bclass, although this stands to be debated. In any case, I would like to hear if anyone else felt the same strong motivation to disbelieve the original message and if so, what points in particular did you find to be the greatest source of misinformation. -- Fungi ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jul 84 03:03:50 EDT (Sat) From: Dana S. Nau Subject: Re: Use of if in natural language Your description sounds like it may relate to the difference between deductive and abductive inference. Jim Reggia and I have been doing some research on this at the University of Maryland; the following is a partial list of references (given in "refer" format). %A J. A. Reggia %A B. Perricone %A D. S. Nau %A Y. Peng %T Answer Justification in Abductive Expert Systems for Diagnostic Problem Solving %D 1984 %R submitted for publication %A D. S. Nau %A J. A. Reggia %T Relationships between Abductive and Deductive Inference in Knowledge-Based Diagnostic Problem Solving %R submitted for publication %D 1984 %A J. A. Reggia %A D. S. Nau %A P. Y. Wang %T Diagnostic Expert Systems Based on a Set Covering Model %D Nov. 1983 %P 437-460 %J International Journal of Man-Machine Studies %A J. A. Reggia %A D. S. Nau %A P. Y. Wang %T A Theory of Abductive Inference in Diagnostic Expert Systems %D Dec. 1983 %R Tech. Report TR-1338, Computer Sci. Dept., Univ. of Maryland %C College Park, MD %A J. A. Reggia %A P. Y. Wang %A D. S. Nau %T Minimal Set Covers as a Model for Diagnostic Problem Solving %J Proc. First IEEE Computer Society Internat. Conf. on Medical Computer Sci./Computational Medicine %D Sept. 1982 %A D. S. Nau %A J. A. Reggia %A P. Y. Wang %T Knowledge-Based Problem Solving Without Production Rules %J Proc. IEEE 1983 Trends and Applications Conference %C Gaithersburg, MD %D May 1983 %P 105-108 %A J. A. Reggia %A D. S. Nau %A P. Y. Wang %T A New Inference Method for Frame-Based Expert Systems %J Proc. Annual National Conference on Artificial Intelligence %C Washington, DC %P 333-337 %D Aug. 1983 ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jul 84 8:17:05-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!duke!mgv @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: A Report on the Cultural Premises of the AI Community Article-I.D.: duke.4495 I would like to point out the existence of a "pilot survey" on the "cultural premises of [the] artificial intelligence com- munity." The survey was carried out during IJCAI-8 in Karlsruhe by Massimo Negrotti, a sociologist with the University of Genoa, Italy. The research was sponsored by the Italian National Research Council (CNR), and I think that you can obtain a copy of the report by writing to Massimo Negrotti, Chair of Sociology of Knowledge, University of Genoa, Genova, Italy. Within its limitations (e.g., small sample size), the survey shows that AI researchers from different geographical areas have different views of the world. For example, "human understanding" is most often defined as "reduction to familiar terms" by British researchers, but as "general representation of facts" by Con- tinental Europeans. It may be interesting to note that almost 60% of the inter- viewed researchers answered "yes" to the following question: "From your point of view, is it plausible a pure A.I. theory [sic] without references to the philosophical tradition?", but that this percentage was as high as 67.8 for Continental Europe- ans, and as low as 37.8 for USA researchers. Marco Valtorta (duke!mgv) ------------------------------ Date: Sat 7 Jul 84 09:36:02-PDT From: Dikran Karagueuzian Subject: New CSLI Reports [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] N E W C S L I R E P O R T S Limited editions of three new Reports (Nos. CSLI-8-84, CSLI-9-84, and CSLI-10-84) have just been published. Copies may be obtained by writing to Dikran Karagueuzian at the Center. The reports are: Reflection and Semantics in LISP by Brian Cantwell Smith. Report No. CSLI--84--8, July, 1984. The Implementation of Procedurally Reflective Languages by Jim des Rivieres and Brian Cantwell Smith. Report No. CSLI--84--9, July, 1984. Morphological Constraints on Scandinavian Tone Accent by Meg Withgott and Per-Kristian Halvorsen. Report No. CSLI--84--11, July, 1984. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jun 84 0:13:42-PDT (Sat) From: ucbcad!tektronix!orca!shark!brianp @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Commonsense Reasoning? Article-I.D.: shark.861 the computer could do the temperature conversion without blinking an led, if it knows that this here's a mapping, (not a monkey and banana to simulate), and its one of those easy linear jobs, and if it knows how to read and can figure out the question. (no fair writing a temperature conversion (or any give-it-some-numbers interpolation/extrapolation) program. you have to write a run of the mill common sense reasoning program, and send it through elementary school. or hire a tutor. little kids can tease new types of people real bad. wouldn't want our program to have emotional problems, would we? :-) Brian Peterson ...!ucbvax!tektronix!shark!brianp ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jul 84 9:37:29-PDT (Thu) From: pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H.Pucc-I.ags @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: The Turing Test (reply to Col. Sicherman) Article-I.D.: pucc-i.338 > Is it coincidence that the computer declines > to write a sonnet and accepts the other challenges? A real human, trying > to prove that he is not a computer program, would probably welcome the > opportunity to offer a poem. Yes, I believe it is a coincidence. Another conversation from the Turing article demonstrates that he did not mean to exclude the possibility of a sonnet-writing machine: Interrogator: In the first line of your sonnet which reads 'Shall I compare thee to a summer's day,' would not 'a spring day' do as well or better? Witness: It wouldn't scan. Interrogator: How about 'a winter's day.' That would scan all right. Witness: Yes, but nobody wants to be compared to a winter's day. Interrogator: Yet Christmas is a winter's day, and I do not think Mr. Pickwick would mind the comparison. Witness: I don't think you're serious. By a winter's day one means a typical winter's day, rather than a special one like Christmas. And so on [Turing continues]. What would Professor Jefferson say if the sonnet-writing machine was able to answer like this in the viva voce? --------------------------------------------------------------- > My attack was not against the details of the conversation (for that > matter, the third problem is ambiguous), but the premise of the Test. Yes, the third problem was ambiguous. I thought it was also rather clever: Q: I have K at my K1, and no other pieces. You have only K at K6 and R at R1. It is your move. What do you play? A: (After a pause of 15 seconds) R-R8 mate. A machine might be expected to ask whether the rook is at QR1 or KR1, not realizing that it is irrelevant. The answer "R-R8 mate" is correct in either case. Was this a trap laid by the questioner? You say you object to the premise of the test. The reason for that becomes apparent in your next comment: > You may remember that Turing called it a "Game" rather than a "Test." This > sort of situation arises _only_ as a game; if you really want to know > whether somebody is a person or a computer, you just look at him/it. Where does Turing say or imply that being able to tell a person from a computer is of any importance? The question is merely, "Can a machine think?" Unless you believe that "having a human form" is a prerequisite for thinking, physical appearance means nothing. Is your objection of the form, 1. The Turing "imitation game" is not an adequate test of a machine's ability to think? [If not, why not?] 2. It is of no importance to decide whether machines can think, and therefore the Turing "imitation game" has no value? [