3-Jul-83 12:01:57-PDT,11325;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 1-Aug-83 17:01:10 Date: Sunday, July 3, 1983 5:01PM From: AIList (Kenneth Laws, Moderator) Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V1 #19 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Monday, 4 Jul 1983 Volume 1 : Issue 19 Today's Topics: AI Interfacing Computational Linguistics Foundations of Perception, AI (2) A Simple Logic/Number Theory/AI/Scheduling/Graph Theory Problem AISB/GI Tutorials at IJCAI Robustness Stories, Program Logs Wanted Program Verification Award [Long Msg] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 28 Jun 83 12:56:43-PDT From: W. Wipke Subject: AI interfacing I have a simple question many of you probably have answers to: when one has an existing application program for which you want to create an AI front end, should one design the AI part as a separate task in its own address space and communicate via msgs to the application program, or should one build the AI part into the same address space as the application program? Obviously the former may constrain communication and the latter may suffer from accidental communication, ie, global conflicts. What is the best wisdom in this question and where is it systematically discussed? Todd Wipke (WIPKE@SUMEX) Professor of Chemistry Univ. of Calif, Santa Cruz ------------------------------ Date: Fri 1 Jul 83 13:43:21-PDT From: C.S./Math Library Subject: Computational Linguistics [Reprinted from the SU-SCORE BBoard.] Computers and Mathematics with Applications volume 9 number 1 1983 is a special issue on comutational linguistics. This issue is currently on the new journals shelf. HL ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 28 June 1983, 21:13-EDT From: John Batali Subject: Foundations of Perception, AI [Reprinted from the Phil-Sci discussion.] [...] We aren't in the same position in AI as early physicists were. Physics started out with a more or less common and very roughly accurate conception of the physical world. People understood that things fell, that bigger things hurt more when they fell on you and so on. Physics was able to proceed to sharpen up the pre-theoretic understanding people had of the world until very recently when its discoveries ceased to be simply sharpenings and began to seem to be contradictions. "Mind studies" (AI, psychology, philosophy, and so on) don't seem to have such a common, roughly correct, theory to start with. We don't even agree on what it is we are supposed to be explaining, how such explanations ought to go, or what constitutes success. [John Batali ] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 29 Jun 1983 03:13 EDT From: KDF@MIT-OZ Subject: Re: Foundations of Perception, AI [Reprinted from the Phil-Science discussion.] [...]