←←(# of singles at $68 each)
←←←←←(# of doubles at $78 each)
Date of arrival:
Date of departure:
Name:
Address: Street
City,State,Zip
Country
Credit card number:
Amex[] Visa[] Master Card[] Diners[]
-------------------------------------------------------------
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM
Please send this form along with a check or money order (pay-
able to LICS) to: LICS Registration
c/o A.J. Kfoury
Boston University
Computer Science Department
111 Cummington Street
Boston, MA 02215
USA
rcvd. by May 25* after*
Member of IEEE Computer Society
or ACM or ASL or EATCS $140 [] $210 []
Author $140 [] $210 []
Full-time Student $40 [] $50 []
Other $180 [] $260 []
(*The added fee for registration after May 25 will be waived
for overseas attendees subject to mail delays and in other
special circumstances on a case-by-case basis. The room
reservation guarantee cannot be extended past May 25.)
NAME:
AFFILIATION:
ADDRESS:Street,
City,State,Zip
Country
TELEPHONE and/or NET ADDRESS:
Vegetarian Meals: [] Vegetarian meals can be guaranteed
only for those who register in advance.
PERMANENT ADDRESS if different from above:
----------------------------------------------------------
CONFERENCE INFORMATION
REGISTRATION: A registration desk will be open Sunday night
from 6:00 PM to 10:00 PM, and during the day on Monday from
8:30 AM to 6:00 PM (Ballroom Foyer). Registrants other than
students receive admission to the technical sessions, a copy
of the proceedings, reception on Sunday, luncheon on Monday,
Tuesday and Wednesday, and a banquet on Tuesday evening.
Student registration includes admission to the technical
sessions and a copy of the proceedings. Additional copies
of the proceedings will be available for sale at the
registration desk.
RECEPTION: A reception will be held Sunday, June 15, 1986,
from 8:00 PM to 11:00 PM at the Hotel (Ballroom).
BANQUET: A banquet will be held Tuesday evening, June 17,
1986 at the Museum of Science. Buses will leave Howard
Johnson's at 6:30PM.
TRANSPORTATION: The Howard Johnson's is about 8 miles from
Boston's Logan International Airport and 2 miles from Har-
vard Square. Taxi fare from the airport ranges from $8 to
$12 depending on traffic conditions. For those coming by
car, it is easily accessible from the Mass Turnpike and the
Expressway. From the airport, take Sumner tunnel to Ex-
pressway North to Storrow Drive (west). Take Central Square
(River St.) exit from Storrow Drive (west), cross the
Charles River and turn right onto Memorial Drive. The Hotel
is on the lefthand side within a short distance. Free
parking is available for Hotel guests.
CLIMATE: Weather in the middle of June is mildly warm and
pleasant. Daytime temperatures range betwen 65 and 75 de-
grees F, with cooler evenings.
SPONSORED BY: IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on
Mathematical Foundations of Computing, in cooperation with
ACM-SIGACT, ASL, and EATCS. Industrial support provided by
IBM RESEARCH.
CONFERENCE CHAIR: Ashok K. Chandra, IBM Research Center,
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598, CSNET: ASHOK.YKTVMV at IBM.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIR: Albert R. Meyer, MIT Lab. for Computer
Science, Cambridge, MA 02139, ARPANET: MEYER at MIT-XX.
LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS CHAIR: A. J. Kfoury, Computer Science Dept.,
Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, CSNET: KFOURY at BOSTONU.
PUBLICITY CHAIR: David Bray, Clarkson College, Potsdam, NY 13676,
BITNET: bh00%clvms.
PROGRAM
SUNDAY, JUNE 15, 1986
6:00PM Registration (Ballroom Foyer, to 10:00PM)
8:00PM Reception (Ballroom, to 11:00PM)
MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1986
INVITED SPEAKER, 9:00AM--9:55AM
9:00 Merging functional with relational
programming in a reduction setting.
J.A.Robinson; Syracuse U.
Chair: J.Reynolds; Syracuse U.
9:55 COFFEE BREAK
Session 1 Monday 10:15AM--12:15PM
Chair: W.Damm; Lehrstuhl Informatik II, Aachen
10:15 Program correctness on finite fields.
L.Csirmaz, B.Hart; McGill U.
10:40 True relative completeness of an
axiom system for the language L4.
S.M.German, E.M.Clarke, J.Y.Halpern;
GTE, Carnegie-Mellon U., IBM Almaden
11:05 Towards deductive synthesis of
data flow networks.
B.Jonsson, Z.Manna, R.Waldinger;
Uppsala U., Stanford U., SRI Int'l
11:30 A complete logical calculus for record
structures representing linguistic
information.
W.C.Rounds, R.Kasper; U. Michigan
11:55 Floyd-Hoare logic defines semantics.
A.R.Meyer; MIT
12:15PM LUNCH
Session 2 Monday 2:00PM--3:35PM
Chair: M.Hennessy; U. Sussex
2:00 An algebraic model of parallel execution
of logic programs.
L.Beckman, R.Gustavsson, A.Waern;
Uppsala U.
2:25 A semantically based proof system for
partial correctness and deadlock in CSP.
S.D.Brookes; Carnegie-Mellon U.
2:50 Outline of a sheaf-theoretic approach
to concurrency.
L.F.Monteiro, F.C.N.Pereira;
U. Nova de Lisbon, SRI Int'l
3:15 Strong bisimulation of state automata.
D.B.Benson, O.Ben-Shachar;
Washington State U.
3:35 COFFEE BREAK
Session 3 Monday 3:50PM--5:25PM
Chair: A.Chandra; IBM Yorktown Heights
3:50 Algorithm development in the theory
of constructions.
C.Mohring; INRIA
4:15 Decidability and definability with
circumscription.
J.S.Schlipf; U. Cincinnati
4:40 The design and implementation of INTUIT.
J.Shultis; U. Colorado
5:05 Equivalence of first order LISP programs.
Proving properties of destructive programs
via transformation.
I.A.Mason; Stanford U.
9:00PM BUSINESS MEETING
Report from Conference Chair.
Report from Program Committee Chair.
Report from Local Arrangements Chair.
Venue for LICS '87 & '88.
TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1986
INVITED SPEAKER, 9:00AM--9:55AM
9:00 A logician looks at expert systems:
areas for mathematical research.
A.Nerode; Cornell U.
Chair: D.Kozen; Cornell U.
9:55 COFFEE BREAK
Session 4 Tuesday 10:15AM--12:20PM
Chair: J.Reynolds; Syracuse U.
10:15 The finitary projection model for second order
lambda calculus and solutions to higher order
domain equations.
R.Amadio, K.B.Bruce, G.Longo;
U. Pisa, Williams College, U. Pisa
10:40 Reasoning with continuations.
M.Felleisen,D.P.Friedman,E.Kohlbecker,B.Duba;
Indiana U.
11:05 The largest first-order axiomatizable
cartesian closed category of domains.
C.A.Gunter; Cambridge U.
11:30 Good rewrite strategies for FP.
J.Y.Halpern, J.H.Williams, E.L.Wimmers;
IBM Almaden
11:55 The denotational semantics of nondeterministic
recursive programs using coherent relations.
D.A.Plaisted; U. North Carolina, Chapel Hill
12:20PM LUNCH
Session 5 Tuesday 2:00PM--3:40PM
Chair: R.Waldinger; SRI Int'l
2:00 A timely resolution.
M.Abadi, Z.Manna; Stanford U.
2:25 On mechanical theorem proving in
Minkowskian plane geometry.
S-C.Chou, H-P. Ko;
U. Texas at Austin, G.E. Schenectady
2:50 Proof of translation in natural semantics.
J.Despeyroux; INRIA
3:15 Computing unification algorithms.
C.Kirchner; SRI Int'l
3:40 COFFEE BREAK
Session 6 Tuesday 3:55PM--5:35PM
Chair: J.Mitchell; AT&T Bell Labs
3:55 Type inference and logical relations.
M.Coppo, M.Zacchi;
U. Degli Studi di Torino
4:20 An analysis of Girard's paradox.
T.Coquand; Carnegie-Mellon U.
4:45 Formalized metareasoning in type theory.
T.B.Knoblock, R.L.Constable; Cornell U.
5:10 Infinite objects in constructive type theory.
N.Mendler, P.Panangaden, R.L.Constable;
Cornell U.
Banquet Tuesday 7:00PM
6:30 Buses depart from hotel for the Banquet
at the Museum of Science
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1986
INVITED SPEAKER, 9:00AM--9:55AM
9:00 Qualitative and quantitive semantics.
J.-Y.Girard; U. Paris VII
Chair: G.Huet; Carnegie-Mellon U.
9:55 COFFEE BREAK
Session 7 Wednesday 10:15AM--12:20PM
Chair: R.Parikh; Brooklyn College, CUNY
10:15 An improved algorithm for the automatic
verification of finite state systems using
temporal logic.
M.C.Browne; Carnegie-Mellon U.
10:40 Efficient model checking in fragments
of the propositional mu-calculus.
E.A.Emerson, C-L.Lei; U. Texas at Austin
11:05 A propositional modal interval logic.
J.Y.Halpern, Y.Shoham;
IBM Almaden, Yale U.
11:30 On the equivalence of weak second order
and nonstandard time semantics for
various program verification systems.
J.A.Makowsky, I.Sain;
Technion, Hung. Acad. Sci.
11:55 Automata on the integers, recurrence,
distinguishability, and the equivalence
and decidability of monadic theories.
P.E.Schupp, D.Perrin; U. Paris VII
12:20PM LUNCH
Session 8 Wednesday 2:00PM--3:35PM
Chair: D.Kozen, Cornell U.
2:00 A choppy logic.
R.Rosner, A.Pnueli; Weizmann Inst.
2:25 Levels of knowledge in distributed computing.
R.Parikh; Brooklyn College, CUNY
2:50 Probabilistic verification by tableaux.
A.Pnueli, L.Zuck; Weizmann Inst.
3:10 An automata-theoretic approach to
automatic program verification.
M.Y.Vardi, P.Wolper;
IBM Almaden, AT&T Bell Labs Murray Hill
3:35 COFFEE BREAK
Session 9 Wednesday 3:50PM--5:25PM
Chair: G.Huet; Carnegie-Mellon U.
3:50 Orderings for equational proofs.
L.Bachmair, N.Dershowitz, J.Hsiang;
U.Illinois Urbana,U.Illinois Urbana,SUNY Stony Brook
4:15 Automatic proofs by induction in equational
theories without constructors.
J-P.Jouannaud, E.Kounalis; CRIN
4:40 Inductive reasoning with incomplete
specifications.
D.Kapur, D.R.Musser; GE Schenectady
5:05 On translating lambda terms into combinators;
the basis problem.
R.Statman; Carnegie-Mellon U.
5:25 END OF SYMPOSIUM
DEMONSTRATIONS: Schedule to be announced.
Systems related to the papers by
* Chou & Ko,
* Constable et al.,
* Coquand,
* Despeyroux,
* Kapur & Musser,
* Shultis.
END
--------------
TN Message #31
--------------
∂26-Mar-86 0928 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 09:28:54 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 09:26:20-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, msgs%Playfair@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193818639.30.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
STACS 86. 3rd Annual Symposium On Theoretical Aspects Of Computer Science.
Orsay, France. January 1986. Lecture Notes In Computer Science. ed. by
Monien and Vidal-Naquet. (8619239)
The Second Conference On Artificial Intelligence Applications.
The Engineering Of Knowledge-Based Systems. December 1985. IEEE Computer
Society. Q334.C65 1985.
IEEE 1985 International Conference On Computer Workstations. San Jose,Ca.
November 1985. IEEE Computer Society. QA76.5.I612 1985.
Robotics And Expert Systems 1985. Proceedings of Robexs 85. First Annual
Workshop on Robotics and Expert Systems. NASA/Johnson Space Center.
June 1985. TJ211.W67 1985.
Computer Architecture For Spatially Distributed Data. NATO ASI Series.
ed. by Freeman and Pieroni. QA76.9.A73.N36 1983.
Computer Mathematics. Cambridge Computer Scienct Texts. by D. J. Cooke
and H. E. Bez. QA76.9.M35C66 1984.
Reliable Computer Systems. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. ed.
by Santosh Shrivastava. QA76.5.R4464 1985.
Integrated Services Digital Networks (ISDN) Tutorial. IEEE Computer Society.
by William Stallings. TK6169.S78 1985.
Perceptual Organization and Visual Recognition. by David Lowe. TA1632.L68
1985.
Architecture Of Systems Problem Solving. by George Klir. Q295.K55 1985.
A Distributed Double-Loop Computer Network (DDLCN) by Jacob Wolf III.
QA76.9.D5W64 1981.
IDAM File Organization. by James C. French. QA76.9.F5F74 1985.
Development Of An Expert Hardware Synthesis System. by C. Ronald Green.
Dissertation. Univer. Ala. Huntsville. (8600276)
Database Achievements. edited by Geoffrey Baker. British Computer Society.
QA76.9D3D311 1979.
Handbook Of Philosophical Logic. Volume III. Alternatives in Classical Logic.
BC6.H36 1983 v.3 c.2.
Computer Animation: Theory and Practice. Computer Science Workbench.
by Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann and Daniel Thalmann. TR897.5.M33 1985.
Microprocessor Software Project Management. Electrical Engineering and
Electronics. 27. by Eli T. Fathi and Cedric Armstrong. QA76.6F38 1985 c.2
Macintosh Graphics In Modula-2. by Russell Schnapp. QA76.8.M3S36 1986.
Micro To Mainframe Creating an Integrated Environment. by Michael Durr
and Dwayne Walker. QA76.5.D76 1985.
Programming C On the Macintosh. Terry Ward. QA76.8.M3W37 1986.
H. Llull
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1107 TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA start salaries for PHD grads
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 11:06:42 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 10:55:41-PST
From: Carolyn Tajnai <TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: start salaries for PHD grads
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12193834905.46.TAJNAI@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If you have any information to offer on starting salaries for
PHD grads, it would be helpful to me. Frequently students ask
me for guidelines for negotiating. Also, industrial reps ask the
same question.
For a top notch PHD student with OR and AI background, and 3 years
experience between masters and PHD.
Also, for a top notch PHD student with only the average amount of
experience picked up during graduate school.
Carolyn
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1220 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu 18th Annual STOC Program
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 12:20:27 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Mar 86 12:19:18-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Wed 26 Mar 86 12:02:49-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 26 Mar 86 13:08:14 CST
Received: from ernie.berkeley.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 26 Mar 86 03:28:11 CST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA16737; Wed, 26 Mar 86 01:28:02 PST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 01:28:02 PST
From: lawler@ernie.berkeley.edu (Eugene Lawler)
Message-Id: <8603260928.AA16737@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: THEORY@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: 18th Annual STOC Program
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 26 Mar 86 12:55:12 CST (Wed)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
18th ANNUAL ACM SYMPOSIUM ON THEORY OF COMPUTING
May 28-30, 1986
Berkeley, California
CONFERENCE INFORMATION
LOCATION: The conference will be held at the Dwight/Derby
Complex of the University of California at Berkeley. This
is at 2600 Warring St., between Dwight and Derby Sts., about
a quarter mile southeast of the main campus area.
The Dwight/Derby Complex is the former campus of the California
School for the Deaf and Blind. The buildings have been recently
renovated to provide unusually attractive and comfortable student
housing. On site are a swimming pool, tennis courts, a running
track and a weight room. A nominal charge for use of athletic
facilities can be paid at the time of the conference.
ACCOMMODATIONS: There are two forms of lodging at Dwight/Derby.
The most desirable accommodations are in the form of suites.
These typically consist of two bedrooms, a living room and a
shared bathroom. Either one or two persons may occupy a bedroom.
(Only single beds are available.) There are also rooms in more
conventional student residence halls; these rooms are also
available for either single or double occupancy.
There are only 160 bedrooms in suites, so it will not be possible
to place all participants in suites. Priority will be given to
those staying on for the Structure in Complexity Theory meeting,
and to those whose advance registration forms are received earliest.
Because of contractual terms with the University, we must ask
participants to accept lodging for either three or four nights,
with earliest arrival noon Tuesday, May 27, and latest departure
noon Saturday, May 31. Rates are indicated on the advance
registration form. These rates include breakfast on Wednesday,
Thursday, and Friday mornings. Unregistered accompanying persons
may also take lunch on those days.
Conference participants will be expected to pay their Dwight/Derby
room charges at the time they check in. Only cash, personal checks
or traveler's checks in US funds can be accepted, since there will
be no provision for accepting credit cards. Please try to check
into Dwight/Derby housing before 9 pm, when the entrance to the main
building will be locked. With some inconvenience, it will be
possible to check in at a later hour by calling the number posted
at the entrance. Please indicate on your advance registration form
if you plan to arrive later than 9 pm.
ALTERNATIVE HOUSING: Conference participants desiring hotel housing
are advised to make reservations at the Hotel Durant, 2600 Durant Ave.,
about a quarter mile from Dwight/Derby. Rooms are available at the
special rate of $62 for single occupancy and $72 for double occupancy,
plus 10% city tax, provided reservations are made by April 18.
Conference participants should make their own reservations by calling
800-2DURANT, 800-5DURANT, or 415-815-8981 and informing the hotel that
they will be attending the "Computer Science" Conference.
TRANSPORTATION: The best way to get to Berkeley from the San Francisco
Airport is by means of the shuttle service called the Airport Connection,
for a charge of $12, compared with a taxi fare of $30-35. This service
ordinarily stops at the Hotel Durant, but the driver may be persuaded
to stop at Dwight/Derby. Be sure to make a reservation in advance of
traveling by calling 1-800-AIRPORT.
>From the Oakland airport, one may either take a taxi directly to Berkeley
for about $20, or else take the shuttle bus from the airport to the
Coliseum station of BART, the BART train to the Berkeley station, and a
taxi from the Berkeley station, for a total cost of about $6.
REGISTRATION: A registration desk will be open Tuesday night at
Dwight/Derby from 6 pm to 9 pm and during the day Wednesday from 8:30 am
to 6:00 pm. Registrants other than students receive admission to the
technical sessions, a copy of the proceedings, the Tuesday night
reception, luncheons on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, and the Thursday
night banquet. Student registration does not include the banquet.
Additional copies of the proceedings will be available for purchase at
the conference.
RECEPTION: A reception will be held Tuesday, May 27, from 8 pm to 11 pm
in the Great Hall at the Dwight/Derby Complex.
CLIMATE: The weather can be expected to be pleasant and sunny during the
day, but cool in the evening. Those venturing to San Francisco may find
the city surprisingly chilly.
------------------------------------------------------
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM
Please send this form with a check or money order
(payable in US dollars to 18th ACM STOC) to:
ACM STOC Registration
c/o E.L. Lawler
Computer Science Division
573 Evans Hall
University of California
Berkeley CA 94720
Received
Before 5/14 After
ACM/SIGACT/IEEE-CS
member $150 [ ] $200 [ ]
Author $140 [ ] $190 [ ]
Nonmember $170 [ ] $220 [ ]
Student $ 30 [ ] $ 60 [ ]
Preference for lodging at Dwight/Derby:
3 nights 4 nights
Single occupancy of bedroom in suite [ ] $155 [ ] $175
Double occupancy of bedroom in suite [ ] $105 [ ] $125
Single occupancy in residence hall [ ] $125 [ ] $145
Double occupancy in residence hall [ ] $ 85 [ ] $105
(Accommodations in suites cannot be guaranteed. Payment in cash
or check in US dollars must be made at time of check-in.)
I wish to share double occupancy of a room with:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Special dietary requirements: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Date of arrival:←←←←←←←←←←←← Time (if after 9 pm):←←←←←←←
Date of departure:←←←←←←←←←←←←
[ ] I am also attending Structure in Complexity Theory meeting.
Name:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
City:←←←←←←←←←←←←←← State:←←←←←←← Zip:←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Country (if not USA):←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Telephone:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Net address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
PROGRAM
Wednesday Morning
Bounded-Width Polynomial-Size Branching Programs Recognize Exactly
Those Languages in NC.
David A. Barrington, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Improved Lower Bounds for Small Depth Circuits.
Johan Hastad, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
With Probability One, a Random Oracle Separates PSPACE from the
Polynomial-Time Hierarchy.
Jin-Yi Cai, Cornell University
Two Lower Bounds for Branching Programs.
M. Ajtai, IBM Almaden Research Center, L. Babai and P. Hajnal,
University of Chicago and Eotvos University, J. Komlos, University of
California, San Diego, and Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, E.
Szmereldi, University of Chicago and Hungarian Academy of Sciences,
Budapest, and G. Turan, University of Illinois, Chicago and Hungarian
Academy of Sciences, Szeged.
On Nontrivial Separators for k-Page Graphs and Simulations of
Nondeterministic One-Tape Turing Machines.
Zvi Galil, Columbia University and Tel-Aviv University, Ravi Kannan,
Carnegie-Mellon University, Endre Szmereldi, University of Chicago
and Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
How Hard is it to Marry at Random? (On the Approximation of the
Permanent).
Andrei Z. Broder, Digital Equipment Corporation.
Arthur Merlin Games versus Interactive Proof Systems.
Shafi Goldwasser, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Michael
Sipser, University of California, Berkeley.
The Complexity of Optimization Problems.
Mark W. Krentel, Cornell University.
Wednesday Afternoon
A Provably Efficient Algorithm for Dynamic Storage Allocation.
E. G. Coffman, Jr., AT&T Bell Laboratories, and F. T. Leighton,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Tight Bounds for Minimax Grid Mathching, With Applications to the
Average Case Analysis of Algorithms.
Tom Leighton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Peter Shor,
Mathematical, Sciences Research Institute.
Four Pages are Necessary and Sufficient.
Mihalis Yannakakis, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Roommate Stability Leads to Marriage -or- Gender is Necessary and
Sufficient.
Dan Gusfield, Yale University.
Making Data Structures Persistent.
James R. Driscoll, Carnegie-Mellon University, Neil Saranak, New York
University, Daniel D. Sleator, Carnegie-Mellon University, Robert E. Tarjan,
Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Rotation Distance, Triangulations, and Hyperbolic Geometry.
Daniel D. Sleator, Carnegie-Mellon University, Robert E. Tarjan,
Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories, William P. Thurston,
Princeton University.
A New Approach to the Maximum Flow Problem.
Andrew V. Goldberg, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Robert
E. Tarjan, Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Fast Algorithms for Convex Quadratic Programming and Multicommodity
Flows.
Sanjiv Kapoor and Pravin M. Vaidya, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign.
Thursday Morning
Parallel Hashing- An Efficient Implementation of Shared Memory.
Anna R. Karlin, Stanford University, and Eli Upfal, IBM San Jose.
Limits on the Power of Concurrent-Write Parallel Computation.
Paul Beame, University of Toronto.
New Lower Bounds for Parallel Computation.
Ming Li and Yaacov Yesha, Ohio State University.
Deterministic Selection in O(loglog N) Parallel Time.
M. Ajtai, IBM Almaden Research Center,
Janos Komlos, University of California, San Diego, W. L. Steiger,
Rutgers University, Endre Szemeredi, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
Linear Programming with Two Variables per Inequality in Poly-Log Time.
George S. Lueker, University of California, Irvine, and Mathematical
Sciences Research Institute, and Vijaya Ramachandran, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and Mathematical Sciences Research
Institute.
Deterministic Coin Tossing and Accelerating Cascades: Micro and Macro
Techniques for Designing Parallel Algorithms.
Richard Cole, New York University, and Uzi Vishkin, New York
University and Tel-Aviv University.
Introducing Efficient Parallelism into Approximate String Matching.
Gad M. Landau, Tel-Aviv University, and Uzi Vishkin, New York
University and Tel-Aviv University.
Parallel Evaluation of Division-Free Arithmetic Expressions.
S. Rao Kosaraju, Johns Hopkins University.
Thursday Afternoon
Ramanujan Conjecture and Explicit Constructions of Expanders and
Super-Concentrators.
A. Lubotzky, Hebrew University, and R. Phillips and P. Sarnak,
Stanford University.
Non-Blocking Networks.
Paul Feldman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Joel Friedman,
University of California, Berkeley, and Nicholas Pippenger, IBM
Almaden Research Center.
An Optimal Sorting Algorithm for Mesh-Connected Arrays of Processors.
S. Rao Kosaraju, Johns Hopkins University, and Mikhail J. Atallah,
Purdue University.
Classifying Learnable Geometric Concepts with the Vapnik-Chervonenkis
Dimension.
Anselm Blumer, University of Denver, Andrzes Ehrenfeucht, University
of Colorado, Boulder, David Haussler, University of Denver, and
Manfred Warmuth, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Reasoning about Fair Concurrent Programs.
Constantin Courcoubetis, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM
Almaden Research Center, and Pierre Wolper, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
A Note on the One-Way Functions and Polynomial-Time Isomorphisms.
Ker-I Ko, University of Houston and Mathematical Sciences Research
Institute, Timothy J. Long, Ohio State University and New Mexico State
University, and Ding-Zhu, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute.
The Complexity of Reasoning About Knowledge and Time.
Joseph Y. Halpern and Moshe Y. Vardi, IBM Almaden Research Center.
Friday Morning.
A Provably Correct and Probably Fast Primality Test.
Shafi Goldwasser and Joe Kilian, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Uniform Closure Properties of P-Computable Functions.
Erich Kaltofen, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute and
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
A Fast Parallel Algorithm for Determining All Roots of a Polynomial
with Real Roots.
Michael Ben-Or, Hebrew University, Ephraim Feig, IBM Yorktown, Dexter
Kozen, Cornell University, and Prasoon Tiwari, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign.
Finding Irreducible Polynomials Over Finite Fields.
Leonard M. Adelman, University of Southern California, and Hendrik W.
Lenstra, University of Amsterdam and Mathematical Sciences Institute.
Pseudo-Random Permutation Generators and the Data Encryption Standard.
Michael Luby and Charles Rackoff, University of Toronto.
The Impossibility of Secure Coin Flips When Half the Processors are
Faulty.
Richard Cleve, University of Toronto.
Fault Tolerance in Networks of Bounded Degree.
Cynthia Dwork, David Peleg, Nicholas Pippenger, and Eli Upfal, IBM San
Jose.
Friday Afternoon
A Linear-Time Algorithm for Triangulating Simple Polygons.
Robert E. Tarjan, Princeton University and AT&T Bell Laboratories, and
Christopher J. Van Wyk, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Topologically Sweeping an Argument.
Herbert Edelsbrunner, University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, and
Leonidas J. Guibas, Digital Equipment Corporation and Stanford
University.
Constructing Higher-Dimensional Convex Hulls at Logarithmic Cost per
Face.
Raimund Seidel, Cornell University.
Further Applications of Random Sampling to Computational Geometry.
Kenneth L. Clarkson, AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Probing Convex Polytopes.
D. Dobkin, Princeton University, H. Edelsbrunnner, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and C. K. Yap, New York University.
Two Probabilistic Results on Rectilinear Steiner Trees.
Marshall W. Bern, University of California, Berkeley.
To Compute the Volume is Difficult.
I. barany and Z. Furedi, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, and
Rutgers University.
Aspects of Information Flow in VLSI Circuits.
Alan Siegel, New York University.
--------------
TN Message #32
--------------
∂26-Mar-86 1427 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU [OHLANDER: Documenting our decisions]
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 14:26:25 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 26 Mar 86 17:27:26-EST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1986 17:27 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193873440.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: [OHLANDER: Documenting our decisions]
Forwarded at Ron's request...
Date: Wednesday, 26 March 1986 17:09-EST
From: OHLANDER at USC-ISIB.ARPA
To: Fahlman
Re: Documenting our decisions
Scott,
I agree with your position on the number of people on the
technical committee. I don't want to propose that there be some
significant increase in numbers just to try to
ensure adequate representation for every potentially interested
party. I just wanted to offer a way of dealing with the
perception that some people might have regarding any potential
bias. Actually, I think that the solution that Steve
recently offered (regarding a vendors' reviewing group) is a
much better one than mine.
In regards to the copyright issue, if we have one, some official
body or person has to hold it. We may not have to get a copyright.
However, we have to make sure that there is only one official
public domain specification. Some one or some place has to be
the official repository and maitainer of this document. Otherwise,
why bother with validation and other such issues. A copyright
would achieve this purpose. The other possibility is to maintain
some stamp of approval that is conferred by having originated from
the officially approved maintainer of the document.
Ron
∂26-Mar-86 1500 Moon@ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM Documenting our decisions
Received: from [192.10.41.45] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 15:00:21 PST
Received: from EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by ALLEGHENY.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 8602; Mon 24-Mar-86 17:56:29-EST
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 86 17:56 EST
From: David A. Moon <Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Subject: Documenting our decisions
To: Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12192630575.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <860324175631.1.MOON@EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I have not seen the Lucid manual either, but I know from my own
experience that a language reference manual for users and a formal,
unambiguous language specification are two very different things. In
other words, starting from the Lucid manual may not save a significant
amount of effort.
While TeX and Scribe are both widely available text formatters, and
there may be others, I would like to argue against using any text
formatter at all for the language specification. In this project we
need to concentrate on content, not on style of presentation. Wrestling
with a text formatter would simply be a distraction from our real
business.
But maybe it's better to back off from such implementation
considerations and first decide what it is we're trying to do. Do we
really have the resources within these committees to write a formal,
unambiguous language specification? Or should we be starting by
developing what amounts to an appendix to the Steele manual?
∂26-Mar-86 1746 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar, March 27, No. 9
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 17:46:39 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 16:52:01-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar, March 27, No. 9
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
March 27, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 9
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, March 27, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall No TINLunch this week
Conference Room
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Reflexivisation: Some Connections Between
Trailer Classroom Lexical, Syntactic, and Semantic Representation
Annie Zaenen, Peter Sells, Draga Zec
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
No Colloquium this week
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, April 3, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Semantics and Property Theory
Conference Room by Gennaro Chierchia and Raymond Turner
Discussion led by Chris Menzel (chris@su-csli)
(Abstract on page 2)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Representation (part 1 of 4)
Trailer Classroom Brian Smith, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy,
Ken Olson, John Perry (Briansmith.pa@xerox)
(Abstract on page 2)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Ventura Hall Modelling Concurrency with Partial Orders
Trailer Classroom V. R. Pratt, Stanford University
(Abstract on page 2)
--------------
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar March 27, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Semantics and Property Theory
by Gennaro Chierchia and Raymond Turner
Discussion led by Chris Menzel (chris@su-csli)
Following Frege, Chierchia and Turner argue that properties play
two metaphysical roles. In one role, they are ``unsaturated''
predicative entities, the semantic counterparts of predicate
expressions in natural language (e.g., ``is running''). In the other,
they are full-fledged ``complete'' individuals, the semantic
counterparts of singular terms (e.g., ``to run'', or ``running''). In
this paper, the authors develop a first-order theory of properties
which incorporates this insight, and which they argue is better suited
to the semantics of natural language than any currently existing
alternative. In this TINLunch, I will sketch the theory informally,
then we will discuss its philosophical foundations, and examine the
evidence the authors' adduce for its superiority as a logical
foundation for semantic theory.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S SEMINAR
Representation
Brian Smith, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy, Ken Olson, John Perry
April 3, 10, 17, and 24
Issues of representation permeate CSLI research, often in implicit
ways. This four-part series will examine representation as a subject
matter in its own right, and will explore various representational
issues that relate to mind, computation, and semantics.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
Modelling Concurrency with Partial Orders
V. R. Pratt, Stanford University
We describe a simple and uniform view of concurrent processes that
accounts for such phenomena of information systems as various kinds of
concurrency, multiparty communication, mixed analog and digital
information, continuous and discrete time and space, the dataflow
concept, and hierarchical organization of systems. The model is based
on a notion of process as a set of partial strings or partially
ordered multisets (pomsets). Such processes form an algebra whose
main operations are sums and products, Boolean operations, and process
homomorphisms. By regarding pomsets as partial strings we make a
connection with formal language theory, and by regarding them as
algebraic structures we make connections with (the models of)
first-order logic and temporal logic. These connections are helpful
for comparisons between language-based and logic-based accounts of
concurrent systems.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar March 27, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND DEVELOPMENT TALK
Kim Halskov Madsen (Madsen@su-csli)
Department of Computer Science, Aarhus, Denmark
Monday, March 31, 12:15, Ventura Hall conference room
This seminar is on professional language and the use of computers.
Empirical investigations on the professional language of librarians
have been made with the following observations 1) Metaphors are
used intensively 2) Concepts from the screen images have entered the
professional language 3) Concepts from the computer profession have
been assimilated by the librarians. A theory of professional language
is of importance when designing computer systems. A tentative theory
could approach issues, such as
. Different situations of language use
. Context dependency
. Change of language
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1746 REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA Senior Survey
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 17:43:58 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 17:08:48-PST
From: Stuart Reges <REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Senior Survey
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 210, 497-9798
Message-ID: <12193902830.22.REGES@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Every year the University surveys the graduating seniors to find out what they
thought about their undergraduate education. A front page article in today's
"Campus Report" discusses the increasing satisfaction students have reported
in the last six senior surveys. In one of the sections of the survey students
are asked to assess their own abilities in various areas. The article says
that:
The largest improvement [in the self-assesment section] occured with
respect to the use of computers, where the proportion claiming
"excellent" ability rose from 11 percent to 22 percent while the
proportion claiming "excellent" or "good" ability rose from 38 percent
to 57 percent. While 14 percent claimed to have no experience or find
the item inapplicable in 1978-80, only 4 percent gave such a response
by 1984-85.
I think that we have had a lot to do with this improvement by having open
enrollments in the introductory courses and trying to create service courses
that meet the needs of many different kinds of students.
So at least the students seem to like what we are doing, even if the University
doesn't seem to like it enough to give us any TA money to do it.
-------
∂26-Mar-86 1831 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Dan Carnese
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 18:31:28 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 18:30:50-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Dan Carnese
To: planlunch.dis: ;
PLANNING BY PROCEDURAL INFERENCE
Dan Carnese (CARNESE@SRI-KL)
AI Lab, Schlumberger Palo Alto Research (SPAR)
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 31
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The standard approach to plan construction involves applying a general planning
algorithm to a representation of a problem to be solved. This approach will
fail on a given problem when the search space explored by the algorithm is too
large. If this occurs, the only alternatives are to re-encode the problem or
to improve the general algorithm.
In this talk, I'll describe an alternative approach where control of the
planning process is provided by a procedure which constructs proofs from
premises characterizing the domain. This approach allows arbitrary
procedures to be used for control, while retaining the desirable property
that unsound inferences cannot be made.
The technique will be illustrated with examples from the domain of
computer-aided manufacturing.
-------
∂26-Mar-86 2026 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Documenting our decisions
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 20:24:36 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Wed 26 Mar 86 23:25:08-EST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1986 23:25 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12193938558.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: "David A. Moon" <Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: Documenting our decisions
In-reply-to: Msg of 24 Mar 1986 17:56-EST from David A. Moon <Moon at SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
I'm not sure that a standard doc has to be very different from a manual,
if the manual is written with sufficient fanaticism. The Steele manual
has been serving us as a de facto spec for awhile now, and it has been
OK for that purpose, if not great. Almost all of the ambiguities are
due to failures on our part to think issues things through and to notice
problems, and not due to the style of presentation. It certainly would
make writing a spec easier if the online text of the Steele book were
available for cannibalization and not legally encumbered. The Lucid
book might serve us just as well in that capacity, except that its text
has not been debugged by the scrutiny of hundreds of users. We will
see.
I agree that we don't want to let text formatting become a big thing in
this effort, at least until the real work is done. But a well-formatted
document with section numbers and an index can be a big help as we go
along.
We obviously don't have the resources to write a formal, 100%
unambiguous language spec. As far as I know, there has never been such
a thing, even for languages much less complex than Lisp. But I think
that if we have a reasonably complete and correct manual to start from,
we'll be able to put together a langauge spec that has many fewer holes
than the original manual, which itself is pretty good except in areas
where all of us were confused or just gave up. Remember that the
original manual was written at a time when there was no implementation
experience with many parts of the language; now we've got the benefit of
some experience, and therefore a much better idea of what things can be
tied down and what things have to be left to implementors. And we
probably won't specify anything that's unimplementable this time.
We could try to write an add-on to the original book, but I think that
this would not be an acceptable form for the standard in the end, and
rewriting could introduce a bunch of new bugs. We're much more likely
to get it right if, at any given time, there's a complete manual
reflecting current truth.
The Europeans think that the best way to build an unambiguous spec is to
define a small kernel as precisely as possible, and then to specify the
rest of the language in terms of that -- by providing example code
implementing the rest of the langauge, I guess. That's a lot of work
too, and has its own set of problems: it's hard to specify just what
elements of the example code are meant to be essential and which can be
changed at the implementor's option. So unless all systems actually use
the example code, you get big problems. I think that a manual is at
least as likely to be unambiguous.
-- Scott
∂27-Mar-86 1517 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Book giveaway
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 15:16:07 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Mar 86 15:15:18-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Mar 86 15:15:06-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 27 Mar 86 16:33:53 CST
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 26 Mar 86 21:32:37 CST
Received: from ubc by csnet-relay.csnet id ab05033; 26 Mar 86 18:24 EST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 12:29:57 pst
Received: by ubc.csnet id AA17682; Wed, 26 Mar 86 12:29:57 pst
From: Gilles Brassard <brassard%iro.udem.cdn%ubc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Cc: bratley%iro.udem.cdn%ubc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Message-Id: <403:brassard@iro.udem.cdn>
Subject: Book giveaway
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 27 Mar 86 16:20:25 CST (Thu)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
I have just completed the original FRENCH version of an
undergraduate textbook on algorithms with my colleague
Paul Bratley. It is expected to come out this year,
edited by Masson (Paris). In the mean time, I have a few
dozen extra copies of the limited distribution edition
to giveaway. The English version, which should be ready
sometimes in December (1986), will be published by
Prentice-Hall.
If you would like me to mail you a copy now (at no charge),
please send me your name and postal address. This offer
is on a first come first serve basis while the supply lasts.
Happy reading,
Gilles Brassard
Universite de Montreal.
OUTLINE (about 550 pages)
1 - Preliminaries
2 - The Analysis of Algorithms
3 - Greedy Algorithms
4 - Divide-and-Conquer
5 - Dynamic Programming
6 - Graph Algorithms
7 - Preconditioning and Related Topics
8 - Probabilistic Algorithms
9 - Algebraic Transformations
10 - Introduction to Complexity
--------------
TN Message #33
--------------
∂27-Mar-86 1624 HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA Agnes Perlaki
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 16:20:36 PST
Date: Thu 27 Mar 86 15:56:49-PST
From: Katherine Hanrahan <HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Agnes Perlaki
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12194151867.30.HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Please join me in welcoming Agnes Perlaki to the CSD support
staff. She will be helping us out in many areas of the department.
Agnes will be at the receptionist desk in Tina's absence. Also, all
building maintanance problems should now be reported to Agnes. Her
office will be in room 206 and her phone extension is 3-1520.
******WELCOME AGNES********
-------
∂27-Mar-86 1641 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Co-op Housing at STOC
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 16:40:53 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Mar 86 16:33:29-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Thu 27 Mar 86 16:02:17-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 27 Mar 86 16:48:56 CST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by rsch.wisc.edu; Wed, 26 Mar 86 23:50:51 CST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 21:51:47-PST
From: Lee Altenberg <ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Co-op Housing at STOC
To: theory@RSCH.WISC.EDU
Message-Id: <12193954345.24.ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 27 Mar 86 16:39:08 CST (Thu)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
For those of you who have been a member of a student co-op, the University
Students Cooperative Association will provide economical guest housing.
There should be spots available near the STOC location. Call (415)848-1936
to make arrangements.
-Lee Altenberg
--------------
TN Message #34
--------------
∂27-Mar-86 1718 ullman@su-aimvax.arpa new meeting time?
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 17:18:26 PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Mar 86 17:03:31 pst
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 86 17:03:31 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: new meeting time?
To: nail@diablo
We have to move from our usual 11Am wednesday time,
because it conflicts with Shuky's course (345).
I'm teaching 10AM MWF, so all MWF mornings are out.
Would those of you who come to meetings, at least on occasion,
give me your schedule for next quarter so i can pick a new time?
--jeff
∂27-Mar-86 1857 WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA redundant accesses to databases
Received: from SU-AIMVAX.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 18:51:21 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Mar 86 18:41:18 pst
Date: Thu 27 Mar 86 18:40:24-PST
From: Marianne Winslett <WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: redundant accesses to databases
To: nail@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Message-Id: <12194181648.32.WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
For those of you who are interested in eliminating ``redundant''
accesses to data, there is a paper entitled ``Interfacing Relational
Databases and Prolog Efficiently,'' by Ceri, Gottlob, and Wiederhold,
about just that. They use meta-data to keep track of what's
in memory. The paper will be presented in the Expert Systems
Databases Workshop coming up soon. Copies are available in Gio's
office.
--Marianne
-------
∂27-Mar-86 1946 DLW@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA Documenting our decisions
Received: from SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 19:42:54 PST
Received: from CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 448899; Thu 27-Mar-86 18:35:17-EST
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 86 18:38 EST
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Subject: Documenting our decisions
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12193938558.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <860327183849.7.DLW@CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I agree that the resulting text should be readable and sensible, and I
agree that we should not strive for a 100% unambiguous spec; we don't
want to end up with a Vienna Definition Language monster like the PL/I
definition. I also agree that we can do a lot better now than we did
last time, partly because we know more about what we're doing.
However, there's another major reason for ambiguities besides the ones
you mentioned: interactions between features. Yes, there are
declarations. Yes, there are FLET and MACROLET. Exactly how do the two
work together? This isn't the greatest example, but I'm sure you know
what I mean. I think that to clear up such problems, the manual will
have to get somewhat more rigorous, and it will probably be necessary to
introduce more terminology with strict definitions.
As was pointed out, the stricter it gets, the harder it is to make the
text flow smoothly and be easy to understand. But I agree that we need
to err on the side of clarity and unambiguity, and keep the writing as
clear as we can in light of that. There's no getting around the fact
that excellent technical writing is difficult.
You're right about the kernel definition. To put it another way, a spec
written that way would be extremely constrictive, since you'd have to
imitate every single aspect of the behavior of the example code,
including its behavior on bad inputs, etc. The Common Lisp spec
explicitly takes the attitude that it only specifies certain behavior,
and other things are termed "an error". Sure, things would be more
portable and unambiguous if we didn't take that attitude, but it has
been our feeling that implementations would be forced into unacceptable
inefficiencies and compromises by such a strict spec.
Of course, now that we know more about implementations, we could
reconsider some of the "is an error" cases, and consider defining them.
However, given our agenda and priorities, I don't know whether it's
worth spending time on that in any significant number of cases. We
could keep it in the backs of our minds, though.
∂27-Mar-86 1955 DLW@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA [yuasa: forwarded]
Received: from SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 19:54:57 PST
Received: from CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 448914; Thu 27-Mar-86 18:50:03-EST
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 86 18:53 EST
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Subject: [yuasa: forwarded]
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU, cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12193149846.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <860327185339.9.DLW@CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I concur with you about the various Japanese folks. The Japanese are
definitely status-conscious. I also found out when I was there that
they are age-conscious, and assume a strong monotonic depedency between
age and level of responsibility. (As a "high-ranking" Symbolics
technical person, I found out that they were surprised that I was
apparently only in my late thirties, and they were even more surprised
when they found out I was in my late twenties. From what I've read,
this is pretty standard.)
I should also point out that Prof. Ida has specifically been active in
getting Common Lisp established as a standard within JEIDA. It's hard
to explain what JEIDA is exactly, both because I don't know, and because
Japanese organizations and their roles do not map into American ones.
It's an industry organization. It's probably sort of like EIA or IEEE
in some ways, at least insofar as it's a forum for adoptation of
standards. In any case, the fact that Ida is involved in JEIDA is
probably another reason that it makes sense for him to be involved with
the Common Lisp standardization process.
Unfortunately, I don't know how much he really knows technically. It
would be very hard to justify his inclusion on the technical committee
on the basis of his deep knowledge of Lisp and Lisp implementation
issues, based on what I know. I could be wrong.
Here's a random idea: perhaps he really belongs on the steering
committee, and he could help us figure out who in Japan makes sense for
the technical committee?
∂27-Mar-86 2220 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU [yuasa: forwarded]
Received: from [128.2.255.254] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 22:18:50 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 28 Mar 86 01:18:49-EST
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1986 01:18 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12194221400.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
To: "Daniel L. Weinreb" <DLW@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: [yuasa: forwarded]
In-reply-to: Msg of 27 Mar 1986 18:53-EST from Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW at SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Unfortunately, I don't know how much he really knows technically. It
would be very hard to justify his inclusion on the technical committee
on the basis of his deep knowledge of Lisp and Lisp implementation
issues, based on what I know. I could be wrong.
Well, we don't necessarily have to apply exactly the same standards to
foreign members that we did to American members. But I share your lack
of knowledge about Ida's technical abilities, and his English is
certainly not good enough for him to help write the manual or choose the
wording. Then again, he may be the guy who ends up translating the
thing into Japanese.
Here's a random idea: perhaps he really belongs on the steering
committee, and he could help us figure out who in Japan makes sense for
the technical committee?
I thought about proposing that myself. He seems to enjoy hacking
bureaucracy. So far, two of the addresses I've tried for mail to Ida
have bounced, and the third has not yet produced a reply.
-- Scott
∂28-Mar-86 0025 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:lantz@su-gregorio.arpa it's a boy!
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 00:25:15 PST
Received: from su-gregorio.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Mar 86 00:25:42-PST
Received: by su-gregorio.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 28 Mar 86 00:24:08 pst
Date: 28 Mar 1986 0024-PST (Friday)
From: Keith Lantz <lantz@su-gregorio.arpa>
To: faculty@score, csl-faculty@sierra, rashid@cmua, marzullo@xerox,
ridge!os@riacs
Cc:
Subject: it's a boy!
Jarrett Kevin Lantz
9lb 1oz
21in
born 2:37pm March 26
son, mom, dad, and big sister all doing fine (at least until classes
start...)
∂28-Mar-86 0808 GRISS%HP-HULK@hplabs.ARPA Ida
Received: from HPLABS.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 08:08:29 PST
Received: from HP-HULK by hplabs.ARPA ; Fri, 28 Mar 86 08:07:53 pst
Date: Fri 28 Mar 86 08:09:22-PST
From: Martin <GRISS%HP-HULK@hplabs.ARPA>
Subject: Ida
To: cl-steering%su-ai@HPLABS
Cc: GRISS%HP-HULK@HPLABS
I would be concerned with adding another person to the steering committee
at this point. I thing you would then also have to consider some
additions from the European communitee and so on, possible leading to
a rather large group.
I think we would do better to identify a serious technical person, or
a more senior person, such as Eichi Goto, who is extremely well known
in the LISP, Alabgra and AI communitee in Japan. Goto has been
involved with numerous LISP implementations, both software and
hardware.
I will dig around for some of the articles I have, maybe can find some
new names.
M
-------
∂28-Mar-86 0948 RPG New Members
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
I agree with Griss and the others who recommended more senior
Japanese members. I met with the KCL folks last year and found
that their understanding of Lisp was surprisingly shallow for
implementors. They seemed quite capable of hacking extraordinary
things together, but lacked the judgement to decide among various
interpretations of Silver-book statements by relying on taste and
a feeling for Lisp. I don't believe that at the point I met with
them they had developed a consistent mental model of Common Lisp.
-rpg-
∂28-Mar-86 1001 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu STOC ADVANCE REGISTRATION
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 10:00:22 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Mar 86 09:59:45-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Mar 86 09:59:44-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Fri, 28 Mar 86 11:02:20 CST
Received: from ernie.berkeley.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Thu, 27 Mar 86 21:00:04 CST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA09481; Thu, 27 Mar 86 18:59:51 PST
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 86 18:59:51 PST
From: lawler@ernie.berkeley.edu (Eugene Lawler)
Message-Id: <8603280259.AA09481@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: theory@rsch.wisc.edu
Subject: STOC ADVANCE REGISTRATION
Cc: lawler@ernie.berkeley.edu
Status: R
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 28 Mar 86 10:46:42 CST (Fri)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
Advance programs for STOC have been mailed out by ACM
by bulk mail. Since there may be some delay in delivery, it
is in the best interests of participants to send in their
advance registrations with a facsimile of the form that follows.
Two corrections to the technical program sent out earlier are
also appended.
--Gene Lawler
18th ANNUAL ACM SYMPOSIUM ON THEORY OF COMPUTING
May 28-30, 1986
Berkeley, California
------------------------------------------------------
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM
Please send this form with a check or money order
(payable in US dollars to 18th ACM STOC) to:
ACM STOC Registration
c/o E.L. Lawler
Computer Science Division
573 Evans Hall
University of California
Berkeley CA 94720
Received
Before 5/14 After
ACM/SIGACT/IEEE-CS
member $150 [ ] $200 [ ]
Author $140 [ ] $190 [ ]
Nonmember $170 [ ] $220 [ ]
Student $ 30 [ ] $ 60 [ ]
Preference for lodging at Dwight/Derby:
3 nights 4 nights
Single occupancy of bedroom in suite [ ] $155 [ ] $175
Double occupancy of bedroom in suite [ ] $105 [ ] $125
Single occupancy in residence hall [ ] $125 [ ] $145
Double occupancy in residence hall [ ] $ 85 [ ] $105
(Accommodations in suites cannot be guaranteed. Payment in cash
or check in US dollars must be made at time of check-in.)
I wish to share double occupancy of a room with:
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Special dietary requirements: ←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Date of arrival:←←←←←←←←←←←← Time (if after 9 pm):←←←←←←←
Date of departure:←←←←←←←←←←←←
[ ] I am also attending Structure in Complexity Theory meeting.
Name:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
City:←←←←←←←←←←←←←← State:←←←←←←← Zip:←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Country (if not USA):←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Telephone:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Net address:←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
PROGRAM CORRECTIONS
Wednesday Afternoon
[Paper by Gusfield withdrawn]
Thursday Afternoon
[Listings of papers by Schnorr, et al and Kosaraju, et al, were
scrambled]
An Optimal Sorting Algorithm for Mesh-Connected Connected Computers.
C.P. Schnorr, University of Frankfurt and A. Shamir, Weizmann Institute.
Optimal Simulations Between Mesh-Connected Arrays of Processors.
S. Rao Kosaraju, Johns Hopkins University, and Mikhail J. Atallah,
Purdue University.
--------------
TN Message #35
--------------
∂28-Mar-86 1008 OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA Re: [yuasa: forwarded]
Received: from USC-ISIB.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 10:07:44 PST
Date: 28 Mar 1986 09:03-PST
Sender: OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
Subject: Re: [yuasa: forwarded]
From: OHLANDER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <[USC-ISIB.ARPA]28-Mar-86 09:03:51.OHLANDER>
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12194221400.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Perhaps the best place for Ida is on the ISO committee. I think
that the Japanese might regard this as an honorable position. It
would also offer the opportunity to interract with the technical
committee.
Ron
∂28-Mar-86 1255 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU New Members
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 12:54:11 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 28 Mar 86 15:54:57-EST
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1986 15:54 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12194380895.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: New Members
In-reply-to: Msg of 28 Mar 1986 12:48-EST from Dick Gabriel <RPG at SU-AI.ARPA>
OK, I can see the wisdom of considering Yuasa and Hagiya as too junior
to the the official Japanese reps, if there are to be only one or two.
Maybe even Ida is too junior -- he's young and an associate professor, I
think. The problem with taking on Goto or someone more senior is that
we want to make sure that whoever we get has some serious interest in
Common Lisp and the standardization thereof. We don't need some
VIP who thinks that Lisp is a cute toy and not very practical.
I think that the KCL guys have a lot of enthusism and energy that we
want to tap, and also good contacts over there. So we want to keep them
involved and feeling good about all this, even if they're not the
official Japanese representatives.
The model I keep coming back to in my mind is trying to get the Japanese
to set up their own committee over there, with much communication with
ours, and that we all come together at ISO. That way N Japanese can get
into the act and they can sort out their own politics.
-- Scott
∂28-Mar-86 1439 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:ullman@su-aimvax.arpa Amos Fiat
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 14:38:33 PST
Received: from su-aimvax.arpa by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Mar 86 14:37:59-PST
Received: by su-aimvax.arpa with Sendmail; Fri, 28 Mar 86 14:38:44 pst
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 86 14:38:44 pst
From: Jeff Ullman <ullman@diablo>
Subject: Amos Fiat
To: faculty@score
I recieved a letter from Amos Fiat, a student at Weizmann inst.,
who has won a Weizmann (postdoctoral) fellowship and wants to
use it at Stanford. His work is in the analysis of algorithms
area. Historically, Weizmann fellows have been outstanding
researchers, e.g., Dolev, Vardi, and Upfal.
However, I have one Weizmann fellow joining the parallel computation
project next year, David Peleg, and I don't think I can
afford another (oh yes, you have to put up 7K "supplement"
plus provide incidental expenses like computer).
If anyone is interested in working with Fiat, I have his resume
and publications.
---jeff
∂28-Mar-86 2041 DLW@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA Ida
Received: from SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 28 Mar 86 20:41:39 PST
Received: from CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 449977; Fri 28-Mar-86 20:07:43-EST
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 86 20:09 EST
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Subject: Ida
To: GRISS%HP-HULK@HPLABSD.ARPA, cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: The message of 28 Mar 86 11:09-EST from Martin <GRISS%HP-HULK@hplabs.ARPA>
Message-ID: <860328200946.8.DLW@CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I agree about finding a more senior person. I also agree with RPG about
Hagiya and Yuasa; I like them and am impressed by their accomplishments,
but their misunderstandings of the manual in a few placed clearly
indicated to me that while they certainly could implement from a spec,
they didn't have a good idea why the spec was the way it was.
On the other hand, let's be quite careful about the kind of person we
choose: it has to be someone who appreciates what it means to write a
substantial program in Lisp, not just someone who has implemented a Lisp
of some sort. I am afraid of choosing someone who is too much of a
theoretist, who would not have the sensitivity to make a good
engineering compromise between elegance and practicality. We should
keep this in mind, and be careful that we know enough about someone
before we put him on the committee that we can be confident he can
work in that kind of engineering milieu.
∂28-Mar-86 2157 JMC Japanese representative
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Japanese support for a Common Lisp standard would be valuable. My
suggestion is that members of the committee discuss with some senior
Japanese, who is himself not a candidate, what kind of person is
desirable and be substantially influenced by the advice obtained.
∂29-Mar-86 0045 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA SIGBIG
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 86 00:45:17 PST
Received: from ames-vmsb.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Fri 28 Mar 86 19:16:32-PST
Date: 28 Mar 86 19:00:00 PST
From: welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA
Subject: SIGBIG
To: super@su-score.arpa
Reply-To: welch@ames-vmsb.ARPA
ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY
San Francisco Golden Gate Chapter
"SIGBIG" Special Interest Committee
For Large High Speed Computers
Meetings on the first Wednesday of each month at 7:30 PM. Speakers
who can give insights to various aspects of SUPERCOMPUTING are
featured each month.
Next meeting: Wednesday, April 2, 1986, 7:30 PM
Speaker: Don Whitehead / Scientific Computer Systems Corp.
Topic: SCS40 - The Cray Compatible Mini-Supercomputer
Location: AXIOM Systems
1589 Centre Pointe Drive
Milpitas, CA
Directions: 17 South to Montague Expressway East. Left from
Montague onto Centre Point (before Capitol).
or 17 South to Capitol Expressway East. Right from
Capitol onto Centre Point (before Montague).
or 680 South to Montague Expressway West. Right from
Montague onto Centre Point (after Capitol).
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tape-recordings of most of the previous may be obtained
in exchange for a tape cassette or $5.00 by contacting:
Mary Fowler (415)261-4058 (rec)
Supercomputing #192, BOX 2787
Alameda, CA. 94501-0787
For information contact Mary Fowler, Chairperson (415) 839-6547
or Mike Austin, Publ. Chair (415) 423-8446
------
∂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 0809 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Random note
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 86 08:09:23 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Sat 29 Mar 86 11:10:14-EST
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1986 11:10 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12194591209.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: Random note
I'll be out of the country from April 1 - 9, so don't wait around for my
input if decisions have to be made. I've got about two weeks of
intensive work to do when I get back, but I'm hoping we can really get
rolling on technical issues starting in May.
-- Scott
∂29-Mar-86 0828 DLW@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA New Members
Received: from SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Mar 86 08:28:10 PST
Received: from CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 450156; Sat 29-Mar-86 11:25:26-EST
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 86 11:27 EST
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Subject: New Members
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: <FAHLMAN.12194380895.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <860329112735.3.DLW@CHICOPEE.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
From what I've learned about the Japanese, I think it's safe to say that
none of us have any hope of having a good understanding of their
internal politics, questions of what's appropriate, who would be
insulted by what, and so on. Fahlman's suggestion re their own
committee, or McCarthy's of consulting with someone there, both sound
reasonable to me, and certainly better than our making a direct choice
of an individual ourselves.
∂30-Mar-86 0823 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Sorry for the repeat
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 08:23:39 PST
Date: Sun 30 Mar 86 08:23:51-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Sorry for the repeat
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12194855840.8.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
on Keith's good news, but I suppose it doesn't hurt to repeat happy
news such as that!
Victoria
-------
∂30-Mar-86 1744 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA LOTS Faculty Orientation
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 17:44:15 PST
Date: Sun 30 Mar 86 17:44:19-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: LOTS Faculty Orientation
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12194957871.16.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The LOTS Computer Facility will hold an orientation session for
FACULTY and INSTRUCTORS Thursday, April 3rd, at 4pm in room "LGI"
of the CERAS building. This session is primarily for those Faculty
and Instructors who will be using LOTS for the first time this spring.
Topics will include class directories, mailing lists, the UPDATE
program, and console and disk allocation policies.
If you have questions but can't make it to this meeting, please send
mail to the LOTS Faculty Liaisons, Deirdre Lieberson and Tom Steuber,
as FL@LOTSC (or FL%LOTSC@SU-SCORE.ARPA).
-John Reuling
-------
∂30-Mar-86 1744 REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA LOTS Faculty Orientation
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 17:44:15 PST
Date: Sun 30 Mar 86 17:44:19-PST
From: John Reuling <Reuling@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: LOTS Faculty Orientation
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: 246 Margaret Jacks Hall, Stanford; 415/725-5555
Message-ID: <12194957871.16.REULING@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The LOTS Computer Facility will hold an orientation session for
FACULTY and INSTRUCTORS Thursday, April 3rd, at 4pm in room "LGI"
of the CERAS building. This session is primarily for those Faculty
and Instructors who will be using LOTS for the first time this spring.
Topics will include class directories, mailing lists, the UPDATE
program, and console and disk allocation policies.
If you have questions but can't make it to this meeting, please send
mail to the LOTS Faculty Liaisons, Deirdre Lieberson and Tom Steuber,
as FL@LOTSC (or FL%LOTSC@SU-SCORE.ARPA).
-John Reuling
-------
∂30-Mar-86 1853 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH reminder
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Mar 86 18:52:58 PST
Date: Sun 30 Mar 86 18:50:50-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Tomorrow's PLANLUNCH reminder
To: planlunch-reminder.dis: ;
PLANNING BY PROCEDURAL INFERENCE
Dan Carnese (CARNESE@SRI-KL)
AI Lab, Schlumberger Palo Alto Research (SPAR)
11:00 AM, MONDAY, March 31
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
The standard approach to plan construction involves applying a general planning
algorithm to a representation of a problem to be solved. This approach will
fail on a given problem when the search space explored by the algorithm is too
large. If this occurs, the only alternatives are to re-encode the problem or
to improve the general algorithm.
In this talk, I'll describe an alternative approach where control of the
planning process is provided by a procedure which constructs proofs from
premises characterizing the domain. This approach allows arbitrary
procedures to be used for control, while retaining the desirable property
that unsound inferences cannot be made.
The technique will be illustrated with examples from the domain of
computer-aided manufacturing.
-------
∂31-Mar-86 0105 RESTIVO@SU-SCORE.ARPA PROLOG Digest V4 #12
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 01:04:55 PST
Date: Sunday, March 30, 1986 7:17PM
From: Chuck Restivo (The Moderator) <PROLOG-REQUEST@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Reply-to: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
US-Mail: P.O. Box 4584, Stanford CA 94305
Phone: (415) 322-5550
Subject: PROLOG Digest V4 #12
To: PROLOG@SU-SCORE.ARPA
PROLOG Digest Monday, 31 Mar 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Query - Multi Processor Compilation & Snips & Economy,
Implementation - C Prolog Bug
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 10 Mar 86 08:41:27-EST
From: Vijay <Vijay.Saraswat@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Query on multi-processor implementations of
I am looking into the possibility of implementing the
language CP[!,|,&] on the Supercomputer Workbench (a shared
memory multi-processor) here at CMU. I would very much
appreciate leads/pointers to actual/proposed work on the
implementations of conc. Logic programming languages on
REAL parallel machines. (I am not looking for feasibility
studies, or numbers obtained from multi-processor
simulations.) Also, if there are such implementations, I
would be interested in bench-marks on `standard' problems.
Answers may be sent to me directly (Saraswat@c.c. cmu.edu)
or to the Prolog Digest: I'll summarise and post to the
Digest if there is enough interest.
-- Vijay Saraswat.
------------------------------
Date: 10 Mar 86 21:27:00 GMT
From: Mark Gooley <Gooley@ucbvax.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Prolog compilation?
A reference that keeps appearing in article after article
about Prolog is D. H. D. Warren's "Implementing Prolog --
compiling predicate logic programs" (D.A.I. Research Reports
39 and 40, Dept. of Artificial Intelligence, University of
Edinburgh, 1977). Is it just being mentioned as a matter of
form (as the over-rated Mead & Conway VLSI textbook is in its
field), or is it genuinely useful? (I'm interested in optimizing
Prolog but I don't want to "re-invent the wheel.") I haven't
been able to look at a copy: the C.S. Dept. library here describes
all technical reports that nobody marks as immediately useful, the
inter-library loan people tell me that no U. S. library has a copy,
and my letter to Edinburgh has been absorbed by a black hole.
Has some better, more-readily-available book or report on
compiling Prolog been written? Failing that, could someone lend me a
copy of the Warren reports?
Many thanks.
-- Mark Gooley
------------------------------
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 16:02:12-EST
From: Vijay <Vijay.Saraswat@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Implementation of snips?
Is there a fast implementation of snips (i.e cuts which allow
the next clause to be chosen, without the goals in the current
clause from the head to the currently failing goal being retries)
for DEC-20 Prolog?
Thank you.
-- Vijay
------------------------------
Date: 19 Mar 86 12:53:39 GMT
From: allegra!dep@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: Making Recursion Affordable in Prolog ?
I had a similar problem. I have written a Prolog program to
explore the problems of creating and maintaining a very large
data base (using my record collection of 1500 records as
an example, with full information about composers, performers,
and pieces performed). With about one quarter of the records
entered I encountered the stack overflow problem and started
extending the stacks and other data structures. But of course
as the data base grew bigger, the stacks had to be enlarged as
well - a rather hopeless task. My solution to the problem is
as follows (using the side-effect aspects of Prolog):
I had a main program something like
getlist(L1),
sort(L1,L2),
putindb(L2),
processdblist,
...
the putindb goes like this:
putindb([]).
putindb([H|T]) :-
assert( something(H) ), or maybe assertz
putindb(T),
!.
then processdblist is
processdblist :-
something(H)
# process(H),
fail,
processdblist.
The database has things in the order desired and you process
each member of the original list in the desired order. The
# operator means "succeed only once - unbind on backtracking"
(a very nice operator to bring a bit of sanity to loops in Prolog).
The stack problem has gone away because you dont hve to keep all
the previous environments around in case you unwind to them while
backtracking.
-- Dewayne
------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 86 02:35:34 GMT
From: DCGoricanec@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: Making Recursion Affordable in Prolog ?
<chomp>
Hello world.
Examine the following :
rubik←cube([],New←perm) :- write(New←perm),!.
rubik←cube([H|T],New←perm) :-
move←generator(H,New←perm,Newer←perm),
rubik←cube(T,Newer←perm).
This predicate is invoked by a list of cube moves such as
rubik←cube([u,r2,l,r2],Resultant←perm)?
Fine. I can submit a list of 25 such moves to a program on my
IBM-XT with 512k running plvp+ but 26 moves causes a stack
overflow.I would like 225 moves in my list ...
My question is : Since this program is list-driven and only
recurses to split the list, how can I kill the thousands of
instantiations cluttering the stack when I move on to the next
list element? i.e. kind of like a cut but instead of inhibiting
backtracking, I want to inhibit recursive memory of past events)
Currently my program is 15k long and can solve u-face efficiently
by using the tables published by Singmaster. Generalization to the
whole cube group is trivial once I get prolog to handle a big list
splitting.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 86 14:57:26 cst
From: Srinivas Sataluri <Sataluri%UIowa.csnet@CSNET-RELAY>
Subject: A Bug in C-Prolog Version 1.5
A bug was found in the C-Prolog, version 1.5,
implementation of exponentiation. The behavior is mysterious
and worth documenting. Consider the following Prolog rules,
each of which is an encoding of the relation: P = X ** (N-I)
rule0(P,X,N,I) :- I >= 0, P is X↑(N-I).
rule1(P,X,N,I) :- I >= 0, Y is N-I, P is X↑Y.
rule2(P,X,N,I) :- I >= 0, Y is N-I, Z is X↑Y, P is Z.
The following is the observed behavior of the interpreter:
| ?- rule0(1,5,2,2).
yes
| ?- rule1(1,5,2,2).
yes
| ?- rule2(1,5,2,2).
yes
| ?- rule0(5,5,2,1).
no
| ?- rule1(5,5,2,1).
no
| ?- rule2(5,5,2,1).
yes
| ?- rule0(25,5,2,0).
no
| ?- rule1(25,5,2,0).
no
| ?- rule2(25,5,2,0).
yes
| ?- ↑D
[ Prolog execution halted ]
An execution trace revealed that CProlog succeeds for
"1 is 5↑0", and fails for "5 is 5↑1" and "25 is 5↑2". Rule2
avoids all these cases, by always having a variable on the
left hand side of "is", and shows correct behavior.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 86 18:47:20 MET
From: Neideck%Germany.csnet@CSNET-RELAY
Subject: C-Prolog-Bug
In reply to the question of Toshiya Toba concerning C-Prolog:
I have tried your test on our C-Prolog and found the same
error you got. The solution is to fix a few lines in "dbase.c",
which are somewhat too restrictive regarding system objects.
The relevant function is "erase(r)":
if (key == CLAUSE)
d = SkelP(d)->Fn;
if ((FunctorP(d)->flgsoffe)&RESERVED) {
ErrorMess = "! Attempt to erase a system object";
return FALSE;
}
should be changed to
if (key == CLAUSE) {
d = SkelP(d)->Fn;
if ((FunctorP(d)->flgsoffe)&RESERVED) {
ErrorMess = "! Attempt to erase a system object";
return FALSE;
}
}
to permit erasing of recorded entries for system identifiers
without sacrificing the safety of the built-in protection
mechanism.
-- Burkhard Neidecker
------------------------------
End of PROLOG Digest
********************
∂31-Mar-86 0816 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA CSD Tuesday Lunch
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 08:16:01 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 08:16:04-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: CSD Tuesday Lunch
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195116566.16.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Tomorrow is the first lunch of the spring quarter in MJH 146 at 12:15 and
there will be general discussion.
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1010 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA General Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 10:09:52 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 10:05:57-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: General Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195136571.16.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
There will be a general faculty meeting tomorrow (April 1) at 2:30 in MJH 146.
An agenda for this meeting will be sent out later today.
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1237 DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA hh
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 12:37:13 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 12:30:15-PST
From: Mary Dalrymple <DALRYMPLE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: hh
To: linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA, folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Don't miss the first happy hour of the spring season --
this Friday at 4:00 in the Greenberg Room. Come one,
come all!
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1302 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA [Ian A. Benson <BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: cs323 summer quarter?]
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 13:01:13 PST
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA ([36.36.0.196].#Internet) by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 31 Mar 86 12:58:10-PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 12:55:44-PST
From: Ian A. Benson <BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: [Ian A. Benson <BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>: cs323 summer quarter?]
To: csd-list@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195167478.12.BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Mail-From: BENSON created at 31-Mar-86 12:41:43
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 12:41:43-PST
From: Ian A. Benson <BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: cs323 summer quarter?
To: bboard@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
cc: benson@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195164927.12.BENSON@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
I have been asked by Gina Modica, Course Assistant, to collect
a petition with names of those interested in taking CS323
Advanced AI, in the Summer. If the Department is able to schedule
a repeat then this will relieve the timetabling confict some CSMS
students have this quarter. Please send me a message a.s.a.p if
you are interested....
-------
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1437 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA General Faculty Meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 14:36:29 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 14:31:21-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: General Faculty Meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195184885.56.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Here's the agenda promised earlier today....
There will be a general faculty meeting on Tuesday, April 1, 1986
at 2:30 in MJH 146. The agenda items include:
1/ Approval of Degree Candidates
2/ Admissions
3/ Publications Commitee Report
4/ Staff Reports
a. Financial
b. Computer Forum
c. Computer Facilities
d. Academic
5/ Teaching Loads Committee Report
6/ PhD Commitee Report
7/ Baskett Reappointment
8/ Other Business
Thanks,
Anne
-------
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1505 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New u-code for Explorers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 15:04:57 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 15:02:48-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New u-code for Explorers
To: ksl-lispm@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195190611.28.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
We have a new microcode (version 257) which fixes a subtle bug in
EQUALP. If you use EQUALP much, you might want to move to this new
ucode. It will cause the machine to take a bit more time to boot,
as it will have to load a new error table. Send me a message if you'd
like to use it.
-- Rich
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1522 HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Call for speaker for next BATS: April 25 at Berkeley.
Received: from [36.36.0.196] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 15:22:38 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 15:21:16-PST
From: BATS Coordinator for Stanford <HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Call for speaker for next BATS: April 25 at Berkeley.
To: aflb.su@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195193972.39.HADDAD@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Anyone who would be interested in giving a BATS talk at Berkeley
on Friday, April 25th, should contact me within the next week.
Thanks,
Ramsey.
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1628 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:anderson@lbl-ux7 msri talks
Received: from [36.36.0.196] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 16:28:03 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 31 Mar 86 16:27:24-PST
Received: from lbl-ux7.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 31 Mar 86 16:27:21-PST
Received: by lbl-ux7.ARPA ; Mon, 31 Mar 86 16:27:39 pst
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 86 16:27:39 pst
From: Rich Anderson <anderson@lbl-ux7>
Message-Id: <8604010027.AA03229@lbl-ux7.ARPA>
To: aflb.all@su-score.ARPA
Subject: msri talks
Cc: anderson@sushi.ARPA
MSRI TALKS March 31 - April 4
Tuesday, April 1
2pm MSRI Lecture Hall
Feng Gao
"The Non-Asymptotic Error of Numerical Integration
and the Problem of Adaption"
4pm MSRI Lecture Hall
Anna Lubiw
"Bipartition Syastems and how to Partition Polygons"
Wednesday, April 2
4pm 60 Evans Hall
Laszlo Lovasz
"The Discrepancy of Combinatorics"
Thursday, April 3
2pm MSRI Lecture Hall
Mark Krentel
"Complexity of Optimization Problems"
4pm 60 Evans Hall
Eva Tardos
"Linear Programming and the Real Numbers"
p.s. Sorry that there is little advance notice on some of these
talks, I am having trouble sending mail.
∂31-Mar-86 1639 BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA Student internships
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 16:39:00 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 16:31:39-PST
From: Jon Barwise <BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Student internships
To: Folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
cc: bboard@SU-CSLI.ARPA
The philosophy department has received an announcement of an
attractive internship program for graduate students who have completed
their candidacy requirements, but who have not begun on a dissertation
project. It is for 12 months with Honeywell, in Minnesota, and is the
the general area of CSLI research. If you are interested, you could
borrow the brochure from Ingrid. The deadline for applications is
April 30.
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1732 NUNBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA Harry Caray Day-- Last Chance
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 17:32:51 PST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 17:28:00-PST
From: Geoffrey Nunberg <Nunberg@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Harry Caray Day-- Last Chance
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In response to popular demand, the deadline for purchase of tickets
for Harry Caray Day tickets has been extended to Wednsday, April 3.
Game day, recall, is Saturday, May 3, at 1:30 p.m. It appears as if we
will have a congenial crowd, but may fall short of the number
necessary to get a welcome sign flashed on the scoreboard.
-------
∂31-Mar-86 1912 @SU-SUSHI.ARPA,@SU-SCORE.ARPA:udi@rsch.wisc.edu Theory Day at Columbia
Received: from [36.36.0.196] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Mar 86 19:09:17 PST
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-SUSHI.ARPA with TCP; Mon 31 Mar 86 19:05:34-PST
Received: from rsch.wisc.edu by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Mon 31 Mar 86 19:00:14-PST
Received: by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 31 Mar 86 20:09:46 CST
Received: from crys.wisc.edu by rsch.wisc.edu; Mon, 31 Mar 86 09:31:49 CST
Message-Id: <8603311531.AA01826@crys.wisc.edu>
Received: from CS.COLUMBIA.EDU by crys.wisc.edu; Mon, 31 Mar 86 09:31:40 CST
Date: Mon 31 Mar 86 10:31:10-EST
From: Zvi Galil <GALIL@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject: Theory Day at Columbia
To: theory@CRYS.WISC.EDU
Status: RO
Resent-To: TheoryNet-list@rsch.wisc.edu
Resent-Date: 31 Mar 86 19:59:02 CST (Mon)
Resent-From: Udi Manber <udi@rsch.wisc.edu>
THE EIGHTH THEORY DAY
AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
SPONSORED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 1986
10:00 PROFESSOR JOHN E. HOPCROFT
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
"MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS IN OBJECT
REPRESENTATION SYSTEMS"
11:00 PROFESSOR HENDRIK W. LENSTRA
UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM
"CODES FROM ALGEBRAIC NUMBER FIELDS"
2:00 PROFESSOR HENRYK WOZNIAKOWSKI
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
"INFORMATION-BASED COMPLEXITY: WORST, AVERAGE
AND PROBABILISTIC SETTINGS"
3:00 PROFESSOR SHAFI GOLDWASSER
MASSACHUSSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
"A PROVABLY CORRECT AND PROBABLY FAST
PRIMALITY TEST"
COFFEE WILL BE AVAILABLE AT 9:30 A.M.
ALL LECTURES WILL BE IN THE KELLOGG CONFERENCE CENTER
ON THE FIFTEENTH FLOOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
BUILDING, 118TH STREET AND AMSTERDAM AVENUE.
THE LECTURES ARE FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
CALL (212) 280-2736 FOR MORE INFORMATION.
-------
-------
--------------
TN Message #36
--------------
∂01-Apr-86 0658 PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA Next AFLB
Received: from [36.36.0.196] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 06:58:02 PST
Date: Tue 1 Apr 86 06:58:05-PST
From: Oren Patashnik <PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: Next AFLB
To: aflb.all@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195364515.7.PATASHNIK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
This is the first AFLB of the quarter. Next week's isn't set yet.
--------------------------------------------
3-Apr-86 : Avi Wigderson (MSRI)
A Geometric Interpretation of Graph Connectivity
with Algorithmic Applications
We show that a graph is k-vertex connected if and only if it has
certain "nondegenerate convex embeddings" in the (k-1)-dimensional
Euclidean space. The proof of this geometric characterization is based
on intuition from physics.
The algebraic properties of these embeddings make them easy to
find. We exhibit (randomized) algorithms for testing the connectivity
of a graph and related problems, which are considerably more efficient
than the best known (which are, however, deterministic).
(Joint work with N. Linial and L. Lovasz)
***** Time and place: April 3, 12:30 pm in MJ352 (Bldg. 460) ******
Regular AFLB meetings are on Thursdays, at 12:30pm, in MJ352. If you
have a topic you'd like to talk about please let me know. (Electronic
mail: patashnik@su-sushi.arpa, phone: (415) 497-1787). Contributions
are wanted and welcome. Not all time slots for this academic year
have been filled. The file [SUSHI]<patashnik.aflb>aflb.bboard contains
more information about future and past AFLB meetings and topics.
--Oren Patashnik
-------
∂01-Apr-86 0735 FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Docmenting the decisions
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 07:35:41 PST
Received: ID <FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Tue 1 Apr 86 10:36:10-EST
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1986 10:36 EST
Message-ID: <FAHLMAN.12195371441.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: Docmenting the decisions
I have now received a hrdcopy of the Lucid manual, and it looks like a
good starting point for the ANSI document, assuming that RPG's lawyers
can work out a release on the rights that will still retain for Lucid
the right to use their own work. The book is organized as a chunk of
introductory text on each chapter, followed by alphabetical listings of
functions and variables in that section, one per page.
We would have to remove a modest amount of Lucid-specific stuff, and put
in a fair amount of work to indicate the range of permissible variation
on some issues -- Lucid's book just says what their Lisp does. Some of
the introductory sections will have to be beefed up a bit, and the right
to incorporate some excepts from Steele's book would be valuable here.
A lot of these things Guy got just right.
Let me propose that the following thigns take place int he next 10 days
while I'm out of town:
1. Bob Mathis will communicate with the ANSI and ISO people and find out
whether the following kinds of status for a spec document are
acceptable to them:
(a) A public-domain document. Anyone would be able to print this and we
couldn't use legal means to prevent them from modifying it. But if the
copy came from us or from ANSI, people would know it is definitive. I
favor this option if we can do it this way -- gets the lawyers out of
the loop for good.
(b) A document copyrighted by a small non-profit corporation set up
specifically for this purpose (e.g. The Common Lisp Ad Hoc Technical
Committee, Inc.). We would prefer not to assign the copyright to ANSI,
but would of course grant to ANSI and to the rest of the community
blanket permission to reproduce the document without making hidden
modifications. Blanket permission would also be given for incorporating
the document into online documentation.
(c) Some other scheme of their choice.
2. RPG will continue his efforts to find a way to release the version
modified by the technical committee into the public domain (or to
assign the copyright to this new organization), while retaining for
Lucid the rights they need.
3. Steele will ask Digital Press if they are willing to grant permission
for this document to incorporate substantial excerpts from the Digital
Press book (but less than 30% of it), given that the result is to be
handled as 1a or 1b.
Suitable acknowledgement would of course be given to the contribution of
Lucid and Digital Press. I don't think the other companies cna object
to that, though if the document is public domain they could quietly
leave this off in their own copies. We would encourage other companies
not to do this, however.
Once all this is settled, I'm willing to collect the files at CMU and
start to roll on this. It seems reasonable to me that we set a goal of
September 1 for having a document with the backlog of small problems
cleaned up, and that we try to settle everything else and get a document
to ANSI by Dec 31, 1986. But we need to discuss this schedule further.
Someone on the steering committee needs to take charge of this business
of collecting the names of all participating companies. We may also
want to hold elections soon within the committess, as we'll have to tell
ANSI what our sturcutre is.
-- Scott
∂01-Apr-86 1358 ALAN@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU Docmenting the decisions
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 13:57:56 PST
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 86 17:00:02 EST
From: Alan Bawden <ALAN@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Docmenting the decisions
To: Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU
cc: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
In-reply-to: Msg of Tue 1 Apr 1986 10:36 EST from Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman at C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].868790.860401.ALAN>
Before anyone makes any decisions about starting with Lucid's book, perhaps
we should all have a look at it?
∂01-Apr-86 1422 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA LOTS registration
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 14:22:19 PST
Date: Tue 1 Apr 86 14:21:34-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: LOTS registration
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195445249.9.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If you are teaching a course that will be making use of the LOTS
computers, you must register your course at LOTS as soon as possible.
The procedure is simple: get on LOTS and run the REGISTRATION program.
It will prompt you for all the right info, and is very straightforward.
Send me mail if you have questions.
-Gina
-------
∂01-Apr-86 1422 MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA LOTS registration
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 14:22:19 PST
Date: Tue 1 Apr 86 14:21:34-PST
From: Gina Modica <MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: LOTS registration
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: instructors@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195445249.9.MODICA@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
If you are teaching a course that will be making use of the LOTS
computers, you must register your course at LOTS as soon as possible.
The procedure is simple: get on LOTS and run the REGISTRATION program.
It will prompt you for all the right info, and is very straightforward.
Send me mail if you have questions.
-Gina
-------
∂01-Apr-86 1801 CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA Faculty meeting
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 1 Apr 86 18:00:42 PST
Date: Tue 1 Apr 86 17:46:45-PST
From: Victoria Cheadle <CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Faculty meeting
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Office: Margaret Jacks 258, 497-1519
Message-ID: <12195482602.42.CHEADLE@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I appreciated all the nice comments made at this afternoon's faculty
meeting regarding the admissions process, etc. If I had not been so
busy blushing (thanks, David!), it might have occurred to me at the
time to mention the invaluable help that John Reuling provided. He
was always available to help with the various programming aspects
of the admissions process. Without his help, it would not have been
possible for things to run as smoothly as they did. I could not have
done it without him.
Victoria
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1445 RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Michael Genesereth
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 14:42:43 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 14:41:36-PST
From: Anne Richardson <RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Michael Genesereth
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, research-associates@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195711040.13.RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
I'm pleased to be able to announce that the School of Engineering
Executive Council today endorsed the recommendation of the CSD
senior faculty to promote Mike Genesereth to Associate Professor
(with tenure). Although Mike's promotion still has to be approved
by the University's Advisory Board (and by the Board of Trustees), I
think it would not be inappropriate to celebrate the hurdles cleared
so far. I've reserved the "Red Lounge" at the Faculty Club from 5:30
this afternoon (Wed. April 2) for us cheer Mike on. All faculty and
colleagues (and students) of Mike's are welcome! -Nils
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1541 admin%cogsci@BERKELEY.EDU UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 8 (Lindblom et al)
Received: from [128.32.130.5] by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 15:32:50 PST
Received: by cogsci.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA23129; Wed, 2 Apr 86 15:12:49 PST
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 86 15:12:49 PST
From: admin%cogsci@berkeley.edu (Cognitive Science Program)
Message-Id: <8604022312.AA23129@cogsci.berkeley.edu>
To: allmsgs@cogsci.berkeley.edu, cogsci-friends@cogsci.berkeley.edu,
seminars@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: UCB Cognitive Science Seminar--April 8 (Lindblom et al)
Cc: admin@cogsci.berkeley.edu
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
Spring 1986
Cognitive Science Seminar - IDS 237B
Tuesday, April 8, 11:00 - 12:30
2515 Tolman Hall
Discussion: 12:30 - 1:30
3105 Tolman (Beach Room)
``The Evolution of Spoken Language''
Bj"orn Lindblom, Peter MacNeilage, Michael Studdart-Kennedy
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
Abstract
A primary task for research on language evolution is an
explicit search for precursors to all aspects of language
structure and speech behavior. By precursors, we mean either
evolutionary precursors, traceable to lower animals, or those
human but nonlinguistic, cognitive, perceptual, and motor capa-
cities that both constrain language and make it possible. Only
when a search for such precursors has failed can we justly term
some characteristic unique--either to language or to man--and
attribute it to some species-specific bioprogram for language
learning and use. While we acknowledge and respect the
discoveries of formal linguistics, we believe that a truly
explanatory approach to language must go beyond a purely
descriptive modeling of autonomous form and structure to raise
the question of "how language got that way" and to squarely
face the challenge of "deriving language from nonlanguage".
Our focus is on a language universal for which any phylo-
genetic or ontogenetic theory must account: duality of pattern-
ing which holds the key to the communicative power of language.
Duality or use of discrete elements and combinatorial rules at
the two levels of phonology and syntax provide an "impedance
match" between the essentially unlimited semantics of cognition
and the restricted set of signaling devices and processes. We
are mainly concerned with phonology, specifically with the ori-
gin and nature of phonemes and features and with the processes
by which these intrinsically amodal elements are instantiated
in the modalities of production and perception. We shall argue
that, since spoken language is a product of biological and cul-
tural evolution, linguistic theory must ultimately be developed
from a neo-Darwinian variation-selection paradigm that views
the formal and substantive properties of language primarily as
adaptation to various biological and social selectional pres-
sures. We shall support this claim by placing language in the
context of the evolution of handedness and hemispheric special-
ization and by considering behavioral and neurophysiological
evidence from both adults and children elucidating the role of
phonological elements as amodal structures linking production
and perception. The feasibility and usefulness of the approach
will be further demonstrated by a series of computational
experiments aimed at the prediction of certain typological
facts about sound patterns and at attempts at deriving the
"featural" and "phonemic" organization of lexical systems
deductively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UPCOMING TALKS
Apr 22: Benjamin Libet, Physiology, UCSF
Apr 29: Dedre Gentner, Psychology, University of Illinois
at Champaign-Urbana
May 6: Paul Rosenbloom, Computer Science and Psychology,
Stanford
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ELSEWHERE ON CAMPUS
On Tuesday, April 8, Professor Dieter Stein of the Institut
fuer Anglistik und Amerikanistik of Justus-Liebig-Universitaet,
Giessen, will speak to the Linguistics Group Meeting on
"Discourse Markers in Early Modern English" at 8:00 p.m. in 117
Dwinelle Hall.
∂02-Apr-86 1555 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 15:54:09 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 15:21:25-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--Computer Science
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA, cs@[36.63.0.171]
Message-ID: <12195718288.32.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Logics of Programs. Brooklyn, June 1985. ed. by Rohit Parikh. Lecture Notes
In Computer Science. QA76.6.L5855 1985,
Advances In Cryptology. Proceedings. France, April 1984. ed. by Beth,
Cot and Ingemarsson. Lecture Notes In Computer Science. QA76.9.A25E95
1984.
Systematische Software-Qualitatssicherung Anhand Von Qualitats- und
Produktmodellen. by Heidemarie Willmer. Informatik-Fachberichte.
QA76.76.Q35W5 1985.
Fehlererkennung und Fehlerbehandlung in Speicherungsstrukturen von
Datenbanksystemen. by Klaus Kuspert. Informatik-Fachberichte.
QA76.9D35K8 1985.
Conference on Software Tools. April, 1985. IEEE Computer Society.
QA76.76.D47C66 1985.
Modula-2 Programming. by John W. L. Ogilvie. QA76.73.M63O36 1985.
Distributed Database Management Systems. by Olin H. Bray. QA76.9.D3
B712.
Physical and Biological Processing of Images. ed. Braddick, and Sleigh.
QP474.P5 1983 c.2
Current Status Of Computers In Medicine: Medical Subject Analysis and
Bibliography. by John Bartone II. Z6675.E4B373 1983.
Artificial Intelligence. The Search For The Perfect Machine. by
Lawrence Stevens. Q335.S84 1985.
Advanced IBM PC Graphics: State Of The Art. by Michael Hyman.
QA76.8.I2594H96 1985.
H. Llull
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1610 LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA Math/CS Library New Books--CS--One More
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 16:08:37 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 15:23:34-PST
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Math/CS Library New Books--CS--One More
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195718678.32.LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Intelligent Robots And Computer Vision. (fourth in a series) SPIE Proceedings.
ed. by Casasent. TJ210.3.I571 1985.
HL
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1723 LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Martin Abadi
Received: from SRI-AI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 17:23:12 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 17:21:06-PST
From: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
Subject: Next Monday's PLANLUNCH -- Martin Abadi
To: planlunch.dis: ;
TEMPORAL THEOREM PROVING
Martin Abadi (MA@SAIL)
Stanford University
11:00 AM, MONDAY, April 7
SRI International, Building E, Room EJ228 (new conference room)
In spite of the wide range of applications of temporal logic,
proof techniques (especially for first-order temporal logic (FTL))
have been quite limited up to now. We have developed a proof system R
for FTL. The system R is based on nonclausal resolution; proofs are
natural and generally short. Special quantifier rules, unification
techniques, and a resolution rule are introduced. The system R is
directly useful for such tasks as verification of concurrent programs
and reasoning about hardware devices. Other uses of temporal resolution,
such as temporal-logic programming, are currently being considered.
We relate R to other proof systems for FTL and discuss completeness issues.
In particular, one variant of R is ``as complete as'' an extension of Peano
Arithmetic. We also describe resolution systems analogous to R for other modal
logics. In fact, the resolution techniques and the corresponding completeness
arguments apply to a large class of modal logics.
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1737 ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA New 3645s
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 17:36:40 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 17:36:31-PST
From: Richard Acuff <Acuff@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: New 3645s
To: aap@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12195742881.43.ACUFF@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
The two remaining GFE Symbolics machines have arrived and are
mostly set up. HPP-3645-10 (cubicle nearest the stairs in C) is
working now. HPP-3645-9 is under repair by Symbolics but should be
available in the next few days. Both of these machines are equiped
with IFUs, FPAs, extended u-stores, and 300MB disks--they should be
quite fast. I'd like to talk to relevant (??) AAP people about
configuring them as there are several options. Please tell me who you
are, relevant people.
-- Rich
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1752 EMMA@SU-CSLI.ARPA Calendar, April 3, No. 10
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 17:41:47 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 17:33:25-PST
From: Emma Pease <Emma@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Calendar, April 3, No. 10
To: friends@SU-CSLI.ARPA
Tel: 723-3561
!
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
April 3, 1986 Stanford Vol. 1, No. 10
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
A weekly publication of The Center for the Study of Language and
Information, Ventura Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
←←←←←←←←←←←←
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR THIS THURSDAY, April 3, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Semantics and Property Theory
Conference Room by Gennaro Chierchia and Raymond Turner
Discussion led by Chris Menzel (chris@su-csli)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Representation: Categories of Correspondence
Trailer Classroom Brian Smith (Briansmith.pa@xerox)
(Abstract on page 2)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Ventura Hall Modelling Concurrency with Partial Orders
Trailer Classroom V. R. Pratt, Stanford University
--------------
CSLI ACTIVITIES FOR NEXT THURSDAY, April 10, 1986
12 noon TINLunch
Ventura Hall Interpreted Syntax
Conference Room by Susan Stucky
Discussion led by Mats Rooth (Rooth@su-csli)
(Abstract on page 3)
2:15 p.m. CSLI Seminar
Ventura Hall Representation: Foundations of Representation
Trailer Classroom Ken Olson (Olson@su-csli)
3:30 p.m. Tea
Ventura Hall
4:15 p.m. CSLI Colloquium
Ventura Hall Information Flow in the Design and Production of
Trailer Classroom Printers' Type: Problems of Computerizing a
Traditional Craft
Richard Southall
(Abstract on page 4)
--------------
!
Page 2 CSLI Calendar April 3, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
SEMINAR SERIES
``Mini-Series'' on Representation
Brian Smith, Jon Barwise, John Etchemendy, Ken Olson, John Perry
April 3, 10, 17, and 24
Issues of representation permeate CSLI research. During April, a
series of 4 seminars will be presented that focus on various aspects
of representation, and on its relation to computation, semantics, and
mind.
1. April 3, ``Categories of Correspondence'' -- Brian Smith
An introduction to the series, a survey of the various ways in
which representation plays a role in our research, and a sketch of a
typology of the various kinds of ``correspondence'' relation that can
hold between A and B, when A represents B (abstract below).
2. April 10, ``Foundations of Representation'' -- Ken Olson
A discussion of some of the philosophical foundations of
representation---particularly `acts' of representation---and its
relation to metaphysics and ontology.
3. April 17, ``On Stitch's Case Against Belief'' -- John Perry
An analysis of the case Steven Stitch makes against belief and other
notions of folk psychology, including a critique of the conception of
representation Stitch employs.
4. April 23, ``Models, Modelling, and Model Theory'' -- John
Etchemendy and Jon Barwise.
An examination of the notion of models and modelling, viewed as a
species of representation, with specific reference to their use in the
model-theoretic approach to semantics.
An abstract of the first seminar appears below.
--------------
THIS WEEK'S SEMINAR
Categories of Correspondence
Brian C. Smith (Briansmith.pa@xerox)
Photographs, sentences, balsa airplane models, images on computer
screens, Turing machine quadruples, architectural blueprints,
set-theoretic models of meaning and content, maps, parse trees in
linguistics, and so on and so forth, are all representations---
complex, structured objects that somehow stand for or correspond to
some other object or situation (or, if you prefer, are `taken by an
interpreter' to stand for or correspond to that represented
situation). It is important, in trying to make sense of
representation more generally, to identify the ways in which the
structure or composition of a representation can be used to signify or
indicate what it represents.
!
Page 3 CSLI Calendar April 3, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Strikingly, received theoretical practice has no vocabulary for
such relations. On the contrary, standard approaches generally fall
into one of two camps: those (like model-theory, abstract data types,
and category theory) that identify two objects when they are roughly
isomorphic, and those (like formal semantics) that take the
``designation'' relation---presumably a specific kind of
representation---to be strictly non-transitive. The latter view is
manifested, for example, in the strict hierarchies of meta-languages,
the notion of a ``use/mention'' confusion, etc. Unfortunately, the
first of these approaches is too coarse-grained for our purposes,
ignoring many representational details important for computation and
comprehension, while the latter is untenably rigid---far too strict to
cope with representational practice. A photographic copy of a
photograph of a sailboat, for example, can sometimes serve perfectly
well as a photo of the sailboat. Similarly, it would be pedantic to
deny, on the grounds of use/mention hygiene, that the visual
representation `12' on a computer screen `must not be taken to
represent a number,' but rather viewed as representing a data
structure that in turn represents a number. And yet there are clearly
times when the latter reading is to be preferred. In practice,
representational relations, from the simplest to the most complex, can
sometimes be composed, sometimes not. How does this all work?
Our approach starts very simply, identifying the structural
relations that obtain between two domains when objects of one are used
to correspond to objects of the other. For example, we call a
representation `iconic' when its objects, properties, and relations
correspond, respectively, to objects, properties, and relations in the
represented domain. Similarly, a representation is said to `absorb'
anything that represents itself. Thus the grammar rule `EXP ->
OP(EXP1,EXP2)', for a formal language of arithmetic, absorbs
left-to-right adjacency; model-theoretic accounts of truth typically
absorb negation; etc. A representation is said to `reify' any
property or relation that it represents with an object. Thus
first-order logic reifies the predicates in the semantic domain, since
they are represented by (instances of) objects---i.e., predicate
letters---in the representation. A representation is called `polar'
when it represents a presence by an absence, or vice versa, as for
example when the presence of a room key at the hotel desk is taken to
signify the client's absence. By developing and extending a typology
of this sort, we aim to categorize representation relations of a wide
variety, and to understand their composition, their use in inference
and computation.
--------------
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Interpreted Syntax
by Susan Stucky
discussion led by Mats Rooth (Rooth@su-csli)
There are fundamentally semantic representation relations holding
between a linguist's representations and the objects and properties in
language they represent. Furthermore, theoretical linguistics,
because of its empirical nature, requires that the representation
relation be made explicit and that certain of its representations be
grounded. Providing a mathematical specification of the formalism is
not enough: mathematical structures themselves must be interpreted.
--Susan Stucky
!
Page 4 CSLI Calendar April 3, 1986
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
NEXT WEEK'S COLLOQUIUM
Information Flow in the Design and Production of Printers' Type:
Problems of Computerizing a Traditional Craft
Richard Southall
In traditional type manufacture, it has been the task of the type
designer to conceive shapes for the characters of a typeface that have
certain combinations of stylistic and functional visual attributes,
and the task of the font producer to make objects that give rise via
the printing process to marks that yield satisfactory realizations of
the attributes conceived by the designer when a reader sees them.
Efficient communication of the type designer's wishes and intentions
to the font producer has thus been crucial to the success of type
production by traditional methods.
In present-day type manufacturing technology, the role of the font
producer is taken by a computer while that of the designer is still
played by a human. The consequent problems of communication between
the two make it worthwhile to take a harder look at the traditional
process of type design, with the aim of identifying the kind of
information that needs to be conveyed between designer and producer
and the kind of means that can be used to convey it.
(Richard Southall, typographer and typedesigner, has been a Visiting
Professor in the Computer Science Department at Stanford. He has
worked extensively with and lectured on TeX and Metafont.)
--------------
TANNER LECTURES ON HUMAN VALUES
Professor Stanley Cavell, Harvard University
sponsored by the Philosophy Department
The Uncanniness of the Ordinary
Thursday, April 3, 8 p.m., Kresge Auditorium
Scepticism, Melodrama, and the Extraordinary:
the Unknown Woman in GASLIGHT
Tuesday, April 8, 8 p.m., Kresge Auditorium
-------
∂02-Apr-86 1757 ROOTH@SU-CSLI.ARPA wedding party
Received: from SU-CSLI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 2 Apr 86 17:57:18 PST
Date: Wed 2 Apr 86 17:44:45-PST
From: Mats Rooth <rooth@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: wedding party
To: folks@SU-CSLI.ARPA, linguists@SU-CSLI.ARPA
We (Mats and Dorit) are getting married on Monday April 7 at 2:30 pm.
Please join us in a celebration at 4 pm the same day on the trailer
deck at CSLI - refreshments will be served!
--- Dorit Abusch and Mats Rooth
-------