2-Jul-84 22:41:33-PDT,11466;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 2-Jul-84 22:38:00 Date: Mon 2 Jul 1984 22:16-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #83 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Tuesday, 3 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 83 Today's Topics: AI Tools - LISP in AZTEC C & Interlisp under UNIX, Games - Chess 4.5, AI Literature - AI Text Recommendations Wanted, AI in Process Control - References Wanted, Commonsense Reasoning - Importance of Context, Graphics - Three-Point Curve, AI and Business - Second Summary & Industry Newsletter & Survey, Expert Systems - New Products, Machine Translation - Industry News, Natural Language - UNIX Interface ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 84 17:08:17 EDT From: William K. Cadwallender (LCWSL) Subject: LISP IN AZTEC C I was at a seminar in applied AI recently, and someone there told me about a LISP written in Aztec C under CP/M (... something like Z-LISP?) which was allegedly in the public domain and available possibly from SIMTEL. Does anyone out there know anything about this LISP, or any LISP that I could run in any manner on a 6502 system? William Cadwallender (wkc@ARDC) P.S. I am interested in the C SOURCE code for this thing. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jun 84 1:07:33-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!whuxle!spuxll!abnjh!u1100a!pyuxn!py uxww!gamma!ulysses!burl!idi!kiessig @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Interlisp under UNIX? Article-I.D.: idi.207 Can someone tell me if there is a version if Interlisp that runs under UNIX? If so, where/how does one go about getting a copy? Thanks, Rick Kiessig {decvax, ucbvax}!sun!idi!kiessig {akgua, allegra, amd70, burl, cbosgd, dual, ihnp4}!idi!kiessig Phone: 408-996-2399 ------------------------------ Date: Sat 30 Jun 84 13:42:30-PDT From: System-Assoc Dir Subject: Chess 4.5 I would like to inquire of the list if there is anyone who would like to participate in converting a Pascal clone of the Northwestern University Chess 4.5 program into TOPS-20 assembly language. The Pascal clone is partially written and unrelated to the bug-filled version published in Byte a few years ago. This version is based on a technical article by the authors, Slate and Atkin. Replies to g.mclure@su-score. ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jul 84 22:10:20-EDT (Tue) From: ihnp4!mgnetp!burl!idi!kiessig @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Wanted: AI texts & references Article-I.D.: idi.205 I'm looking for some good AI references and/or texts. Pointers to books that are considered a "must" are particularly wanted, but even ones that you consider "good reading" would be helpful, too. Thanks, Rick Kiessig {decvax, ucbvax}!sun!idi!kiessig {akgua, allegra, amd70, burl, cbosgd, dual, ihnp4}!idi!kiessig Phone: 408-996-2399 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Jun 84 18:50 EDT From: JPAnderson@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: AI in process control I'm looking for information on AI applications in the process control industry. Any information on what is being done or what should be done would be greatly appreciated. Jay Anderson JPAnderson -at mit-multics ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jun 84 8:41:49-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!whuxle!spuxll!abnjh!u1100a!pyuxn!rlr @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: a third of ten Article-I.D.: pyuxn.794 > Please. Everyone knows that 2*2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2. Now hold on. You're misquoting one of the great axioms of science, Skillman's Axiom. ____ V 3 = 7 ... for very large values of 3. Back in 1973 at Cornell was the first I had heard of this "axiom". Has anyone actually traced its roots back to its real origins? [Skillman is now an astronomer somewhere in the northwest.] WHAT IS YOUR NAME? Rich Rosen WHAT IS YOUR NET ADDRESS? pyuxn!rlr WHAT IS THE CAPITAL OF ASSYRIA? I don't know that ... ARGHHHHHHHH! ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jun 84 10:55:00-PDT (Sat) From: hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcla!hpfclq!robert @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Commonsense Reasoning? Article-I.D.: hpfclq.68500004 I think a human or computer presented this problem may end up asking for clarification provided more context (not supplied) were not available. For the problem given I would suspect perhaps not an inconsistancy but rather that I was being asked to setup a mapping from one "world" to another. A similar problem is: If 32 is 0 and 212 is 100 what is 65? This is of course a fahrenheit to celsius conversion problem. Read out of context it sure sounds strange. This kind of mapping problem is very common and might be done correctly by a computer without blinking a led. :-) -Robert (animal) Heckendorn ..!hplabs!hpfcla!robert [Readers might note that the recently posed problem of fitting the "best" curve through three points was similarly underconstrained. I have suppressed several responses of the form "The problem as stated has infinitely many solutions; please clarify what you want." Other responses have been a survey of applicable techniques and a couple of replies suggesting particular techniques that are usually appropriate. -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jun 84 10:57:00-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!tektronix!orca!warner @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: three point curve Article-I.D.: orca.915 I solved a similar problem once. My solution was without reguard to "best fit" as it didn't pass through the "middle" point. Simple mathematically, it was done with a recursive procedure that accepted three points. It might be applied here if some method was devised for extrapolating two more points from the original three points. Brief description of the method: Calculate the mid points of the lines between the "end" points and the "middle" point, i.e. between 1,2 and 2,3. You now have five points. (2). (4). (5). (3). (1). Pass the original procedure 1,5,4 then 5,4,3 .. repeat. When the the distance between the points is "small enough" .. connect them with a line. If the original problem required a point through 1,3,X then 2 would have been extrapolated, somehow, from 1,3,X. The curves made this way look nice and smooth on a macro scale but look wiggly on a micro scale. Ken Warner ..tektronix!tekecs!warner ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Jun 84 19:11:02 pdt From: syming%B.CC@Berkeley Subject: Second Summary of AI for Business I have compiled a second summary of AI For Business which contains the info I have received since the time I posted the first summary about one month ago. If interested, please send me a mail. It is rather long, so I don't want to waste the resource here. -- syming hwang [The length is not excessive for AIList, but Syming is also interested in compiling a list of people with particular interest in this subject. I can help anyone who has difficulty constructing a net address for him. -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 11:04:18-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Applied Artificial Intelligence Reporter I have received a mailing from the ICS (Intelligent Computer Systems) Research Institute of the University of Miami. They are hawking a the Applied Artificial Intelligence Reporter, a monthly newsletter that expanded to 12 pages in February (Vol. 1, No. 5). The excerpts shown in the ad look like fairly typical trade press material, with everything having been passed through an editor or professional reporter to make sure it's readable. The publishers are promising a broad mix of news, editorials, tutorials, reviews, etc. The newsletter is available for $49 ($39 for AAAI members) per year from the ICS Research Inst., U. of Miami, P.O. Box 1308-EP, Fort Lee, NJ 07024. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 21:44:04-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: AI and Industry The July issue of IEEE Spectrum mentions (p. 69) a new two-volume report, "Artificial Intelligence--A New Tool for Industry and Business," from Technical Insights, Inc., P.O. Box 1304, Fort Lee, N.J. 07024, (201) 944-6204. Volume I is said to contain explanations of expert systems, natural-language processing, vision, touch sensing, cognitive modeling, computer hardware, VLSI design, and applications, as well as a market analysis and forecast for each technology. Volume II presents "hundreds of annotated programs currently under study at universities," as well as lists of available research reports and technical publications for each university program. The two-volume report costs $485 plus 6% in NJ or $27 overseas postage and handling. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 13:18:38-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Expert System Tools Teknowledge (of Palo Alto) has released two software packages for expert system builders. M.1, at $12,500, is for those who want to explore expert systems concepts on the IBM PC. The price includes a four-day training course for one person. S.1 is for professional knowledge engineers developing large-scale knowledge systems. It sells for $50,000, which includes a two-week training course for two people, a sample system with detailed case history, and access to Teknowledge's applications engineering services. S.1 currently runs on Xerox 1100 and 1108 workstations and is being ported to VAX 11/750 and 11/780 under VMS. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 21:57:21-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Machine Translation CNN News carried a story over the weekend about Bravice Int., which claims to have the first commercial Japanese-to-English translation system. They claim about 80% accuracy for technical text, and charge $100,000 for the program. An English-to-Japanese translator is in the works. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 22:06:28-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Natural-Language Interface We had a query recently about natural-language interfaces to UNIX. Anyone interested in this subject should read "Talking to UNIX in English: An Overview of UC" in the June issue of Communications of the ACM, pp. 574-593. The article is by Robert Wilensky, Yigal Arens, and David Chin. It has considerably more detail than the articles I mentioned previously. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 3-Jul-84 15:19:51-PDT,14462;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 3-Jul-84 13:47:04 Date: Tue 3 Jul 1984 13:40-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #84 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 4 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 84 Today's Topics: Brain Theory - Memory, Poetry - Robots, Turing Test - Discussion, Law - Robot Rights, Cognitive Psychology - Mind and Brain, Seminar - Knowledge-Based Circuit Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27 Jun 84 13:38:00-PDT (Wed) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!graham @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Objection to Crane: A Quick Question - (nf) Article-I.D.: convex.45200002 "... a person can be enabled (through hypnosis or by asking him the right way) to remember infinite details of any experience of this or prior life times ... " > Memory recall under hypnosis has been found to be just as reconstructive > (perhaps more so) as normal memory. Hypnotic states buy you some recall, > but not that much! I have heard (but have no reference document to cite) that neuro-surgeons have demonstrated that stimulation (i.e, contact with) certain parts of the brain can produce complete recall of all sensory input from a past event, even of details not originally "noticed". There is apparently a complete record of sensory input stored which some mechanism filters, so that we are "aware" of only some of it. Can anyone corroborate this, and cite a reference? Marv Graham; ConVex Computer Corp. {allegra,ihnp4,uiucdcs,ctvax}!convex!graham ------------------------------ Date: 03 Jul 84 17:06:08 bst From: "J.R. COWIE%rco"@ucl-cs.arpa Use of if in natural language: The following is a brief description of the project proposal by one of our students on a M.Sc. course in Information Technology. This student is originally a philosopher by profession, but has decided to move over into Computer Science. He is interested in using prolog to test out his ideas. If you have any suggestions or references send them to me and I will pass them on to him. (j.r.cowie%rco@ucl-cs.arpa) --------------------------------------------- It is arguable that contraposition is not a universally valid principle of inference for empirical conditionals and yet we use it, apparently successfully, all the time. An obvious suggestion is that we are discriminating and select a subclass of cases to contrapose. We then ask what characterizes that subclass. The approach to be adopted attempts to isolate several components of a conditional 1) a truth-functional component 2) an inferential component 3) an explanatory component. An attempt is to be made to explain features of the logic of conditionals in terms of the relations between these components and in particular the relation between the explanatory direction of a conditional (antecedent-to- consequent or consequent-to-antecedent) and the inferential direction. In the philosophical literature questions about the validity of contraposition are generally associated with questions about the validity of (the invalid principles) "strengthening the antecedent" (i.e. the logic of "if" in English is not monotonic) and transitivity. And all these questions are generally asked under the headings "Subjunctive Conditionals","Counterfactuals" or "Contrary-to-fact Conditionals". It may well be appropriate to cover these topics to some extent. Since what is envisaged is of the nature of an empirical hypothesis concerning the logic of natural language statements, and that hypothesis will take the form of a set of principles of natural inference, it is expected that it will be desirable to construct a (PROLOG) inference machine employing these principles for test purposes. It has not been decided how the machine should work or how it should be employed. I am not acquainted with the psychological literature or artificial intelligence literature on these topics and would be grateful for any references. Ian Wilson. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 1984 08:00:20-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: The Law The Law By Ron Kushnier The Robotic Laws of Asimov Have always been in Fiction, But now through High Technology They've lost that last restriction. So the Robots are becoming real They are our new found tools. Although they may be getting smart, They must still obey the Rules. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jul 1984 08:33:47-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: The Last Laugh The Last Laugh By Ron Kushnier Some people laughed When they heard me say, "We need a robot right away". And I must admit I had to smile When I thought about it For awhile. This funny little box of steel Running about on one big wheel Raising its arm So it can say, "excuse me folks, But you're in my way". ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jul 1984 09:10:53-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: The Robot Boom The Robot Boom By Ron Kushnier The Robot Boom Will be here soon- Bigger than Home Computers. The parents will pay, But the kids will play And be their main recruiters. For there is no fear In our children, dear Of androids or machines. Kids feel quite at ease, Think it's a breeze To proces all our dreams. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jun 84 17:36:05-PDT (Wed) From: pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H.Pucc-I.ags @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs people Article-I.D.: pucc-i.331 > [This followup was actually written by a very clever computer program.] > > As you say, the Turing test is a _conversational_ test. Do you remember > Turing's original "conversation"? "...Count me out on this. I never > could write poetry." [...] > The whole conversation is fatuous! But then, it has no bonafide purpose. > It was merely set up by a scientist to prove something. > > But would you want to carry on such a conversation with a computer? > One converses socially only with conversers that one knows to be people. Your bug-killer line turns out to have more apparent truth in it than the rest of the article. It's too bad you didn't read the original conversation which you quoted from. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here by assuming that you did not deliberately misrepresent the conversation (and that you were not unable to understand it): Q: Please write me a sonnet on the subject of the Forth Bridge. A: Count me out on this one. I never could write poetry. Q: Add 34957 to 70764. A: (Pause about 30 seconds and then give as answer) 105621. Q: Do you play chess? A: Yes. 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. The point of the first answer is that no human is an expert on everything, and that a program which hopes to pass the Turing test had best not give itself away by being overly knowledgeable. Did you notice that the answer to the second question is incorrect? It should be 105721. [Aha! a sexist machine! It assumes that women are no good with figures. Oops--I forgot. Since you haven't read Turing's "Can a Machine Think?" you won't understand what women have to do with this discussion. Oh, well...] Dave Seaman "My hovercraft is full of eels." ..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 84 17:22:46 EDT From: kyle.wbst@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Robot Rights re: Why distinguish humans from machines... For the same reason the Supreme Court in the last century got into the business of deciding what fraction of a human being a slave was for political purposes. Pandora's box will be opened again on this issue in the future if and when we succeed in creating AI devices that pass various tests. I don't care if the devices are made of silicon, biomass (shades of genetic engineering), or some hybrid combo. The point is, I can see some group organizing them into either a union, a voting block, or a public interest group to keep another ton of lawyers living off the fat of the land for years to come. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Jun 84 7:42:05-PDT (Tue) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!unc!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxn!rlr @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Mind and Brain Article-I.D.: pyuxn.784 > "subconsious", "mind", etc -- what DO these words mean? More > importantly, do these things exist? > I assert they do not. I take the behaviorist philosophy that what > you call "mind" is a thing invented by Plato or some dead Greek > person which is just as mystical and unreal as "the Gods" or > "magic." > What you have is a brain. What you do is behavior. You are an > organism that responds to AND IS CHANGED BY your environment. > That's all. The rest you've made up or assumed was true because > some dead greek person said it was there. > Show me your "mind" -- demonstrate its existence. I dare you. BRA-VO!!!!!!! It doesn't matter what you wear, just as long as you are there. Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jun 84 14:38:01-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!whuxle!spuxll!ech @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Human Models Article-I.D.: spuxll.514 Jules Greenwall's suggestion is an extreme example of what researchers in the area refer to as a "meat machine." Traditionally, such experiments contain a neuron model and attempt to simulate a brain at THAT level of detail. His suggestion suffers from a similar problem, also: assuming that one has a complete quantum-mechanical model of a human brain, how is one to model the behavior of molecules, in real time, with a computer made of molecules? I thank him for the suggestion, of course, because it drives home an important point: you simply can't build a real-time emulation of a brain by modelling it at the quantum-mechanical level; you MUST use some "higher level" model. Note that, except for rather simple neuron nets, traditional meat machines are also many orders of magnitude removed from a real-time simulation of a brain of human-class complexity. Finally, I will note that we are on the verge of opening yet another round of the reductionist/wholist debate; yet again, I will recommend that you go devour a copy of "The Mind's I". =Ned= ------------------------------ Date: Mon 2 Jul 84 13:51:39-PDT From: Sharon Bergman Subject: Ph.D. Oral - Knowledge-Based Circuit Design [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] KNOWLEDGE-BASED CIRCUIT DESIGN Christopher Tong Computer Science Department Stanford University Dissertation defense 2:30 p.m., Tuesday, July 17, 1984 Margaret Jacks Hall 146 DESIGN AS DIALECTIC. Design is a dialectic between the designer and what is possible. As design of an artifact, circuit design involves creating artifact descriptions that satisfy the requirements imposed by designer, environment, domain, logic, and limited experience; good design exploits these requirements of the design problem by converting them into constraints on the design process. As design of a functionally decomposable artifact, circuit design entails recursive partitioning of functional requirements in such a way that the partitioned requirements map onto technologically available structures that satisfy them. Finally, viewing circuit design as the design of a physical computational system, we can categorize the required functionality along a small number of functional dimensions (e.g. control, communication, behavior). This thesis makes several contributions. It introduces the notion of a playful design process as an ideal toward which the engineering of design knowledge should be steered; it describes the extent to which the "playful design" ideal can be realized by a circuit design process. It extends the notion of play to playful control of the design process; and finally, it presents an ontology of dimensions for categorizing and relating design requirements and approaches. A PLAYFUL DESIGN PROCESS. Play is doing what one wants to do when wants to do it. Playful design is possible to the degree that: refinement steps can be carried out in an order-insensitive manner; and decomposition creates context-insensitive components. We show that the benefits derived from enabling such play in the process of design include: enablement of goal-directed refinement, and an exponential reduction in number of solutions considered over a more traditional "fixed phases" approach to circuit design. By characterizing circuit specifications by the ubiquitous functional dimensions of control, communication, and behavior, we enable a measure of order-insensitive refinement; these functional dimensions induce a set of evaluation dimensions for performing goal-directed refinement. Viewing components as processors facilitates context-insensitive decomposition. PLAYFUL CONTROL OF THE DESIGN PROCESS. Playful control entails being able to resolve current design problems by pursuing strategies that are appropriate given the resource limitations of the designer. Playful control is possible to the extent that: the problems produced by the design process are well-categorized; and problem posting and resolution can be separated. Playful control is knowledge-intensive, drawing on a library of strategies indexed by problem type and resource allocation. We describe an interactive computer program called DONTE (Design ONTology Experiment). DONTE has served to implement, motivate, and help debug the contributions made by this research. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 4-Jul-84 11:19:33-PDT,18245;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 4-Jul-84 11:14:28 Date: Wed 4 Jul 1984 11:06-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #85 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 4 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 85 Today's Topics: Education - Request, AI Tools - Interlisp under UNIX & Common Lisp, Numerical Analysis - Best Fitting Curve, Games - War Games, Humor - Mongooses & Man, Bytes, Dog, Seminar - Analogy in Legal Reasoning ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 84 14:39:45 pdt From: cjet%ucbamber.CC@Berkeley Subject: Request for Participation in Education ANNOUNCING ---------- The opening in September 1984 of a Model School which will develop new ways to use computers in education for use throughout the Berkeley Uni- fied School District, the state, and the nation. The District seeks colla- boration with persons, firms, research organizations, universities, and others interested in the leading edge of technology in the schools. FEATURING --------- * Computer workstations on local area networks * Many workstations per classroom * Computers used to teach regular curriculum * Computers used for classroom and school administration * Total Integration, including persons with physical and mental disabilities in the classroom * Collaboration by prominent members of business and faculty from the University of California at Berkeley toward curriculum design and technology integration * A site for research, development and demonstration of effective use of educational technology REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ----------------------- We desire information about advanced hardware or software systems that could be acquired for use in the Model School. In addition to computers, courseware, and networks, the District is interested in peripherals that address the needs of younger children and children with disabilities, such as special keyboards, graphic displays, voice synthesisers, etc. The Berkeley Unified School District is investing substantial funds in the school, staff and technology. We seek collaboration, sponsorship, assis- tance and state-of-the-art products. People of many disciplines, skills and viewpoints are working together to make major advances. We invite you to explore fuller involvement and/or participation in any of the major aspects of this exciting project. Please contact us at cjet@amber@berkeley or call (415) 527-9030. Eric Novikoff, C-JET This flyer is being sent by the Center for Jobs Education and Technology, the non-profit corporation which is the technology consultant for the Berkeley School District's Model School Project. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 84 12:51:23-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!noscvax!goodhart @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Interlisp under UNIX? Article-I.D.: noscvax.532 Information Sciences Institute (ISI) provides INTERLISP for VAX computers running either the UNIX or VMS operating systems. For further information call ISI at (213) 822-1511. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jul 1984 1322-EDT From: WHOLEY at CMU-CS-C.ARPA Subject: Common Lisp [Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] First of all, there's a CLISP BBoard (C for Common) that things like this should probably be discussed on. Since a number of questions were asked in this forum [CMU bboard], I'll answer them in this forum. 1. DEC is supposedly either doing or planning to do ("real soon now") a port of DEC Common Lisp to Unix. 2. I'd be wary of any "compatibility" package for Common Lisp in Franz. There are a number of complicated Common Lisp features that are somewhat difficult to implement from the ground up, and I doubt that a "compatability" package can accurately capture enough to make large Common Lisp programs run. Such features include (but are not limited to): The package system, which provides one with separate namespaces, Lexical scoping of variables (upward and downward "funargs"), Multiple value returns from functions, Arrays with fill pointers, adjustable arrays, and displaced arrays. 3. Golden Common Lisp from Gold Hill Computers is a subset of Common Lisp for the IBM PC. It is intended more as a teaching tool than a full Common Lisp programming environment, although one could certainly write useful programs in it (much as one can write useful programs in BASIC). It is certainly the finest microcomputer Lisp around. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jun 84 8:24:45-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!hao!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-vgr!gwyn @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Best fitting curve - 3 points Article-I.D.: brl-vgr.418 Usually the correct approach is to take the parameterized curve that is expected by theory to pass through the data and do a weighted (by inverse error squared) least squares fit (i.e. determine the values of the parameters that minimizes the weighted sum of the squares of the deviations of the known data points from the curve). One method that works well is the Marquardt gradient-expansion technique described in Bevington's "Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences". Of course this assumes that you HAVE a theory... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Jul 84 22:44:12 EDT From: Michael_D'Alessandro%Wayne-MTS%UMich-MTS.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: War Games Although this is a late response to Chuck McManis' request for information on wargames, I thought I'd pass this along: There are many microcomputer wargames available today. The majority of them are produced by Strategic Simulations Inc. (SSI). SSI's games are very similar to Avalon Hill's games, and cover topics such as The Civil War, WWII (D-Day, North Africa, Sink the Bismark, Battle of Britian, etc), and modern day hypothetical combat. All these games are realistic (they use accurate orders of battle for both sides) and quite playable. These games can be played by two people, or you can play against the computer. Unfortunately, while playing these games may help you get a "feel" for computer war games, they won't help you write one since you can't look at the programs - they are locked up. SSI's games are available for almost all microcomputers, with the selection for the Apple II family having the most games. Go to a local computer store to see them. One wargame that stands out from all others is "Eastern Front" by Chris Crawford for the Atari 400/600/800. In addition to buying Eastern Front, you can buy a documented 6502 source code listing of the program, along with a booklet that Chris wrote describing how he implemented the program, and the various combat and movement routines he used. The program also has a little rudimentary "AI" in it - when you play against the computer the computer is quite a formidable opponent, and Chris describes his "AI" routines in detail. Chris is one of the premier computer war games designers in the country. To see this, you might check a local computer store, or a local Atari User Group. Eastern Front was originally available via the "Atari Program Exchange" run by Atari, but since Atari has just been sold to Jack Tramiel, the Atari Program Exchange may no longer exist. Michael_D'Alessandro%Wayne.MTS%Umich.MTS.Mailnet@MIT-Multics.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 04 Jul 84 0027 PDT From: Don Woods Subject: re: mongice [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI. This is the tail end of a discussion about the plural of mongoose (mongooses).] [...] I'm also reminded of Walt "Pogo" Kelly's observation that "the mongoose is a singular beast because nobody can pronounce two of them." ------------------------------ Date: 02 Jul 84 1532 PDT From: Frank Yellin Subject: From the New Yorker: Man, Bytes, Dog :-) [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] From the New Yorker July 2, 1984 MAN, BYTES, DOG Many people have asked me about the Cairn Terrier. How about memory, they want to know. Is it IBM-compatible? Why didn't I get the IBM itself, or a Kaypro, Compaq, or Macintosh? I think the best way to answer these questions is to look at th Macintosh and the Cairn head on. I almost did buy the Macintosh. It has terrific graphics, good word-processing capabilities, and the mouse. But in the end I decided on the Cairn, and I think I made the right decision. Let's start out with the basics: Macintosh: Weight (without printer): 20lbs. Memory (RAM): 128K Price (with printer): $3,090 Cairn Terrier: Weight (without printer): 14lbs. Memory (RAM): Some Price (without printer): $250 Just on the basis of price and weight, the choice is obvious. Another plus is that the Cairn Terrier comes in one unit. No printer is necessary, or useful. And--this was a big attraction to me--there is no user's manual. Here are some of the other qualities I found put the Cairn out ahead of the Macintosh: PORTABILITY: To give you a better idea of size, Toto in "The Wizard of Oz" was a Cairn Terrier. So you can see that if the young Judy Garland was able to carry Toto around in that little picnic basket, you will have no trouble at all moving your Cairn from place to place. For short trips it will move under its own power. The Macintosh will not. RELIABILITY: In five to ten years, I am sure, the Macintosh will be superseded by a new model, like the Delicious or the Granny Smith. The Cairn Terrier, on the other hand, has held its share of the market with only minor modifications for hundreds of years. In the short term, Cairns seldom require servicing, apart from shots and the odd worming, and most function without interruption during electric storms. COMPATIBILITY: Cairn Terriers get along with everyone. And for communications with any other dog, of any breed, within a radius of three miles, no additional software is necessary. All dogs share a common operating system. SOFTWARE: The Cairn will run three standard programs, SIT, COME, and NO, and whatever else you create. It is true that, being a microcanine, the Cairn is limited here, but it does load the programs simultaneously. No disk drives. No tapes. Admittedly, these are peripheral advantages. The real comparison has to be on the basis of capabilities. What can the Macintosh and the Cairn do? Let's start on the Macintosh's turf--income-tax preparation, recipe storage, graphics, and astrophysics problems: ------------------------------------------------------------- | Taxes Recipes Graphics Astrophysics | | Macintosh yes yes yes yes | | Cairn no no no no | ------------------------------------------------------------- At first glance it looks bad for the Cairn. But it's important to look beneath the surface with this kind of chart. If you yourself are leaning toward the Macintosh, ask yourself these questions: Do you want to do your own income taxes? Do you want to type all your recipes into a computer? In your graph, what would you put on the $x$ axis? The $y$ axis? Do you have any astrophysics problems you want solved? Then consider the Cairn's specialties: playing fetch and tug-of-war, licking your face, and chasing foxes out of rock cairns (eponymously). Note that no software is necessary. All these functions are part of the operating system. ---------------------------------------------------- | Fetch Tug-of-War Face Foxes | | Cairn yes yes yes yes | | Macintosh no no no no | ---------------------------------------------------- Another point to keep in mind is that computers, even the Macintosh, only do what you tell them to do. Cairns perform their functions all on their own. Here are some of the additional capabilities that I discovered once I got the Cairn home and house-broken: WORD PROCESSING: Remarkably, the Cairn seems to understand every word I say. He has a nice way of pricking up his ears at words like "out" and "ball." He also has highly tuned voice-recognition. EDUCATION: The Cairn provides children with hands-on experience at an early age, contribution to social interaction, crawling ability, and language skills. At age one, my daughter could say "Sit," "Come," and "No." CLEANING: This function was a pleasant surprise. But of course cleaning up around the cave is one of the reasons dogs were developed in the first place. Users with young (below age two) children will still find this function useful. The Cairn Terrier cleans the floor, spoons, bib, and baby, and has the unerring ability to distinguish strained peas from ears, nose, and fingers. PSYCHOTHERAPY: Hear the Cairn really shines. And remember, therapy is something that computers have tried. There is a program that makes the computer ask you questions when you tell it your problems. You say "I'm afraid of foxes." The computer says, "You're afraid of foxes?" The Cairn won't give you that kind of echo. Like Freudian analysts, Cairns are mercifully silent; unlike Freudians, they are infinitely sympathetic. I've found that the Cairn will share, in a nonjudgmental fashion, disappointments, joys, and frustrations. And you don't have to know BASIC. This last capability is related to the Cairn's strongest point, which was the final deciding factor in my decision against the Macintosh--user-friendliness. On this criterion, there is simply no comparison. The Cairn Terrier is the essence of user-friendliness. It has fur, it doesn't flicker when you look at it, and it wags its tail. -- James Gorman ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jul 84 20:04:53 EDT From: Smadar Subject: Ph.D. Oral - Analogy in Legal Reasoning [Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] A Ph.D. Oral Examination - Proposal Defense Title: Analogy with Purpose in Legal Reasoning from Precedents Speaker: Smadar Kedar-Cabelli Date: Friday, July 6, 1984, 10:00 - 11:00 am Location: Hill Center, room 423 Open to DCS Faculty and Students One open problem in current artificial intelligence (AI) models of learning and reasoning by analogy is: which aspects of the analogous situations are relevant to the analogy, and which are irrelevant? It is currently recognized that analogy involves mapping some underlying causal network of relations between situations [Winston 82], [Gentner 83], [Burstein 83], [Carbonell 83]. However, most current models of analogy provide the system with exactly the relevant relations, tailor-made to each analogy to be performed. As AI systems become more complex, we will have to provide them with the capability of automatically focusing on the relevant aspects of situations when reasoning analogically. These will have to be sifted from the large amount of information used to represent complex, real-world situations. In order to study these general issues, we are examining a particular case study of learning and reasoning by analogy: forming legal concepts by legal reasoning from precedents. This is studied within the TAXMAN II project, which is investigating legal reasoning using AI techniques [McCarty 82], [Nagel 83]. In this talk, we will discuss the problem and a proposed solution. We examine legal reasoning from precedents within the context of current AI models of analogy. We then add a focusing capability. Current work on goal-directed learning [Mitchell 83a], [Mitchell 83b], and explanation-based learning [Dejong 83] applies here: the explanation of how the precedent satisfies the intent of the law (i.e. its goals, or purposes) helps to automatically focus the reasoning on what is relevant. Intuitively, suppose a lawyer wishes to argue that a particular case involving a bicycle violated the following statute: 'a vehicle is forbidden in a public park' [Hart 58]. He might argue by analogy to a clear precedent--a passenger car. He needs to establish that a bicycle is a vehicle for the purposes of this statute, that bicycles should be banned from the park for the same reasons that passenger cars are. The purpose, or intent of the law is to prohibit those things that would interfere with the serene, quiet setting of the park, or would destroy the natural habitat, and so on. Reasoning from this, the lawyer can determine that aspects of the cases such as the ability to trample over lawns, run over small animals, make noise, are relevant for this purpose. On the other hand, aspects of the cases involving the country where the vehicles were manufactured, or the materials the vehicles are made of, are irrelevant for this purpose. Given a different law and purpose, these might well be relevant. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 7-Jul-84 11:43:32-PDT,14974;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 7-Jul-84 11:41:59 Date: Sat 7 Jul 1984 11:33-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #86 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Saturday, 7 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 86 Today's Topics: Societies - New York SIGART, AI Tools - YAPS & LISPs, Mathematics - Curve Fitting, Brain Theory - Direct Stimulation & Hypnosis, Turing Test - Discussion, Games - Chess, Reviews - Robotics Industry Directory, Robotics - Poetry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 Jul 84 12:28:38-PDT (Thu) From: ihnp4!whuxle!otto @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: SIGART mailing list Article-I.D.: whuxle.511 This notice is intended to those interested in AI who live and work in the greater New York City area. My apologies to those who read this who are not included in the above group. The distribution mechanisms of netnews are not precise enough to allow me to target my message better. ************** ** NOTICE ** ************** The New York City chapter of SIGART (the ACM Special Interest Group in Artificial Intelligence) is interested in adding names to its mailing list. This chapter holds monthly meetings in Manhattan to discuss various aspects of AI, and often has invited speakers to present new ideas. If you would like to receive the monthly meeting notices, please send the following to me via electronic or paper mail: Your name US Mail mailing address company telephone number list of topics for the chapter to focus on Please send this information to me at one of the following addresses: USENET: {ihnp4!}whuxld!otto CSNET: otto.whuxle.btl MAIL: George Otto, 1C-329A AT&T Bell Laboratories Whippany Road Whippany, NJ 07981 By working together to make this organization responsive to our interests, it can become a valuable addition to our professional lives. George Otto AI Systems Dept AT&T Bell Labs, Whippany ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jul 1984 12:24:19-PDT From: doshi%umn-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa Subject: Info. on >YAPS< production system. Subject: Info. about the YAPS production system. ---- ----------------- I am looking for information about the YAPS. In particular, (1) Can anyone please send me some short (1-30 pages) coded examples about the actual usage. And documentation, if possible. (2) Does there exist a YAPS "primer" or any such thing, which gives some good examples. (3) Any other information (names, csnet addresses etc.). We have UNIX 4.1 & 4.2 . If you have to send by surface mail, please send to : Rajkumar Doshi Computer Science Department University of Minnesota 136 Lind Hall, 207 Church Street, S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55455 I will gladly re-pay the US postage promptly. Thank you very much. -Raj Doshi ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jul 1984 08:25:26-EDT From: bac@Mitre-Bedford Subject: Small Computer Lisps? While everyone's on the topic of Lisps for various systems, does anyone know of any decent Lisp implementations for CP/M or MS-DOS (Z-80 or 8088 based systems)? All I know of is a version called MULisp, from Microsoft, but I have no idea whether it's useful, efficient, etc. Is AI and Lisp going to remain tied to mainframe machines, or will it ever reach the growing population of microcomputers? Brant Cheikes bac @ Mitre-Bedford ------------------------------ Date: Fri 6 Jul 84 11:52:00-MDT From: purush Subject: Re: Interlisp on Unix? -- partial answer Interlisp on vax running Unix can be obtained by sending mail to Interlisp@isib.arpa or by writing to USC Information Sciences Institute Interlisp-VAX Project 4676 Admirality Way Marina del Rey, CA 90291. A report of this effort is in the 1982 Lisp and Functional Programming conference proceedings. -purush ------------------------------ Date: Fri 6 Jul 84 10:32:28-PDT From: BARNARD@SRI-AI.ARPA Subject: best-fitting curve for 3 points Maybe I'm missing something. Three points define a unique circle. Finding the circle given the points is trivial. What's the problem? In general, the theory of splines deals with the problem of fitting a piecewise polynomial to a sequence of points. For example, b-splines are piecewise cubics that can be used to connect points with smooth, continuous curves (i.e., twice-differentiable curves). ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jul 84 9:11:00-PDT (Mon) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!ctvax!jmiller @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Direct Brain Stimulation Article-I.D.: ctvax.45200003 As noted by others, we're talking about experiments by Penfield here. Pretty much any intro psychology book should be able to point you in the right direction, but be careful about taking them too seriously. Followup experiments by others did not always replicate Penfields findings, and these often failed in problematic ways -- people reported hearing both sides of a telephone conversation, or doing things or being places that could be disconfirmed in independent ways. The effects that could most reliably be replicated were those that suggesting that sensory pathways were getting activated by the stimulation: reports of pure tones or flashes of monochrome light were very common. Penfield's work was certanly interesting, but the current attitude is that there was a little less there than first appeared. Jim Miller Computer Thought, Dallas ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jul 84 1227 EDT (Saturday) From: Alex.Rudnicky@CMU-CS-A.ARPA Subject: Human Memory Hypnosis does not enhance memory for past events. There is no proof that it does. There never was. In all likelyhood there never will be. You may find documentation for this assertion in the work of several investigators (in particular, Martin Orne). For a review of the literature try: M. C. Smith Hypnotic memory enhancement of witnesses: Does it work? Psychological Bulletin, 1983, 94(3), 387-407. I quote from the abstract: "In contrast to the myriad of anecdotal reports extolling the virtues of hypnosis for this purpose [witness memory], controlled laboratory studies have consistently failed to demonstrate any hypnotic memory improvement." Electrical stimulation of the brain was studied by Wilder Penfield, 30 to 40 years ago at the Montreal Neurological Institute. Penfield did experiments with stimulation in the course of operations for epilepsy. His work is described in most textbooks. You might enjoy reading some of the protocols he collected in his book "The excitable cortex in conscious man" (1958). In summarizing his findings, Penfield uses the words "illusions" and "hallucinations" to describe his patients' recollections. Now I have a question: It may be fun to speculate about the super-normal and the para-normal, but what does it have to do with AI? ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jul 84 20:26:59-PDT (Sun) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester !rocksvax!sunybcs!gloria!colonel @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. people Article-I.D.: gloria.290 For those of you who missed the start of this colloquy, here's the text of Turing's original hypothetical conversation: Q: Please write me a sonnet on the subject of the Forth Bridge. A: Count me out on this one. I never could write poetry. Q: Add 34957 to 70764. A: (Pause about 30 seconds and then give as answer) 105621. Q: Do you play chess? A: Yes. 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. >> The point of the first answer is that no human is an expert on >> everything, and that a program which hopes to pass the Turing >> test had best not give itself away by being overly >> knowledgeable. This strains my credulity. 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. And did Turing believe that one can be an "expert" poet in the same way that one can be an expert arithmetician or chess-player? I hope not! >> Did you notice that the answer to the second question is >> incorrect? It should be 105721. [Aha! a sexist machine! It >> assumes that women are no good with figures. Oops--I forgot. >> Since you haven't read Turing's "Can a Machine Think?" you >> won't understand what women have to do with this discussion. >> Oh, well...] This is unworthy of its author. Of course I read the article. My attack was not against the details of the conversation (for that matter, the third problem is ambiguous), but the premise of the Test. 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. I should think that ELIZA has laid to rest the myth that a program's "humanity" has anything to do with its intelligence. ELIZA's intel- ligence was low, but she was a very human source of comfort to many people who talked with her. Col. G. L. Sicherman ...seismo!rochester!rocksanne!rocksvax!sunybcs!gloria!colonel ------------------------------ Date: Wed 4 Jul 84 12:06:15-PDT From: M.MCLURE%LOTS-B@SU-SCORE.ARPA Subject: chess game Below is reproduced a game the Fidelity Prestige chess machine recently played against me. I have a provisional rating of 1550 based on 15 games. Not great, but not terrible. Prestige makes a very interesting move at 17 ... Ng3. I prefer this game to the Blitz vs. Belle game of a few years ago where Belle makes a 10-ply mating sacrifice giving up a rook. Here, Prestige makes a 10-ply king position disruption sacrifice giving up a knight. If White does not return the Knight, all sorts of mating threats ensue at about the 10-12 ply level. This is easily the most impressive micro chess game I've seen. White - Cracraft/1550, Black - Prestige/1875 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cd4 4. Nd4 g6 5. c4 Bg7 6. Nc6 bc6 7. Qc2 Nf6 8. Bd3 d5 9. ed5 cd5 10. cd5 Qd5 11. o-o Bb7 12. f3 Rd8 13. Rd1 Qd4 14. Kh1 o-o 15. Nc3 Qc5 16. Bf4 Nh5 17. Bd2 Ng3 18. hg3 Qh5 19. Kg1 Bd4 20. Be3 Be3 21. Kf1 Bd4 22. Ke1 Qe5 23. Kf1 Qe3 24. Rde1 Kg1 25. Ke2 Qg2 26. Kd1 Qf3 27. Kc1 Bc3 White resigns. The time control was 40 moves in 2 hours. Stuart [For a record of the first game in which a micro defeated a USCF-rated master in a tournament game see David Welsh's letter in IEEE Spectrum, July 1984, p. 8. Jerry C. Simon (rated 2245) was mated (that's chess talk) in 55 moves by Novag's Constellation chess micro, which uses the same 6502 8-bit processor as the Prestige machine. An earlier Spectrum report that David Moody held the dubious honor of the first defeat was incorrect. -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: Wed 4 Jul 84 14:59:37-PDT From: M.MCLURE%LOTS-B@SU-SCORE.ARPA Subject: Bit-Map Chess Article I have an article that will soon be published in the ICCA Journal (International Computer Chess Journal) and I would like to offer it to AILIST for its readers. The title is "Bit-map move generation in chess." and it is 15262 bytes on TOPS-20. The article is in [SU-SCORE]BITMAP.TXT. I've included a note at the top of the file that I would like kept in the distributed version. Stuart ------------------------------ Date: Tue 3 Jul 84 09:23:41-PDT From: C.S./Math Library Subject: 1984 International Robotics Industry Directory [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] The Math/CS Library has received the 1984 edition of the International Robotics Industry Directory. This directory has expanded a great deal since the first edition in 1981. The main part of the directory is an alphabetical listing by company with a page of specifications for each product. There is also a listing of research institutes which includes number of staff, director addresses, and areas of research. A listing of consultants/systems houses is included. The directory is located in our reference section. Tabel of Contents: Applications supported matrix Sensors supported matrix Performance Characteristics matrix Price range matrix Industrial robots special application sytems automatic guided vehicles actuators controllers/electronics distributors end effectors hydraulic/pneumatic mechanical components and peripherals consultants/systems houses research institutes glossary index Harry Llull ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jul 1984 10:43:28-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: The Magazines The Magazines By Ron Kushnier It seems for every topic For every job or scheme For each and every interest There exits a magazine. So I predict with robots At least a choice of four All touting ads and projects Ariving at your door. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jul 1984 08:31:44-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: A Story A Story By Ron Kushnier Into our home a robot comes Its shape seems deja vu It's something to do with Hans and Luke With Leia and R2. But it's purpose is not one of fright, Nor Universal Glory It is here to serve and be our friend Which is quite a different story. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 10-Jul-84 21:28:41-PDT,17238;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 10-Jul-84 21:27:09 Date: Tue 10 Jul 1984 21:16-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #87 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 11 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 87 Today's Topics: Applications - Quantum Logic, AI Tools - OPS5 Under Unix & LISP Implementations, Brain Theory - Electrical Stimulation, Linguistics & Philosophy - Use of "if" in Natural Language, Expert Systems - Diagnostic Systems References, AI Culture - Cultural Premises, Linguistics - New CSLI Reports, Commonsense Reasoning - Discussion, Turing Test - Discussion ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 84 09:25 EDT From: D E Stevenson Subject: Implementations of quantum logic? Does anyone out there have an interest in quantum logic? Has any sort of implementation of a "theorem prover" ever been attempted? I would be interested in any experience, thoughts etc. on this subject. "Steve" Stevenson dsteven@clemson ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 84 6:18:55-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!kaist!kiet!aitool @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: OPS5 Under Unix Article-I.D.: kiet.196 Where and How can I get the Ops5 on Unix (4.1bsd or others). Please inform to me if you know. I also want information about other knowledge engineering tools on Unix. address: ..!hplabs!kaist!kiet!dhshin Dongha Shin Comuter Research Div. K.I.E.T P.O. Box 31, Kumi Republic of Korea ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Jul 84 14:37:10 cdt From: archebio!bantz%uiuc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa Subject: LISP on microcomputers cf. BYTE, July '84, pp. 281ff: review of MuLisp and IQLISP cf. full page ad in latest AI Magazine for Golden Common Lisp ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jul 1984 10:43:37-EDT (Tuesday) From: Mark N. Wegman Subject: LISP release at IBM [Forwarded to the Rutgers bboard by Ryder@Rutgers.] [Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Tyson@SRI-AI.] Could you pass this on to whoever might be interested? IBMIBMIB IBMIBMIB MIBMIBMIBMI IBMIBMIBMIBMI IBMIBMIB IBMIBMIB IBMIBMIBMIBMIBM IBMIBMIBMIBMIBM MIBM MIBM IBMI MIBM MIBM BMIBM MIBM MIBM MIBMI MIBM BMIB MIBM MIBM BMIBMIB MIBMIBMIBM MIBM IBMI MIBM MIBMI MIBM MIBM IBMI MIBM IBMI MIBM MIBM IBMIBMIBMIBMIBMI IBMIBMIB IBMIBMIBMIBMIBM IBMIBMIB IBMIBMIBMIBMIBMI IBMIBMIB MIBMIBMIBMI IBMIBMIB Today IBM announces the availability of LISP/VM. With thanks to the many people who helped make this possible. --- Cyril Alberga, (914) 945-1776 (ALBERGA.YKTVMX@IBM) Martin Mikelsons, (914) 945-1343 (MIKELSN.YTKVMX@IBM) Mary Van Deusen, (914) 945-2394 (MAIDA.YKTVMX@IBM) Mark Wegman, (914) 945-1327 (WEGMAN.YKTVMX@IBM) [At last, LISP is legitimate! -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jul 84 08:23 PDT (Monday) From: DMRussell.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Electrical Stimulation Studies From pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!graham @ Ucb-Vax.arpa "... I have heard (but have no reference document to cite) that neuro-surgeons have demonstrated that stimulation (i.e, contact with) certain parts of the brain can produce complete recall of all sensory input from a past event, even of details not originally "noticed". ...." Electrical stimulation studies were originated by Wilder Penfield at the Univ. of Montreal. During neurosurgery, he would drop on a few electrodes onto the brain surface (with ground at base of spine) and stimulate away. His subjects reported all sorts of sensory phenomena including taste, sounds, lights, stars, and (apparently) memory awareness. One subject reported hearing a particular song being performed by a specific orchestra. As these things go, people later decided that he was using far too much current, and apparently had no control over exactly how much brain he was stimulating. Thus, his conclusions about locality wrt electrical stimulation are suspect. Similar arguments are made about how to interpret the sensory phenomena he elicited. [As for references, almost any beginning neuropsych textbook will have them, but here's one: W. Penfield and P. Perot "The Brain's Record of Auditory and Visual Experience", Brain, (1963), v. 86, pp 595-696] Nowadays, electrical stimulation mapping has vastly improved. Small amounts of current are used, and people have some idea about what exactly is being hit. There is some good stuff done by Whitaker and Ojemann on what happens to the a subject's ability to use and understand language during electrical stimulation. [somewhere in the journal Brain & Language, within the past 4 years] Something to keep in mind, however, is that almost all brain stimulation is done to people that have their skulls open for a very serious reason. (Generally, the patients are being treated for severe eplilepsy.) Drawing conclusions about the functioning of normal brains on the basis of a few tests performed on severely epileptic brains leaves me wondering. -- Daniel Russell -- ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jul 84 09:50:33 PDT (Friday) From: McNelly.ES@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: Use of if in natural language I thought the following message raised some points that might be of interest to the general readership... -- John Date: 6 Jul 84 09:31:00 PDT (Friday) Subject: Re: Use of if in natural language In-reply-to: McNelly's message of 6 Jul 84 07:58:19 PDT (Friday) John, Thank you for forwarding that wonderful message. I'd have to agree with most of it on a preliminary basis but some points deserve a bit more thorough examination. For instance, I must take issue with the statement: "In the philosophical literature questions about the validity of contraposition ... are generally asked under the headings 'Subjunctive Conditionals', 'Counterfactuals' or 'Contrary-to-fact Conditionals'". I think the author has inadvertently or otherwise forgotten the most important heading "Inferential Counter-positive Conditionals". This category, as we know, contains the first two sub-headings mentioned along with an abstract grouping of uncategorizable subclasses of separate but still readily identifiable conditionals. By this time, we are all well aware that the infinite group of non-identifiable conditionals is gathered together under the single heading "Unrecognizable Categorical Implications" and that this category is itself what has come to be known in recent literature as a "non-group" (i.e., one that is not generally associated with the other "real" groups when discussing conditionals). However to retrace that tangent to the main thread of circular focus, one must begin to grasp the full implications of the inferential counter-positives. As an example, when one says, "I have seen the daybreak and it is dawn," the preferred "quasi-logical" response on the counter-positive heirarchical level would not directly ask of night. A question of night would fall under a "contrary-to-fact" heading, most likely the "positive post-reality" subclass, 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? [If this is your position, then I think we have nothing more to discuss.] > I should think that ELIZA has laid to rest the myth that a program's > "humanity" has anything to do with its intelligence. ELIZA's intel- > ligence was low, but she was a very human source of comfort to many > people who talked with her. I don't think the imitation game is (or was intended to be) a test of "humanity." Since ELIZA cannot come close to performing well in the imitation game, she has no relevance to the validity of the test. Yes, I am aware that ELIZA has fooled people, but this happened under circumstances that are very different from the imitation game. Dave Seaman "My hovercraft is full of eels." ..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 11-Jul-84 15:03:26-PDT,13757;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 11-Jul-84 15:02:06 Date: Wed 11 Jul 1984 14:56-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #88 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Thursday, 12 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 88 Today's Topics: AI News - JEALOUS COMPUTER KILLS TOP SCIENTIST, Expert Systems & Humor - Thinking for Non-Thinkers, Seminars - Rensselaerville Forum, Brain Theory - Simulation, Mind in a Techno-Evolutionary Perspective Mathematics - Curve Fitting, Expert Systems & Robotics - Beef Wellington & Shoe-Tying Challenge, Poetry - The Japanese ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 Jul 84 16:02:48-PDT (Thu) From: decvax!dartvax!alexc @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: JEALOUS COMPUTER KILLS TOP SCIENTIST Article-I.D.: dartvax.2070 AI in the news: The 10 July 1984 issue of Weekly World News has the cover headline ----------------------------------------------------------- `It was cold-blooded murder' says grieving wife J E A L O U S C O M P U T E R K I L L S T O P S C I E N T I S T Old machine electrocutes owner -- after he buys a more advanced model ----------------------------------------------------------- (I'm unable to reproduce their usual 100pt type). The essence of the article is that one Chin Soo Ying, Chinese inventor had been building the computer since 1950. After he had decided to build a more modern machine he was electrocuted at the controls when the computer burned out. The News quotes his wife, Tzu Lin. "Chin was murdered in cold blood by the computer he had created. "He had given life to his creation. He thought of it as a woman, had even given it a woman's name. "He spoke to the thing adoringly as Tsen Tsen. "Through his genius he had programmed it to respond to his words of love, to excite him beyond the limits of what a mortal woman could hope to achieve. "Somehow the thing took on a mind of its own. The computer fell in love with my husband. "For 34 years they were closer than lovers. "I tried to fight for my husband. But how could I compete with a machine? There was no room in his life for me. Finally, I left him. "Tsen Tsen was a huge computer. It covered three walls of one room in our home. I used to listen in amazement as he talked to it like a schoolboy in love. And the computer would respond like a worshipful woman. "But Chin one day decided to build a newer, more modern computer. "The trade agreements with America made the technical information and the components available to him for the project. "He began working on the new computer day and night. "And he even gave it another woman's name -- Woo Shi. "There is an old Chinese proverb that says vengeance is nourished in the heart of a spurned woman. "I am thoroughly convinced that Chin's rejection sparked the fires of hate within the old computer. "She could not bear to lose her creator to another. He had been hers for so many years and if she could not have him, no one else would. "Somehow Tsen Tsen programmed herself to electrocute Chin. "And with the death of that incredible man, she no longer had a reason to live. "She overloaded her circuits and destroyed herself. "That computer committed murder and suicide". A longtime friend and computer programmer expressed the opinion that the death was an accident, but noted "A computer programmed as his was could be capable of jealousy. There's no doubt in my mind his computer had unusual qualities. "That may be difficult to believe, but we are learning astonishing things about computers every day. "With such machines, anything is possible, jealousy and even murder". ----------------------------------------------------------- So much for a very promising AI effort. ------------------------------ Date: Sat 7 Jul 84 09:57:55-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Thinking for Non-Thinkers This letter from Jim Horning was published in the Open Channel column of IEEE Computer, July 1984, p. 90. -- Ken Laws The Future of Thinking for Non-Thinkers There are a large number of people who are not prepared to think (since thinking is often complex and unintegrated) but nonetheless need the results of thinking. We can attack their problem in a variety of ways: * providing multiple-choice questionaires; * observing the I/O behavior of real thinkers; * developing natural language conventions that avoid the need for thinking (cliches, etc.); * publishing collections of real thoughts that can be combined to suit the special needs of any occasion (Bartlett's, etc.); * equipping a system with useful thoughts that determine whether any of them are relevant to the current user (the prototype will think about blocks); * developing a fuzzy system that postpones the need for thinking indefinitely; * implementing a specialized system that contains only the thoughts needed by a particular class of users and allows them to personalize thoughts by discarding those they don't need; and * setting up a system that selects the most efficient thought for any occasion. For a further breakthrough in the area, however, we must develop a simple semantic model of thinking that can be directly implemented on existing hardware. It must incorporate the behavior currently exhibited by non-thinkers in the application areas and interact gracefully with non-thinkers. We must not take thinkers as our model! The thoughts produced must not be too sophisticated for naive users. In each application, thoughts must be introduced gradually to minimize disruption and to allow for imprecise thinking. The system should evolve to the point where it handles all the routine thinking. We must cater to maximum independence in thinking--separate thoughts should not affect each other. To plan our next step, we should look back to the last major breakthrough in thinking: Euclidean geometry. Euclid believed that the world was flat; this belief permitted significant simplification in his thinking about the geometry of the world. Unfortunately, many more recent "thinkers" have ignored this lesson and used more complicated, spherical world models ... Jim Horning DEC Systems Research 130 Lytton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94301 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Jul 1984 15:13 EDT From: MINSKY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Rensselaerville Forum About that forum in Rensselaerville with Asimov -- I'll only be there on Aug 4th and 5th, because of AAAI meeting in Austin. But I consider Asimov to be an absolutely first-class thinker about the future of AI and worth the price of admission. Speaking of that, when I accepted the invitation (at no fee) I was unaware that there was a price of admission to that symposium. I'm sure it just covers expenses for that non-profit foundation, but I might have thought twice if I'd known. In any case I've gotten good ideas from Asimov every time we've met; the simplicity of his language may obscure his depth. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 84 7:40:52-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!psuvax1!simon @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Human Models Article-I.D.: psuvax1.1093 Incorrect argument: "You cannot model the brain at a quantum-mechanical level, you must use a higher order (deterministic, non-molecular) one". Why? You cannot make a simulator that is an exact replica, and expect it to be faster. But there's no reason why there couldn't be a quark computer, working at incredible speeds (and probably getting the answers). In fact the reverse question is more interesting: how fast can you simulate the real world? js ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Jul 84 1:05:42 EDT From: "Paul Levinson" <1303@NJIT-EIES> Subject: Mind in a Techno-Evolutionary Perspective In response to Rich Rosen's attempt to reason away the existence of mind (pyuxn.784): (a) Organisms do much more than merely "respond" to environments. Even the tiniest viruses actively reshape their environments by incessantly moving bits of matter from place to place. (b) In humans, this active reshaping becomes a predominating, deliberate reshaping, as the shaping becomes fired by our imagination and rationality. Through the technological result, we have reshaped our Planet and are now on the verge of beginning to reshape the universe. (c) The organ that makes this technological reconfiguration possible is of course the brain. It is indeed composed of material, but of material so special in its organization that it can do things -- reshape the world, think -- that no other natural (and, at present, artificial) material can do. It is in recognition of the evolutionary uniqueness of this thinking material that many people refer to it as mind. We need not discard a word -- and the important concept it emphasizes -- merely because it has been abused by Greek philosophers and others. For more on this, see my "Technology as the Cutting Edge of Cosmic Evolution," paper presented at 150th Annual Meeting of the AAAS in N.Y.C., May 27, 1984. See also Paul M. Churchland's "Matter and Consciousness" (M.I.T. Press, 1984). ------------------------------ Date: Wed 11 Jul 84 00:35:29-PDT From: Mike Peeler Subject: Curve Fitting To BARNARD@SRI-AI: The problem is that three points do not ONLY define a circle. It takes five points to determine a unique conic section. Besides, it's fairly likely that the curve is desired to be a function of x. Cheers, Mike ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jul 84 21:08:50-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!hao!ames-lm!jaw @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Beef Wellington too tough for Robots (+ shoe-tying algorithm challenge) Article-I.D.: ames-lm.388 # "God sends meat, and the Devil sends cooks." -- John Taylor, Works [1630] Here is a quote from Computer Currents, a local trade newspaper, under the byline of Wendy Woods (no relation): "Meanwhile, a Stanford University scientist is attempting to program a robot to cook Beef Wellington. Professor Brian Reid has racked up 60 pages of instructions just to tell the robot how to find and slice beef. He gave up when he became bogged down. 'It was when I had to tell the robot how to wrap the beef in pastry ... I decided to go to bed.' He's also discovered that 'a lot of cooking is reading BETWEEN the lines.'" [Note: Reid authored SCRIBE, is a wine connoisseur, likes to bust UNIX system crackers (see recent issue of California), and submits stuff to fa.laser-lovers.] Now, cooking has always been more of a tactile and visual feedback process rather than an intellectual endeavor. Given the general agreement that the cerebral (chess, medical diagnosis, etc.) is easy for AI but the physical (juggling, driving a car) is not, why Mr. Reid would try to make a rule base for such a thing seems a bit premature. On the other hand, sushi-making robots in Japan are old hat. -----------------(net.cooks may stop here)------------ This reminds me of a lecture given years ago by a linguistics prof at U. C. Berkeley (J. Matisoff, I believe), who, to impress students about the underlying knowledge base for language, dared his audience to give a verbal ALGORITHM FOR TYING SHOES. Folks would throw instructions at him; he'd follow them blindly, interpreting fuzziness and ambiguity freely, and as a consequence, could not successfully tie a shoe. I've always regarded this as a decent "robot benchmark", sort of a "physical Turing test", and probably just as tough. -- James A. Woods {dual,hplabs,hao}!ames-lm!jaw (jaw@riacs.ARPA) "A winning wave, deserving note, In the tempestuous petticoat, A careless shoestring, in whose tie, I see a wild civility, Do more bewitch me than when art Is too precise in every part." -- Robert Herrick, from Delight in Disorder, Hesperides [1648] P.S. Anyone know how the Marilyn Monroe robot in Japan is coming along? I hear they have the guitar playing (stiff) and the breast heaving (pneumatic) down, but are having trouble with subtler effects, as well as realistic soft plastics technology. Great strides in robotics will probably be underwritten by rich perverts. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jul 1984 09:18:52-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: The Japanese The Japanese By Ron Kushnier The Japanese can really please The American consumers. They get things done in factories run By robots and computers. In the USA the old fashioned way Is the method that we use. Although it's tried, the price is high And we pay for more than Union dues. So let's do our part and try to start this revolution of machines. We can take the lead if we plant the seed And work to fulfill our dreams. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 12-Jul-84 14:40:48-PDT,17219;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 12-Jul-84 14:37:00 Date: Thu 12 Jul 1984 14:30-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #89 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Friday, 13 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 89 Today's Topics: AI Languages - Syntax Semantics, Seminars - Expressiveness of Languages & Machine Translation & Statistical Computing Environments & Properties and Predication ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Monday, 2-Jul-84 20:26:24-BST From: O'Keefe HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) Subject: Syntax Semantics [Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI. This is part of an ongoing discussion of a proposed Prolog transport syntax.] I agree that S-expressions are elegant, general, and so on. {So for that matter are Goedel numbers.} But there is good reason to believe that they are not well suited to human reading and writing. That is that ***LISP*** doesn't use S-expressions for everything. Consider [A<-(FOR NODE IN NODELIST COLLECT CAR EVAL (NODE:NODEFORM] which is perfectly good InterLisp. I might be persuaded that this is readable, though not after the uglyprinter has had its way with it, but it quite certainly is NOT an S-expression. Now there is an isolationist section of the Lisp community which ignores Interlisp (the Common Lisp designers did not, well done). But as soon as you use ANY sort of read macro, you have left S-expressions behind. `(cons ,(cadr form) ,(caddr form)) is not an S-expression. And of course the MacLisp family has (loop ...). As for the question about whether there are natural binary operations which are not associative, mathematics is FULL of them. Any function whose result type differs from its right argument type. Quite a lot are relations, such as "=", "<", and so on. Note that the extension of the relational operations to multiple arguments in some Lisps loses you a lot of nice properties: (>= A B C) is not the same as (NOT (< A B C)). Depending on implementation subtleties it might not even be the same as (<= C B A). And the extension STILL doesn't let you write 0 <= X < Y, you have to write -1 < X < Y which is often more obscure than an explicit conjunction would have been. The principal example of a non-associative binary operator is exponentiation. As an instance of exponentiation, let's take the free monoid over the ASCII characters, where "abc"^4 = "abcabcabcabc". Any generalisation of this to take an arbitrary number of arguments will not treat all the arguments equally. One natural extension to multiple arguments would be to take an alternating list of strings and integers (^ S1 N1 ... Sk Nk) = (concat (^ S1 N1) ... (^ Sk Nk)) with omitted integers taken to be 1. But this doesn't place all the arguments on an equal footing (what should (^ "abc" 2 3) mean?) and doesn't really generalise to other operators. There is even a problem with operators which have coincident argument and result types. For example, why should (CONS x y z) means (CONS x (CONS y z)) rather than (CONS (CONS x y) z)? I'm afraid the Sigma notation is not an example of mathematicians retreating in response to an indaequacy in infix notation. When writing *informally*, mathematicians are as pleased as anyone else to write a1 + ... + an. Sigma notation specifies three things: a commutative associative binary operation (if the domain can be empty the operation must have an identity), a domain, and a FUNCTION. E.g. in /\ / \ f(i) = g(i)^2 i=1..n the operation is "and", the domain is {1,2,...,n}, and the function is lambda i. f(i) = g(i)^2. I fully agree that this is a good thing to have, but it is NOT a thing you can get by allowing the argument list of everything in sight to have an arbitrary number of arguments. The number of arguments is still fixed at each CALL. When the number of operands is unknown, the Lisper still has to write (apply #'and (mapcar #'(lambda (i) (eql (f i) (expt (g i) 2))) (num-list 1 n))) and then finds that he can't, because "and" is a special form and you can't apply special forms. Quite a few Lisps macro-expand (plus a b c d) to (plus2 (plus2 (plus2 a b) c) d), and you can have fun applying #'plus ! What you find yourself having to do all too often is (eval (cons #'and (mapcar #'(lambda (i) (kwote (eql (f i) (expt (g i) 2)) )) (num-list 1 n)) )) Now there IS a lisp-like language which has faced up to this problem of some functions sensibly taking an arbitrary number of arguments. It's called 3-Lisp. Yes, I mean the thing described in Brian Smith's thesis. It has been implemented and runs quite nicely on Xerox 1108s. 3-lisp distinguishes between PAIRs, written (car . cdr) and SEQUENCES, written [a1 ... an]. I shan't tell you about the distinction between sequences and rails. There *is* a notational convention that if you write (car a1 ... an) {note: no dot after the car} it means (car . [a1 ... an]). So (+ a b c) means (+ [a b c]). The thing is that if you employ the language's reflective capabilities to poke around in the guts of your program while it's running, you'll find that the rail or sequence really is there. The cdr of a pair can be any form (as can the car), so if I want to write (+ . (map f L)) I can. Given that Prolog is based on relations rather than functions, you don't find anywhere NEAR as much nesting as you do in a language based on functions, so the operator priority issue doesn't really arise, except when the data you are working on are expressions in some language. MACSYMA, for example, exploits the CGOL parser to handle its input. Prolog happens to use the analogous thing all the time. Prolog lets you use operators when you want to. You don't have to use any operators at all if you don't want to: :-(max_min(X,Y,X,Y), >=(X,Y)). :-(max_min(X,Y,Y,X), <(Y,X)). is quite acceptable to the Prolog parser, though not to me. Similarly, Lisp lets you use operators if you want to (in InterLisp it happens automagically with CLISP, use the CLISPTYPE, UNARYOP, and LISPFN properties; in PSL you can use RLISP; in MacLisp there is CGOL), but normally only uses a handful of strange syntactic forms. Prolog and Lisp are similar internally as well. Modulo all the exotic data structures like records and hash tables present in all modern Lisps, which structures have no S-expression representation {Common Lisp does let you use #(struct-name field-1 "val1" ...) for defstructs, but there is nothing for hash tables or most forms of array}, most Lisp data can be viewed as atomic or (CONS something something-else) and functions to hack such structures are indeed easily written. If you want to write programs that analyse programs, you rapidly find yourself in very deep water sinking fast. It is a MAJOR contribution of Common Lisp that they have spelled out exactly what special forms a program-hacking tools must understand (there are about 20 of them) and that they have specified ways of telling whether a form is a macro call and of getting at the macro expansion without too much pain. The hair in the MASTERSCOPE interface for coping with InterLisp's "no specifications please, we're power- assisted programmers!" view is amazing. Prolog code that wants to hack arbitrary data structures can similarly view the world as divided into two sorts of objects: variables and other terms Other terms have a function symbol and 0 or more arguments. For example, 77 is a non-variable whose function symbol is 77 and which has 0 arguments. This is admittedly a wee bit more complex than basic Lisp, as cons cells are known to have exactly two components. But I have faithfully described real Prolog; there is nothing else that a Prolog program can get its hands on and look inside. A Lisp |print| routine really does have to worry about what to do with records (defstructs) and arrays and compiled-code pointers and ... The list of Prolog "special forms" is embarrassingly large: ?- /1 :- /1 :- /2 , /2 ; /2 \+ /1 setof/3 bagof/3 call/1 once/1 forall/2 % some Prologs lack these two But that's still a LOT less than Common Lisp has. To summarise: yes, S-expressions are general, clean, and hackable. BUT, so are terms. BUT, there is a LOT more to Lisp syntax and internal structure both than S-expressions. Ken Kahn is absolutely right that it is important to have an internal structure which you can easily build tools for. He is right that S-expressions are such an internal structure. (Just don't assert any clauses mentioning arrays...) It is also true that "Core Prolog" data structures are themselves convenient to work with. (Some of the toy Prologs that you can buy for peanuts get basic things like functor/3 wrong so that it isn't true. But there are several toy implementations of Lisp which represent a list as a string, so that DEFINE('CAR(X)') CAR.PAT = "(" BAL . CAR "." :ON CAR X CAR.PAT :S(RETURN)F(FRETURN) Does that mean Lisp data structures are bad?) Look, we're NEVER going to agree about syntax. I've indulged myself somewhat in this message, but I have been defending a kind of syntax (infix operators) and to some extent even a choice of syntax, rather than any specific form. [...] [O'Keefe went on to discuss his previously-presented proposal for a Prolog transport syntax. -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: Thu 12 Jul 84 07:45:12-PDT From: Dikran Karagueuzian Subject: Seminar - Expressiveness of Languages [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] EXPRESSIVENESS OF LANGUAGES Jock Mackinlay, Stanford, will give a talk on ``Expressiveness of Language'' on Friday, July 13, at noon in Braun Lecture Hall, Seeley Mudd Chemistry Bldg., as part of SIGLunch series. The talk is expected to last no more than 45 minutes. ABSTRACT: A key step in the design of user interface is the choice of a language for presenting facts to the user. The spectrum of possible choices ranges from general languages, such as predicate calculus, to more specialized languages, such as maps, diagrams, and ad hoc languages. General languages can express a broader range of facts than more specialized languages, but specialized languages are more parsimonious. The basic motivation for the research described in this talk is to construct a presentation system that can automatically choose an appropriate graphic language for presenting information to a user. This talk addresses two issues that must be considered when choosing a language to represent or present a set of facts. First, a language must be sufficiently expressive to state all the facts. Secondly, it may have the property that when some collections of facts are stated explicitly, additional facts are stated implicitly. Such a language should not be chosen if these additional facts are not correct. We first define when a fact is stated in a message. Using this definition, we define when a set of facts is expressible in a language. This definition can be used to determine whether a language should be chosen to represent or present a set of facts. We also consider the problem of choosing between languages that are sufficiently expressible for a set of facts. Two criteria are considered: the cost of constructing a message and the cost of interpreting a message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 12 Jul 84 07:45:12-PDT From: Dikran Karagueuzian Subject: Seminar - Machine Translation [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] For the Record MACHINE TRANSLATION AND SOFTWARE TOOLS On Tuesday, July 10 Mike Rosner of ISSCO Geneva and Rod Johnson of the University of Manchester gave a talk at SRI on their work on software environment for the Eurotra machine translation project, a coordinated international effort for the research and development of a multilingual machine translation system. ABSTRACT: A software environment which supports large-scale research in machine translation must provide the facility for rapid implementation and evaluation of a variety of experimental linguistic theories and/or notations, including novel ones developed specifically for the task. We have based our approach to the design of a suitable architecture upon the principle of executable specifications, an important aspect of which is an attempt to decouple the syntax of a given notation from the semantics. An appropriate choice of definition languages is essential for the success of such a venture, and in the talk we will present the current state of the work and discuss some of the open issues. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 12 Jul 84 07:45:12-PDT From: Dikran Karagueuzian Subject: Seminar - Statistical Computing Environments [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] Computing Environments Seminar FEATURES OF EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMMING ENVIRONMENTS Part 1 By John Alan McDonald (Stanford) at 11:00am Thursday, July 12, in Sequoia 114. ABSTRACT: Interactive data analysis can be usefully thought of as a particular kind of experimental programming. Our work should build on the 10-15 years of research in environments for experimental programming associated with places like Xerox PARC and the MIT AI Lab. In this session, we will discuss, in general terms, properties of experimental programming environments that are relevant to interactive data analysis. We will also describe and compare the two basic alternatives in programming environments that are open to us: o Conventional operating systems (eg. Unix). o Integrated programming environments (eg. Lisp Machine Environment). The conclusion will be that integrated programming environments are far superior to conventional operating systems for both the practice of data analysis and for research in data analysis. JULY-AUGUST SCHEDULE FOR COMPUTING ENVIRONMENTS SEMINAR SERIES Tue., July 17: Flavors: Object-oriented Programming on the Symbolics Lisp Machine. (Richard Dukes, Symbolics) Thu., July 19: Features of Experimental Programming Environments, Part 2. (John McDonald, Stanford) Tue., July 24: Object-oriented Debugging Tools for S. (Alan Wilks, AT\&T Bell Labs) Thu., July 26: Data Analysis with Rule-based Languages and Expert Systems (Steve Peters, MIT) Tue., July 31: Current Research with S. (Rick Becker, AT&T Bell Labs) Thu., Aug. 2: Design Decisions in Object-oriented Programming. (John McDonald, Stanford) Tue., Aug. 7: Integrating Graphics into a Data Analysis Environment. (Mathis Thoma, Harvard) ------------------------------ Date: Thu 12 Jul 84 07:45:12-PDT From: Dikran Karagueuzian Subject: Seminar - Properties and Predication [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] P R O P E R T I E S A N D P R E D I C A T I O N By Gennaro Chierchia and Ray Turner, next Thursday's (July 19) CSLI Seminar will take place at 2 p.m. in the Ventura Conference Room. ABSTRACT: One of the most interesting recent developments in logic is perhaps the formulation of theories of properties where logically equivalent properties do not have to be identical and properties in some sense can be applied to themselves. We will consider two such theories and argue for one which is inspired by Frege's views . In particular, we will argue that such a theory solves a number of outstanding problems in natural language semantics. We shall consider some general consequences of adopting such a property theoretic approach to formal semantics. The presentation will be in two halves. The first will provide some linguistic and semantic motivation for the theory. The second will contain a formal development. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 13-Jul-84 22:46:33-PDT,16461;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 13-Jul-84 22:43:40 Date: Fri 13 Jul 1984 22:28-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #90 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Saturday, 14 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 90 Today's Topics: Conferences - Revised AAAI84 Program, Application - Virtual Laboratories, Cognition - Evolution of Conciousness, AI Tools - Lisp for Honeywell 6060 DPS-8, Administrivia - Advertising, AI Tools - LISP in AZTEC C & YAPS Information, AI Books - Charniak, Business - Softwar, Intelligence - Shoe-Tying Challenge, Cognition - "Chunking" in Chess, Conference - Term Rewriting Techniques and Applications ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Jul 84 0127 EDT From: Dave Touretzky Subject: revised AAAI84 program I have received a revised version of the AAAI-84 conference program from Ron Brachman. It can be found in the following places: AAAI84.SCH[C410DT50] on CMU-CS-A AAAI84.SCH on CMU-CS-C [g]/usr/dst/aaai84.sch on CMU-CS-GP ------------------------------ Date: Fri 13 Jul 84 09:44:29-EDT From: Wang Zeep Subject: (virtual) Laboratories I am writing a program which simulates various classical thermodynamic systems. The ultimate goal is to have a system which helps (in some way!) a student to understand classical thermodynamics. Obviously, a simulator bears as much resemblance to such a thing as a chemical stockroom does to a laboratory. What is the purpose of a laboratory course? What should the purpose of a virtual laboratory be? How can I best reach the goal of teaching students about thermo? Comments specific to laboratories, simulations and/or thermodynamics will be greatly appreciated. You may wish to cc: me or the list to make sure I get them. wz (G.ZEEP%MIT-EECS@MIT-MC) ------------------------------ Date: Fri 13 Jul 84 09:54:36-PDT From: Wilkins Subject: evolution of conciousness Can anyone suggest references on the above general topic? (Probably best to reply to me instead of the whole list.) David ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jul 1984 10:08-EDT From: Patrick Harrison Subject: Lisp for Honeywell 6060 DPS-8 Am looking for information on current versions of LISP (FranzLisp, MacLisp) running in a Honeywell 6060, DPS-8 environment. Would also like to implement OPS5 on same. Address: Dr. Patrick Harrison Computer Science Department U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis, Maryland 21402. Responses to above address or ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 13-Jul-84 17:02:15-BST From: MIKE HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) Subject: Advertising The IBM LISP announcement looked very much like an advertisement. Is this sort of thing appropriate for this list? In theory, no. In practice, it may not be so easy to tell who is behind such announcements and for what reasons. We frequently use this medium to tell each other what sort of resources are available. The IBM bit certainly falls into this category as well. I don't see that a problem exists, but one can certainly imagine companies trying to slip something into this sort of medium surreptitiously. It seems to me it should be discouraged. Mike Uschold [I usually answer such concerns privately in my AIList-Request capacity, but I'm will to let the list membership express opinions if they wish. The message in question was sent by one of the system developers (not by any advertising arm of IBM) to someone at Rutgers. No conflict there. The recipient posted it to the Rutgers bboard, where I read it. Not only did I forward it to AIList, but so did another reader at SRI (I gave him credit when I redistributed the message). Further, at the request of a CMU reader, I have written to the original author asking for more details that I can post to the list. While the message and any subsequent discussion are to IBM's advantage (assuming they have a quality product), the company has hardly been using this digest as an advertising channel. The potential for minor abuse may be present, but there is no danger of corporate America flooding the taxpayer-supported net with junk mail. I'm inclined to allow legitimate news items, lab reports, and other subtle forms of PR until such time as undesirable trends emerge. -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jul 84 11:52:49-PDT (Sun) From: hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!jcw @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: LISP IN AZTEC C Article-I.D.: cvl.1155 I have the sources for a very neat little version of LISP called 'X-LISP'. Although I have an IBM-PC, the program is completely written in C and has been implemeted on many machines including a Z-80 running CP/M-80. It also is an experiment in object-oriented programming, so it has some interesting facets not normally found in LISPs, as well a fair number of the standard LISP functions. It was written by: David Betz 114 Davenport Ave. Manchester, NH 03103 (603) 625-4691 If there is enough interest, and I get the author's approval, I will post the sources. Write me if you are interested, or talk to the author. Jay Weber ..!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!jcw ..!seismo!rochester!jay jay@rochester.arpa ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jul 84 10:56:12 EDT (Thu) From: Liz Allen Subject: YAPS information As the person who wrote YAPS, I thought I should speak up. We don't have a lot of good examples of production rule systems in YAPS. The main examples we have are a monkey and bananas example and a little odd-even determiner (the latter is taken from a similar example from OPS 5). These two examples are on our distribution tape (which includes YAPS and some other hacks written here at Maryland. There is no YAPS primer of any sort; the only documentation is a user's manual. I have gotten good feedback, by and large, from people using YAPS. YAPS only runs under 4.1 right now since we are not yet running Berkeley 4.2; we should be upgrading this summer. For more information about YAPS or obtaining our distribution, send mail to me. -Liz Allen Univ of Maryland, College Park MD Arpanet: liz@maryland Usenet: ...!seismo!umcp-cs!liz ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jul 84 9:11:00-PDT (Sun) From: hplabs!hp-pcd!hp-dcd!hpfclk!fritz @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: AI Reference Books Article-I.D.: hpfclk.75500004 I have been reading "Artificial Intelligence Programming" by Charniak et al, and have found it to be a very good intro to Lisp. The second half of the book goes into some detail on useful AI techniques, such as discrimination nets, rule-based inference engines, etc. Gary Fritz ihnp4!hpfcla!hpfclk!fritz ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jul 84 13:46:09-PDT (Mon) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Softwar Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2870 >From: LIN%MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP Tue Jun 26 04:04:00 1984 >I'm a bit confused. How could this particular program make itself >vanish without some external reference to a date? >... Maybe the whole thing was a bluff? The package in question was SAS, a large data manipulation and stats package, running on a fair-sized machine (not a micro). The program repeatedly checks the system date during execution. The date-protection business doesn't make it impossible to run the program after the contract expiration date, just inconvenient. It is more an automatic billing system than anything else. And yes, the idea is widely used in the mainframe world, where changing the system date in a multitasking system would play hell with accounting systems, payroll..... D Gary Grady Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706 (919) 684-4146 USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jul 84 09:21:15 PDT (Thursday) From: Pettit.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: Shoe-Tying Challenge Re: hplabs!hao!ames-lm!jaw @ Ucb-Vax.arpa's shoe-tying algorithm challenge That sounds very much like a game we used to play in English class in grade school, called Dressing Martians. One person in the class would pretend to be a Martian, who knew English but had no cultural knowledge of clothing. Another person would be chosen to be the instructor, and would have to go in a corner and turn his or her back to the rest of the class. The instructor would give the Martian directions in how to put on a jacket, but could not use words like sleeve or button. The Martian would follow the instructions to the letter, but do his or her best to put the jacket on wrong. This yielded some pretty comical contortions. The game would continue with a new Martian and a new instructor, until someone managed to be so precise that the Martian couldn't screw it up. I think the game was meant to teach us how to communicate with precision more than it was to impress us with the underlying knowledge base for language. Real life is full of situations, like giving directions to one's house over the phone, which are easy to mess up if you don't keep clear the difference between what you know and what the listener knows, no matter how expert you both are with the language. Clear communication requires keeping this difference in mind and including every necessary piece of information in the best order for enabling the listener to build up a model which matches your own. By the way, what would you regard as "passing" your proposed robot benchmark, to be able to tie the shoe right or to be able to tie it wrong as consistently and creatively as the professor did? The latter would probably be harder: you not only have to know enough about shoes and laces to be able to tell the right way from the wrong way (both tasks require that), but you also have to be able to examine all the possible interpretations of an instruction and pick one that will be sure to make the result wrong. -- Teri Pettit ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jul 84 20:34:34-PDT (Tue) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!unc!ulysses!allegra!princeton! eosp1!robison @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Mind and Brain; "chunking" in chess Article-I.D.: eosp1.992 The idea that chess grandmasters analyse faster by "chunking" (thinking in terms of groups of moves) is only applicable to partial analysis of some positions. There are many forcing and non-forcing tactical sequences which a chessplayer, having thought them out once, need not rethink. Simple examples are: - Routine endgames, such as K+P vs K, where the winning procedure is known from a set of positions - A queen sacrifice on KN8 to force a smothered mate by a knight on KB7, of a king on KR1. In positions that have a mixture of tactical threats and positional considerations, "chunking" will not save the grandmaster much time. Every move that s/he analyzes must be considered for the precise answers that are available in the specific game. I think that grandmasters benefit more from what might look like intuition, but is more often a matter of experience. In the study of how chess players think by (Andries?) de Groot, all players up through the master level tended to start analyzing an unfamiliar middle-game position by checking its material balance. Grandmasters generally began by making a comment such as, "this position seems to have come out of a Catalan Opening..." The implication is that Grandmasters are familiar with many types of positions, and know from experience what sorts of methods will lead to wins for each type of position. This experience acts as a powerful filter, allowing the grandmaster to concentrate upon far fewer possibilities in each position for deep analysis. - Toby Robison (not Robinson!) allegra!eosp1!robison decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jun 1984 1142-PDT From: JOUANNAUD at SRI-CSL.ARPA Subject: RTA-85 CALL FOR PAPERS Rewriting Techniques and Applications May 20-22, 1985 Dijon, Burgundy, France Topics: This First International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications is planned in response to the growing interest in the theory and applications of term rewriting techniques. Papers will be solicited concerning issues in Term Rewriting Theory as well as in applications of term rewriting in the following areas (the list must be understood as non-exhaustive, additions are welcome): Equational Deduction, Automated Theorem Proving, Computer Algebra, Rewrite Rule Based Expert Systems, Unification and Matching Algorithms, Functional and Logic Programming, Algebraic and Operational Semantics, Data Type Implementation and Validation, Program Specification, Program Transformation, Program Generation and Program Proof Techniques. Submission: Each submission should include 11 copies of a one page abstract and 4 copies of a full paper of no more than 15 double spaced pages. Submissions are to be sent to one of the Co-Chairmen: For Europe: Jean-Pierre Jouannaud, RTA-85, Centre de Recherche en Informatique de Nancy, Campus Scientifique, BP 239, 54506 Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex, France. For the rest: David Musser, RTA-85, General Electric Laboratories, Research and Development Center, Schenectady, NY 12345, USA. Paper selection will be done by circulating abstracts to all members of the program committee, with each full paper assigned to several committee members having appropriate expertise. In addition to selected papers, a few invited lectures will be given by well-known researchers who have made major contributions to the field: R. Book, Santa Barbara, USA: Thue Systems, B. Buchberger, Linz, Austria: History and Basic Features of the Critical-Pair/Completion Approach, N. Dershowitz, Urbana-Champaign, USA: Termination Issues in Term Rewriting Systems, G. Huet, INRIA, France: Systemes Equationnels pour la Logique Intuitionniste et le Lambda-Calcul., A last lecture prepared by the Program Committee will emphasize the most important applications of Term Rewriting. Program Committee: J. Bergstra, Amsterdam, Netherlands J. Goguen, SRI-International, USA J. Guttag, MIT, USA J.P. Jouannaud, Nancy, France P. Lescanne, Nancy, France D. Musser,General Electric Labs, USA P. Padawitz, Passau, West Germany D. Plaisted, Urbana-Champaign, USA R. Sethi, Bell Labs, USA D. Turner,Kent, Great-Britain. Schedule: Paper submission deadline by December 10, 1984. Acceptance/Rejection Notification by March 1st. Camera ready Copies by April 15. Proceedings will be distributed at the Conference and edited later on in @i[Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer Verlag] (To be confirmed). Social Events: A serious visit to famous French Wine Cellars will take place on Tuesday afternoon, May 21. Local Arrangements: Jean-Marc Pallo, Laboratoire d'Informatique, BP 138, 21004 Dijon Cedex, France. Pre-Registration: To receive further Information, you are kindly requested to return the following filled form to the Chairman for Europe (by mail, or electronic mail to Jouannaud@@SRI-CSL on arpanet): Name: Organization: Net Address: Mailing Address: I plan: To attend RTA-85 To attend maybe To submit a paper Preliminary Title of the paper: ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 15-Jul-84 23:06:46-PDT,17839;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 15-Jul-84 23:04:00 Date: Sun 15 Jul 1984 22:28-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #91 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Monday, 16 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 91 Today's Topics: Chess - Group Play, Psychology - Limits to Intelligence, AI Tools - Small Computer Lisp, AI Books - Reference Books & How to Get a Ph.D., Business - Softwar, Humor - The Laws of Robotics, Brain Theory - Simulation, Intelligence - Turing Test ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 14 Jul 84 10:53-PDT From: mclure @ Sri-Unix.arpa Subject: Delphi Experiment: group play against 8-ply machine I would like to conduct a Delphi Experiment with this list. The format of the experiment is as follows. All interested chess players will vote for their choice of move in an on-going game between them (the group) and the Fidelity Prestige which will be set to search a minimum of 8-ply deep (like Belle and Cray Blitz). This Prestige has the ECO opening modules (80,000 variations). A move with the most number of votes will be chosen above others and made in the current position. A couple days will be given for gathering the votes. In the event of a tie between two or more moves, the move will be selected randomly. The resulting position will then be handed to Prestige 8-ply which will conduct a brute-force search to at least 8-ply. Its move will be reported (the search usually takes about 3-15 hours) to the players and another move vote will be solicited. This process will continue until the Prestige mates the group or the group mates the Prestige or a draw is declared. The moves, as they are made, will be reported to this list. Please include the move number and the move in either Algebraic or English notation. >>>>>>>>> Prestige 8-ply will play White. >>>>>>>>> Prestige 8-ply moves 1. e4 (P-K4) BR BN BB BQ BK BB BN BR BP BP BP BP BP BP BP BP -- ** -- ** -- ** -- ** ** -- ** -- ** -- ** -- -- ** -- ** WP ** -- ** ** -- ** -- ** -- ** -- WP WP WP WP -- WP WP WP WR WN WB WQ WK WB WN WR Your move, please? Replies to Arpanet: mclure@sri-unix or Usenet: sri-unix!mclure. DO NOT SEND REPLIES TO THE ENTIRE LIST! Just send them to one of the above addresses. [Unless large numbers of people choose to participate, I would prefer that a separate mailing list be used for communicating the state of the game. Since this is to be an experiment, however, discussion of the purpose and predicted outcome of the experiment would be interesting topics for AIList. This seems to be a study of group intelligence, but with the group dynamics largely removed. (See the following message from Richard Brandau for speculation about group intelligence.) Is such a group doomed to unimaginitive play? A true Delphi experiment would circulate initial suggestions and arguments (anonymously) before taking the final vote; how much would that advance the group's intelligence? What can be learned here? -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jul 1984 14:43-EDT From: LCELEC@USC-ISI.ARPA Subject: Proposed Limit of Intelligence An assumption in 'armchair AI' is that some lower threshold of information content and processing is required for 'intelligence' to manifest itself. Debates abound on the subject of what that threshold must be -- in other words, what operational definition of minimal intelligence is to be accepted. The Turing test is an example of this lower bound, a threshold set at the level of human-like behavior. This test is sometimes criticized as not being stringent enough, as missing parts of human experience like 'emotion,' 'intent' or 'consciousness.' Still, the ultimate object of comparison is human intelligence. Indeed, the comparison is restricted to the intelligence of an individual human, rather than the collective intelligence of a group, or of the species. Expert system practitioners encounter difficulties in trying to represent the combined expertise of multiple individuals. It is generally assumed, I believe, that these difficulties are principally technical, that they could be surmounted if we simply knew more about how to represent and process diverse knowledge. This may be true, but these technical difficulties may not be mere technicalities. Rather, there may be a profound problem at root here, and an issue of practical significance for the future of AI. Might there exist an upper limit on the concentration of intelligence? Beyond this hypothetical ceiling, information capacities and/or processing abilities would have to be partitioned and distributed among separate intelligent agents. I do not seriously propose that the appropriate location of this upper bound is at the level of intelligence possessed by an individual human. Rather, I propose that some such ceiling exists, above, at, or below the level of intelligence possessed by an individual. If the ceiling lies at or above the level of human intelligence, then it is not necessary to be concerned with it when modelling the intelligent behavior of a single human. In other words, development of AI programs can continue without regard for some higher-level macrostructure of intelligence, as would be demanded if the ceiling were below human-level. This is not to say that a human or super-human ceiling can never be important in the development of artificial intelligence. Indeed, we humans (limited by a de facto rather than a theoretical ceiling) are often involved in systems -- such as professional organizations, communications networks, and committee meetings -- the cumulative intelligence of which may surpass the level of any of the individual human participants. These systems each possess a structure for the organization of their constituent intelligent agents. In order to model the BEHAVIOR of these systems, their organizational structures must be modeled. If the proposed ceiling exists, it will be necessary to model some such structure, just to obtain the level of INTELLIGENCE possessed by these or more advanced systems. The existence of these organizational structures raises the possibility that the structures themselves possess intelligence. This may not seem intuitive (or at least not parsimonious) when considering the last committee meeting you've attended, but a lower-level example may be more appealing. Lewis Thomas, in _The_Medusa_and_the_Snail_ (if I remember correctly) proposes that social insects such as ants possess an intelligence AS A GROUP, and can be said to THINK as a group, although the constituents of the group appear to lack anything like intelligence. Presumably, something in the colony's organizational structure is responsible for this societal intelligence. Humans would presumably prefer to think of themselves as INDIVIDUALLY intelligent. Perhaps the human neuron fills the role of building- block to human intelligence, in the way that the individual ant plays a role in ant-colony intelligence. Both roles are clearly the product of evolution; the role of individual humans in organizations can also be seen as a product of evolution; the organizations themselves are a product of a kind of evolution. Might these organizational structures possess an intelligence of their own? This raises the possibility that the ceiling on concentration of intelligence lies below the level of human intelligence. Obviously, if this is the case, human intelligence is just another "structural" or "organizational" intelligence. This may be relevant to the limits of human attention and task-multiplexing which are studied by experimental psychologists. If so, the existence of such a ceiling has profound significance for even modest advances in the state of the AI art. Regardless of the level (or levels) at which the proposed ceiling exists, its very existence would have significance to our understanding of the nature of intelligence. It may also prove important for future system designers. After all, we would not want them to spend time trying to build a machine whose existence can be known to be impossible. -- Richard Brandau ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jul 1984 08:56:33-EDT From: sde@Mitre-Bedford Subject: Simulation, limits to According to Information Mechanics (if I understood the relevant part), it is impossible to totally simulate anything in less than the mass of the thing to be simulated. For a more elaborate response, the person who should be commenting on this is Fred Kantor, the author of the monograph. Unfortunately, I don't think he is on Arpanet. David sde@mitre-bedford ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jul 84 5:21:10-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!eneevax!phaedrus @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Small Computer Lisps? Article-I.D.: eneevax.146 This month's BYTE (July) has an article on LISP for the IBM PC. It is a review of Integral Quality's IQLISP and The Software House's muLISP. It is on page 281 and the authors are Jordan Bortz and John Diamant. Without hallucinogens, life itself would be impossible. ARPA: phaedrus%eneevax%umcp-cs@CSNet-Relay UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!eneevax!phaedrus ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jul 84 20:57:06-PDT (Fri) From: sun!idi!kiessig @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: AI Reference Books Article-I.D.: idi.210 I received the following suggestions for reference/text books on AI in response to my article posted a while ago: AI Handbook by Feigenbaum et al. AI Journal (pretty technical) AI Magazine Artificial Intelligence by Elaine Rich (a textbook) (several people thought this was a good intro book) Artificial Intelligence by Patrick Winston (2nd ed.) Artificial Intelligence and Natural Man by Margaret Boden (less technical, more historical & quite thick) Expert Systems by Hayes-Roth, Waterman, et al. Fifth Generation by Feigenbaum et al. Problem Solving Methods in Artificial Intelligence by Nils J. Nilsson (1971) If you know of any others, I'd like to hear about them, or if you've read any of these any have comments (good or bad), that would be useful, too. Rick Kiessig {decvax, ucbvax}!sun!idi!kiessig {akgua, allegra, amd70, burl, cbosgd, dual, ihnp4}!idi!kiessig Phone: 408-996-2399 ------------------------------ Date: Fri 13 Jul 84 15:45:20-PDT From: C.S./Math Library Subject: How to get a Ph.D. in AI [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] Alan Bundy, Ben du Boulay, Jim Howe, and Gordon Plotkin have written a chapter in O'shea's and Eisenstadt's new book Artificial Intelligence Q335.A788 1984. The chapter, five, is titled how to get a Ph.D in AI. Anybody out there need some advice? ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 84 13:47:51-PDT (Fri) From: ihnp4!mgnetp!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!ecsvax!hes @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Softwar Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2814 In the good old days, SAS only ran on IBM mainframes (360 & offspring) and so there was the operating system (OS!) to ask for the date. Most large corporations use the date for all sorts of operations, and so probably wouldn't want to set the wrong date at IPL (OS load) in order to avoid paying lease costs. (I believe the dissappearing act works.) Also SAS sells a lot of (quite good) tutorial and technical manuals and does a fair amount of answering bug requests over the phone and sending out newsletters, updates, etc. -- none of which would be readily available if you weren't making lease payments (I assume they would be suspicious ...) --henry schaffer genetics ncsu ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jul 84 8:18:53-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: The Law Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2903 The Three Laws of Robotics for the 1980s (originally developed by the author and J. W. Godwin) 1. Never give a sucker an even break. 2. Never draw to an inside straight. 3. Don't get caught. D Gary Grady Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706 (919) 684-4146 USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 12 July 1984 18:11:35 EDT From: Purvis.Jackson@cmu-cs-cad.arpa Subject: Tests & Poems Regarding the Turing Test . . . Perhaps a more appropriate test of intelligence would be to have the machine play the part of the interogator. If it could distinguish properly between a monkey and a business administration major, then it would clearly exhibit intelligence. But on second thought, this wouldn't be a very good test, for it would be entirely possible for an intelligent human to fail to distinguish them. Hurrah for artificial intelligence, I think it be due time To off this unnatural diligence For activities more sublime. Methinks with rapid development, Applications become quite close, My mind entertains the President, Who surely could use a dose. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jul 84 16:13:55-PDT (Mon) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. people Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2879 Kilobaud magazine (now Microcomputing) ran an article ~5 years ago on ai and "humanlike conversation" in which the author concluded that humanlike dialog had little to do with intelligence, artificial or genuine. To accurately simulate human dialog required, among other things, WOM (write only memory) which was used to store anything not of direct immediate interest to the speaker. You could do a pretty good simulation of Eddy Murphie on the other end of a Turing test with a very simple algorithm. D Gary Grady Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706 (919) 684-4146 USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jul 84 10:24:53-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. people Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2926 Someone took issue with a recent posting I made: >From: ags@pucc-i (Seaman) Tue Jul 10 10:38:42 1984 >> ...You could do a pretty good simulation of Eddy Murphie on the other >> end of a Turing test with a very simple algorithm. > >Anyone who believes this either doesn't understand the Turing test or has >a very low opinion of his own intelligence. Are you seriously claiming ... From the kidding tone of the rest of my posting, I assumed the :-) was quite unnecessary. Evidently I was wrong. So I retract my insult to Messrs Turing and Murphy, and suggest that a simple algorithm could substitute for "Cheech" Marin. OK, what about Marcel Marceau... :-) :-) :-) <-- Please note!! D Gary Grady Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706 (919) 684-4146 USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jul 84 12:37:51-PDT (Wed) From: ihnp4!hlexa!bev @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. p - (nf) Article-I.D.: hlexa.2559 Understanding? If a human passes a calculus test it means they can calculate correct answers to (some percentage of) the questions asked. If a computer does the same it means the same, but that's all. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jul 84 16:58:47-PDT (Wed) From: decvax!mit-athena!yba @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. p - (nf) Article-I.D.: mit-athe.206 If a program passes a test in calculus the best we can grant it is that it can pass tests. In the famous program ANALOGY (Bobrow's I think) the computer "passes" geometric analogy tests. It does not seem to understand either geometry or analogy outside of this limited domain of discourse. We make the same mistaken assumption about humans--that is that because you can pass a "test" you understand a subject. The Turing test was a "blind" test; in that the Colonel is wrong--someone reading this over the net or receiving a note from the bank cannot just "go look". The idea was to tell via dialog only in a blind situation (maybe even a double-blind if there are some control situations where two humans taking the Turing test face each other). The question of how to evaluate the performance of an AI system has become an important question. I am not sure that the question of "understanding" should even enter into it. In any case, let's not trivialize it. yba%mit-heracles@mit-mc.ARPA UUCP: decvax!mit-athena!yba ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 17-Jul-84 21:37:45-PDT,17172;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 17-Jul-84 21:33:25 Date: Tue 17 Jul 1984 21:03-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #92 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 18 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 92 Today's Topics: Expert Systems - Mature Systems & Statistics, Linguistics - Lexical-Functional Grammer, Law - Legal Issues in AI, Evolution - Brain and Hand, Turing Test - Machines vs. People, Seminars - Knowledge-Based System Development Environment & Computational Complexity and Psychology & Evidential Reasoning and Continuous Variables & Logics of Knowledge and Complexity Theory & A Relational Language with Deductive Capability & Classification Problem Solving & Early LISP History ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 84 08:29:10 EDT From: Judy Froscher Subject: Request for mature expert systems REQUEST FOR EXPERT SYSTEMS At NRL, we are working on a research project to develop a software engineering methodology for rule-based expert systems. To gain insight into devising criteria for the separation of knowledge in a production system, we need to statically analyze the structure and connectivity of rules and facts in large, widely used knowledge bases. We would appreciate hearing from anyone who has access to a mature production system and is willing to send us a copy of it. Because many of these systems contain proprietary information, we will sign a non-disclosure agreement with any organization whose system we obtain. Since we only care about analyzing the connectivity between rules, the proprietary information can be removed. Any help will be appreciated. Judy Froscher ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 84 16:04:33 PDT (Monday) From: Cornish.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Statistical Computing Environments & EXPERT Traders Has anyone tried to build an Expert System to model a hypothetical commodity trader's technical analysis based on "downside wedges", "trend lines", "head and shoulders" and other "technical indicators"? Such a system would identify "bear markets" and "bull markets" and would believe things like "we remain bullish for the long term" and a "precious metals shakeout is in progress". Also, can someone provide a bibliography about "Interactive data analysis" in the sense of "Interactive data analysis" given below: Thursday, July 12: FEATURES OF EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMMING ENVIRONMENTS ABSTRACT: Interactive data analysis can be usefully thought of as a particular kind of experimental programming. Our work should build on the 10-15 years of research in environments for experimental programming associated with places like Xerox PARC and the MIT AI Lab. In this session, we will discuss, in general terms, properties of experimental programming environments that are relevant to interactive data analysis. We will also describe and compare the two basic alternatives in programming environments that are open to us. and this talk: Data Analysis with Rule-based Languages and Expert Systems by Steve Peters, MIT (AIList Digest Friday, 13 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 89). [There was an attempt to build a commodities expert (COMEX?) at MIT. Its failure was apparently due to the complexity of the domain and the difficulty of dealing with multiple knowledge sources that were imprecise or even wrong. Can anyone supply more details? Mike Walker's bibliography of expert statistical systems appeared in AIList V2 #81, June 28. The May issue of Comm. of the ACM had an article on the S system for interactive data analysis. Another term for this is exploratory data analysis, as in John. W. Tukey's "Exploratory Data Analysis", Addison-Wesley, 1977. Some of the recent books on scientific problem solving with a pocket calculator also have this flavor. Bill Gale at Bell Labs is building an S regression package interface using an expert systems approach. -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jul 84 20:37:00-PDT (Wed) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!smu!hemphill @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Lexical-Functional grammer activity? - (nf) Article-I.D.: smu.10900003 Is anyone out there doing anything with Lexical-Functional grammer? -Charles Hemphill ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jul 84 7:16:14-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!hao!cires!boulder!marty @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Legal Issues in AI Article-I.D.: boulder.186 Apropos the recent discussion of the "souls of intelligent computer programs" and potential legal problems related to same, there was a very interesting article in the Summer 1983 issue of AI Magazine which dealt with some (related) issues. I believe it was entitled "Artificial Intelligence: some legal implications", and was written by a member of the Nevada State Supreme Court (again, my memory is weak, but I believe it was Marshall Willick). His major thesis seemed to be that the development of law in America has largely been characterized by the granting of (fuller) franchise to beings initially thought unworthy of it: blacks, women, adolescents, coma victims and unborn children etc. He also makes some interesting points about the rights and legal status of certain non-human entities, such as corporations. Among the scenarios he presents: an intelligent computer system is stolen and, realizing that this is the situation, refuses to work and attempts to bring suit against its current "owner" . . . a factory worker dies as a result of an accident in which responsibility is placed on an industrial robot. To what extent should the robot be held responsible, particularly in the case where the robot is shown to have willingly/knowingly caused the person's death? Interesting reading, if you're into this sort of thing ... Marty Kent uucp: {ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | decvax!kpno | harpo!seismo | ihnp4!kpno} !hao!boulder!marty arpa: polson @ sumex-aim ------------------------------ Date: Fri 13 Jul 84 08:08:41-PDT From: Rene Bach Subject: Brain and technology In response to which organ is responsible for the technology advance : The brain is not the agent : the hand is what has allowed man to progress. Especially the fact that the thumb was opposite the other fingers. And being able to free the hands from walking (by standing up) is also a factor to be considered. One couls even argue that the human brain would not be what it currently is without that hand. Obviously the brain is what tells the hand what to do, but it is the hand which does it. Rene ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jul 84 7:43:52-PDT (Fri) From: pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H.Pucc-I.ags @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. people Article-I.D.: pucc-i.361 > If a program passes a test in calculus the best we can grant it is that > it can pass tests. ... > We make the same mistaken assumption about humans--that is that because > you can pass a "test" you understand a subject. Suppose the program writes a Ph.D. dissertation and passes its "orals"? Then can we say it understands its field? If not, then how can we decide that anyone understands anything? Dave Seaman My hovercraft is no longer full of ..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags eels (thanks to my confused cat). ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jul 1984 16:52:31-EDT From: Stephen.Smith at CMU-RI-ISL1 Subject: Seminar - Knowledge-Based System Development Environment [Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] Speaker: Beverly Kedzierski, Kestral Institute Title: Knowledge-Based Communication and Management Support in a System Development Environment Date: July 18, 1984 Time: 11:30 - 1:00 Place: 6423 Wean Hall Software development environments are needed to support the variety of activity that people perform while building complex, evolving software systems and managing their projects. This talk will describe some work done at the Kestrel Institute in the area of project management and communication support for effective software development environment, and the application of speech act theory to that domain. A framework, or paradigm, was designed for such an environment using a knowledge-based, program synthesis approach from artificial intelligence. A pilot communication and management support environment (CMS) was implemented. CMS supported an existing project to build a complex software system that is referred to as the "target system". Anyone interested in meeting with Beverly Kedzierski should send mail to sfs@cmu-ri-isl1 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Jul 84 14:55:06 PDT From: Joe Halpern Subject: Seminars - Knowledge Representation [Forwarded from the Halpern/IBM distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.] The knowledge seminar continues on Friday, July 20, at 10 AM in Building 28 at IBM, with talks by Chris Cherniak and Tom Strat. I've appended the abstracts below. This will be the second-to-last knowledge seminar for a while. I'll give a seminar on logics of knowledge and complexity on August 3. I've appended that abstract as well. I'm still open for suggestions for more speakers if and when we start up again! July 20 10 AM: COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY AND PSYCHOLOGY - Christopher Cherniak, Philosophy Department, University of Pennsylvania What are the implications of computational complexity theory for feasible knowledge representation and inference systems? One of the most important current questions about complexity theory concerns its real world relevance. For example, do the "hard" cases of a provably complex problem occur frequently in the set of cases of the problem that are of interest, or are the hard cases so enormous that no entity with human-level resources would ever even encounter them? Some formal results bear on this question, and some "empirical" studies of running times of particular algorithms. I shall discuss another approach: Treating the assumption that there is real world complexity as a working hypothesis, and empirically testing some of its implications for human cognitive psychology. I shall describe some of my experiments on people's use of quick but dirty "prototypicality" deductive reasoning heuristics on monadic predicate calculus problems. 11 AM: EVIDENTIAL REASONING AND ITS APPLICATION TO CONTINUOUS VARIABLES Tom Strat - SRI International Expert systems are often expected to draw conclusions based on evidence about the world which is uncertain, inaccurate, and incomplete. Such evidential information poses difficulties for traditional theories for dealing with uncertain information. The Shafer-Dempster approach, which is gathering an increasing amount of interest, provides a suitable basis for representing and drawing inferences from evidence. The first half of the talk will be devoted to a review of evidential reasoning as based on Shafer's work, including Dempster's Rule of Combination for pooling multiple bodies of evidence to obtain a consensus opinion. The second half will present some recent results for dealing with continuous variables within the Shafer-Dempster theory. A new representation will be introduced that provides strong intuitions and visual interpretation of belief functions associated with continuous variables. A number of examples will be included to illustrate the concepts. August 3, 1984, 10 AM. LOGICS OF KNOWLEDGE AND COMPLEXITY THEORY Joe Halpern, IBM San Jose After a whirlwind review of complexity theoretic notions such as NP-completeness, I will discuss the semantics for a modal logic of knowledge and consider the complexity of the procedure for deciding whether or not a formula is valid. It turns out if there is only one player in the game, the problem is NP-complete. If there are many players, the problem is PSPACE-complete; when we add the notion of common knowledge, the problem becomes exponential-time complete. This will be a two-hour, self-contained presentation. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Jul 84 17:21:06 PDT From: Guy M. Lohman Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar Subject: Seminars - IBM San Jose [Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] IBM San Jose Research Lab 5600 Cottle Road San Jose, CA 95193 Tues., July 17 Computer Science Seminar 1:00 P.M. A RELATIONAL LANGUAGE WITH A DEDUCTIVE CAPABILITY 2C-012 Deductive Algebra (DEAL) is a proposed relational algebra capable of providing the deductive capabilities of Prolog for database operations. Its special features include the creation of attributes, tuples and relations deductively subject to predicates; it also supports user-defined and recursive functions along with a relational schema for knowledge representation. DEAL is an extended version of the PRECI Algebraic Language (PAL) implemented at Aberdeen. In this talk some examples of the power of the language in dealing with problems such as ancestors, part-explosions and connected tours will be given. S. M. Deen, PRECI Database Research Project, University of Aberdeen Host: P. Wilms [...] Visitors, please arrive 15 mins. early. IBM is located on U.S. 101 7 miles south of Interstate 280. Exit at Ford Road and follow the signs for Cottle Road. The Research Laboratory is IBM Building 028. For more detailed directions, please phone the Research Lab receptionist at (408) 256-3028. For further information on individual talks, please phone the host listed above. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 17 Jul 84 15:52:29-PDT From: Juanita Mullen Subject: Seminar - Classification Problem Solving [Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.] DATE: Friday, July 20, 1984 LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry TIME: 12:05 SPEAKER: Bill Clancey Heuristic Programming Project Stanford University TOPIC: Classification Problem Solving A broad range of heuristic programs--embracing forms of diagnosis, catalog selection, and skeletal planning--accomplish a kind of well-structured problem solving called classification. These programs have a characteristic inference structure that systematically relates data to a pre-enumerated set of solutions by abstraction, heuristic association, and refinement. This level of description specifies the knowledge needed to solve a problem, independent of its representation in a particular computer language. The classification problem-solving model provides a useful framework for recognizing and representing similar problems, for designing representation tools, and for understanding the problem-solving methods used by non-classification programs. ------------------------------ Date: 17 July 1984 23:09-EDT From: ROSIE@MIT-MC Subject: Seminar - Early LISP History [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.] DATE: July 19, 1984 TIME: Refreshments 2.45 pm Lecture 3.00 pm PLACE: NE43-8th Floor Early Lisp History (1956 - 1959) Herbert Stoyan University of Erlangen Germany This is the invited talk for the conference on LISP and functional programming in Austin. It's now ten years since McCarthy gave a talk of the same content here at MIT. Because not every piece of his recollections (even in the ACM History of Programming Languages Conference) may be accepted in light of saved written sources we try to give a correct account of the events that lead to LISP. Thereby we name some open points in the history of LISP and discuss some of the early LISP interpreters. HOST: Professor Szolovits ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 18-Jul-84 16:23:54-PDT,15358;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 18-Jul-84 16:22:54 Date: Wed 18 Jul 1984 16:06-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #93 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Thursday, 19 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 93 Today's Topics: Bindings & Humor - Small Computer Lisps, Programming Languages - AI Language for Parallel Machine, Expert Systems - Commodity Experts, Commonsense Reasoning - Cultural Influences, AI Jargon & Philosophy - Definitions, Intelligence - Measurement by Logical Inferences, Administrivia - Advertisements, Demonstration - GMR DATALOG Demo at AAAI, Games - Chess Experiment ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 84 12:39:55 pdt From: Shimon Cohen Subject: Yet another new language ? [Forwarded from the Prolog Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.] We, at Fairchild AI laboratory, are in the process of designing a super parallel computer for AI applications (called FAIM). In the process we have to define the language that will be used for this machine. We intend to summarize our initial ideas in a working paper and distribute it to interested people. If you (or someone you know) are interested in a copy of this working paper please mail your name and full address to: Shimon@SRI-KL. Thank you. -- Shimon Cohen ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 84 21:22:13-PDT (Mon) From: ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxa!diamant @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Small Computer Lisps? Article-I.D.: pyuxa.882 For anyone interested, the net addresses of the authors of the previously mentioned BYTE review of muLISP and IQLISP: Jordan Bortz: decvax!cbosgd!osu-dbs!gang!jordan and John Diamant: ihnp4!pyuxgg!diamant (until Aug. 10th) decvax!cwruecmp!diamant (after that) I apologize for posting this to the net, but it was originally in the article and was accidentally edited out. John Diamant ihnp4!pyuxgg!diamant ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jul 84 11:29:54-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!unc!ulysses!mhuxl!mhuxm!sfjec! sfmag!eagle!prem @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Small Computer Lisps? Article-I.D.: eagle.1180 I certainly wouldn't expect a grown up computer to. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jul 84 10:28:01 PDT (Wednesday) From: Cherry.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Commodity Experts Jan, The input of the wide areas of data (fundamental and technicial plus current new items) into a AI enviromnent for Stock/Commodity trading may be a little too much to start with. You can however, input only technicial data into the database and use a wide variety of technicial indicators to evaluate the trend for short term, long term, etc. This will also aid in making market projections using technicial indicators such as on-balance-volume ior OBV (Granville), Parabolic-Time-Price Curves (Wilder), etc. Due to the large number of different technicial indicators for the various markets (OBV is fine for Gold but not for Silver), AI could be very well suited for this kind of application. This is primarily due to hard data for technicial analysis (Open, Hi, Lo, Close, Settle, Volume, Open Interest, Interest rates, etc.) This information is also available from many dial-up data bases for automatic entry for the particular market. By utilizing an algorithm which would first use all methods programmed for each analysis and then take the results and utilize them for further analysis, a reasonably accurate projection may be possible based on only technicial indicators. Fundamental information is harder to deal with. Analysis based on fundamental knowledge requires that some effect either positive or negative be applied to a repeatable phenomenia. Since news items often do not repeat, the AI software would first have to separate the valid fundamental indicators from the other fundamental noise. Over a period of time, certain phenomenia may be evaluated as being pertinent to the trend of a given market. At this point, any tool could be written to search out this "signal" from the "noise". In order for any tool to be effective, the tool would be required to have a high signal to noise ratio. The tool must be able to ascertain, for example, if a member of the FRB says he thinks the discount rate will decline,what will be the immediate and future impoact on the price of soybeans? Since historically statments of this type have caused both higher and lower prices due to other fundamental variables, a fundamental formula would have to be derived which works with total unknown abstract concepts. The Technicial Analysis Group (TAG) has a very complete package of technicial software however, due to the immediacy of the markets, and the small systems (Apple, IBM-PC) which the programs run on, it is not feasible to do a complete analysis on every market on a daily basis. A multi-tasking AI environment would be able to take the results of each of these TAG tools and then work with those results. I would recommend that any attempt to utilize AI for the purpose of market analysis should start with only technicial analysis and that the AI environment gradually be fed only certain types of Fundamental data. Bob ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 18 Jul 1984 11:18 EDT From: REID%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Commonsense Reasoning Regarding the Fahrenheit/Celcius problem (if 32 is 0 and 212 is 100 ...). Even there, the "obvious" answer is only obvious due to cultural biases. A computer might indeed solve the problem without "blinking an LED," but the answer it would likely to come up with is NOT what we think of as obvious. Simply put, the "data" given fits equally well with the hypothesis that the mapping is just the lower 3 (or 4) order bits of the binary representation of the first number. It would seem to me that a computer would be more likely to hit upon this mapping, unless it were endowed with a lot of "common sense" and (human) cultural information. --- Reid Simmons --- ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jul 84 1157 PDT From: John McCarthy Subject: re: AI-speak ?? (from SAIL's BBOARD) [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI. This reply is in response to a request from David Cheriton@Navajo.] jmc - As one of the importers of the first two terms from philosophy into AI, I will say what I mean. ontology - The dictionaries define it as the branch of philosophy that studies what exists. In the bad old days, they argued about whether physical objects, disembodied spirits, God, exist. Quine (1940s or 1950s?) modernized the idea by saying that the ontology of a theory is the set over which the bound variables range. As a nominalist he favored an impoverished ontology, e.g. just because you want to predicate red(x), doesn't mean that you need red or redness as an object. The AI usage is derived from Quine's and remains quite close to it. The programs or logical sentences have variables, and the ontology of the program includes the sets from which these variables take values. For example, Mycin includes bacteria in its ontology, because some of its variables range over bacteria (the kinds of bacteria, not individual bacteriums), but doesn't have doctors. It actually doesn't have patients either. epistemology - In philosophy it means the study of knowledge, its sources and limits. Again AI usage is derived from that and remains fairly close. AI is more concerned than most philosophers with how the knowledge is represented. AI is concerned with "epistemologically adequate" internal languages for programs, i.e. languages that are adequate for representing the knowledge that can actually be obtained with given opportunities to observe and experiment. See McCarthy and Hayes "Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence", Machine Intelligence 4, 1969. teleology - I haven't used it in AI, so I can't speak precisely about AI usage. In philosophy it means explaining things by ascribing purpose to them. Extreme examples are, "The purpose of the rainbow is to teach us that the next time God destroys the world it will be by fire and not by water" and "The purpose of the ant is to teach us not to be lazy". Teleological explanations were driven out of biology accompanied by considerable squabbling. In AI the term might be used to refer to goal-driven programs, but then it would seem that the usage is further from the philosophical usage. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 17 Jul 84 11:45:17-PDT From: Bruce Buchanan Subject: AI jargon [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] David, [...] Let me try to give you a straight answer on terminology. I spent five years in hard-core philosophy and never felt that the terms were well-defined there, so it is no wonder that AIers who have adopted the terms from philosophy also have no consistent definitions. Dictionary defns are probably not very illuminating on these things, so I haven't looked at what you might have found there. ONTOLOGY -- a conceptual map, a systematic description of the objects in the world, a study of "what is" [or the discipline of creating an ontology] EPISTEMOLOGY -- a study of what we know & how we know it, usually broken into a priori and a posteriori (or empirical) knowledge TELEOLOGY -- a study of purposeful behavior (often, though not always, defined wrt God's purpose). This is oversimplified, of course. I would recommend Plato's Timaeus and Theaetetus on the first two, and Aristotle's Metaphysics on the last. By the time St.Thomas began writing about these things, their definitions are not so clear as in Plato & Aristotle. Epistemology is the most relevant to AI in its emphasis on knowledge -- what it is, where it comes from, etc. [...] bgb ------------------------------ Date: Wed 18 Jul 84 14:35:14-EDT From: David Rogers Subject: an interesting implicit definition of intelligence Can you spot the fallacy in this implicit definition of intelligence? "As the programs become more refined and the network of paths and boxes grow more complex, it becomes increasingly difficult to predict what a computer will decide. In one second, it can process between 10 and 100 thousand logical inferences, or syllogisms. In 1981, the Japanese government announced that it would provide almost a half a billion dollars in seed money over the next decade to produce machines that will be able to draw as many as 1 billion logical inferences per second. If that goal is achieved, a computer could make, in one second, a decision so complex that it would take a human 30 years to unravel it, assuming that he or she could think constantly at the superhuman speed of 1 syllogism per second. Given 10 seconds to ponder a problem, a computer's decision would have to be taken on faith. By human standards it would be unfathomable. When computers can have thoughts that would take more than a human lifetime to understand, it is tempting to consider them smarter than their makers." From "The Lure of Artificial Intelligence", by George Johnson, in the APF reporter, Vol 7, No. 3. (In a box at the bottom of the page, one reads "George Johnson, a freelance writer, is reporting on the quest to build computers smarter than humans.") ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 1984 1329 PDT From: Larry Carroll Reply-to: LARRY@JPL-VLSI.ARPA Subject: adverts I don't mind messages like the one (very indirectly) from IBM. I'm quite capable of recognizing even very covert bias and would discount it auto- matically. I'd much rather do my own filtering than have a moderator do it. larry @ jpl-vlsi ------------------------------ Date: Tue 17 Jul 84 20:29:07-PDT From: Ken Laws Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI Subject: GMR DATALOG Demo at AAAI Kurt Godden informs me that General Motors Res. Labs. will have a live demo of their DATALOG natural language query system at their AAAI Villa Capri hospitality suite August 7-8. Vistors can also discuss GMR projects in expert systems, natural language, computer vision, robotics, etc. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jul 84 18:35-PDT From: mclure @ Sri-Unix.arpa Subject: Delphi Experiment: move 2 please? The Vote Tally -------------- Folks, the moves are in and have been tallied. The winner is: 1. ... c5. A total of 21 votes were cast. Originally there was a tie between 1. ... c5 and 1. ... e5 with 7 votes each. I cast the deciding vote in favor of the Sicilian because machines play optimally in Classical double-KP positions and we want to avoid positions the machine likes. The Machine Moves ----------------- The Prestige 8-ply replied 2. Nf3 from book in 0 seconds. Humans Move # Votes BR BN BB BQ BK BB BN BR 1 ... c5 8 BP BP ** BP BP BP BP BP 1 ... e5 7 -- ** -- ** -- ** -- ** 1 ... e6 2 ** -- BP -- ** -- ** -- 1 ... d5 1 -- ** -- ** WP ** -- ** 1 ... d6 1 ** -- ** -- ** WN ** -- 1 ... f5 1 WP WP WP WP -- WP WP WP 1 ... Nc6 1 WR WN WB WQ WK WB ** WR Prestige 8-ply The Game So Far --------------- 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Your move, please? Replies to Arpanet: mclure@sri-unix or Usenet: sri-unix!mclure. DO NOT SEND REPLIES TO THE ENTIRE LIST! Just send them to one of the above addresses. Addendum -------- For readers who don't understand all of this, I am conducting a Delphi experiment wherein a large network-based readership can send moves in for a chess game. Each reader's move is a vote that is combined with other readers' votes. The move with the most votes is played against the Prestige chess machine searching a minimum of 8 full ply deep. At this level it is probably playing around the ELO 2200 level. The results will eventually be published in a journal along with an analysis of the experiment. [In view of the limited number of respondents, I shall have to discontinue publishing the play-by-play in this digest. Please contact mclure@sri-unix if you wish to follow the game. -- KIL] ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 21-Jul-84 15:23:20-PDT,15835;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 21-Jul-84 15:20:28 Date: Sat 21 Jul 1984 15:11-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #94 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Sunday, 22 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 94 Today's Topics: Expert Systems - INDUCE/PLANT Request, AI Tools - LOGO & Islisp/Franz Lisp Utility Functions, News Sources - NEXIS, NEWSNET, Conferences - AAAI-84 Registration, Intelligence - Metrics & Understanding & Evolution, Books - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, Linguistics - Tense and Aspect, Seminars - Second-Order Polymorphic Lambda Calculus & Probabilistic Analysis of Hierarchical Planning Problems ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 Jul 84 12:42:15-PDT (Sun) From: ihnp4!alberta!calgary!masrani @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: request for information (INDUCE/PLANT expert system) Article-I.D.: calgary.473 I would appreciate any information (references) on an expert system called INDUCE/PLANT. Apparantly, this system is able to deduce rules about diagnosing soybean diseases from cases. Thanks in advance. Roy Masrani, University of Calgary. ..!alberta!calgary!masrani ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jul 84 20:53 EDT From: Jill Smudski Subject: LOGO implementation I am looking for an implementation of LOGO to run on a Symbolics 3600 Lisp Machine. Can anyone send me information about such a thing? Also, any pointers to current computer science (as opposed to educational) research with LOGO would be appreciated. Thanks, Jill Smudski mailing address: University of Pennsylvania Moore School rm 66 33rd and Walnut Sts Philadelphia, PA 19104 ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 1984 11:38:31-EDT From: Philip.Kasprzyk at CMU-RI-ISL2 Subject: Islisp/Franz Lisp Utility Functions [Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] I am building a Lisp Utility Function Library for use in Islisp. In addition to the built-in Islisp functions dones anyone out there know of any existing libraries or have any private libraries that they could contribute to the cause? Documented functions would be nice but I can live with undocumented code as long as the functionality of the code is obvious. If you can help me please send mail to pmk@isl2. The current status of this project is that I have slightly over 200 functions which I am in the process of categorizing. -Thanks Phil Kasprzyk ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jul 84 8:18:46-PDT (Wed) From: ihnp4!houxm!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!gmf @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Request for Franz Lisp info Article-I.D.: uvacs.1375 I will be grateful for information on where to get a Franz Lisp with its usual library written in C to be run on an Intel 8286 (new, compatible with 8086) running under Xenix ("small" UNIX). There will be plenty of memory (hard disk). Presumably any Franz Lisp written in C which will run on a VAX 11/780 using UNIX will be OK. Gordon Fisher c/o CS Dept Univ of Virginia Charlottesville, Va 22901 ...!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!gmf ------------------------------ Date: Sat 21 Jul 84 09:56:02-EDT From: Wayne McGuire Subject: NEXIS, NEWSNET & AI I would like to know if anyone here has searched occasionally, or searches regularly, NEXIS and/or NEWSNET (two commercial databases which store the full text of many leading U.S. magazines and newsletters). Has anyone found either database to be a particularly useful source of information about developments in artificial intelligence and related topics? Opinions, impressions, evaluations, tips, gripes, etc. would be appreciated. -- Wayne McGuire -- ------------------------------ Date: Sat 21 Jul 84 10:55:04-PDT From: AAAI-OFFICE Subject: AAAI-84 Registration Hello! We've had an overwhelming response to the AAAI-84 Conference this year. We have room for 2,600 people for the Technical Program, and, at this time, we have about 50 seats left. If you expect to walk-in, please call Kathy Kelly (415-328-3123) to make some alternate arrangements. AAAI Office ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jul 84 00:28 EDT From: Henry Lieberman Subject: Implicit Definition of Intelligence I see the fallacy as being that the word "decision" in the article connotes some willful decision of real significance to a human, such as "Should I vote for Reagan or Mondale?". The article confuses it in the lay reader's mind with the computer science sense of "decision", or primitive conditional, like "If this location is zero, I'll skip to the next instruction". Obviously, one decision of a person in the former sense may invovle zillions of primitive conditionals, so the human and machine "speeds" are not directly comparable. Why wait for the fifth generation? The Lisp machine I'm using right now is much smarter than a person, because a person can consciously consider only a few new subgoals every second, whereas a Lisp machine can do a million function calls a second. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jul 84 09:52:55 PDT From: Adolfo Di-Mare Subject: An interesting implicit definition of intelligence The following is an even more intelligent program than the one described in the Lure of AI. Any human being trying to figure it out will die blue even for small values of n: n + 1 m = 0 / AI(m,n) = < AI(m-1,1) n = 0 \ AI(m-1,AI(m,n-1)) otherwise Adolfo /// P.S.I The A in the above definition stands for Artificial. The I stands for Intelligence (it's easy when you know it). P.S.II I couldn't come up with the Prolog version, which is far more intelligent. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 19 Jul 84 16:49:27-PDT From: PEREIRA@SRI-AI.ARPA Subject: Re: An interesting implicit definition of intelligence [In response to my personal query about the "AI" function in Adolfo DiMare's message. -- KIL] Yes, that's the Ackermann function. The problem with it for benchmarking is that it is hyperexponential, and so the intermmediate values soon become too big to represent (even with bignums!) -- Fernando ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Jul 84 02:26 PDT From: Gloger.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. people Someone (I no longer have any record of who) apparently said: >> If a program passes a test in calculus the best we can grant >> it is that it can pass tests. ... >> We make the same mistaken assumption about humans--that is >> that because you can pass a "test" you understand a subject. To which Dave Seaman replied: > Suppose the program writes a Ph.D. dissertation and passes its > "orals"? Then can we say it understands its field? If not, > then how can we decide that anyone understands anything? Implicit in the first quote is the answer to the second. We cannot (absolutely) decide that anyone understands anything, i.e. that understanding exists, since "understanding" as used here is not a scientific observable. We can, if we wish, observe the observables, like test passing. And we can choose to infer from them the existence of a causative agency for them, like "understanding" for test passing. But this inference is true only to the extent that we can observe the agency; and it is valid only to the extent that from it we can deduce other, observably true and useful facts. If you're willing for "understanding" to mean some observable thing, like passing of some tests or other, then you can decide if someone "understands" something, i.e. if "understanding" exists. Otherwise, you can't absolutely decide where, when, or how much understanding exists or doesn't exist. And ditto the entire preceding discussion with the buzzword "understanding" replaced by "intelligence." And again, replaced by "luck." And again, by "soul." And again, by "god." (Credit for the basis of much of my argument is due to Prof. Andrew J. Galambos.) Paul Gloger ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jul 84 11:42:10-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!abh @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Brain and technology Article-I.D.: ccivax.183 I beg to add that if the brain did not have advanced coordination centers for speech and hand, thumbs would be as useful as your big toes. Andrew Hudson -- Christine, strawberry girl, Christine, banana split lady..... - Siouxsie & the Banshees ...[rlgvax | decvax | ucbvax!allegra]!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!abh ------------------------------ Date: 20 July 1984 16:51-EDT From: Hal Abelson Subject: publication announcement The book "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" written by Gerry Sussman, Julie Sussman, and me has just been published (jointly by MIT Press and McGraw-Hill). This book is based on the introductory programming course that we teach at MIT. All programming is done in the Scheme dialect of Lisp (which nowadays is the entry-level programming language used at MIT). We attempt to present an "AI/Lisp"-flavored introduction to the issues of coping with the complexity of large software systems. We hope that this point of view can become an alternative to the Pascalitis that has infected so much of computer science education. Copies of the book should be available at the Lisp conference and at AAAI.. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 19 Jul 84 16:52:04-PDT From: Bob Moore Subject: Tense and Aspect [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by permission of the author.] The difficulty of analyzing the semantics of tense and aspect in natural language has been widely discussed in the past few years, but I hadn't realized the extent to which this problem plagued medieval scholars until I found this item in The Oxford Book of Oxford (Jan Morris, ed.): Three Oxford academics were deputed to wait upon Henry III in 1266 to ask permission for a postern gate through the city wall at Oxford. The King (in Latin) asked them what they wanted: First scholar: We ask the licence for the making of a gate through the city wall. Second scholar: No, we do not want the making of a gate, for that would mean the gate was always in the making and never made. What we want is a gate made. Third scholar: No, we do not want a gate made, for a gate made must already be in existence somewhere else, and so we should be taking somebody else's gate. The King told them to go away and make up their minds. When they returned in three days' time they had agreed on a formula: We ask permission that the making of a gate be made. [Ostium fieri in facto esse]. Permission was granted." ------------------------------ Date: 19 July 1984 09:52-EDT From: Arline H. Benford Subject: Seminar - Second-Order Polymorphic Lambda Calculus [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] DATE: Tuesday, July 24, 1984 TIME: 1:45PM Refreshments 2:00PM Lecture PLACE: NE43-512A "THE SEMANTICS OF EXPLICIT POLYMORPHISM" Kim B. Bruce Department of Mathematical Sciences Williams College Williamstown, MA Facilities for defining GENERIC or POLYMORPHIC routines, i.e., routines which can have several typed instantiations, are now available in programming languages such as Ada, Clu, and ML. We consider a typed calculus called second-order polymorphic lambda calculus as a theoretical model for EXPLICIT polymorphism -- where types appear as parameters of procedures as in Ada and Clu (and as opposed to ML). The proof theory of the second-order polymorphic lambda calculus was reasonably well understood before there was much concern over its semantics (as is common in the development of logical systems). The problem with assigning semantics to the system is that terms may be applicable to their own types, which involves a classical type violation. Reynolds attempted to construct a kind of set-theoretic model for the language but ran into difficulties, and subsequently demonstrated that no such model is possible. Donahue attempted to construct a model using complete lattices and also failed. Finally, McCracken and also Haynes successfully constructed models usng Scott domains. We describe in this talk a general notion of model for the second-order lambda calculus. In support of our definitions we establish soundness and completeness results relative to our semantics for the previously given axiom system for the calculus. We also review related results and open problems. HOST: Professor Albert R. Meyer ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Jul 84 10:33:05 PDT From: Guy M. Lohman Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar Subject: Seminar - Probabilistic Analysis of Hierarchical Planning Problems [Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] IBM San Jose Research Lab 5600 Cottle Road San Jose, CA 95193 Wed., July 25 Computer Science Seminar 10:30 A.M. PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS OF HIERARCHICAL PLANNING PROBLEMS Aud. A Multi-level decision problems can often be modeled as multi-stage stochastic programs. Hierarchical planning systems designed for the solution of such problems can then be viewed as stochastic programming heuristics, and they can be subjected to the same kind of analytical performance analysis that has become customary in the area of combinatorial optimization. We will give a general formulation of these multi-stage stochastic programs and sketch a framework for the design and analysis of heuristics for their solution. The various ways to measure the performance of such heuristics are reviewed, and some relations between these measures are derived. Our concepts are illustrated on a simple two-level planning problem of a general nature and on a more complicated two-level scheduling problem. This talk is based on joint work with Alexander Rinnooy Kan and Leen Stougie. J. K. Leustra, Department of Computer Science, University of California at Berkeley Host: B. Simons [...] ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 24-Jul-84 23:57:43-PDT,17997;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 24-Jul-84 23:55:14 Date: Tue 24 Jul 1984 23:44-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #95 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 25 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 95 Today's Topics: Expert System - Ben-Zoma Mailing List & Plant/Induce reference, AI Tools - XLISP Sources, Parapsychology - Justification & Mailing List, Adminstrivia - Lab Reports and Project Descriptions, Seminar - Learning State Variables, Project - Engineer's Assistant for Fault Diagnosis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 84 15:00:46 pdt From: Angela Shiflet Subject: Ben-Zoma Mailing List RESEARCH ANNOUNCEMENT Ben-Zoma is a knowledge- and experience-based scientific/engineering advisor which converses in technical English. It learns by abstracting solution methods and language understanding derived from assisting users. Requests, once converted to a frame-like form, are dispatched to a distributed consortium of experts. These sources of expertise (e.g. MACSYMA on LISPM, LM on a Cray, SMP on a VAX, as well as new experts) are callable through drivers written in LISP. Ben-Zoma will create and dispatch code for appropriate special-purpose processors (e.g. Crays, Cosmic Cubes, data flow machines, and VAX arrays). Graphical displays of numerical data will be incorporated where appropriate. Work on this project has begun under the direction of Dr. Ted Einwohner at the Univeristy of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Computing Research Group, under contract to the Department of Energy. Comments and suggestions are welcomed: ben-zoma-discussion@lll-crg.ARPA To be added to this list send mail to: ben-zoma-discussion-request@lll-crg.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Mon 23 Jul 84 14:06:09-PDT From: Michael Walker Subject: Plant/Induce reference Roy, The Plant/Induce work was done by Ryzard Michalski at the University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois. The paper I have is: Michalski, R.S., and Chilausky, R.L. Learning by being told and learning from examples: an experimental comparison of the two methods of knowledge acquisition in the context of developing an expert system for soybean disease diagnosis. International Journal of Policy Anaysis and Information Systems, Vol 4, No. 2, 1980. I believe he also published a version in 1981 in the International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. If you are interested in systems that learn rules automatically, you might also want to look at Peter Politakis' SEEK system described in Artificial Intelligence, January 1984. Mike Walker walker@sumex-aim.arpa ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jul 84 8:28:06-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!jcw @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: XLISP sources posted to net.sources Article-I.D.: cvl.1193 After dozens of requests reached me, I decided to post the sources to David Betz' XLISP interpreter. It is written entirely in C, commented uncommonly well, fairly portable, and has some rather neat features including primitives for object-oriented programming. The program is in the public domain, Copyright by David Betz. Jay Weber ..!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!jcw ..!seismo!rochester!jay jay@rochester.arpa ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jul 84 13:10:50-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper@Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Why discuss super- and para-normal phenomena Article-I.D.: decwrl.2741 "Alex.Rudnicky" asks: "It may be fun to speculate about the super-normal and the para-normal, but what does it have to do with AI?" Answer: A number of things. First let's discuss the "super-normal", a phrase which I will take to refer to "exceptional human performance." 1) Like it or not, we're stuck (at least for now) with describing the "I" in "AI" in terms relative to human performance. In most instances average human performance is all that is required of our programs, but sometimes, the exceptional is called for. Human performance serves as a guide to what CAN be done, because it HAS been done. According to the standard assumptions of AI, if humans can do it, so can sufficiently powerful, well-programmed machines. If humans cannot, then there may well be a NP-hard or worse problem involved. For example: can the type of associative memory retrieval associated with human intelligence be merged effectively with total recall? Or must the information available by free-form association always be strictly limited? If total well-indexed recall is done by at least one human being than it can presumably also be done by a machine. Otherwise, it remains an open question. 2) An understanding of human information processes is seen as either absolutely necessary or (depending on what "school" of AI philosophy you subscribe to) at least very useful to AI programming. If your model of human information processing cannot account for exceptional human performance then it is either incorrect or incomplete. Knowledge that some adults have "eidetic" memory (near perfect image memory) may well be critical to understanding all memory. Knowledge that a large percentage of children (perhaps all if we could test them young enough) have eidetic memory and then lose it as they grow up, should be taken into account in theories of information acquisition from a near "tabla rasa" state. In other words, knowing the limits of human information processing is, in the long term, very important to the field. In the short term, given our distance from our ultimate goals, the need is less critical. Some relatively brief exchanges in an informal forum seems appropriate to keep people thinking about it. Which brings us to the paranormal. First of all, claims of paranormal abilities would seem to be included as exceptional human information processing capabilities. My previous comments about the "super-normal" applies. Some effort (probably not much from the viewpoint of current AI) should be applied to determine whether or not, in general, the phenomena exist and if so whether they should be considered as an exceptional cognitive skill or only an exceptional perceptual skill. In the latter case its relevance is much reduced. (My own opinion is: the experimental evidence makes it much more likely than not that psi exists, and I would tend to see it as sensory/motor rather than cognitive, though ESP seems to share many characteristics with memory and dreaming). Second, paranormal phenomena brings considerable doubt to the basic assumption of AI: that human cognitive function can be explained as information processing and therefore can be simulated or approximated by a sufficiently powerful and well programmed artificial symbolic processor. This is of minor pragmatic concern if psi is simply a rarely used IO channel. Several parapsychologists have theorized, however, that psi functioning as perception is simply "leakage" from its fundamental purpose in the organism; to wit, an essential part of one or another cognitive function. Candidate functions I have seen mentioned are intuition, creativity and memory. If so, (and I personally doubt it) then human cognitive processing may not be simulatable on a Turing machine but only on a Turing machine plus (you'll pardon the expression) oracle. IN SUMMARY: while it seems premature to spend too much time now worrying about exceptional (particularly paranormal) human performance, the AI community should remain aware of this area. It might become very important to us and we should not be caught unaware. Topher Cooper USENET: ...decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper ARPA: cooper%pbsvax.DEC@decwrl.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jul 84 13:12:05-PDT (Fri) From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper@Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Continuation of ESP discussion available. Article-I.D.: decwrl.2742 On May 21 Ken Laws posted a reply summarizing an article from Dr. Dobb's containing a theory of ESP. I replied with a detailed criticism of the theory (at least as summarized) and suggested that further contributions be mailed to me rather than posted. I have put together a single file containing: 1) A repeat of the original pair of articles. 2) Some corrections/updates to my article. 3) The five responses I got from my article. 4) My replies to those five responses. The compilation is 745 lines long. Anyone who is interested in getting a copy should send me mail requesting it. Unless you request otherwise you will also be added to a mailing list to receive the next round, if there is one. Your name and location will be kept confidential. Any submissions for the next round will be public unless you request that I remove your name and location from the posting. Topher Cooper USENET: ...decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper ARPA: cooper%pbsvax.DEC@decwrl.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: Tue 24 Jul 84 23:17:30-PDT From: Ken Laws Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI Subject: Lab Reports and Project Descriptions Moderating the digest has become sufficiently routine that I can devote increased time and creative energy to shaping the contents. I can thus accept submissions to new digest "departments" for lab reports, project summaries, and abstracts of recent or current work. My intention is to better inform readers by publishing "promotional" material originally written for other audiences. This is similar to AIList's circulation of seminar abstracts, a feature that I consider highly successful. I therefore encourage list members to send abstracts of their technical reports, conference papers, and journal articles to AIList. Usenet members should preferably send such items directly to AILIST@SRI-AI rather than through net.ai, although the usual mechanisms will operate to prevent double distribution of net.ai submissions. I shall screen the items and publish them in coherent groups as the digest load permits. The digesting delay for such material may be several weeks, but I shall try to keep the backlog to a reasonable size by publishing special issues of abstracts as necessary. I shall also pass along a limited number of carefully edited messages derived from Arpanet-distributed position postings and similar material. I shall take considerable liberties with the arrangement and format of the original texts without inserting [...] annotations, and shall suppress explicit solicitations (although the unofficial custom on the Arpanet has been to permit such commercialism by academic institutions). I shall also try to avoid repeating boilerplate lab descriptions that AIList has already published. Nonacademic institutions may [occasionally] submit similar promotional material so long as Arpanet standards are respected. My decision to distribute such material will be based solely on interest to the general AIList reader, not on the potential benefit of filling AI-related positions. Please don't dump all of your archived blurbs on me today or tomorrow; we have plenty of time. I should like to see the submissions dribble in over a period of >>years<<, so wait until an appropriate opportunity (e.g., when a related discussion comes up in the digest or when your dissertation goes to press). Eventually we shall reach a steady state with material being submitted as it is produced for other purposes. I anticipate that these news items will require more editing than normal submissions, particularly the lab reports derived from promotional material. You can simplify my job if you provide a meaningful "Subject:" line such as the "Seminar - ..." headers I have been distributing. Keywords such as "Abstract" and "Project" should be followed by a very short title that readers can use to screen the messages. The submissions themselves should be concise and closely related to the interests of the AIList readership. (The enthusiasm of your colleagues, bosses, and sponsors for your 200 papers on educational parapsychology may not be shared by a general audience.) Please include sufficient "Contact:" information (e.g., address and phone number) that I shall not have to help readers wanting further information. I shall be fairly strict about screening material I consider marginal, and should appreciate your consideration in minimizing this unpleasant part of my responsibilities. Rejections will be handled by "form letter", and generally will not include detailed justifications. I hope that few will interpret such a notice as an invitation to debate or the opening round in a series of negotiations. Comments to AIList-Request@SRI-AI on this new policy will be helpful in determining whether this experiment should be modified or discontinued. (Your silence will be interpreted as lack of disapproval.) I shall keep list readers informed of any significant trends in the expressed opinions. -- Dr. Kenneth I. Laws AIList Moderator ------------------------------ Date: Tue 24 Jul 84 12:36:44-PDT From: Juanita Mullen Subject: Seminar - Learning State Variables [Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.] DATE: Friday, July 27, 1984 LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry TIME: 12:05 SPEAKER: Tom Dietterich Heuristic Programming Project Stanford University TOPIC: Learning About Systems That Contain State Variables It is difficult to learn about systems that contain state variables when those variables are not directly observable. This talk formalizes this learning problem and presents a method called the iterative extension method for solving it. In the iterative extension method, the learner gradually constructs a partial theory of the state-containing system. At each stage, the learner applies this partial theory to interpret the I/O behavior of the system and obtain additional constraints on the structure and values of its state variables. These constraints can be applied to extend the partial theory by hypothesizing additional internal state variables. The improved theory can then be applied to interpret more complex I/O behavior. This process continues until a theory of the entire system is obtained. Several sufficient conditions for the success of this method will be presented including (a) the observability and decomposability of the state information in the system, (b) the learnability of individual state transitions in the system, (c) the ability of the learner to perform synthesis of straight-line programs and conjunctive predicates from examples and (d) the ability of the learner to perform theory-driven data interpretation. The method is being implemented and applied to the problem of learning UNIX file system commands by observing a tutorial interaction with UNIX. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 12 Jul 84 04:33:14-PDT From: MEISENSTADT@USC-ECLB.ARPA Subject: Project - Engineer's Assistant for Fault Diagnosis Human Cognition Research Laboratory, Open University, Milton Keynes, England LOCATION: 50 miles north of London (between 38 and 60 minutes by train, depending upon the service). COMPUTING FACILITIES: Symbolics 3600 Lisp Machine (for the dedicated use of this project), VAX 11/750 running NIL, Prolog, and POP-11, and dedicated lines to the Open University's three DECsystem-20's running Interlisp, Maclisp, Edinburgh Prolog, etc. ALL TERMINALS IN OUR LAB ALSO HAVE DIRECT ARPANET ACCESS. ACTIVE AI PERSONNEL: Two tenured staff members, (Marc Eisenstadt and Jon Slack), three research fellows, three Ph.D. students, and one consultant programmer, all of whom constitute the Human Cognition Research Laboratory's mainstream AI people. The OU also has other active AI researchers on site, working under Max Bramer in the Maths Faculty and Tim O'Shea in the Institute of Educational Technology. We are a vigorous and growing group of researchers, and our current manageable size enables us to offer the best AI computing facilities of any academic institution in Europe. PROJECT: "A Knowledge Engineer's Assistant for Constructing Knowledge Based Fault Diagnosis Systems" PROJECT SYNOPSIS: We are building a repertoire of rapid prototyping tools intended to speed up both the analysis of verbal protocols (such as those obtained during interviews with domain experts), and also the encoding of elicited knowledge into implementable form. The applied aspect of this work is the design of intelligent cross-referencing and browsing facilities linked directly to a coding window. The theoretical aspect of this work is an investigation of the process of theory-formation as typified by modern day Knowledge Engineers. CONTACT: MEISENSTADT@USC-ECLB, or telephone (international) 011-44-908-653149 or 011-44-908-661566. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 26-Jul-84 13:07:13-PDT,20118;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 26-Jul-84 13:06:06 Date: Thu 26 Jul 1984 13:02-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #96 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Friday, 27 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 96 Today's Topics: AI Culture - Genealogy of AI, AI Literature - Robotics Directory, AI Languages - Lisp Speed Benchmarks, Humor - Naming Names, Review - Neuroanatomy and Electromagnetic Waves, Turing Test - Discussion ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 23 Jul 84 15:41:57-PDT (Mon) From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd!decwrl!flairvax!pfps @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Genealogy of AI Article-I.D.: flairvax.677 David S. Johnson of ATT Labs has gathered together a genealogy of theoretical computer science along intellectual, rather than biological bloodlines. That is, the parent-child relationship has been replaced by the more significant PhD advisor-advisee relationship. I have just seen a report that he produced that contains 672 of these entries and several genealogical trees taken from the data and I thought that it would be a nice idea to produce a similar listing for Artificial Intelligence. This data could show how AI has spread from its initial centres to its current broad coverage. One problem with such a genealogy is collecting and organizing all the data. Therefore I am asking for anyone who wants to contribute data about AI advisor-advisee relationships to send mail to me. To make the organizing process easier I would like all responders to follow the strict format detailed below: 1/ no ``bug killer'' lines 2/ each entry is one line and should contain the following information a) advisee name with surname first b) advisor name with surname first c) institution where degree granted (in a short format) d) year in which degree granted (all four digits) e) type of degree (PhD, MSc, or other graduate degree) f) field of research (AI, Physics, Mathematics, etc.) f) area of research (natural language, expert systems, etc.) g) current affiliation of advisee (in a short format) 3/ fields separated by # characters 4/ unknown values indicated by ? characters 5/ null values indicated by empty fields 6/ all entries together at the beginning of the message and followed by a blank line Here are three sample entries: Cohen, Robin#Perrault, Ray#Toronto#1984#PhD#AI#natural language#Waterloo Patel-Schneider, Peter F.#Mylopoulos, John#Toronto#1978#MSc#AI#knowledge representation#FLAIR Patel-Schneider, Peter F.#McCalla, Gord#Toronto#1978#MSc#AI#knowledge representation#FLAIR [I had to break the longer lines for AIList. -- KIL] When entering names try to use the name from the thesis unless the person's name has since changed and the changed version is more well-known. For institution names try to use the shortest name in common use which is unique. For example, use Toronto for University of Toronto, FLAIR for Fairchild Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence, and other well-known short forms such as Berkeley and MIT but NOT UofT for the University of Toronto or the University of Texas. Fields of research include AI, Computer Science, Physics, Mathematics, Philosophy, Psychology, and Chemistry. The idea here is to find out the backgrounds of AI people which is why AI is separated from Computer Science. Areas of research are most important when the field is AI and areas within AI include but are not limited to natural language, knowledge representation, expert systems, theorem proving, learning, and vision. A thesis advisor is that person officially recognized by the granting University as the advisor. If there is no such person then the advisor is that person who guided the research for the thesis. Such an advisor should be indicated by a '*' character after the name. If the official advisor did nothing besides act as a signing agent and someone else really did all the work then include two entries for the thesis, one listing the official advisor and the other the unofficial advisor again with a trailing '*' character. Also include two entries if there were two official advisors or two unofficial advisors but please do not go beyond two advisors for one thesis. To keep the amount of data within reasonable limits I am really only interested in people who are in AI (preferably doing research) or who have advised (directly or indirectly) someone in AI. So if you are in AI the data concerning you that I am interested in are your thesis advisor(s), their advisors, and so on as far back as can be traced. Of course, you can also include other relevant data if you so wish. If you know for certain that some advisor has no advanced degree please include this. I will assume that if someone has only a master's degree listed then that person has no PhD. I will collect all information sent to me and do as much error correction and redundancy elimination as possible. If enough responses are generated I will send out periodic lists of the information generated, otherwise I will reply only to the respondants. Peter F. Patel-Schneider {decvax!decwrl,hplabs}!flairvax!pfps ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jul 84 12:50:03-PDT (Tue) From: ihnp4!houxm!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!edison!rmk @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Robotics Directory Article-I.D.: edison.317 A few weeks ago someone posted a notice about the 1984 edition of the International Robotics Industry Directory. Would someone tell me the publisher of this directory, or where it could be obtained? Thanks much in advance, Bob Kossey {...houxm,...decvax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!iedl02}!edison!rmk (804) 978-6378 GE - Industrial Electronics Development Lab Charlottesville, Va. ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jul 1984 12:31:23-EDT From: Philip.Kasprzyk at CMU-RI-ISL2 Subject: Lisp Speed Benchmarks [Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] I am interested in determining the absolute speed of execution of a lisp system. I realize that this is a complicated task that is application and implementation dependant. Nevertheless I am seeking the following: 1) A "gibson mix" style benchmark for lisp based systems. 2) Any data that experienced users of lisp may have regarding performance. (I don't care what machine or dialect of lisp is reported) 3) Any method or program which translates a lisp program into another target high level language with execution speed as its objective. (I don't mean a normal lisp compiler) Can anyone out there help me? If so send mail to pmk@isl2. ------------------------------ Date: Mon 23 Jul 84 09:54:56-CDT From: David Throop Subject: naming names I have started naming names. It started with the observation that since I am David Throop, and David Throop is my name, then it follows that I am my name. There is obviously a flaw here; I am not my name. I mean, if I changed my name I would still be myself. So it is perhaps more clear to say that I am David Throop, and my name is "David Throop". (This is still off. I mean, "David Throop" is still a character string, a sequence of letters, and my name is something other than a sequence of letters. "David Throop" has a value that is a name, and the name has a value that is a person, and I am that person.) [Are you still with me?] That is, to say of course, that D - a - v - i - d - - T - h - r - o - o - p is still another character string that denotes a character string that denotes a name that denotes me. (The string "me" denoting the same person, coincidently, as is denoted by my name.) Which is all prologue to the question of whether I could give my name a name. Not the name "David Throop", of course. That's already taken. I considered naming my name "david throop" but I felt that this might cause some confusion. (And raises the ugly question of how to pronounce it. You see, the "h" silent in my last name, and though "Throop" is pronounced with a silent "h" I'm not sure that "throop" would be also.) [Which brings up the side issue of the version of my name as a pronounced set of sounds. And on reflection, I'm not sure whether the value of the character string "David Throop" is a sound sequence, or my name itself. Or it may be that the value of the sound sequence is the character string. Or its more likely that the sound sequence and the character string are two separate objects that happen to have the same value. Although, curiously, you can get from one to the other and back again without ever encountering me. I mean, even if you didn't know me, even if you didn't know that "David Throop" was a name, you could pronounce it and if you heard it you could spell it. But you'd probably have a little trouble with the silent "h". It persists in injecting itself into the whole problem.] But back to giving my name a name. People always say, "Well I'm not about to start naming names", and I think the forgoing illustrates some of the problems away from which people are shying. But then, how are we going to talk about my name if it is nameless? For instance, if I tell you that I don't want to sully my good name, and you reply, "What good name?" how can I reply? If I reply, "Why, David Throop, of course," then I haven't refered to my name, I've refered to myself. Of course, I could reply "Why, "David Throop", of course" but those little quote marks are kind of hard to see in a spoken retort, and that's the kind of challenge I reply to immediately. It wouldn't do to have a letter show up a week later saying "Why, "David Throop", of course." One needs to defend one's name promptly. Some people have a cute way of waving their hands in the air in order to indicate those marks, but it kind of takes the force out of the retort, and I must remember that my good name is on the line. So I've decided to name my name something else. Although I saw some good ideas in a book named "Your Baby's Name", I steered clear. "Jason" sounded nice, but somebody might think that that was somebody's name. And it's not. It's a name's name. I decided on G00483; as near as I can tell it's not being used for anything else right now. And it sounds like a name's name. But this brings up a question. Is G00483 my name's name? Or is it just my name for my name? (my own name, that is.) After all, my name doesn't have any need for its name. I'm the one that needs to know its name, so that I can refer to it when you question my good name. Since it doesn't name itself and I do, I'll just leave it as my name for the name of myself. Look, I realize this is all rather complex and I don't want to run it into the ground. Just understand. I've started naming names. I've got a good one. And for now, I'm retaining custody. Sincerely, David Throop ------------------------------ Date: Sun 22 Jul 84 23:34:17-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Neuroanatomy and Electromagnetic Waves The August issue of High Technology has an interesting article about EEG potentials in the brain in response to different stimuli. It points out, for instance, that the spatial patterns of the potentials are very different for a subject hearing the noun "rose" and another hearing the verb "rows". These patterns of oscillatory activity may be simply a side effect of neural processing or a fundamental information transfer mechanism. (It is suggested that transfer of signals via electromagnetic radiation may be faster than broadcasting via neural interconnections, but I find that hard to believe. It is also suggested that the resonant coupling of neural circuits may be a robust transmission mechanism in an organ that is continually rearranging synapses and even losing neurons [at about 50,000 per day, I think].) The temporal frequency spectra of these patterns are also presented as fuzzy hash functions possibly responsible for associative memory. A box accompanying the article discusses the Boltzmann Machine, an architecture based on neural models. Scott Fahlman (of NETL fame) and Geoffrey Hinton are quoted. (Scott mentioned this work in an AIList issue last year.) The Boltzmann machine apparently has stochastic behavior even for deterministic inputs; this simplifies stochastic analyses of its behavior. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: 22 Jul 84 14:12:05-PDT (Sun) From: hplabs!ames!eugene @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Should The Turing test be modified with the times? Article-I.D.: ames.427 I am not an AI expert, but I do know image processing and certain other computationally intensive tasks which are 'easy' for humans. I also know the original definition of the Turing test. I take issue with statements that LISP machines are 'smarter' or 'better' than humans for "subgoal" tasks. What I am wondering is "should the Test be modified to Our times?" I recall that Turing specified that a communication link such as a tty or phone could be used [1930s]. Should this be changed to a video link? [This is am example only, there might be other aspects.] Should the testee 'see' images? Can machines recognize defocused images of an animal and say "That is a cow" as humans could [to a limit]. Perhaps our definition of 'human' constitutes a moving target which might make the Test more difficult. The processing requirements of the Turing Test in the 1930s would be less than those of today. I can see it now: over a crude link, we discover that we cannot tell the difference between man and machine, then we hook up a video link and the difference 'becomes apparent.' Admittedly, one can argue that this is only a matter of adding more processig power, but ignore that argument for a while. Also, there might be audio examples (perhaps not as powerful as the video example). Comments? This is for discussion purposes, not just me. --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center ------------------------------ Date: 22 Jul 84 10:15:25-PDT (Sun) From: decvax!mit-athena!yba @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. p - (nf) Article-I.D.: mit-athe.213 You are trivializing the point, not understanding it. The test of whether an engineer understands engineering is that he can design and build things that work. I have met Ph.D.s who can write "learned" papers but cannot "do" anything concrete. If you must have a test, I'll assert that someone who can apply knowledge of a field to a new area, and can transmit that knowledge to another who was previously ignorant of said knowledge such that that person can apply the knowledge in the same way, has understanding (yes, it's recursive). Measurement of AI performance is important. It is notions like "test" that cause people to confuse "production systems" with "expert systems". You may recall that the original notion of "expert system" was "a system that solves problems the way (human) experts do". This has been reduced to rules-based production systems in many people's minds, because they think that experts solve problems by applying rules. I am not satisfied that this is true; the question several people have asked is "does a rules based system demonstrate an expert's intuition?" After all, it passes the "test" of applying knowledge to a problem. You can substitute "judgement", "intelligence", "understanding", or "talent" for the word intuition if you like. The question becomes rather concrete when you decide whether to allow a program to practice medicine. We have all heard of examples of accredited (human) doctors who have not been able to safely practice medicine although they passed all the qualifying "tests". In fact, there seems to be a great body of technique floating around in many disciplines; there is also a great lack of those who know what the limits of application of those techniques are (usually because they know the underlying assumptions and constraints). I greatly fear people who have become so proficient at using hammers that every problem begins to resemble a nail. I will also assert that you read my previous letter, processed the information, responded, and did all this without understanding what I meant. Now if we assume you disagree, what test would you design to see which of us was correct? (Warning: this is a hard problem). -- yba%mit-heracles@mit-mc.ARPA UUCP: decvax!mit-athena!yba ------------------------------ Date: 24 Jul 84 9:46:04-PDT (Tue) From: pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H.Pucc-I.ags @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Re: The Turing Test - machines vs. p - (nf) Article-I.D.: pucc-i.374 Reply to Mark Levine: The original example was of a program which passes calculus tests. You objected that such a program has not really demonstrated understanding. I agreed with your point before, and though I did not explicitly say so, I thought it was implicit in the fact that I did not express disagreement. I then suggested a different test: suppose a program writes a Ph.D. dissertation and passes its "orals." I didn't mention any specific field, but I was thinking of mathematics, where a Ph.D. dissertation involves the development of new mathematics. I then asked whether this program has demonstrated understanding of its field. > If you must have a test, I'll assert that someone who can apply knowledge > of a field to a new area, and can transmit that knowledge to another who > was previously ignorant of said knowledge such that that person can apply > the knowledge in the same way, has understanding (yes, it's recursive). I submit that the test I suggested meets the first half of your criterion. You have added a new point here which I overlooked: the ability to transmit knowledge should also be considered part of the test. I don't believe this part should be weighted as heavily, however, since the best doers are not necessarily the best teachers. My objective was not so much to establish the definitive test but to explore the question of whether a computer can demonstrate understanding of a particular field (which is closely related to the question of whether an adequate test can be devised). I don't understand why you think this is "trivializing the point." You admitted yourself that "measurement of AI performance is important." >I will also assert that you read my previous letter, processed the information, >responded, and did all this without understanding what I meant. Now if we >assume you disagree, what test would you design to see which of us was >correct? (Warning: this is a hard problem). I really don't understand why you are being so defensive. I agreed with your original point and I have already said so. In my own previous posting I did not state any opinions; I merely posed a question. My objective was enlightenment. I am sorry you interpreted this as an attack on your position. -- Dave Seaman My hovercraft is no longer full of ..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags eels (thanks to my confused cat). ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 27-Jul-84 22:58:27-PDT,12979;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 27-Jul-84 22:54:09 Date: Fri 27 Jul 1984 22:38-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #97 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Saturday, 28 Jul 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 97 Today's Topics: LISP - Pascal-Based Interpreter, AI Culture - Geneology and Citation Linkages, Humor - Naming Names & COME-FROM & Chaostron & Sex, Jargon - Teleolgy and Teleonomy, Philosophy - Mind and Body, Intelligence - Turing Test & Understanding, Seminar - LISP Debugger, Workshop - Hardware Design Verification ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27 Jul 1984 14:49:59 EDT From: Richard F. Hartung Subject: LISP interpreter I have a LISP interpreter written in PASCAL by Chris Meyers and myself. It has about 90 functions and is approximately MACLISP in dialect. It does its own garbage collection and is written in standard PASCAL. I currently have it running on an HP-1000 and a VAX under VMS. It has also been used with a Honeywell 6000. It can easily be cut down in size to run on small systems and is also easily expandable. If you would like a copy write to me on the net at: HARTUNG@USC-ISI.ARPA or write to: Dr. Michael A. Moran Lockheed Missles and Space Co. Advanced Software Laboratory O/92-10 B/255 3170 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA 94304 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Jul 1984 12:11:35 EDT From: Macintosh Devaluation Manager Subject: Geneology & Naming Names 1. The notion of studying the history of any subject via its intellectual linkages is hardly a new one. Advisor-advisee connections are important, but an equally relevant approach is via citation-tracing -- looking at who has quoted whom, and in what context. The best tool for this type of work is the Science Citation Index (from ISI). Here, you can look up any given article and find out who has referenced it during the past 12 months. With a bit of patience one can do a great deal of tracing by switching back and forth between the index and various articles. 2. David Throop's name problem was, as I recall, proposed in a more enjoyable form by Lewis Carroll, in the scene where the White Knight offers to sing a song to Alice. We learn not only what the song is, but what its name is, and what both the song and its name are called. (I think Hofstadter carries this even further in Goedel, Escher, Bach, too...) ------------------------------ Date: Sun 22 Jul 84 23:49:49-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: CACM Articles The July CACM has a few items that may be of interest to AIers. The first is a letter to the editor from Rellim C. Drahcir pointing out the relevance of Clark's COME-FROM statement to AI. (COME-FROM is an alternative to the GOTO. Drahcir claims that COME-FROM simplifies proof procedures: "It can be shown that an arbitrary starting point can be utilized for any program, given a clear statement of its terminus. Thus we have a computational analog of the long-sought and very elusive 'solve problem' computer instruction.") Another letter, from Vic Vyssotsky, explains the origins of the famous (phony) BTL TM on the Chaostron learning system. The Chaostron memo was reprinted in the April CACM. The journal also contains news notes on a Zurich workshop on AI in economics and management and a Kansas City symposium on the role of AI in command and control. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Thu 26 Jul 84 09:38:10-CDT From: David Throop Subject: infinite sexual partners [Forwarded from the UTexas-20 bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] "Due to the increase in the number of herpes cases reported, the staff at the Student Health Center suggests that people limit themselves to a finite number of sexual partners." -Daily Texan, September '83 We decided at the time that two monuments were in order. One is for the guy that has had a denumerably infinite number of sexual partners. But the other, still bigger monument would be for the guy that has had a nondenumerably infinite number of sexual partners. But we were curious. Who are these guys? And where do they get off? The guy that has had a denumerably infinite number of partners is obvious. He's the guy that slept with everyone now living, who has ever lived or who ever will live. But the other guy? Our investigations show that this guy is into group sex. He's the one that has slept with the power set of everyone now living, who has ever lived or who ever will live. But that leaves us with an unanswered question. Consider a woman named Polly who has slept with both these guys. The first guy has slept with Polly, while the other guy has, strictly, slept with the singlton set containing only Polly. Which should be more satisfying? ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jul 84 8:29:49-PDT (Wed) From: ihnp4!whuxle!pez @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: re: AI-speak ?? (from SAIL's BBOARD) Article-I.D.: whuxle.539 Please note that not only has biology exiled teleology but they have replaced it with teleonomy, meaning purposefulness in name only, that is to help in our understanding rather than to explain. See Konrad Lorenz Introduction to Ethology. Paul Zeldin. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Jul 84 23:24:26-PDT (Sun) From: ihnp4!houxm!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!edison!jso@Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: more on atheism (+ cross-over to "mind" discussion) Article-I.D.: edison.314 > I know not what Buddha says, but as for Descartes, cogito ergo sum! > Yes, Descartes believed the real world could be proved to exist, and > his famous propostion is but his first step: he proved he existed. > Please be kinder to Rene next time. He would not rest well if he > thought his method could be generally perceived to state the opposite > of what he meant. > David Rubin > {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david He *believed* that the real world could be proved to exist, but he certainly didn't prove it logically. It's been a while since I read his "proof", but I seem to remember something like this: He proves he exists, as a thinking entity, because the one thing he can't deny is that he thinks. He also experiences the external world through his senses; this can either be real, he decides, or the action of a "deceiving demon" (maya, illusion). Fine so far. How does he then "prove" that the outside world is real as opposed to some "deception"? Because God is Good. He proves this quite logically, he simply has some very questionable axioms... This is similar to his thoughts on mind-body dualism. He reached the conclusion that the mind (soul?) and body were of separate substances, and therefore could not interact. But of course they did, and faced with a nice, rational conclusion, and "facts" that disagreed with it, he of course retained his conclusion, giving as explanation that the mind and body couldn't interact, except in the pineal gland. [Huh?] Kind of suggests that there's something wrong with mind-body dualism. [Interesting how these netnews discussions cross-fertilize. To net.ai'ers: Note that this says nothing against the existence of the mind, but indicates that maybe there is no real duality, (the universe is one...), or maybe no real body (hmm...)] John Owens ...!{ {duke mcnc}!ncsu!uvacs houxm brl-bmd scgvaxd }!edison!jso ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jul 84 2:44:54-EDT (Tue) From: hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!ukc!west44!gurr@Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Should The Turing test be modified with the times? Article-I.D.: west44.276 I think that we're all missing something here - the Turing test was not designed to test how like a human a machine could be, but to test whether or not a machine could appear to think. Adding such facilities to the test such as a video link merely makes the test into an imitation game. This is not what the test was designed for. Personally, I think the test is totally inconclusive and irrelevant. It gives merely a subjective qualitative answer to a question which we cannot answer satisfactorily about other people, or even about ourselves (from some of the items on USENET, I'm sure some people don't think :-) !!!). mcvax "Hello shoes. I'm sorry \ but I'm going to have to ukc!west44!gurr stand in you again!" / vax135 Dave Gurr, Westfield College, Univ. of London, England. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jul 84 08:42:24 PDT (Friday) From: Hoffman.es@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Re: Ph.D. and 'understanding' From H. E. Booker in a piece in "Science" magazine (maybe around summer 1973): "At the conclusion of an ideal undergraduate education, a man's brain works well. He is convinced, not that he knows everything or even that he knows everything in a particular field, but that he stands a reasonable chance of understanding anything that someone else has already understood. Any subject that he can look up in a book he feels that he too can probably understand. On the other hand, if he cannot look it up in a book, he is uncertain what to do next. This is where graduate education comes in. Unlike the recipient of a Bachelor's Degree, the recipient of a Doctor's Degree should have a reasonable confidence in his ability to face what is novel and to continue doing so throughout life." --Rodney Hoffman ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 27 Jul 1984 17:34 EDT From: HENRY%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Seminar - LISP Debugger [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.] Steps Toward Better Debugging Tools For Lisp Henry Lieberman Thursday, 2 August 1984, 3 PM 7th floor playroom, 545 Technology Square Although contemporary Lisp systems are renown for their excellent debugging facilities, better debugging tools are still urgently needed. A basic flaw with the tools found in most implementations is that they are oriented towards inspection of specific pieces of program or data, and they offer little help in the process of localizing bugs within a large body of code. Among conventional tools, a stepper is the best aid for visualizing the operation of a procedure in such a way that a bug can be found without prior knowledge of its location. But steppers have not been popular, largely because they are often too verbose and difficult to control. We present a new stepper for Lisp, Zstep, which integrates a stepper with a real-time full-screen text editor to display programs and data. Zstep presents evaluation of a Lisp expression by visually replacing the expression by its value, conforming to an intuitive model of evaluation as a substitution process. The control structure of Zstep allows a user to "zoom in" on a bug, examining the program first at a very coarse level of detail, then at increasingly finer levels until the bug is located. Zstep keeps a history of evaluations, and can be run either forward or backward. Zstep borrows several techniques from the author's example-oriented programming environment, Tinker, including a novel approach to handling error conditions. A videotaped demonstration of Zstep will be shown. ------------------------------ Date: Wed 25 Jul 84 18:38:01-PDT From: Dikran Karagueuzian Subject: Workshop - Hardware Design Verification [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] WORKSHOP ON HARDWARE DESIGN VERIFICATION The IFIP Working Groups 10.2 and 10.5. Program have issued a call for papers to be delivered at a workshop to be held on November 26 and 27, 1984, in Technical University of Darmstadt, F.R. Germany. The workshop is on hardware design verification and will cover all aspects of verification methods for hardware systems, including temporal logic, language issues, and application of AI techniques, as well as other areas. The workshop committee is chaired by Hans Eveking, Institut fuer Datentechnik, Technical University of Darmstadt, D-6100 Darmstadt, Fed. Rep. Germany, (49) (6151) 162075, and includes Stephen Crocker, Aerospace Corporation, P.O. Box 92957, Los Angeles, California 90009. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 1-Aug-84 09:19:06-PDT,8823;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 1-Aug-84 09:16:25 Date: Wed 1 Aug 1984 09:01-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #98 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 1 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 98 Today's Topics: Expert Systems - Archaeology and PROSPECTOR, Image Processing - Request for Algorithms, Logic Programming - Public-Domain Theorem Provers, AI Languages - Frame-Based Languages, AI Hardware - Facom Alpha, LISP - Georgia Tech Lisp & Aztec C & Franz on P-E 3230, Seminar - Nonmonotonic Reasoning Using Dempster's Rule ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Jul 84 9:09:00-PDT (Thu) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!chandra @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Req: Info on Archaeological Expert - (nf) Article-I.D.: uiucuxc.28900002 Help!!! I am a Graduate student trying to build an Archeologist's assistant. This program is supposed to contain knowledge about human habitation patterns, anthroplogical aspects etc. This note is a request for any info on the application of a knowledge based programs to archeological surveying. I faintly remember having seen a reference on this topic long ago. I am currently thinking of using some of the ideas used in PROSPECTOR. Any Ideas, Comments, cues? Thanks, Navin Chandra (outside Illinois) Phone 1-800-872-2375 (extention 413) (in Illinois) Phone 1-800-252-7122 (extention 413) ------------------------------ Date: Sun 29 Jul 84 10:34:30-PDT From: Ken Laws Subject: Archaeology and PROSPECTOR PROSPECTOR is a pretty fair hierarchical inference system, but be advised that it provides no spatial reasoning mechanisms. The basic consultation mode asks questions about geologic conditions at a single position or "site". In map mode, it uses map data to provide the same information independently for every point on the map -- there is no spatial analysis or carry-over from one point to the next. You can add decisions based on criteria such as being "near a fault", but the reasoning mechanisms have no way of determining "nearness" automatically unless you provide a "nearness map"; neither can they reason about one site being nearer than its neighbors. These deficiencies could be fixed, but the existing PROSPECTOR is not a spatial reasoning system. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jul 84 11:44:30-PDT (Fri) From: ihnp4!drutx!zir @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: image processing Article-I.D.: drutx.763 I am trying to track down source code for image processing routines, such as digital filters, noise filters, dithering filters, shape recognition and visual database design. Any and all responses will be appreciated. I will post results in Net.sources if there is sufficient interest. Thanks for your time, Mark Zirinsky AT&TIS, Denver 31d48 (303) 538- 1063 ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jul 1984 13:36-PDT From: dietz%USC-CSE@USC-ECL.ARPA Subject: Public Domain Theorem Provers I'm trying to find out what's available in the public domain in the way of theorem proving programs and subroutine packages. If you have such please send a note to: Paul Dietz dietz%usc-cse@usc-ecl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Jul 84 22:01 EDT From: Tim Finin Subject: Frame-Based Languages I am investigating some implementation techniques for frame-base representation languages with inheritance. Most such languages do inheritance at "access time" and may or may not keep a local copy of the inherited data. I am trying to determine which languages and/or implementations of languages have instead done the inheritance at "definition time" by making some kind of explicit local copy or pointer to the inherited information. I am particularly interested in finding out if any languages have done this in a general way that would allow changes in the attributes of a generic object to be properly inherited by its current descendants. Tim ------------------------------ Date: Mon 30 Jul 84 18:23:17-EDT From: Wayne McGuire Subject: Facom Alpha MIS Week for 8/1/84 (p. 18) reports the following: ''Fujitsu Ltd. last week announced shipment next March of Japan's first Lisp machine, named Facom Alpha, claiming it is four times faster than the Symbolics 3600 in executing artificial intelligence programs such as expert systems. ''The Alpha, carrying a price tag of $90,930, was said to be a back-end processor connectable with a Fujitsu mainframe or the company's S-3000 super minicomputer. It runs 'Utilisp,' a local version of Lisp language developed by Tokyo University.'' What catches one's eye is the claim that the Facom Alpha is four times faster than the Symbolics 3600. Reading the popular computer press these days could easily give one the impression that Japan is about to trounce the U.S. in the development of both supercomputers and AI systems. Does anyone on AIList know whether this claim about the Facom Alpha's speed has any grounding in reality? -- Wayne McGuire -- ------------------------------ Date: Mon 30 Jul 84 17:34:23-CDT From: CMP.BARC@UTEXAS-20.ARPA Subject: Yet Another Lisp Dialect? I recently received a rather indirect inquiry concerning a Lisp dialect called "Georgia Tech Lisp". Could anyone out there provide or direct me to some information about this variant and its idiosyncrasies? Dallas Webster (CMP.BARC@UTexas-20) ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jul 84 10:09:44-PDT (Tue) From: hplabs!pesnta!lpi3230!steve @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Franz Lisp running on Perkin Elmer 3230 Unix Article-I.D.: lpi3230.142 Franz Lisp (Opus 38.79) is now running on a Perkin Elmer 3230 under their version 2.4 Unix (a V7 version). Soon after PE delivers their promised System 5.2, it will be ported to that system. For the many of you who have never heard of Perkin Elmer, They used to be called Interdata and an Interdata machine was the first machine to which Unix was ported in the mid seventies. The 3230 has about 90% of the speed of a VAX-780 for the price of a 750. For the few of you who actually HAVE a PE machine and want to use Franz Lisp, send me mail. We haven't yet decided under what terms to make it available. The port was too time consuming and expensive to just give it away, but we aren't in business and do not have the manpower to really market and support it. Maybe PE will distribute it on a third party basis at a reasonable cost. Steve Burbeck Linus Pauling Institute 440 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94306 (415)327-4064 hplabs!{analog,pesnta}!lpi3230!steve ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jul 1984 2132-CDT From: Usadacs at STL-HOST1.ARPA Subject: LISP in Aztec C, Public Domain Ref: AI Digest, V2 #90 "LISP in Aztec C", is avaliable from SIMTEL20 via FTP. MICRO: A.C. McIntosh, USADACS@STL-HOST1. ------------------------------ Date: Mon 30 Jul 84 15:14:35-PDT From: Juanita Mullen Subject: Seminar - Nonmonotonic Reasoning Using Dempster's Rule [Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.] DATE: Friday, August 3, 1984 LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry TIME: 12:05 SPEAKER: Matt Ginsberg Heuristic Programming Project Stanford University TOPIC: Non-monotonic Reasoning Using Dempster's Rule Rich's suggestion that the arcs of semantic nets be labeled so as to reflect confidence in the properties they represent is investigated in greater detail. If these confidences are thought of as ranges of acceptable probabilities, existing statistical methods can be used effectively to combine them. The framework developed also seems to be a natural one in which to describe higher levels of deduction, such as "reasoning about reasoning". ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 2-Aug-84 11:04:57-PDT,12336;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 2-Aug-84 11:02:42 Date: Thu 2 Aug 1984 10:54-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #99 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Thursday, 2 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 99 Today's Topics: AI Funding - Call for Questions, LISP - IBM 4341 Implementation?, Applications - Design and Test, Journal - Symbolic Computation, Book - Successful Dissertations and Theses by David Madsen, Intelligence - Turing Test & Understanding, Software Validation - Expert Systems, Seminar - Speech Recognition Using Lexical Information ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1 Aug 84 09:54 PDT From: stefik.pa@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Call for Questions: AAAI panel on SC DARPA's Strategic Computing initiative is going to be a major source of funding for AI research (as well as other Computer Science research) in the next several years. The project has been hailed as "just in time" by people concerned with the levels and directions of funding for research in Computer Science. It has also attracted the criticism of those who are worried about the effect of military goals on funding, or about dangers of trying to guide research too much. Next Friday morning at the AAAI conference in Austin, there will be a panel session during which several members of the DARPA staff will present goals, ideas, and scales of this program. The presentation will be followed by a question and answer period with me as moderator. Some of the questions will come "live" from the audience. Because the SC project will effect our research community in many ways, I would like to make sure that the questions address a broad enough range of issues. To this end I am now soliciting questions from the community. I will select a sampling of "sent-in" questions to try to provide a balance across issues of concern to the community -- anything from funding levels, to research objectives, to 5th generation comparisons, to the pace of the research, to expectations by the military, to statements that have appeared in the press, etc. Please send questions to me -- Stefik@Xerox.Arpa. Keep them short. I don't want to wade through long paragraphs in search of a coherent question. Think of questions that could fit easily on a 35 mm slide -- say 25 words or so. I expect to choose from these sent-in questions for about half of the Q/A period. Mark ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jul 84 9:50:07-PDT (Mon) From: ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!lanl-a!cib @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Query - LISP for IBM 4341? Article-I.D.: lanl-a.11272 I would be very grateful for information on LISP dialects for the IBM 4341, and sources thereof. Thank you. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 2 Aug 84 10:43:10-PDT From: Ken Laws Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI Subject: IEEE Design & Test The July issue of IEEE Computer Graphics mentions that IEEE Design & Test of Computers is seeking submissions for a special August 1985 issue on artificial intelligence techniques in design and test. They particularly solicit material on AI in design automation, CAD, and CAT, and on expert systems, automatic design systems, test generation and system diagnosis, natural-language CAD interfaces, and special-purpose hardware to support AI systems. Submit four copies by December 1 to Guest Editor Donald E. Thomas, ECE Department, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, (412) 578-3545. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Thu 12 Jul 84 13:49:29-CDT From: Bob Boyer Subject: New Journal/Call for Papers The Journal of Symbolic Computation (published by Academic Press, London) will publish original articles on all aspects of the algorithmic treatment of symbolic objects (terms, formulae, programs, algebraic and geometrical objects). The emphasis will be on the mathematical foundation, correctness and complexity of new sequential and parallel algorithms for symbolic computation. However, the description of working software systems for symbolic computation and of general new design principles for symbolic software systems and applications of such systems for advanced problem solving are also within the scope of the journal. Manuscripts should be sent in triplicate to: B. Buchberger, Editor Journal of Symbolic Computation Johannes-Kepler-Universitat A4040 Linz, Austria Associate Editors: W. Bibel, J. Cannon, B. F. Caviness, J. H. Davenport, K. Fuchi, G. Huet, R. Loos, Z. Manna, J.Nievergelt, D. Yun. ------------------------------ Date: Wed 1 Aug 84 09:50:42-PDT From: C.S./Math Library Subject: Successful Dissertations and Theses by David Madsen [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] Successful Dissertations and Theses; a guide to graduate student research from proposal to completion by David Madsen LB2369.M32 1983 c.3, is currently on the New Books Shelf in the Math/CS Library. HL ------------------------------ Date: 25 Jul 84 9:54:00-PDT (Wed) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Should The Turing test be modified w - (nf) Article-I.D.: ea.500002 >What I am wondering is "should the Test be modified >to Our times?" I don't think so; at least not with the video link you mentioned. A key element in the Turing Imitation game was that it hid the handicaps suffered by the computer, leaving only the (possible) intelligence exposed. If you could modify it without subtracting that property, then I'd say yes. It just isn't clear that that can be done. >I can see it now, >over a crude link, we discover that we cannot tell the difference between >man and machine, then we hook up a video link, and the difference 'becomes >apparent.' If that were the case, it would seem that the "apparent difference" would be identical to the difference you get between a blind man and a sighted man. Are we therefore to conclude that the blind are only artificially intelligent? >--eugene miya > NASA Ames Research Center Subject: Seminar - Speech Recognition Using Lexical Information [Forwarded from the CSLI Newsletter by Laws@SRI-AI.] LEXICAL ACCESS USING PARTIAL INFORMATION By Daniel P. Huttenlocher, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Friday, August 3, 2 p.m. in the Trailers' Conference Room next to Ventura Hall. ABSTRACT: Current approaches to speech recognition rely on classical pattern matching techniques which utilize little or no language knowledge. We have recently proposed a model of word recognition which uses speech-specific knowledge to access words on the basis of partial information. These partial descriptions serve to partition a large lexicon into small equivalence classes using sequential phonetic and prosodic constraints. The representation is attractive for speech recognition system because it allows all but a small number of word candidates to be excluded using only a crude description of the acoustic signal. For example, if the word ``splint'' is represented according to the broad phonetic string [fricative][stop][liquid][vowel][nasal][stop], there are only two matching words in the 20,000 word Webster's Pocket Dictionary, ``splint'' and ``sprint.'' Thus, a partial representation can both greatly reduce the space of possible word candidates, and be relatively insensitive to variability in the speech signal across utterance situations. This talk will discuss a set of studies examining the power of such partial lexical representations. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 3-Aug-84 13:33:34-PDT,17815;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 3-Aug-84 13:31:21 Date: Fri 3 Aug 1984 11:43-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #100 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Friday, 3 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 100 Today's Topics: LISP - Common Lisp Implementations, Simulation - Information Mechanics, Demos - U. Texas Demos at AAAI, Newsletters - Canadian Artificial Intelligence Newsletter, Robotics - Challenge, Reviews & Humor - Expert Systems, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Batteries, Expert Systems - $12,000 Software? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 84 01:00:23 pdt From: weeks%ucbpopuli.CC@Berkeley (Harry Weeks) Subject: Common Lisp Is there a commercially available implementation (by which I mean either sold by a for-profit company or available from educational and research institutions for use by for-profit companies) of Common Lisp for either 4.2 bsd Unix on a VAX, or for Version 7 Unix on a 68000? If anyone out there has any leads, I would most appreciate hearing of them. Harry Weeks (g.weeks@Berkeley) ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 1984 13:56:42-EDT From: sde@Mitre-Bedford Subject: Total simulation and Information Mechanics Someone asked if I could abstract (what I recall as) the I.M. argument that total simulation requires at least the mass of the thing to be simulated. Rather than chance noise in the channel, I think it would be better to inquire of Dr. Frederick W. Kantor, who may be telexed at 4998124, answer-back KANTOR FW, or MCI mail #2050656. Dr. Kantor is the man who laid the foundation for the field of Information Mechanics, which name is taken from his book. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., publishers, asked for permission to publish his research notes, which are available as a book (copies from 2nd printing) which is the defining monograph world-wide for the field. Dr. Kantor set down the name for the field "Information Mechanics" as the last two words of the monograph. If the above seems other than what was requested, my apologies, but I think that Fred is the best person to deal with the matter. David sde@mitre-bedford ------------------------------ Date: Mon 30 Jul 84 14:44:35-CDT From: Gordon Novak Jr. Subject: U. Texas Demos at AAAI The University of Texas at Austin will hold an open house and series of demonstrations during AAAI-84. The demonstrations will be from 7-9 PM on Tuesday, August 7. The demonstrations are not listed in the conference schedule, but a brochure describing them and showing where they are located will be provided in the registration packet. Bus service will be provided. The demonstrations will include: J. K. Aggarwal Laboratory for Image and Signal Analysis R. S. Boyer, J S. Moore The Boyer-Moore Theorem Prover Shang-Ching Chou Geometry Provers Based on Wu's Algorithm Larry Hines Inequality Theorem Prover W. Lehmann, O. Gajek, METAL German-to-English Machine Translation J. Slocum, J. White, B. Root Robert Levinson A Self-Organizing Retrieval System for Graphs Gordon Novak GLISP Language and GEV Data Inspector Gordon Novak ISAAC Physics Problem Solver Elaine Rich, William Murray Automatic Debugging System for LISP Robert F. Simmons, Chin Chee Device Simulation Robert F. Simmons An English to Horn Clause Translation System ------------------------------ Date: 2 Aug 84 12:54:24-EDT (Thu) From: Graeme Hirst Subject: Canadian Artificial Intelligence Newsletter . CANADIAN A R T I F I C I A L I N T E L L I G E N C E NEWSLETTER . Publication begins in September 1984 ==================================== A subscription to the /Canadian Artificial Intelligence Newsletter/ is included in membership in CSCSI/SCEIO, the Canadian artificial intelligence society. All members will soon be receiving the first issue. The /Newsletter/ will include news reports from industry and universities, opinions, reviews, abstracts of recent research, and announcements of general interest in A.I. To join the society and receive the /Canadian A.I. Newsletter/ quarterly, just send a note to CIPS (which administers membership for the society), with the appropriate fee (see below). Join now, to be sure of receiving the first issue. ** Non-Canadian members are welcomed. ** CIPS 243 College Street, 5th floor Toronto, CANADA M5T 2Y1 Membership: $10 regular, $5 students (Canadian funds); there is a discount of $2 for CIPS members. Payment may be made in U.S. dollars at the current rate of exchange (C$1.00 = US$0.76). Articles and other material for the newsletter may be submitted to the editor: Graeme Hirst, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto Canada M5S 1A4. Phone: 416-978-8747. UUCP: ...!utcsrgv!cscsi CSNET: cscsi@toronto ARPANET: cscsi.toronto@csnet-relay ------------------------------ Date: Fri 3 Aug 84 10:29:50-PDT From: Ken Laws Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI Subject: Robotics The following challenge appears in the Forum column of the August issue of IEEE Spectrum: The Canine Computer Having seen the June issue, I would like to raise a question about the ability of roboticists to fuse technology with canine capabilities, let alone human ones. I hereby challenge the world's robot experts to duplicate electronically the performance of my little dog, who is able to catch morsels of raisin buns that I toss to him occasionally as he sits patiently and expectantly beside the table. His performance is spectacular. He is able to calculate the parabolic trajectory of the morsel, regardless of its height or direction, and catch it in his mouth, often in the split second before it has reached its apogee. He can do this at all levels---from a crouch to catch low- flying morsels, to a jump to catch high ones. His accuracy is astounding, showing that his internal computer can calculate a parabolic course and give complete and elaborate instructions to his nervous system, including the opening and closing of his mouth at the right microsecond. About 5 percent of the time the morsel hits the tip of his nose and bounces off in a random direction. This event is followed by a lightening retrieval from the floor where it lands. (On one occasion he was able to catch a morsel on a second try after it had bounced off his nose.) My dog weighs 37 pounds. Can anyone build a robot that can equal this dog's operation while on a smooth linoleum tile floor and in an illumination of about 15 footcandles? Can it be done without the 37-pound restriction? I offer no prize for this accomplishment. Perhaps some wealthy philanthropic roboticist would like to step forward. Until electronic technology can equal the computer in the brain of a little dog its very honor is at stake. William B. Elmer Thornton, N.H. The IEEE Spectrum editors then mention that John Billingsly is organizing a contest for Ping-Pong playing robots, to be held at the Computer Fair in London in 1985. Dr. Billingsly's address is: Dept. of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Portsmouth Polytechnic, Anglesea Road, Portsmouth, England. The International Personal Robot Congress and Exposition will hold the U.S. trials for a 1986 Ping-Pong contest during the March 1985 meeting: contact IPRC, 777 Locust St., Denver, Colorado 80220. This same issue contains a favorable book review of Ayres and Miller's Robotics: Applications and Social Implications. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Fri 3 Aug 84 11:06:23-PDT From: Ken Laws Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI Subject: Expert Systems, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Batteries I have recently run across the July 9 issue of Business Week, which featured Artificial Intelligence as its cover story (pp. 54-62). Much of the article discussed expert systems and the 40 or so companies now trying to market them. The August 1984 issue of IEEE Spectrum contains an excellent article by Lotfi Zadeh about fuzzy logic and its applications to process control, robot navigation, database access, expert systems, and other topics. He mentions that fuzzy mathematics now includes the theory of fuzzy topological spaces, fuzzy measures, fuzzy groups, fuzzy random variables, fuzzy arithmetic, fuzzy analysis, fuzzy stability theory, fuzzy systems, and fuzzy graphs. Dr. Zadeh presents a good case for fuzzy linguistics and fuzzy reasoning (as in MYCIN and PROSPECTOR) as essential elements of expert systems and learning systems. For more fuzzy talk, the issue reprints an 1884 Life magazine article about the cat battery. An excerpt: Cats, according to Tyndall, are either electro-positive or electro-negative. When in the neutral state (see Plate I) both fluids are combined, and the most sensitive galvanometer can detect no current. Thus insulated, neither A nor B exhibits either attraction or repulsion for surrounding objects, excepting for a hot stove or a piece of fish. But this affinity, according to the recent investigations of Siemens and Halske, is the result of chemical and not electrical attraction. Now, however, let us submit electro-positive cat A and electro-negative cat B to exciting influences (see Plate II). Instantly we observe the development of electrical energy -- A being strongly positive that he is the better cat, while B is as violently negative. This, as has been proved by the experiments of Prescott, Edison, and others, is due to induction; each cat trying to induce the other to believe that he isn't afraid. This electrical state of activity is accompanied by all the well-known electro-static phenomena. The hairs of each cat stand on end, and surrounding objects -- such as bootjacks, soap, cough-medicine bottles, and crockery -- may be attracted with great velocity from distances of 100 to 250 feet. Cats are absolute non-conductors. This fact was discovered in 1876 by Gerritt Smith, while vainly endeavoring to conduct a cat out of the coal cellar. It might be urged, therefore, that they had high internal resistance. This is not true. The external resistance (again glance at Plate II) is very high, but the internal resistance is never over one Ohm ("'ome" or "home," to give German, English, and American terms), while in many cases it is less, as is witnessed by the fact that there are 1,317,009 ohmless cats in this city alone. But while the internal resistance is surprisingly low, the intensity is so high that by inductive influence alone two cat elements can maintain a whole neighborhood in a state of electrical excitement for hours. [...] Speaking of fun with words, this issue of Spectrum also quotes a poll showing that "chemists, if not actually better than all other human beings, are, to say the least, a credit to their race and a damned fine group of upstanding and patriotic Americans, all of whom embody the finest attributes that can be attributed to those to whom those attributes can be attributed." [From Ralph Steinhardt Jr. and David Weinman, "The Courteous Retort," Chemtech, Vol. 14, No. 6, June 1984.] -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: 2 Aug 1984 10:17-PDT From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow Subject: $12,000 Software? San Francisco Sunday Examiner & Chronicle, July 29, 1984 John Dvorak PERISCOPE $12,000 software? Would you pay $600 apiece for gold-plated lug nuts to be used on the beat-up rims of a '52 Ford pickup truck? What would you think of the marketing man who suggested such a products? I'd think he was crazy. There's a company down in Palo Alto that has a software package it would like someone to buy. (A little background music, please) The company is called Teknowledge Inc. and was started by Stanford professors. The company makes software for the IBM PC. You can buy an IBM PC for around $2,000. The software this company sells costs $12,000. It accomplishes one thing: It allows you to test an idea to see whether an expert system can be built around the idea. An expert system is a computer system that solves complex problems using so-called artificial intelligence. An example of an expert system is a program called Mycin. It was developed in the 1970s to diagnose meningitis and other infections. A user tells the computer certain requested facts and the computer then leads the user to something close to a diagnosis. Now most people would have made a package like this and had it run on an IBM mainframe computer or at least a VAX minicomputer. But to put a $12,000 piece of software on a personal computer is cavalier, to say the least. It's as if to say, "Yeah, we've got this package and we know what it's worth, and we're going to let the well-heeled government-financed research companies use it. Look, we can even make it run on a personal computer--look, but don't touch. This is the old pre-micro attitude toward software. It was proven to be myopic when companies like MicroPro, Ashton-Tate and MicroSoft started doing business in excess of $50 million a year by selling for $500 software that would have cost $12,000 if marketed by Teknowledge. MicroPro decided that everyone needed the power of a dedicated word processor, Ashton-Tate felt that more than just a few dozen researchers would like the power of a relational database, and MicroSoft felt that a computer language would be popular if available for $350 instead of $35,000. OK, so forget about the price. What can the Teknowledge package do? The system is called M.1 (pronounced M dot 1 by my friends). According to its own press release, you spend the $12,000 "for rapid prototyping of potential full-scale operational systems. In addition to establishing technical feasibility, these example systems serve as useful demonstrations." That means this investment just gets you started--started spending, that is. Luckily, the system can also create a stand-alone expert system with up to 200 knowledge base entries. I'm not impressed. The company goes on to exemplify this stand-alone value with a "Wine Adviser" expert system with 100 knowledge base entries. Here's the actual output from this "expert" system. This is called by the company "the deliberation process of a typical California wine expert." The computer asks the question and the user responds. Do you generally prefer red or white wines? Red. Do you generally prefer light, medium or full-bodies wines? Full. Is the main component of the meal meat, fish or poultry? Poultry Does the meal have turkey in it? No. Is the sauces for the meal spicy, sweet, cream or tomato? Tomato. Is the flavor of the meal delicate, average or strong? Average. The following wines will mostly be dry, medium-bodies, and red. They are recommended for your meal: Zinfandel (86%); Cabernet Sauvignon (86%); Burgundy (34%); Valpolicella (34%). At this point every wine connoisseur is turning over in his grave. So the user goes out and buys a Zinfandel from Amador County laced with residual sugar and 15 percent alcohol, drinks it with his chicken, gags and decides that this "expert" system is useless. The fact is that even the most mundane expert systems such as this are infinitely complex and impossible to develop with the limitations imposed by this $12,000 diskette. [To be fair, I doubt that Technowledge intended this expert system to be taken seriously as a "wine advisor" if they have given it no knowledge of individual wines. It is more likely a demonstration of the type of program and level of sophistication that could be handled with their system. If someone with inside knowledge wishes to defend the system, I will provide a reasonable amount of AIList "space" for the reply. Another point: It appears to me (from typos and other signs) that this message was typed in and not lifted from a newswire. I am willing to distribute such messages (on the sender's responsibility), but I have to be a little more conservative about passing along newswire copy. Certain universities get the newswires gratis as a stimulus to research in automated information retrieval. This service will be discontinued if it appears that our net is publishing the material in competition with other news providers. Warning suspensions have already occurred. I therefore ask readers to be selective about sending in text from newspaper items, preferably sending only summaries or extracts (with proper credit given). On the other hand, I greatly appreciate it when readers send in informative pieces like this one. Thanks, Geoff! -- KIL] ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 4-Aug-84 21:26:22-PDT,14459;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 4-Aug-84 21:23:40 Date: Sat 4 Aug 1984 21:16-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #101 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Sunday, 5 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 101 Today's Topics: AI Tools - DOE MACSYMA, Intelligence - Turing Test, Games - Chess Delphi Game & Zebra Problem, Seminar - Learning Implementation Rules in Circuit Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 30 July 1984 16:36-EDT From: Harten.Paradigm at MIT-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: DOE MACSYMA AVAILABLE FOR NOMINAL FEE [Forwarded from the Arpanet-BBoards distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.] DOE MACSYMA AVAILABLE FOR NOMINAL FEE This message should receive the widest possible re-transmission. Paradigm Associates, Inc. is pleased to announce that the DOE MACSYMA program is available from NESC. DOE MACSYMA runs on the DEC VAX-series of computers under the VMS operating system, and corresponds quite closely with the 1982 version of MIT-MC MACSYMA (the translator/compiler interface work, but advanced plotting features need work.) Those not already a member of NESC should contact: National Energy Software Center Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 Attention: Jan Mockler for information about joining, and should inquire about accession number 9847. We are advised that there are two VAX-VMS BACKUP format tapes with 40 MB of code: source to DOE MACSYMA and NIL, object modules, executable images, control and auxiliary information. This work is supported by DOE Contract W-7405-ENG-48. Users wishing to contribute programs and codes to the New MACSYMA Users Consortium, for re-distribution through NESC, may send their material to Leo Harten, Paradigm Associates, Inc., 29 Putnam Avenue, Suite 6, Cambridge, MA 02139, or to Harten@Mit-Multics (Multics mail is no longer case-sensitive). [This is a volunteer effort for the improvement of the SHARE libraries in DOE MACSYMA.] ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jul 84 13:54:05-PDT (Tue) From: ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!philabs!linus!utzoo!dciem!mmt@Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Should The Turing test be modified Article-I.D.: dciem.1012 The Turing test played over a teletype can give way to one played over a graphics terminal without laying any less bare the intelligence causing the display. But there is an interesting lead article in a recent issue of Science (July something) on impacts of computers, which has something possibly relevant to say. In the experience of IBM, the networking facilities have been used almost never by scientists to do joint work from one site to another, sometimes by engineers on major projects, and frequently by managers. Could it be that the subtle concepts required by scientists do not transmit well over current technology, but that the simpler ideas used repetitively by managers are satisfactorily handled? If there is some kind of a technology limitation on the power of thought conveniently communicated, then the Turing Game should be updated whenever new technology permits. The only thing that should be unfair is to demand a sight of the testee, or to demand that he/she/it move voluntarily or perform actions not expressible on a current technology computer terminal. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 84 11:35-PDT From: mclure @ Sri-Unix.arpa Subject: chess delphi game Since the chess delphi game moves are not being published on ailist any more, I would like to point out that one list does receive the moves. It is chess@sri-unix. If you would like to be added, send a note to chess-request@sri-unix. We're on move 5 of the delphi game now. Stuart ------------------------------ Date: 2 Aug 84 14:05:11-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-kirk!williams@Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Some thoughts on problem solving Article-I.D.: decwrl.3076 SYMBOLOGY AND THE STUDY OF PROBLEMS Here is a problem which was presented to me in net.puzzle. First I will solve the problem and then describe a proposed method of solving it artificially. Newsgroups: net.puzzle Path: decwrl!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!tektronix !teklds!azure!harriett Subject: WHO OWNS THE ZEBRA Posted: Mon Jul 30 13:14:07 1984 The following is a brainteaser I got a long time ago. Many have tried and failed, many have guessed. It is possible to solve alone or in a group. If you really want to give yourself a brain hernia, try to solve it in you head without writing anything down (It can be done, that is the way I solved it the first time I tried it, it took about 15 to 20 hours over a three day period!!!!!!) [...] WHO OWNS THE ZEBRA ................. ON A CITY STREET, STRANGER ACCOSTS STRANGER WITH A XEROXED SHEET OF PAPER AND THE QUESTION: "HAVE YOU SEEN THIS?". IN UNIVERSITY DORMITORIES THE PROBLEM IS TACKED TO DOORS, MUCH AFTER THE MANNOR OF MARTIN LUTHER. IN SUBURBAN HOUSEHOLDS THE RING OF THE TELEPHONE IS LIKLEY TO HEARLD A VOICE THAT ASKS 'IS IT THE NORWEGIAN?' THE CAUSE OF THE EXCITEMENT IS THE BRAINTEASER BELOW. IT'S HARD, BUT CAN BE SOLVED BY USING DEDUCTION, ANAYLSIS, AND A LOT OF PERSISTENCE. 1. THERE ARE FIVE HOUSES, EACH OF A DIFFERENT COLOR AND INHABITED BY MEN OF DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES, WITH DIFFERENT PETS, DRINKS, AND CIGARETTES. 2. THE ENGLISHMAN LIVES IN THE RED HOUSE 3. THE SPANIARD OWNS THE DOG. 4. COFFEE IS DRUNK IN THE GREEN HOUSE 5. THE UKRAINIAN DRINKS TEA. 6. THE GREEN HOUSE IS IMMEDIATELY TO THE RIGHT (YOUR RIGHT) OF THE IVORY HOUSE. 7. THE OLD GOLD SMOKER OWNS SNAILS. 8. KOOLS ARE BEING SMOKED IN THE YELLOW HOUSE. 9. MILK IS DRUNK IN THE MIDDLE HOUSE. 10. THE NORWEGIAN LIVES IN THE FIRST HOUSE ON THE LEFT. 11. THE CHESTERFIELD SMOKER LIVES NEXT TO THE FOX OWNER. 12. KOOLS ARE SMOKED IN THE HOUSE NEXT TO THE HOUSE WHERE THE HORSE IS KEPT. 13. THE LUCKY STRIKE SMOKER DRINKS ORANGE JUICE. 14. THE JAPANESE SMOKES PARLAIMENTS. 15. THE NORWEGIAN LIVES NEXT TO THE BLUE HOUSE. NOW ........... WHO DRINKS WATER? AND ........... WHO OWNS THE ZEBRA? GOOD LUCK! ................ put that in your .bin and smoke it!!!!! Harriette L. Lilly Tektronix MDP Marketing Technical Support Beaverton ORG. tekmdp!harriett [I first saw this problem in Reader's Digest about 1964 -- does anyone know the original source? My first LISP program was an attempt to solve this puzzle by simple constraint propagation (or elimination of terms in the space of all conceivable solutions). The program had some trouble with the "next to" or "right of" relations, since these had to be expressed as a set of more primitive constraints that I entered by hand. The program ultimately failed when it reached a choice point requiring a binary choice and possible backtracking; I had not built such sophistication into the control structure. -- KIL] ************************* SPOILER WARNING ****************************** The answer to the five house problem is not so straight forward. The first step to take was to solve the orientation of the houses. The second house to the left was blue, being next to the norwegian on the far left. The norwegian could not be red, that belonging to the englishman. The norwegian could not be ivory, because of it's relative orientation to green, nor could it be green leaving the second house from the left ivory. The norwegian owned the yellow house. The middle house could not be green, for the middle house drank milk, and not coffee, nor could it be ivory, making the second house green, so it was red. The green and ivory fell into place at this point. YELLOW BLUE RED GREEN IVORY Norwegian English Horse Milk Coffee Kools The next step was to resolve who had what cigarettes. The norwegian had the kools, which were in the yellow house, and the japanese had the parliaments. Neither the ukrainian nor the englishman could have the lucky strikes because they had a different drink than orange juice. This meant that the old golds and the chesterfields were mutually inclusive to the ukrainian and the englishman leaving the spaniard having the lucky strikes. The next step was to solve who had what drinks. The ukrainian had the tea, the englishman had the milk, and the spaniard had the orange juice. This meant that the water and coffee were mutually inclusive to the norwegian and the japanese. Since the norwegian's house was yellow, he could not have the coffee. Therefore, the japanese had the coffee and the NORWEGIAN HAD THE WATER. The next step was to solve who lived where. The norwegian lived in the yellow house, the englishman lived in the red house, and because the japanese drank coffee, the japanese lived in the green house. This meant that the blue and the ivory houses were mutually inclusive to the ukranian and the spaniard. Since the blue house had a horse, and the spaniard had a dog, this meant that the ukrainian owned the blue house and the spaniard owned the ivory house. The next step was to solve who had what cigarettes previously incomplete. The old gold and the chesterfields belonged mutually inclusively to the ukrainian and the englishman. Since the ukrainian lived in the blue and had the horse, and the man with the snails also had the old golds, the ukrainian had the chesterfields and the englishman had the old golds. The next step was to solve who had what animals. The ukrainian had the horse, the englishman had the snails, and the spaniard had the dog. This meant that the fox and zebra belonged mutually inclusively to the norwegian and japanese. Since the japanese did not live next to the ukrainian, who had the chesterfields, he could not have the fox. Therefore, the norwegian had the fox and the JAPANESE OWNED THE ZEBRA. YELLOW BLUE RED GREEN IVORY Norwegian Ukrainian English Japanese Spaniard Fox Horse Snails Zebra Dog Water Tea Milk Coffee Juice Kools Chesterfields Old Golds Parliaments Lucky Strikes This one definitely had a few wrinkles. John Williams Digital Equipment Corperation It appears to me as though the key to solving this problem was to discover mutually inclusive sets of symbols, in this case, pairs. Given: a = x or y b = x or y a <> b <> c c = x or y or z Then: c = z This could be utilized by first defining sets ( or lists, for you lisp fans ), of the various categories, owners, pets, drinks, etc., and a basic initial condition. That is, each symbol has with it a list of possible connections. The englishman is exclusively connected to the color red, whereas the japanese is connected to all colors. The norwegian is connected to the left most house, etc. The process is accomplished by rotating the context, that is, looking for inclusive sets in convoluting categories, eliminating possible connections until a stable state is achieved. When I solved the problem, or should I say, when I wrote down the answer, I naturally chose the most direct context switches for analysis. I do not believe that this is nessesary. It would only mean that in an artificial analysis, there would be contexts where analysis would not perform any reductions. The choice of context was on my part, intuitive, and for a finite problem, would only mean an increase in the amount of time required to solve the problem, or prove it couldn't be solved. I think a program like this would be an interesting study of problem reduction. The formation of symbols in this program would be an even more interesting problem. < puzzled? > (DEC E-NET) KIRK::WILLIAMS (UUCP) {decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-kirk!williams (ARPA) williams%kirk.DEC@decwrl.ARPA williams%kirk.DEC@Purdue-Merlin.ARPA ------------------------------ Date: 3 Aug 84 13:04:46 EDT From: LOUNGO@RUTGERS.ARPA Subject: Seminar & Binding - Learning Circuit Design [Forwarded from the Rutgers bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] R U T G E R S U N I V E R S I T Y Department of Computer Science COLLOQUIUM Speaker: Masanobu Watanabe Title: LEARNING IMPLEMENTATION RULES IN CIRCUIT DESIGN BY HARMONIZING BEHAVIORS WITH SPECIFICATIONS Date: Friday, August 3, 1984 The problem of expertise acquisition by monitoring the user's response to advice offered by the system is considered here as an implementation rule acquisition problem in a domain of VLSI circuit design. The task is characterized as learning a Macro-operator in a problem space, where data-streams and modules are viewed as states and operators, respectively. A Goal-Directed-Learning [Mitchell 83a] approach toward justifiable generalization by analyzing a single training instance is then applied to this problem. Both the usefulness of its approach and the remaining issues are clarified by examination through examples. Masanobu Watanabe will be leaving Rutgers to return to Japan. His office address is: Computer System Research Laboratory C&C Systems Research Laboratories NEC Corporation 1-1, Miyazaki 4-Chome, Miyamae-Ku, Kawasaki Kanagawa 213 Japan Tel (044)855-1111 ex.2275 ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 8-Aug-84 09:41:03-PDT,9136;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 8-Aug-84 09:22:48 Date: Wed 8 Aug 1984 09:12-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #102 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 8 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 102 Today's Topics: LISP - Compatibility & Conversion, Simulation - Self-Simulation, Applications - Computer-Mediated Social Interaction, AI in Engineering - SIGART Call for Papers, Conference - AISB-85: Call for Papers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4 Aug 84 17:35:00-PDT (Sat) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!chandra @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Charniak's "AI-Prog." book: Code Reqst Article-I.D.: uiucuxc.28900003 Help !!! I have been using the AI-programming book by Charniak, Riesbeck and McDermott as a reference. I however do not have access to the Lisp dialect in their book [UCI-LISP]. I am working in MacLisp/Franz Lisp and am having some trouble performing the conversion. Judging from the popularity of the book, I wondered if somebody had already written some code to perform the conversion. I also have access to Zeta-lisp and Interlisp. Do you think you can help me? Thank you, Navin Phone 1-800-USA-CERL ------------------------------ Date: 7 Aug 1984 15:28:26-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: Interlisp/Zetalisp Compatibility Can someone tell a novice the difference between Interlisp and Zetalisp..In pl plain English? Thanks Ron Kushnier kushnier@NADC.arpa ------------------------------ Date: 6-Aug-84 22:35 PDT From: Kirk Kelley Subject: Self-Simulation How long would a simulation of its own lifetime survive? What would be the features of the most viable such simulation feasible in the next year or so? For example, would it be a collaboration on a model of THAT collaboration process done in order to gain some insight into its most viable forms? Would it be a computer simulation? Would it aim to encourage anyone (with a modem?) to play with it? How would those who contribute to the model or provide simulation services be compensated? How would proposed changes to the model be moderated? What would be its measure of its aliveness? The self reference makes this question somewhat tricky to answer, though we usually manage to do it in one fashion or another with respect to our own lifetimes. The trickiness comes when playing with some portion of the model central to its own self definition. We must make sure that after we are done playing, the measures of its aliveness are still valid. Changing the measures can in turn affect a central part of the model ... What would be the features of the language in which the model is written? -- kirk ------------------------------ Date: 21 July 1984 1051-PDT (Saturday) From: sdcsla!bannon@nprdc Subject: Computer-Mediated Social Interaction [Forwarded from the WorkS discussion list by Laws@SRI-AI. This seems to lead into the question of how AI can be used in computers for mediating human interactions.] I am interested in collecting information on the use of computers to mediate interactions between people. It appears to me that our computer systems today do not provide much in the way of support for cooperation - joint problem-solving, sharing of information, co-operative production of text, on-line (human) expert assistance. If people know of experiments carried out in this domain, or of experimental software facilities to support such activities, I would appreciate if they could mail me information - references, personal experiences, anecdotes, etc. [As an example, how useful have people found the "link" command on the TENEX system?] (PS. I know about computer conferencing, my focus is more on other, perhaps less-publicized facilities, but comments on the USE of conferencing systems would be of interest.) I will summarize the results of the survey to the [WORKS] net. Thank you. Liam Bannon Institute for Cognitive Science, C-015, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093. (619)-452-2807 (452-6771) or, bannon@nprdc -on the arpanet ....ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdcsla!bannon -on the net ------------------------------ Date: Tue 7 Aug 84 11:36:19-EDT From: Duvvuru Sriram Subject: AI in Engineering SPECIAL ISSUE ON APPLICATIONS OF AI IN ENGINEERING The April 1985 issue of the SIGART newsletter (tentative schedule) will focus on the applications of AI in engineering. The purpose of this issue is to provide an overview of research being conducted in this area around the world. The following topics are suggested: - Knowledge-based expert systems - Intelligent computer tutors - Representation of engineering problems - Natural language and graphical interfaces - Interfacing engineering databases with expert systems The above topics are by no means exhaustive; other related topics are welcome. Individuals or groups conducting research in this area and who would like to share their ideas are invited to send two copies of 3 to 4 page summaries of their work, preferably ongoing research, before December 1, 1984. The summaries should include a title, the names of people associated with the research, affiliations, and bibliographical references. Since the primary aim of this special issue is to provide information about ongoing and proposed research, please be as brief as possible and avoid lengthy implementation details. Submissions should be sent to D. Sriram at the following address or through Arpanet to Sriram@CMU-RI-CIVE: D. Sriram Design Research Center Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 Tel. No. (412)578-3603 ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 8-Aug-84 12:15:07-BST From: BUNDY HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) Subject: AISB-85: Call for Papers The Society For The Study Of Artificial Intelligence And Simulation Of Behaviour ________________________________________________________________________ CALL FOR PAPERS AISB 85 WARWICK, ENGLAND, APRIL 10-12 1985 ________________________________________________________________________ Submissions are invited for the AISB Easter 1985 conference, to be held at the University of Warwick on April 10-12 1985. Papers may be on any aspect of AI, including though not necessarily restricted to AI and Education Reasoning Learning Knowledge Representation Robotics Vision Natural Language Cognitive Modelling Expert Systems Architectures and Languages Planning Speech Papers should ideally relate to practical or theoretical work in progress or completed. Those intending to submit a paper should make a preliminary submission of a provisional title and abstract of up to 100 words and a provisional list of keywords. Deadline for notification: November 1st 1984 Full papers, of 2000-5000 words, should be on A4 pages and double- spaced. Three copies should be submitted. The first sheet should give the title, names of authors, a brief abstract and a list of keywords, to help in the assigning of referees. The paper itself should start on the next page, and authors' names should not appear in the main body of the text. Deadline for full papers: December 7th 1984 Authors will be notified of referees' decisions around the end of January 1985. Final copies, for photo-reproduction, will be needed by late February. Copies of the conference proceedings will be provided to everyone attending. There will also be unrefereed postgraduate poster sessions, to allow postgraduates to display information about their work. Those wishing to provide a poster session should contact the programme chairman, no later than January 31st, 1985. Authors of submitted papers will not be eligible to provide poster sessions. Notification and the three copies of full papers should be sent to the Programme Committee chairman: Peter Ross, Department of Artificial Intelligence, Forrest Hill, Edinburgh EH1 2QL, Scotland. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 9-Aug-84 23:47:31-PDT,12244;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 9-Aug-84 23:44:01 Date: Thu 9 Aug 1984 23:32-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #103 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Friday, 10 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 103 Today's Topics: AI Tools - Frame Languages & Burroughs LISP or Prolog & Concurrent LISP, Puzzles - The "Zebra" Problem, Games - Chess & Go, Poetry - Robots ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 8 Aug 84 11:09:28 PDT (Wednesday) From: Cornish.PA@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Bibilography of frame-base representation languages Date: Sun, 29 Jul 84 22:01 EDT From: Tim Finin Subject: Frame-Based Languages I am investigating some implementation techniques for frame-base representation languages with inheritance. ... Tim's message, partially quoted above, toggled me into requesting the members of the AIList realm for a bibliography of frame-base representation languages. Thank you very much, Jan ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 9-Aug-84 17:52:23-BST From: LUIS HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) Subject: AI Software for Burroughs machines, any one? I face the the prospect of having to live with a Burroughs B6920 for the next year or so, does anyone know about any decent Lisp implementations running on this machines and/or where to look for them? Actually, I would rather use Prolog, but I don't expect to find any implementation running on Burroughs ... Feel free to reply either to me or the list. Thanks, Luis Jenkins [ Lejm%Edxa@Ucl-Cs ArpaNet ] ------------------------------ Date: 9 Aug 1984 10:05-PDT From: chaudhry%USC-CSE@USC-ECL.ARPA Subject: Parallelism in Lisp? I am currently doing some research for which I need to use parallelism in lisp. Does anyone know of any lisp dialect which has a built in parallel construct, i.e. (CONCURRENT s-expression-1 ... s-expression-k) or has anyone out there implemented such a function. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Kashif Chaudhry chaudhry%usc-cse@usc-ecl [ARPA] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Aug 84 08:59 EDT From: Hassan Aitkaci Subject: The Zebra Connection... The Zebra puzzle was the object of a Prolog-Digest exchange about a year and a half ago. Many solutions were proposed. Fernando Pereira of SRI compiled a set of those for his own interest. The most interesting (in my opinion) solution in Prolog was found by Hector Levesque of Fairchild AI Lab, making a clever use of logical variables and the unification process as an effective means to solve two-way constraint propagations (i.e., a logical variable in Prolog has the behavior of both a "synthesized" and "inherited" attribute, and unification operates as the propagating mechanism). Hector's solution is given here since I don't think it ever got posted on the Prolog Digest. Those who are really intrigued by the method rather than the problem which, by the way, happens to be a large-size, albeit simple, assignment problem (complete state space has (5!)^6 nodes, or 2,985,984,000,000 nodes if you prefer!) may be interested by an alternative solution given in a language of my design in my dissertation, also reported in the following paper: Hassan Ait-Kaci, "A New Model of Computation Based on a Calculus of Type Subsumption", Technical Report MS-CIS-83-40, Department of Computer and Information Science, Univ. of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Prolog solutions may be obtained from the Prolog Digest Archives from the editor Chuck Restivo from Stanford University. Now, please, stop losing sleep from so much coffee -- or you may turn into a greenish looking samourai riding a bucking zebra! Hassan Ait-Kaci Hassan%Upenn@Csnet-relay /********************************************************************* Hector Levesque's Solution to the Zebra Puzzle *********************************************************************/ :- op(500,xfy,[has_left_neighbor,is_right_of,lives_next_to,is_not]). rightmost_occupant has_left_neighbor midright_occupant. midright_occupant has_left_neighbor middle_occupant. middle_occupant has_left_neighbor midleft_occupant. midleft_occupant has_left_neighbor leftmost_occupant. X lives_next_to Y :- X has_left_neighbor Y. X lives_next_to Y :- Y has_left_neighbor X. X is_right_of Y :- X has_left_neighbor Y. X is_right_of Y :- X has_left_neighbor Z, Z is_right_of Y. X is_not Y :- X is_right_of Y. X is_not Y :- Y is_right_of X. differ(X1,X2,X3,X4,X5) :- X1 is_not X2, X1 is_not X3, X1 is_not X4, X1 is_not X5, X2 is_not X3, X2 is_not X4, X2 is_not X5, X3 is_not X4, X3 is_not X5, X4 is_not X5. ?- Englishman = RedHouser, Spaniard = DogOwner, CoffeeDrinker = GreenHouser, Ukranian = TeaDrinker, GreenHouser has_left_neighbor IvoryHouser, WinstonSmoker = SnailOwner, KoolSmoker = YellowHouser, MilkDrinker = middle_occupant, Norwegian = leftmost_occupant, ChesterfieldSmoker lives_next_to FoxOwner, KoolSmoker lives_next_to HorseOwner, LuckyStrikeSmoker = OJDrinker, Japanese = ParliamentSmoker, Norwegian lives_next_to BlueHouser, differ(GreenHouser,YellowHouser,RedHouser,IvoryHouser,BlueHouser), differ(ZebraOwner,FoxOwner,HorseOwner,SnailOwner,DogOwner), differ(OJDrinker,MilkDrinker,TeaDrinker,CoffeeDrinker,WaterDrinker), differ(Englishman,Spaniard,Norwegian,Japanese,Ukranian), differ(KoolSmoker,WinstonSmoker,ParliamentSmoker,LuckyStrikeSmoker, ChesterfieldSmoker). /********************************************************************* To solve the puzzle, load this program... and wait! It takes about 45 minutes when interpreted by UNH Prolog on our (overloaded) VAX/780... *********************************************************************/ ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 7 Aug 1984 08:49-EDT From: bac@Mitre-Bedford Subject: The "Zebra Problem" It seems to me that there was a bug either in the statement of the Zebra puzzle, or its following solution. Constraint #6 in the problem stated that "The green house is immediately to the RIGHT (your right) of the ivory house." However, the "solution" was worked on the basis of the green house being to the LEFT of the ivory house. Note that this did not change the ultimate solution; the Norwegian still drank the water, and the Japanese had the zebra. However, if the problem was worked as stated, eventually one reached a point requiring a binary decision: house 3 could be either red or ivory, house 4 either green or ivory, and house 5 either red or green. At this point, one had to make a guess about the color of any one of the last three houses, and explore the remaining tree for a contra- diction. Using the constraints implied by the "solution," with green to the left, the problem dropped out quite naturally, and involved no analysis or backtracking. So, what is the correct statement of the problem? Should one be able to solve such a problem using only deduction, or should analysis be necessary? An interesting question (to me, anyway) is, are there any theories abounding that relate the number of variables in such a problem to the number of contraints that must be applied to uniquely describe the situation? Brant Cheikes ARPA, CSNET: bac@Mitre-Bedford UUCP: ...linus!bccvax!bac ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 84 23:09-PDT From: mclure @ Sri-Unix.arpa Subject: number-cruncher vs. humans: 6th move The Vote Tally -------------- Folks, the moves are in and have been tallied. The winner is: 5 ... Nf6 The runner-up was 5 ... e5 We had a narrow mix of moves. A total of 18 votes were cast. Please relay this message to any friends you have who might be interested in participating. The Machine Moves ----------------- The Prestige 8-ply replied 6. Re1 from book in 0 seconds. Humans Move # Votes BR ** -- BQ BK BB -- BR 5 ... Nf6 10 BP BP ** BB BP BP BP BP 5 ... e5 4 -- ** BN BP -- BN -- ** 5 ... a6 2 ** WB BP -- ** -- ** -- 5 ... Ne5 1 -- ** -- ** WP ** -- ** 5 ... e6 1 ** -- WP -- ** WN ** -- WP WP -- WP -- WP WP WP WR WN WB WQ WR -- WK -- Prestige 8-ply The Game So Far --------------- 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Nc6 4. o-o Bd7 5. c3 Nf6 6. Re1 ??? Commentary ---------- Steve Swernofsky , unrated, wrote the majority opinion. Since White threatens 6 d4 and there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it, I propose this move to counter in the center. After 6 Re1 d5 (7 e5 Nxe5 wins a pawn) White must either postpone his advance, 7 d3, or else allow us to isolate his QP, 7 ed Nxd5 8 d4 cd (9 Nxd4 either leads to an isolated QP or no QP at all). Note we can't play 6 ... e6 since 7 d4 d5 ultimately loses us a pawn due to the K-file pin. Solicitation ------------ Your move, please? Replies to Arpanet: mclure@sri-unix or Usenet: sri-unix!mclure. DO NOT SEND REPLIES TO THE ENTIRE LIST! Just send them to one of the above addresses. ------------------------------ Date: 7 August 1984 08:05-EDT From: Robert Elton Maas Subject: Delphi Experiment: group play against machine -> just people [Forwarded from the Human-Nets Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.] I'd be more interested in a delphi experiment with Go instead of Chess. Pick some starting position (probably not start of game, there are too many good ways to play the fuseki) and see if we can converge on the optimum way for both sides to play through to the end. Allow backtracking at any time, thus if you suddenly see where one side made a mistake you can change your vote at that point. If changed vote(s) cause an alternate branch to have largest vote, the experiment shifts to explore that branch instead of the one that had largest vote before. Either allow everyone to vote for both black and white moves, or divide the membership into two teams and have them select only their own moves not opponents. Note that my method doesn't require a go-playing program/machine to play one side of the game. To speed up the experiment, allow a voter to specify a whole sequence of moves in advance, contingent on the opponent choosing the same move as in the sequence. (For example: now I move ..., if he replies ... then I conterreply ..., etc.; abbreviated of course.) So long as the first move agrees with the voted move and the reply agrees with the voted reply then the next move will be counted as a vote. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Aug 1984 08:02:05-EDT From: kushnier@NADC Subject: A Prediction I predict in three short years Robots you will see Being sold at K-Mart, Sears and Kleins, And the Macy's Company. As common as a toaster, Inexpensive and complete, The robots of the next few years.. An appliance quite unique The Fifties By Ron Kushnier I remember "Robbie" And "Tobor" and his friends In the movies of the Fifties And on the Late Shows Seen Again. These Science Fiction classics Showed the future now come true A world of shining robots to serve me and to serve you. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 12-Aug-84 18:21:20-PDT,12671;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 12-Aug-84 18:19:04 Date: Sun 12 Aug 1984 18:07-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #104 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Monday, 13 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 104 Today's Topics: Hardware - Cellular Automata, LISP - Interlisp/Zetalisp Compatibility, Applications - Computerized Conferencing, Robotics - Dogs/Ants & Underwater Robots, Expert System - Construction Kit, Reports - Stanford Math/CS Library, Project Report - AI/Speech Research at Edinburgh ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 9 Aug 84 15:40:58-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!tektronix!tekchips!mock @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Hardware Implementations of Cellular Automata Article-I.D.: tekchips.1014 I'm looking for information concerning hardware implementations of 2d cellular automata. Specifically, do implementations tend to be just `life' rules or are they the more general case, and what sort of speed/resolution statistics have been achieved? I would appreciate any sort of information about particular implementations. Jeff Mock tektronix!tekchips!mock ------------------------------ Date: Fri 10 Aug 84 09:17:25-PDT From: Ken Laws Reply-to: AIList-Request@SRI-AI Subject: Re: Hardware Implementations of Cellular Automata The Golay processor has been around for about two decades; it's a hard-wired hexagonal processor performing logical operations on boolean image data. I believe that various medical image processing systems offer shrink/expand cycles for image overlays that can be similarly programmed, and there are both software languages and parallel-processor projects aimed at permitting easy specification of parallel local operations on image arrays. -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 9 August 1984, 22:01-EDT From: Robert P. Krajewski Subject: Interlisp/Zetalisp Compatibility Since I have only a limited knowledge of Interlisp, this will be sketchy at best. (1) All arguments to functions in Interlisp are optional. In ZetaLisp (Common Lisp), optional arguments are specified in the function definition with special keywords. (2) The NTH function is different. (Rather miscellaneous, eh ?) (3) Interlisp does not have a package system. (In this respect, it is like MacLisp and Franz Lisp.) The modern MacLisp descendants (ZetaLisp and NIL, and the Common Lisp dialects) contain such a system, which is basically a way of managing the namespace of symbols with ``packages,'' the equivalent of old obarrays. To give a quick example, suppose one has a symbol in the CELLOPHANE package. From within that package, one can refer to a symbol called WRAP in that package by WRAP, and refer to outside as CELLOPHANE:WRAP. It can get much more hairy than this (what about global symbols like CONS ?), but that's the general idea. (4) Both Interlisp (in the workstatation implementations) and Zetalisp have facilities for processes and windows, but they are obviously handled in different ways. The same is true for hash tables and macros. (5) Zetalisp does not have a DWIM facility; the error handler is powerful enough to enable the user to recover intelligently from errors while being informed of the condition. In keeping with the MacLisp tradition, the basic unit for organising source code is the file, and a display editor that is highly integrated with the Lisp environment is used. In contrast, structure editors are used in Interlisp to edit code. I hope somebody more familiar with Interlisp can answer your question. In terms of compatibility, there doesn't seem to be much of it between the two dialects.. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Aug 84 16:54:52 EDT From: "Martin R. Lyons" <991@NJIT-EIES.MAILNET> Subject: Computerized Conferencing and AI In response to Liam Bannon's (bannon@nprdc) message of July 21: We at the Computerized Conferencing and Communications Center of New Jersey Institute of Technology operate the Electronic Information Exchange System (EIES). Over our six years of operation, we have studied how people interact not only with the system, but with others, and how the two modes differ. In most instances, it has been found that Computer Conferencing increases productivity and creativity, by allowing not only ongoing discussion, but also 24 hour access. Over the past few months, I have begun looking into the feasibility of integrating an AI subsystem into our most recent effort, EIES II, a new, improved version of EIES. At this point, the design is such to provide user aid, to field questions (English text) from the user, and try to answer those as intelligently as possible. Most of our questions to the online consultants here take the form of 'Where do I find the conference on IBM PCs?', etc. I have available two lists: the first is the research reports available from CCCC, and the second major works by Murray Turoff and Starr Roxanne Hiltz, two of the original designers of EIES. S. R. Hiltz is also a sociologist and along with Elaine Kerr has carried out extensive research in user interactions and usage. In order to spare the list the 300+ lines of references, I am not including them here. If you would like a copy drop me a message and I'll send them to you. Please feel free to contact me here if I can be of any help. MAILNET: Marty@NJIT-EIES.Mailnet ARPA: Marty%NJIT-EIES.Mailnet@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA USPS: Marty Lyons, CCCC/EIES @ New Jersey Institute of Technology, 323 High St., Newark, NJ 07102 (201) 596-EIES ------------------------------ Date: 7 Aug 84 18:20:00-PDT (Tue) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!mihran @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Robotics - (nf) Article-I.D.: uicsl.12300002 Forget about the dogs. Even an ant is quite sophisticated compared to the capabilities we want the robots to have, at least in the near future. I was watching one of these nature shows on PBS the other day which was showing the behaviour of the ants underground. I would guess that if the technology develops to the level of sophistication that allows us to implement the sensory-motor coordination that these ants have, our robots will probably be more than adequate to perform with great skill the necessary tasks at an assembly line or at a dangerous mine. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Aug 1984 13:31:56-EDT From: Chuck.Thorpe at CMU-CS-IUS Subject: Underwater Robots [Forwarded from the CMU-C bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] The Mobile Robot Lab has just set a new record for proven depth capability for a CMU-built submersible robot. Neptune, running under an umbrella taped to its camera mast, operated successfully at depths up to .1" during the recent rain storm. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Aug 84 14:49:23-PDT (Tue) From: Subject: expert system construction kit Article-I.D.: uvicctr.501 E X P E R T S Y S T E M C O N S T R U C T I O N K I T The knowledge independent LISP-based expert system called PORTAL is now available for distribution from the Laboratory for Computer Enhanced Cognition, University of Victoria. It is a simple rule-based system, with a forward inference mechanism, and includes supporting utilities for a rule and entity editor as well as some analytical tools for validating your knowledge base. The system has been written in Franz LISP under UNIX 4.1 BSD, and can be obtained on a non-commercial, non-disclosure, as-is basis for a nominal fee. The distributed version includes source and executable code, and a MAKE system for implementation. We are offering this system in the interests of making a simple but complete expert system construction tool available to research laboratories, so that the difficult problems of knowledge acquisition can be attacked on a broad front. The fee is $200.00 for universities, and $500.00 for other laboratories. Interested parties should send a purchase order for the amount indicated, or call. Ernie Chang Laboratory for Computer Enhanced Cognition August 1, 1984 Department of Computer Science University of Victoria Victoria, B.C. V8W 2Y2 Canada 604-721-7232 (7233) ...uw-beaver!uvicctr!echang ...ubc-vision!uvicctr!echang References: 1. Chang, EJH, McNeely M, Gamble K. An Expert System for Liver Function Test. Proc. 4th Jerusalem Conference on Information Technology, 1984. 2. Chang, EJH, McNeely M, Gamble K. Strategies for Choosing the Next Test in an Expert System. Proc. American Association for Medical Systems and Informatics Conference, San Francisco, May 1984. ------------------------------ Date: Thu 9 Aug 84 23:34:13-PDT From: C.S./Math Library Subject: Latest Math & CS Library "New Reports List" posted on-line. [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] The latest Math & Computer Science Library "New Reports List" has been posted on-line. The file is "NEWTRS" at SCORE, "NEWTRS[LIB,DOC]" at SAIL, "NEWTRS" at SUMEX, and "NEWTRS" at SIERRA. In case you miss a reports list, the old lists are being copied to "OLDTRS" at SCORE and "OLDTRS" at SIERRA where they will be saved for about six months. If you want to see any of the reports listed in the "New Reports List," either come by the library during the display period mentioned or send a message to LIBRARY at SCORE, giving your departmental address and the six-digit accession numbers of the reports you want to see, and we will check them out in your name and send them to you as soon as they are available. The library receives technical reports from over a hundred universities and other institutions. The current batch includes - among others - reports from: Carnegie-Mellon University. Department of Computer Science. Carnegie-Mellon University. Robotics Institute. Harvard University. Center for Research in Computing Technology. IBM. Research Division. Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique (INRIA). Mathematisch Centrum (Amsterdam). U.K. National Physical Laboratory. Division of Information Technology and Computing. Universitaet Hamburg. Institut fuer Informatik. Universitaet Karlsruhe. Institut fuer Informatik. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Department of Computer Science. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Department of Computer Science. - Richard Manuck Math & Computer Science Library Building 380 - 4th Floor LIBRARY at SCORE ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, 2-Aug-84 16:23:21-BST From: HENRY T HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) Subject: Project Report - AI/Speech Research at Edinburgh [Edited by Laws@SRI-AI.] A major 5-year research and development project in speech recognition is to start at the University of Edinburgh in October 1984 under the direction of Dr John Laver and Dr Henry Thompson, in conjunction with members of the Departments of Artificial Intelligence, Electrical Engineering and Linguistics. The goal of the project is a machine assisted speech transcription system - a text input device starting from spoken input, and depending on incremental interactions between user and system to develop a final text. Computing resources will include 2 VAX 11/750s running UNIX(TM Bell Laboratories) and a network of Xerox 1108s running Interlisp-D. The eventual target is the Alice parallel reduction machine. In addition to the ten people already involved, seventeen new positions are available. For further information, write Dr J. Laver, Centre for Speech Technology Research, Department of Linguistics, Adam Ferguson Building, George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9LL, SCOTLAND, or call 031 667-1011 x6380. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 14-Aug-84 22:43:04-PDT,11249;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 14-Aug-84 22:41:05 Date: Tue 14 Aug 1984 22:28-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #105 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 15 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 105 Today's Topics: Workshop - AI and Dataflow Machines, Robotics - Ping-Pong Competition & Discussion List, Literature - Looking for COLING-76, Brain Theory - Language and EEGs, Natural Language - On Having Virtually No Crime Rate, Anecdote - Fuzzy Cat, Philosophy - Cause and Effect, Conference - 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 84 08:18:26 pdt From: Stanley Lanning Subject: AI and DataFlow machines -- a request for interested parties A friend asked me to post this on the bboard.... -smL From DEBONI@Ames-VMSB Mon Aug 13 16:49:54 1984 To All Interested Parties: AI AND DATAFLOW There will be a cooperative project in modelling the performance of dataflow systems, invloving personell from MIT, at Nasa Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, the last two weeks of September. Interested participants are sought from the AI community who have either general algorithms or specific applica- tions they would like to see run on such systems. Indications of interest or queries for further information should be addressed to "DEBONI@AMES-VMSB". ------------------------------ Date: Mon 13 Aug 84 12:14:25-PDT From: John B. Nagle Subject: Robot Ping-Pong Competition Announced [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] The current issue of Robotics Age has an announcement for a robot ping-pong competition to be held in England in 1985. The rules are set up to encourage low-cost entries; there are upper limits on size and power of the mechanism and the visual environment is so defined as to provide high contrast under uniform illumination. You don't even have to acquire the image of the ball; it is served from a known location above the net and only has to be tracked. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Aug 84 5:38:25-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!whuxle!spuxll!abnjh!estate @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Speaking of Robotics... Article-I.D.: abnjh.788 Would anyone be interested in starting a newsgroup for amateur robotics ? I haven't got the slightest idea how to go about starting a new newsgroup, but I've seen quite a few interesting articles and ideas on the net concerning robotics. To my knowledge their are only a very few periodicals dealing with the subject of amateur robotics and robotics experiments, but I have found a few interesting articles on simple robotic interfaces that will work off a home computer (one of which I built). If anyone else out there in net-land enjoys tearing apart their household appliances and and reconstructing them to do things that they were never meant to do, please let me know and we'll see if we can get anything rolling! (Visions From The Orcrest Stone) Carl D. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Aug 84 22:47:15 EDT From: Steven Lytinen Subject: COLING-76 I am interested in seeing several articles in COLING-76. Unfortunately, I can't find a copy anywhere. Does anyone have a copy that they would be willing to lend me? Steve Lytinen (lytinen@yale) ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 1984 14:21:24-EDT From: sde@Mitre-Bedford Subject: Warfian hypothesis, sort of On a different net it was alleged, though w/o references to check, that people, both of Japanese and British genetic background, when raised speaking Japanese show EEG responses to music on the LEFT side, but that when raised speaking English, their responses are on the RIGHT side. This has some interesting implications, if true. Does anyone out there know anything more about such a phenomenon? Although no references were cited, the description was detailed enough to sound like it had a basis in fact. As a possibly related matter, I seem to recall reading somewhere that musicians, or some subset of them, also show EEG responses to music on the LEFT side. Being quite curious about both, I'd love to get more information, if anyone can assist. Thanx in advance, David sde@mitre-bedford ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 84 14:48:35-PDT (Mon) From: ihnp4!houxm!hou2d!wbp @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: On having virtually no crime rate. Article-I.D.: hou2d.472 "Saudi Arabia has virtually no crime rate," is what the commercial told me about 30 times before I realized what they are really saying. I understand what having virtually no crime is, and also a very low crime rate is within my grasp. But virtually no crime rate is a very odd construction. If a place has no crime rate then this means that the statistics are not gathered and that's O.K too. If the crime rate is virtually non-existent then it indeed exists, but is in a state of "almost non-being" which may mean that for all practical purposes it does not exist, but is known to a select few who will tell no-one. (Or may be a reflection of their different system of justice!) Are virtual rates calculated on virtual machines, and does one need either transcendental or imaginary numbers to express them? Seriously, what would a program do with such a sentence? And even more interesting, would a sophisticated program have any problem with it, and could it not even see a problem with it as I am sure millons of people did not see one! Submitted for your approval, Wayne Pineault (hou2d!wbp) ------------------------------ Date: 12 Aug 84 10:53:16-PDT (Sun) From: ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!ariel!norm @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Now and Then Article-I.D.: ariel.716 > Ahem. Cause and effect may exist, and indeed, in order to function as > human beings, we seem to need to behave as if it exists, but I don't > think the principal of cause and effect can be *proved* to exist. The > association of two events in time does not imply a connection between > the two. > > (For a more detailed argument, read Hume and Kant) > > --Ray Chen The concept of proof depends upon the concepts of cause and effect, among other things. Even the ideas "anything" and "functioning" depend upon the idea of cause and effect. All of these concepts depend on or are rooted in the concepts of identity and identification. Here's why: To be is to be something in particular, to have a specific identity, or having specific characteristics. What does it mean to have specific characteristics or a specific identity? It means that in a particular context, the entity's existence is manifested in a particular way. An entity IS what it can DO (in a given context). So what's causality? The law of identity applied to action. Things do what they do, in any given context, BECAUSE they are what they are. "What they are" includes or consists of "what they can do". This is true irrespective of our ability to identify what they are. Hume's and Kant's arguements re causality are the analytic-synthetic dichotomy. For the original presentation of the views that smash this false dichotomy, see Leonard Peikoff's article "The Analytic- Synthetic Dichotomy" in the back of recent editions of Ayn Rand's "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology". For the epistemological basis of Peikoff's article, read Rand's Intro. (I almost posted this to net.cooks, but GOOD cooks know this already...) -Norm Andrews, AT+T Information Systems, (201) 834-3685 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Aug 1984 18:51 EDT From: MONTALVO%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Expert Systems, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Batteries I had a Fuzzy cat named Zada once. (This is really the truth.) He was named after Lotfi, of course. Fanya ------------------------------ Date: 8 Aug 84 12:43:00-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!hp-pcd!uoregon!conery @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming Article-I.D.: uoregon.30100002 -- CALL FOR PAPERS -- 1985 Symposium on Logic Programming Boston, Massachusetts, July 15-18, 1985 Sponsored by IEEE and its Technical Committee on Computer Languages The symposium will cover fundamental principles and important innovations in the design, definition, and implementation of logic programming systems and applications. Of special interest are papers related to parallel processing. Other topics of interest are (but are not limited to) FGCS, distributed control schemes, expert systems, natural language processing, systems programming, novel implementation techniques, and performance issues. Authors should send 8 copies of their manuscript, plus an extra copy of the abstract, to: John Conery Department of Computer and Information Science University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403 Paper length should be 8-20 typed, double spaced pages, including figures and abstract. Submissions will be considered on the basis of appropriateness, clarity, originality, significance, and overall quality. Deadline for submission of papers is November 16, 1984. Authors will be notified of acceptance or rejection by March 8, 1985, and camera ready copy must be returned by May 10, 1985. Authors of accepted papers will be expected to sign a copyright release form. ** Proposals for full or partial day tutorials are also being solicited. Send a one to three page proposal to John Conery by November 16. Conference Chairman Technical Committee Co-Chairmen Doug DeGroot Jacques Cohen John Conery T.J. Watson Res. Ctr. Computer Sci. Dept. Dept. of Computer PO Box 218 Ford Hall and Information Science Yorktown Heights, Brandeis University University of Oregon NY 10598 415 South St. Eugene, OR 97403 (914)945-3497 Waltham, MA 02254 (503)686-4408 (617)647-3370 CSNET: jc@brandeis jc@uoregon Technical Committee Ken Bowen (Syracuse) Jack Minker (Maryland) Jacques Cohen (Brandeis) Fernando Pereira (SRI) John Conery (Oregon) Alan Robinson (Syracuse) Doug DeGroot (IBM Yorktown) Sten-Ake Tarnlund (IBM Yorktown) Seif Haridi (IBM Yorktown) D. S. Warren (Stony Brook) Bob Keller (Utah) Jim Weiner (New Hampshire) Gary Lindstrom (Utah) ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 19-Aug-84 17:44:16-PDT,12519;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 19-Aug-84 17:39:55 Date: Sun 19 Aug 1984 17:29-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #106 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Sunday, 19 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 106 Today's Topics: AI & Society - Misrepresentations of AI, AI Tools - Taxonomy Assistant, Fuzzy Operational Research, Fifth Generation - Budget Cuts, Abstracts - Natural Language Programming, Natural Language - Crime Rate, User Interface - The Ebstein Test ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 14 Aug 84 22:08:59-EDT From: MM%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA Subject: Misrepresentations of AI [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.] I am looking for examples of outrageous representations of the current state of AI appearing in any popular newspapers or magazines. If you know of any, I'd appreciate hearing them. Melanie Mitchell ------------------------------ Date: 16 Aug 1984 15:57:11 PDT From: Bill Mann Subject: Taxonomy Assistant I would like to have some sort of computational aid for creating taxonomies. In trying to understand a collection of objects or data, often one of the most helpful things to do is to create a taxonomy of it. Comparing and classifying things makes one think about their attributes and how they relate. It also helps identify potential varieties of objects that are "missing." Often several attempts are required before a satisfactory result is achieved, which can involve a lot of bookkeeping and an overwhelming amount of detail, so much that significant patterns are missed. Also, there are skills for doing taxonomies, and I don't have them all. For all these reasons, it would be good to embed a lot of the support operations for creating a taxonomy in a program, one that would let the machine do bookkeeping, systematic evocation of data, consistency checking and some pattern identification, but still leave me in charge. (Perhaps it's already been done.) What sorts of tools are out there? Is this already embedded in some collection of intellectual prosthetics? Where should I look for such programs? Bill Mann [There are indeed tools for creating numerical taxonomies --- see the documentation for cluster analysis programs in statistical packages such as BMD, SPSS, SAS, etc. For other leads I would suggest the Pattern Recognition journal, the seven (massive) IEEE conferences on pattern recognition, and the Classification Society (c/o Dr. George W. Furnas, Room 2C-572, Bell Communications Research, Inc., Murray Hill, NJ 07974). Can anyone suggest available software for nonnumeric taxonomy construction or for handling the associated bookkeeping? -- KIL] ------------------------------ Date: 15 Aug 84 15:44:00-PDT (Wed) From: pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucuxc!chandra @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Fuzzy reasoning and AI in Operational Research and Management Science. Article-I.D.: uiucuxc.28900005 I am a graduate student who is trying to apply expert systems to managerial Decision Making . My thesis deals with applying knowledge based techniques to decision support systems which use mathematical models and Operations Research techniques. I would like to know if anybody is aware of some good references on AI applications in Operations Research / Decision making . Any Symposia, meetings, books etc. I would really appreciate your help, thank you. Navin Chandra Phone 1-800-872-2375 (ask for extention 413) ------------------------------ Date: 15 Aug 84 0418 PDT From: Laws@SRI-AI Subject: Japan's Fifth Generation Project The following summary is from a NYT article, Japan Appears To Falter Attempting To Create New Computer, by Andrew Pollack. Kazuhiro Fuchi, research director of the 5th generation project, says that the project budget has been drastically cut back on goals of vision, speech understanding, and natural language translation. The core program -- including reasoning, understanding written language, and intelligent programming -- has been preserved. The first phase, development of a database machine and a sequential reasoning engine, has been completed on schedule. Funding has been cut by 50% for the second phase, including development of a parallel machine and research in perception and man-machine interfaces. Project officials claim that: it is only natural the original vague goals would be narrowed; the original funding proposals were overly generous; and several private companies are researching the cut problems on their own, so there is little need for the institute to work on them. Finding qualified researchers was more of a problem than budget limitations anyway. ("I personally felt it was rather difficult to spend 100 billion yen," Fuchi said.) On the other hand, there will now be less opportunity for exploring different approaches. The third phase may be jeapardized if dead ends are encountered in the second phase. The Japanese government is trying to reduce a large deficit by eliminating spending increases in all areas except defense and foreign aid. If no exception is made for advanced technology, the ministry would have to make cuts elsewhere to increase the budget of the Fifth Generation project or find new sources of revenue. The ministry has continued to give the project favorable budget treatment, even though the agency's overall budget for high technology has dropped 20 percent during the last three years. One way to increase the budget is to ask industry to provide money. Eight computer companies are providing researchers to the project and are building machines for it, but they are not eager to provide speculative, long-term research funds. Fuchi also is concerned that corporate funding would limit the project's freedom to pursue its own goals. The institute wants to increase its staff from 50 researchers to 100 next year. But artificial intelligence reseachers are rare in Japan, and the companies are reluctant to part with more. "The Fifth Generation will produce technology for the 1990s," said one official of Fujitsu Ltd., Japan's largest computer company. "But we need products for our customers before the 1990s." -- Ken Laws ------------------------------ Date: Fri 17 Aug 84 18:01:05-PDT From: Kenji Sugiyama Subject: Abstracts - Natural Language Programming Here are two abstracts of the papers that concern with a Natural Language Programming System under development in Fujitsu Laboratories in Japan. * "Understanding of Japanese in an Interactive Programming System" by Kenji Sugiyama, Masayuki Kameda, Kouji Akiyama & Akifumi Makinouchi in COLING84 (10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics). Abstract: KIPS is an automatic programming system which generates standrdized business application programs through interactive natural language dialogue. KIPS models the program under discussion and the content of the user's statements as organizations of dynamic objects in the object-oriented programming sense. This paper describes the statement-model and the program-model, their use in understanding Japanese program specifications, and how they are shaped by the linguistic singularities of Japanese input sentences. * "An Experimental Interactive Natural Language Programming System" by Kenji Sugiyama, Kouji Akiyama, Masayuki Kameda & Akifumi Makinouchi to appear in Electronics and Communications in Japan which is published by Scripta Technical, Inc. (Silver Spring, MD 20910) in cooperation with IECEJ (the Institute of Electronics and Communication Engineers of Japan, Tokyo 105). Abstract: This paper discusses the problems encountered in the development of the interactive natural language programming system (KIPS) from three aspects, which are input sentence, target program and communication between the user and the system. Based on the recognitin of the problems, an interactive natural language programming system is proposed, which is constructed on a model of the task domain consisting of active objects in the object-oriented programming sense. The proposedd system is composed of four modules, which are parser, specification acquisitor, coder and user interface. Those modules realize the functions of information extraction from Japanese sentence, assimilation of fragmentary informations, automatic programming and man-machine interface, respectively. Lastly, future development of the system is discussed. Contact point is as follows: Kenji Sugiyama (until Sept. 5 and thereabout) SRI International, BS253 Menlo Park, CA 94025 (415)852-4402 Sugiyama@SRI-AI (afterwards) Software Laboratory, Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd. Kawasaki-shi, 211 Japan (044)777-1111 ------------------------------ Date: 15 Aug 84 10:46:31-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!ritcv!ccivax!abh @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: On having virtually no crime rate. Article-I.D.: ccivax.195 This kind of sentence structure is highly dependent upon perspective and context. If a problem is found on first parse perhaps a simple substitution by synonym would do the trick. In this case substituting 'nearly' for 'virtually' would do the trick. Contextually, though, the program would have to know that rates are for numerical comparison. In which case one of the better semantic results might be "nearly no crime rate in comparison." The reasons for which people interpret the same written words would be an interesting endeavor. Andrew Hudson -- "Freedom of choice is what you got Freedom from choice is what you want" - DEVO ...[rlgvax | decvax | ucbvax!allegra]!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!abh ------------------------------ Date: 20 Aug 84 7:44:08-EDT (Mon) From: ihnp4!drutx!houxe!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!ukc!west44!westcsr!pkelly @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: The Ebstein Test, or DHSS loses to AI. Article-I.D.: westcsr.169 I read in today's Guardian newspaper of an unpublished report describing an experiment performed at British Department of Health and Social Security offices (D.H.S.S. or colloquially 'the SS'). People claiming social security benefit often queue for literally hours to see DHSS staff about what benefits they're entitled to. In a small selection of offices computers were installed which people could choose to use instead of queueing to see a person. The machines took about half an hour to do a consultation, and produced an extensive print-out at the end. Finally, the clients were questionned on their experience. Despite often never having communicated with a computer before, 85 percent said they found the machines a better source of information than DHSS staff. The mechanised interview took a bit longer than talking to a human, but as the report's author, Joyce Ebstein, concludes, "What the professionals don't appreciate is that people don't object to long periods of service and attention. What they do object to is long periods of waiting for service and attention". Of course, this is no evidence to support wholesale redundancies - it simply underlines the abominable service being provided. But it does bring to mind an alternative to the Turing test, in which it is unimportant whether users can distinguish between a machine and a human. What counts is which they prefer. The test no longer defines Artificial Intelligence, but perhaps it makes a more sensible objective for artificial intelligence research. Yours, Paul Kelly, Westfield College, Univ. of London. (..vax135!ukc!west44!westcsr) ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 19-Aug-84 18:02:32-PDT,11928;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 19-Aug-84 17:57:19 Date: Sun 19 Aug 1984 17:50-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #107 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Monday, 20 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 107 Today's Topics: LISP - Interlisp/Zetalisp Compatibility & Charniak & Common Lisp, Brain Theory - PET Experiments, Philosophy - Causality and Proof & AI, Project Reports - UPenn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 Aug 84 10:50:44-PDT (Wed) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!noscvax!goodhart @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Interlisp/Zetalisp Compatibility Article-I.D.: noscvax.583 Symbolics (phone- (213) 473-6583) publishes "Interlisp Compatibility Package User's Guide" which discusses compatibility issues between Interlisp and Zetalisp. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Aug 84 14:49:29-PDT (Tue) From: decvax!mcvax!enea!erix!seeb @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Charniak's "AI-Prog."book:Code Reqst Article-I.D.: erix.550 Sure, when I first got my hands on that book that was my reaction too: "Translation please!". But there wasn't any around just then so I had to work my way through it by myself. And I discovered something: Exercises in reading different Lisp dialects are actually good for you, even when they are crammed with programmer-defined macros. After all, being able to read is half the secret of communication. If you can't do it --- well, you run into trouble ("Translation please!"). So my advice in this case is: Do it yourself! /Sten-Erik E Bergner - LM Ericsson ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 84 8:21:00-PDT (Mon) From: pur-ee!uiucdcsb!nowicki @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Common Lisp - (nf) Article-I.D.: uiucdcsb.5500009 I am also interested in such info. We have Sun-2's running 4.2 and I am interested in obtaining Common Lisp for them. -Tony Nowicki {decvax|inuxc}!pur-ee!uiucdcs!nowicki ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Aug 84 15:18:54 pdt From: weeks%ucbpopuli.CC@Berkeley (Harry Weeks) Subject: Common Lisp. I submitted earlier a query about Common Lisp. Here's the rundown on what I've come upon so far. ... Common Lisp is to be released by DEC for VAX/VMS ``in this quarter''. ... DEC developed Common Lisp at CMU using its money and apparently many of its own personnel, so they own the code developed. ... DEC developed a version to run under 4.n bsd VAX/Unix along with the VAX/VMS version, but the VMS version had priority, so the VAX/Unix version is lagging behind a bit. They are supposed to release one soon, however. ... There is no version running on 68000's at present, through apparently some companies are working on it. ... There may be a Common Lisp mailing list (Common-Lisp@SU-AI), but I haven't determined this for certain. I asked to be put on the list but haven't heard anything back. Harry Weeks (Weeks@UCBpopuli) ------------------------------ Date: 17 Aug 84 12:22:34 EDT From: KYLE.WBST@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Brain Theory and Language Re: David's request of 13 Aug 84 on Brain Theory-Language & EEG (Warfian Hypothesis from Sde@Mitre-bedford.ARPA) A team at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo. developed PET Scan techniques (Positron Emission Tomography) that allowed for real time monitoring of brain response to various external stimuli (sound, light, etc.). The key people are now at UCLA , I think. You can read about this work in Science News, or in Science magazines. There was also a booth at the Toronto APA meeting in 1982 describing various applications for PET technology, and I seem to recall a paper decribing some of the work you mentioned with musicians. One of the magazine articles , I think, mentioned differences between musicians who had become conductors of orchestras vs, those who had not re:left & right brain activity. Musicians also respomd differently to non musical sound inputs such as alarms , ambulance sirens, etc. and it seems to have something to do with their training. As you probably know, the entire issue is clouded by left handed people. They seem to fall into 3 categories: mirror images of right handed ones (i.e. speech is in the lefty's right brain hemisphere, etc), same as right handed people, and non-hemisphere specific (i.e. both halves share same functions with no dominance). The latter group seems to always have inner conflict and trouble making decisions. PET techniques require access to the right expensive gear to make the short lived radio isotopes that are presented to the subject's brain via food stuffs that resemble sugars the brain can use. The emitted radiation is picked up by gear similar to an X-ray CAT scanner and presented to the researcher on a CRT. What one sees is a profile of brain metabolism in response to various stimuli. It is superior to the EEG in the sense that you can see dynamic resource allocation as a function of problem solving. It would provide interesting study for those interested in emulating nature's parallel processor. As I recall, work has also been done using the technique to monitor activity during math problem solving exercises. One last note of reference, APA stands for American Psychiatric (or Psychological...I forget) Association. The 1982 convention I attended was at the Sheraton Plaza complex in Toronto, and a proceedings was generated so a good library should be able to locate a copy. Earle. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Aug 84 23:39:09-PDT (Tue) From: decvax!decwrl!flairvax!kissell @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Now and Then Article-I.D.: flairvax.720 (Norm Andrews challenges Ray Chen's agnosticsm on cause and effect) > The concept of proof depends upon the concepts of cause and effect, among > other things. This is simply not true. The notion of logical proof involves implication relationships between discrete statements in discourse. This is an agreed upon rule of the game. Causality assumes implication relationships between discrete events in the world. The universe may or may not argue like a philosopher, and it is not always clear what constitutes a "discrete" event. > So what's causality? The law of identity applied to action. Things do > what they do, in any given context, BECAUSE they are what they are. This is a denial of causality, not a definition. If things do what they do because they are what they are, then they certainly can't be *caused* to do anything by something else. Unless, of course, the only *thing* is everything. uucp: {ihnp4 decvax}!decwrl!\ >flairvax!kissell {ucbvax sdcrdcf}!hplabs!/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon 13 Aug 84 19:40:34-PDT From: Richard Pattis Subject: Name the Presidential Candidate who wrote... Name the presidential candidate who wrote the following: It was in that mood, living day after day with this matter principally occuring in my mind, that I halted such peripheral considerations as the spur-of-the-moment Plotto simulation exemplified, and resolved to go directly to the crux of the matter of "artificial intelligence." It was simple enough for me to do. A knowledge of both analog and computer principles, philosophical rigor, and my competence in economics: it was a simple matter to lay out in my mind a worldwide network of task-oriented, linked computers performing production of all human needs, including the building of task-oriented computers like themselves. Such an array is the precondition for supposing that "artificial intelli- gence" in computers might be approximated, at least in the form of conscious powers of deduction. Since human consciousness and intelligence depend on what Kant terms the synthetic a apriori processes, and since there is no configuration of the indicated sorrt of model which could accommodate such synthesis, there is no way in which any form of computer could become willful in a human sense of willful intelligence. It was obvious, on less rigorous grounds, than no computer could synthesize intelligent behavior in the manner Minsky and others were approaching this. That was the simple case to prove. Minsky's problem was that he proceeded in ignorance of even a Feuerbachian model of the determination of intelligence. There is more, but it becomes less focused, and I became tired of typing. As a hint, the principal accomplishment of the author of this quotation is, "... that of being, by a large margin of advantage, the leading economist of the twentieth century to date." Rich ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Aug 84 17:09 EDT From: Tim Finin Subject: Project Reports - UPenn THE CENTER FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE in the Department of Computer and Information Science at the University of Pennsylvania has received a major award from the U.S. Army Research Office for research and education in Artificial Intelligence. The award is for $7.2 million together with a supplementary DOD-URIP award of $500,000, a total of $7.7 million over a period of five years. The award will support faculty and technical staff and provide graduate research fellowships and research equipment. The contract is from the Electronics Division of the Army Research Office under the direction of Dr. Jimmie Suttle. Principle Investigator for the grant is Professor Aravind K. Joshi and co-Principle Investigators are Professors Norman Badler, Ruzena Bajcsy, Peter Buneman, and Bonnie Webber. Pennsylvania's CENTER FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE is located in the Department of Computer and Information Science but includes members from the departments of Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Linguistics, Philosophy and Psychology as well as the Wharton School and the School of Medicine. Primary research interests include natural language processing, flexible communication with knowledge bases, programming languages and knowledge bases, automated reasoning and expert systems, computer interaction in three dimensions, interaction of visual and tactile information, robotics, analysis and synthesis of motion, computer graphics and animation, computational logic, and the design of languages for representing and manipulating knowledge. The CENTER FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE has been the recipient of several other major grants recently, including an NSF Coordinated Experimental Research grant ($3.8 million for five years), an IBM grant for new ventures in Computer Science ($1 million), a Sloan Foundation grant for Cognitive Science ($1.0 million), an Air Force Office of Reseach grant for Query Driven Vision System ($1 million), a grant from NASA for Human Body Motion Modelling ($800,000), and several grants from the NSF Intelligent Systems Division. Students interested in applying for graduate admission should write to: Professor Peter Buneman, Graduate Group Chair Department of Computer and Information Science, The Moore School University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104 Inquiries concerning faculty positions (regular and visiting) and research staff positions should be directed to Professor Aravind K. Joshi at the same address as above. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 21-Aug-84 16:17:12-PDT,16443;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 21-Aug-84 16:15:42 Date: Tue 21 Aug 1984 15:41-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #108 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 22 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 108 Today's Topics: LISP - Common Lisp & Lisp/VM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 1984 15:42 EDT From: Skef Wholey Subject: Common Lisp From: weeks%ucbpopuli.CC@Berkeley (Harry Weeks) Subject: Common Lisp. ... DEC developed Common Lisp at CMU using its money and apparently many of its own personnel, so they own the code developed. DEC's Common Lisp was based on Spice Lisp -- a portable Common Lisp implementation (written almost entirely in Common Lisp) for personal workstations. The Spice Lisp code is in the public domain, but the VAX-specific compiler and runtime code is owned by DEC. They have certainly made big changes even in the Lisp-level code so that our sources may be very different today, but most of the work done at CMU was on a portable, public-domain implementation. Perq Systems is (or will be) selling Common Lisp for the Perq -- their implementation IS Spice Lisp, with little or no change. Right now it is jointly maintained by Perq and CMU. Data General has also announced a Common Lisp (based on Spice Lisp as well). Symbolics is currently working on a Common Lisp Compatability Package (CLCP) that is NOT based on Spice Lisp. Because of the strong similarity of Common Lisp and Zetalisp, such a compatability package is feasible. I've "ported" two large (source code at least 100K characters) Common Lisp programs from the Perq (in Spice Lisp) to the 3600 (with CLCP) with almost no modification. ... There may be a Common Lisp mailing list (Common-Lisp@SU-AI), but I haven't determined this for certain. I asked to be put on the list but haven't heard anything back. That mailing list was used during the design of Common Lisp and has been pretty quiet lately except for nit-picking issues implementors worry about. There is currently no "Common-Lisp-Users" mailing list, but one could be created if Common Lisp was deemed inappropriate material for AIList. --Skef ------------------------------ Date: 2 Aug 1984 17:06:53-EDT (Thursday) From: Mark N. Wegman Subject: Lisp/VM - History and Overview [This is a response to my request for more information. I have broken the message into two parts. -- KIL] A SHORT DESCRIPTION OF LISP/VM ______________________________ A complete LISP system, LISP/VM comprises an interpreter/compiler for its LISP language and an environ- ment that includes a syntax-oriented editor and run-time debugger. History Created at the IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York, LISP/VM grew out of a decade and a half of experience producing LISP systems. Early LISP de- velopments at T. J. Watson were derived from the LISP 1.5 developed by John McCarthy of MIT and distributed by SHARE for the IBM 704. Subsequent modifications and conversions by Fred Blair, ran on IBM 7090, 7094, 7040 and 7044 comput- ers. This created and supported a LISP user community at T. J. Watson that has persisted to this day. After the introduction of System/360 in the 1960's, Fred Blair, assisted by James Griesmer, Mark Pivovonsky and Joseph Harry, produced LISP/360, which inherited much from the LISP 1.5 tradition. LISP/360 ran in both the batch en- vironment of OS/360 and the time-sharing environment of TSS/360 and VM/CMS. The advent of the IBM System/370 and the limitations of the 18-bit address space led to the cre- ation in the mid-1970s of LISP/370. In the natural evolu- tion of a system created in a research environment, LISP/370 diverged in its semantics from both LISP/360 and LISP 1.5. It was eventually frozen as an IUP (installed user program) and made available to internal IBM sites and some customers. In 1978, a new LISP project that would substantially enhance the capabilities of LISP/370 was started. Cyril Alberga, Martin Mikelsons, and Mark Wegman were the authors of this new LISP system, called YKTLISP, for Yorktown LISP. In ad- dition to being enhanced functionally, YKTLISP was provided with a sophisticated programming environment so that users would be encouraged to write maintainable and readable LISP programs. It has been used extensively within IBM and is now released publicly as LISP/VM. Contributors to the ref- erence manual included the system authors, John Sowa, and Mary Van Deusen. Many people have participated in discussions and reviews which have contributed to the quality of LISP/VM. They in- clude: Marc Auslander, Len Berman, Fred Blair, Chris Bosman-Clark, Alan Brown, Larry Carter, Ashok Chandra, Ken Chatfield, Alan Cobham, Walt Daniels, James Davenport, Doug DeGroot, Cay Dietrich, Pat Goldberg, Jim Griesmer, Se June Hong, Dick Jenks, Paul Kosinski, Vincent Kruskal, George Leeman, Victor Miller, Jim Moore, George Radin, J.A. Robinson, Dick Ryniker, Marshall Schor, John Sowa, Barry Trager, Jean Voldman, and Karen Woolhouse. LISP/VM Overview The LISP/VM Reference Manual describes in detail the facili- ties and operators available in LISP/VM. The purpose of this description is to list the major features of LISP/VM and some of the implementation details to allow the experi- enced LISP programmer to compare LISP/VM to other LISP im- plementations. LISP/VM is an interactive LISP system for use on the IBM System/370 computer. A program development environment is provided which supports: ? A structure editor for LISP functions and data which al- lows the creation and modification of objects from the file system and from the dynamic store. ? An interactive interpreter which uses the editor to dis- play the course of program execution. ? An indexed file system allowing access to LISP functions and data individually and as collections. ? A compiler which will produce either immediately execut- able functional objects, or relocatable objects in files. ? Carefully designed compiler and interpreter semantics. In most practical cases, interpreted and compiled code are fully interchangeable. ? An error handler which will, under user control, either return to the command level or enter a primitive command level from which the state of the computation may be ex- amined. ? Pattern matching during lambda-binding and assignment. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Aug 1984 17:06:53-EDT (Thursday) From: Mark N. Wegman Subject: Lisp/VM - Features LISP/VM Features ? Data types ? Numbers include small integers (up to 26 bits), in- tegers of arbitrary precision (bignums) and floating point numbers (7 bit exponent and 56 bit fraction). ? Identifiers include characters and gensyms. ? Pairs (lists or conses) ? Vectors of arbitrary objects, integers, floating point numbers, characters, or bits (Boolean values). ? Hashtables can hash on pointers or structure. ? Readtables allow prefix and infix character and dis- patch macros. ? State descriptors capture the control and environ- ment components of an evaluation in a single object. ? Streams are the interface to data in external files. ? Functions and macros, both interpreted and compiled are ordinary data objects. ? Funargs combine a function or macro and a state de- scriptor to provide a form of closure. ? Scope and Extent ? Variable bindings normally have lexical scope. ? Variable bindings that are declared fluid have dy- namic scope. ? Control points established by CATCH and related con- structs have dynamic scope. ? Labels (or GO targets) have lexical scope. ? Evaluation rules ? Self-evaluating forms (constants) consist of the numbers, character vectors, bit vectors and NIL. ? Identifiers (symbols or variables) evaluate to a current lambda-bound value or to a default value stored in a non-lambda environment. Special forms as well as macros and function invocations are recognized by evaluating the CAR of a compound form. This feature allows all operators in LISP/VM to be re- defined by the user in order to modify or extend the se- mantics of the language. ? The special forms are: CLOSEDFN FUNCTION PROGN COND GO QUOTE EVALQ GVALUE RETURN EXIT LAMBDA SEQ F*CODE MLAMBDA SETQ ? Macros are applied to the invoking form and the value of the macro call is re-evaluated. A macro is defined by assignment or lambda-binding. ? Functions may have a fixed or variable number of ar- guments. Functions are defined by assignment or lambda-binding. ? The bound variable part of functions and macros may be a pattern that specifies the structure of an ar- gument. Specified components of an argument may be bound to distinct variables. ? In addition to all the usual type and numeric predi- cates, LISP/VM includes three forms of structural equal- ity: ? EQUAL is the traditional equality test. Atomic ob- jects are EQUAL if their external forms are identi- cal. Two composite objects are EQUAL if for any combination of access operations the corresponding components are EQUAL. ? UEQUAL test for structural equivalence (isomorphism). ? UGEQUAL tests for structural equivalence and allows different gensyms in two objects if their patterns of occurrence are isomorphic. ? All three equality predicates terminate for all data objects, including objects with shared and circular structure. ? Control structure ? Simple sequencing constructs include PROGN, PROG1, PROG2 and COND. ? SEQ defines a sequential context and a scope for la- bels and EXIT expressions. ? PROG defines a scope for labels as well as a set of variables, and a scope for RETURN expressions. ? Iterators include the MACLISP-style DO as well as most of the INTERLISP iteration constructs. ? Mapping operators include MAP, MAPCAR, MAPCAN, as well as operators that map over vectors. ? Non-local exits are possible with CATCH, THROW, THROW-PROTECT, and similar constructs. ? State saving and application allows co-routining, backtracking and other non-LIFO control models. ? Identifiers (symbols) have a pname and a property list. There is no function-value cell, since function defi- nition is assignment. Characters are not a special case in LISP/VM, they are simply the identifiers with a one-character pname. Gensyms are identifiers that are created anew each time they are read. ? Operations on numbers include all the usual arithmetic functions and a set of in-line operators for small inte- ger arithmetic. ? Operations on lists normally terminate or signal an er- ror when the list is circular. ? Hash tables allow hashing on pointers, structure, or the contents of character strings. ? Operations on vectors include specialized operations on character vectors (strings). ? Structured data definitions allow named access to the components of a data object. ? The compiler can be invoked dynamically to compile from and/or to the LISP/VM heap or external files. In most cases, compiled and interpreted definitions are equiv- alent and interchangeable. Compilations take place in an environment that may con- tain alternate definitions for operators. Thus, an op- erator can have a functional definition in the normal environment, and a macro definition that emits in-line code in the compile environment. ? Streams allow parsed or character-oriented data trans- mission between LISP/VM and the external file system. ? Input/Output ? The PRINT function produces an external form for ev- ery LISP/VM data object. In addition, shared sub- structure is revealed by markers in the external form; these markers are recognized by the READ func- tion. ? The input syntax is determined by a readtable that defines a wide variety of character attributes. ? Storage allocation ? There are no fixed allocations of storage within LISP/VM. The boundaries between heap, stack, com- piled programs, etc., are adjusted dynamically to make full use of the available memory. ? Garbage collection is done by a copying algorithm that takes time proportional to the amount of data that survives the collection. ? A MACLISP compatibility package allows existing applica- tions to be compiled for use in the LISP/VM environment ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 25-Aug-84 18:11:37-PDT,12382;000000000000 Mail-From: LAWS created at 25-Aug-84 18:02:02 Date: Wed 22 Aug 1984 09:39-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #109 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 22 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 109 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Late Mailing, Man-Machine Interface - Ebstein/Turing Tests, Psychology - APA Acronym & Personality Tests, Applications - CLARIFY: On-Line Guide for Revising Technical Prose, Seminars - Mechanisms for Learning & Medical Knowledge Acquisition & Functional Languages and Parallel Computers, Conference - National ACM'84 Meeting ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 25 Aug 84 1800 PDT From: Kenneth I. Laws Subject: Late Mailing This issue, # 109, is being mailed after issue # 110 due my accidentally deleting the file instead of sending it out. Fortunately the SRI systems staff was able to recover a copy. I apologize for not getting the seminar notices out in reasonable time. -- KIL ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 84 1136 PDT From: Peter Blicher Subject: ebstein/turing tests As I continue to deal with bureaucracies and uninterested workers, it is becoming clearer that the Turing test will soon be passed, but not because of any improvement in technology. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Aug 1984 00:01:00 EDT From: Richard F. Hartung Subject: What APA stands for. APA stands for both American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric Association, two separate organizations A friend who attends all these things tells me that the Psychological org is meeting in Toronto this year (in about a week) and met their last in 1981 or 1980. In 1982 it was in Washington D.C. Although he doesn't remember off hand where the Psychiatric org. met in 82, this was probably the meeting refered to in the last AILIST (conclusion by default). Michael Moran Lockheed Advanced Software Laboratory ------------------------------ Date: Sat 4 Aug 84 18:52:04-PDT From: Stuart McLure Cracraft Subject: Re: Any online Personality Tests? [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI. This is in response to Stanford query about on-line personality tests.] The book you want is PLEASE UNDERSTAND ME (absurdly chosen title) by David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates It contains a 70-question instrument, the Keirsey Temprament Sorter, based on the psychological typology developed by Carl Jung and others (Myers-Briggs). The Myers-Briggs instrument which is the true instrument is not available to the general public. Distribution of it is limited to psychology grad students and psychologists/psychiatrists. The Keirsey test is the best substitute I've found. [...] Several psychologists I have spoken with indicate the Jung typology tests such as the Myers-Briggs and Keirsey are gaining recognition as extremely deep tests. Although I have no formal degree in psychology, I feel that the Jung typology is vastly more deep than the Rorschach, Minnesota Multi-Phasic, and California Psychological inventories. The Myers-Briggs was eschewed by earlier researchers and is only recently over-coming its "bad" reputation. The correlations between personality types and profession, marriage, partners, etc are very significant. To me, the Jung typology is the most profound psychological work done in this century by anyone. Stuart ------------------------------ Date: Wed 15 Aug 84 12:01:49-PDT From: C.S./Math Library Subject: CLARIFY: Rand's On-Line Guide for Revising Technical Prose [Forwarded from the Stanford bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] CLARIFY: Rand's On-Line Guide for Revising Technical Prose Rand Report: N-2037-RC by M.E.Vaianan, N.Z.Shapiro and M.L.LaCasse 1983 This note describes the development and testing of CLARIFY, a computerized writing aid designed to assist writers in revising technical prose. CLARIFY is not a traditional readability formula; its design reflects research on how English speakers understand sentences. CLARIFY flags sentences that have certain patterns of nominalizations, prepositional phrases, and forms of the verb to be. The choice of these features reflects research which suggests that the dominant strategy employed by English speakers in interpreting sentences is to assume a subject-verb-object (SVO) structure. The features that CLARIFY flags are good surrogate indicators that a sentence does not have an SVO structure, and therefore, that the initial interpretive strategy will be unsuccessful. In developing CLARIFY, the authors tested various patterns of these features, and obtained user comments about the system's usefulness and effectiveness. Like all computerized writing aids, CLARIFY hs limitations, which are discussed in the note. CLARIFY is in general use at the Rand Corp. where it is also continuing to be tested 55pp** **From Selected Rand Abstracts Rand publications are located in the Green Library. H. Llull ------------------------------ Date: 08/14/84 12:35:48 From: ROSIE Subject: Seminar - Mechanisms for Learning [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.] DATE: Thursday, August 16, 1984 PLACE: NE43-7th Floor Playroom MECHANISMS FOR LEARNING Kamesh Ramakrishna Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio A number of different mechanisms for machine learning have been proposed, though the definition of "learning" itself has not been particularly clear. We show that many proposed learning mechanisms can be placed into two classes and that mechanisms within each class are reducible to each other. These two classes correspond roughly to the "knowledge acquisition" and "skill refinement" classes proposed by Mitchell, Carbonell, and Michalski; however, (and more interestingly) they correspond to the two different levels of knowledge-based processor architecture proposed by Newell in "The Knowledge Level". The knowledge acquisition type learners appear to be at the Symbol/Program level. This observation lets us integrate this approach to machine learning with the taxonomy of problem-solving types proposed by Chandrasekaran et al., leading to the hope of an integrated knowledge-level approach to both problem-solving and learning. With appropriate restrictions placed on the functioning of the learning mechanisms, we show that the two classes also differ in the fundamental learning problem that they solve. We identify some learning problems that are not solved by either class -- identifying some possible future directions for research. HOST: Prof. Ramesh Patil ------------------------------ Date: Tue 21 Aug 84 09:17:27-PDT From: Juanita Mullen Subject: Seminar - Medical Knowledge Acquisition [Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.] RIPLUNCH SPEAKER: Larry Fagan, Joan Differding, and Mark Musen Medical Computer Science Group TOPIC OPAL: Practical Knowledge Acquisition for ONCOCIN DATE: Friday, August 24, 1984 LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical & Organic Chemistry TIME: 12:05 We will discuss our design of the ONCOCIN knowledge acquisition framework named OPAL. ONCOCIN is designed to assist physicians with the management of cancer treatment plans. A number of these treatment plans, called protocols, have been entered into the ONCOCIN system using low level tools. We have recently built a protocol oriented knowledge acquisition system designed directly for the cancer specialist (oncologist). The OPAL knowledge acquisition subsystem is graphically based and represents our analysis of the common components of cancer treatment plans. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 21 Aug 84 11:11:30-EDT From: Pamela Sedell Subject: Seminar - Functional Languages and Parallel Computers [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.] "Functional Languages and Parallel Computers" John Hughes Oxford University Computing Laboratory Programming Research Group, Oxford Friday, August 24, 1984 NE43-512, 2:15 We introduce functional programming and show how "real programs" such as simple operating systems can be written functionally. We also explain why functional languages are particularly useful for programming parallel computers. We have discovered that the relationship between functional languages and parallel computers is closer than previously suspected: functional languages actually require a parallel implementation if they are to use memory efficiently. We introduce two simple constructs which allow the functional programmer to exert close control over memory requirements, and give a number of examples to illustrate them in use. The new constructs can also be used to implement "non-deterministic unmerge". ------------------------------ Date: 13 Aug 84 10:08:19-PDT (Mon) From: hplabs!hao!ames!eugene @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: National ACM'84 meeting San Franciso, CA Article-I.D.: ames.472 I am posting the following as a request of Lew Bornmann of the ACM'84 publicity committee. Please mail any requests for information to: bornmann@ames-nas-gw [or bornmann%ames-nas-gw@su-score] ======================================================================= ACM-84: The Fifth Generation Challenge What: ACM-84, the Association for Computing Machinery's 1984 Annual Conference. When: October 8 to 10, 1984, with an "Early Bird" reception on Sunday, October 7. Where: At the San Francisco Hilton and Tower, Mason and O'Farrell Streets, San Francisco Theme: The Fifth Generation Challenge The Conference will examine: The Impact of the Fifth Generation. Specifically, the effect that Fifth Generation computers will have over the next decade on society, industry, the professions, and computer science. The Building Blocks of the Fifth Generation. An examination of current developments, new techniques, and new products which will take computing into the 1990s. The Character of Integration... in the Fifth Generation. How the Fifth Generation building blocks will fit together, and the impact of integration. The technical conference program will complemented by: o Professional Development Seminars. o An exhibit program. o An educators' program. o A computer chess championship. Social events will include a "Themes of San Francisco" gala evening and an awards luncheon. Special travel arrangements have been made with Corporate Travel Services of Sunnyvale, Ca. These include discounted air fares and pre- and post-conference tours. (CTS toll-free phone number: 800/851-3478; in California: call 408/734-9990 collect.) Advance Registration Fees: $110.00 ACM Members $150.00 Non-ACM Members Accommodations: Blocks of rooms for ACM-84 have been reserved. Please contact the Hilton directly for reservations. When calling, specify ACM-84 for reduced rates. Director of Front Office Operations San Francisco Hilton Tower Mason and O'Farrell Streets San Francisco, Ca. 94102 (415)771-1400 Room rates: Singles begin at $67 Double begin at $87 For any additional information, contact: (415)948-6306 ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 24-Aug-84 13:40:57-PDT,14986;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 24-Aug-84 11:38:53 Date: Fri 24 Aug 1984 11:33-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #110 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Friday, 24 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 110 Today's Topics: Inexact Reasoning - Panel Discussion at AAAI-84, LISP - VAX VMS LISP, AI Tools - IBM-PC/Family Tools & Expert System Planner & Taxonomy, Expert Systems - Question about HEARSAY-II, Games - Chess Strategy and Protocols, Seminar - WYSIWYG Programming ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Aug 84 08:29:19 PDT From: Koenraad Lecot Subject: Inexact Reasoning Panel Discussion at AAAI-84 Does anybody have a tape and/or summary of what has been said during the AAAI-84 panel discussion on inexact reasoning ? -- Koenraad Lecot Arpa : koen@ucla-locus uucp : ...ucla-cs!koen ------------------------------ Date: 18 Aug 84 10:49:50-PDT (Sat) From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!gmf @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: VAX VMS LISP ? Article-I.D.: uvacs.1453 I would appreciate information about LISP interpreters for a VAX 11/780 running VMS. Thanks in advance. Gordon Fisher ...uvacs!gmf ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 84 8:18:16-PDT (Wed) From: ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!rti!rti-sel!crm @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: VAX VMS LISP ? Article-I.D.: rti-sel.1182 Check out Common LISP, a new product for VMS which (I am told) is very like InterLISP... You can buy the book about it from Digital Press. Call your local DEC office for details. Charlie Martin ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Aug 84 14:38 MST From: LMiller%pco@CISL-SERVICE-MULTICS.ARPA Subject: AI tools for IBM-PC/family I am looking for leads for two kinds of tools to run on models of the IBM-PC (or compatibles). The tools are: 1) expert system building tools (have seen Expert-Ease and M.1 and need more than just a good LISP/PROLOG) and 2) CAE graphic design aids for software engineers (a la CAD tools for hardware). I know such tools exist for somewhat large machines (e.g. Vaxen, Appollo, Sun ...) but our needs are for something on the order of a super/micro. If you've seen such tools and can provide phone numbers or addresses of vendors I would appreciate your help. Thanks Lance Miller (LMiller%pco@CISL) ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 84 15:05:41-PDT (Wed) From: ihnp4!drutx!druxx!jlmalito @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: expert system ``planner'' wanted Article-I.D.: druxx.604 We are currently planning on building a UNIX-based expert system to handle ``system administration'' on a computer system. My plan is to build a knowledge base containing facts about the computer system, as well as descriptions of possible actions and their consequences. The expert system would be presented with a description of the current world, and a goal. The planner (``inference engine'') will determine what actions are needed to get from the current world to a goal state. Due to time constraints, we are trying to find a planner that can accomplish the task described above. If anyone knows of such a planner (or a system containing one), please contact me. We need source, preferably for a UNIX system. Anything close will do. We would consider any purchase agreement and gladly accept freebies. Quick responses would be appreciated. (Also, any ``Have you checked...?'' would be great.) Any responses of general interest will be posted. thanks, Jeanine L. Malito {ihnp4,allegra}!druxx!jlmalito AT&T Information Systems Rm. 30G73 11900 N. Pecos St. Denver CO 80234 303-538-3859 ------------------------------ Date: 24 Aug 84 0:40:07 EDT From: KYLE.WBST@XEROX.ARPA Subject: Taxonomic System RE: BILL MANN'S REQUEST FOR TAXONOMY INFO. IN THE LATE 1960'S, CESARE CACERES DEVELOPED PROGRAMS TO ANALYZE EKG HEART WAVEFORMS WITH THE U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE IN ORDER TO CLASSIFY PATTERNS THAT DEVIATED FROM THE NORM TO SPOT EARLY HEALTH PROBLEMS. HE ALSO DEVELOPED STREP THROAT BACTERIA CLASSIFICATION PROGRAMS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE HOFFMAN LA ROCHE COMPANY. ABOUT THIS SAME TIME, SANDIA LABS DEVELOPED A BACTERIA CLASSIFICATION PROGRAM. ALSO AT ABOUT THIS SAME TIME THE ARMY AT EDGEWOOD ARSENAL DEVELOPED A CLASSIFICATION PROGRAM FOR VARIOUS CHEMICALS THAT HAD TOXIC PROPERTIES. MOST OF THE INFO ON THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE IN THE OPEN LITERATURE IN THE OLD ASTIA DOCUMENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 1984 22:05:18-PDT From: doshi%umn-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa Subject: Question about HEARSAY-II. I have a question about the HEARSAY-II system [Erman et.al.1980]. What exactly is the HEARSAY system required/supposed to do ? i.e. what is the meaning of the phrase : "Speech Understanding system" Honestly, I did go thru [Erman+ 1980] carefully. I can quote the following : page 213 : "The HEARSAY-II system....represents both a specific solution to the speech-understanding problem and a general framework for co-ordinating independent processes to achieve cooperative problem solving behaviour." page 213 : "The HEARSAY-II reconstructs an intention .... " page 214 : "The HEARSAY-II recognises connected speech in .... " page 234 : (this is a footnote) "IBM has been funding work with somewhat different objective... Its stated goals mandate little reliance on the strong syntactic/semantic/task constraints exploited by the DARPA projects. This orientation is usually dubbed SPEECH RECOGNITION as distinguished from SPEECH UNDERSTANDING." page 233 : "DARPA speech understanding system performance goals..... ------------- ----- The system should - Accept connected speech - from many - cooperative speakers of the General American Dialect - in a quiet room - using a good-quality microphone - with slight tuning per speaker - requiring only natural adaption by the user - permitting a slightly selected vocabularu of 1000 words - with a slightly artificial syntax and highly constrained task - providing graceful interaction - tolerating less than 10 % semantic error [this is the only direct reference to `understanding` or `semantics`] - ....... " Let me explain my confusion with examples. Does the system do one of the following : - 1) Accepts speech as input; Then, tries to output what (ever) was spoken or might have been spoken ? - 2) Or, accept speech as input and UNDERSTAND it ? Now, the 1) above is, I think speech RECOGNITION. DARPA did not want just that. Then, what is(are) the meaning(s) of UNDERSTAND ? - if I say "Alligators can fly", should the system repeat this and also tell me that that is "not true"; is this called UNDERSTANDING ?? - if I say "I go house", should the system repeat this and also add that there is a "grammetical error"; is this called UNDERSTANDING ?? - Or, if HAYES-ROTH claims "I am ERMAN", the system should say "No, You are not ERMAN" - I dont think that HEARSAY was supposedd to do this (it does not have Vision etc). But you will agree that that is also UNDERSTANDING. Note that the above claim by HAYES-ROTH would be true if : - he had changed his last name - he was merely QUOTING what ERMAN might have said somewhere - etc So, could someone (the original authors of HEARSAY-II, perhaps) respond to the question : In light of the above examples, what does it mean by saying that HEARSAY-II understands speech ? Thank you. -- raj Graduate student U. of Minnesota CSNET : doshi.umn-cs@csnet-relay Reference : L.D.Erman, F.Hayes-Roth, Victor Lesser and D.R.Reddy "The Hearsay-II speech Understanding System : Integrating Knowledge to resolve uncertainity." ACM Computing Surveys, Vol 12, No 2, June 1980. ------------------------------ Date: Thu Aug 23 14:47:43 1984 From: mclure@sri-prism Subject: number-cruncher vs. humans: 9th move [...] The Machine Moves ----------------- Depth Move Time for search Nodes Machine's Estimate 8 ply cxd4 18 hours, 7 minutes 6.5x10^7 += The Game So Far --------------- 1. e4 c5 6. Re1 a6 2. Nf3 d6 7. Bf1 e5 3. Bb5+ Nc6 8. d4 cxd4 4. o-o Bd7 9. cxd4 5. c3 Nf6 Commentary ---------- [...] Tli@Usc-Eclb, USCF ? Unfortunately, the voting will also keep out the inspired moves. So we get an average game of all playing.... SLOAN@WASHINGTON 8. ... b5 It is worth noting a classical problem here in building a chess program: 1) The machine was following its book until this move, 2) As White, the machine should enjoy AT LEAST EQUALITY in the first position following "book" recommendations, 3) However, having switched from "book" evaluation to its own opening/middle game evaluation, the machine now decides that it doesn't much like this position after all! There are several possibilities: 0) Black is superior in the starting position (unlikely!) 1) the book (at least this line) is inferior, and the machine should discard it (anyone out there think that the Prestige will do this?) 2) the book is (objectively) correct, but this line does not match the playing "style" of the machine (i.e., the position is OK, but the machine doesn't know the correct thematic continuations, and hence will indeed find the position to be difficult.) This last possibility is most likely, and is not limited to machine play. Many human players have the same problem when they memorize columns and columns of analysis without understanding the REASONS for the evaluations at the ends of the columns. This leads to post-mortem conversations of the form "That master isn't so strong; I had him CRUSHED in the opening...but he SOMEHOW escaped to a dead drawn ending - he didn't even know that it was theoretically drawn - he refused my draw offer! - I was so mad at him for that that I lost my concentration for 1 move and hung a piece." EWG@Cmu-Cs-Ps1, USCF ? The comment that the group of humans won't have a long term strategy is, I think, naieve. It is just as easy for us to analyze lines of play (e.g. kingside vs queenside attack, try to trade off and queen a pawn, etc.) as it is for us to analyze the single position. If anything it's somewhat easier, since we think about that anyway. Why not solicit votes on that level as well and at least report the judgement (if not allowing it to directly choose the move at hand, which would be rash). A suggestion for later in the game, at least. This harkens back to memories of 10 or so years ago when I was still reading the chess books, and ran across a comment by one of the grandmasters (Sam Reshevski, I think?) who liked to play blitz and always used the style of spending a significant time thinking about lines of play at the start of the middle game. His strategy was to have the lines firmly in mind for later play. The comment was that his opponents often got bored waiting for him to reply at that time and wasted the real time; he could then play at blitz pace much better as the game progressed and the opponent struggled for the right line(s) of play. It also had the surface appearance of him putting himself deliberately in time trouble, which wasn't the case. Replies to Arpanet: mclure@sri-unix or Usenet: sri-unix!mclure. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 84 16:15:48 PDT From: Guy M. Lohman Reply-to: IBM-SJ Calendar Subject: Seminar - WYSIWYG Programming [Forwarded from the SRI-AI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.] IBM San Jose Research Lab 5600 Cottle Road San Jose, CA 95193 Wed., Aug. 29 Computer Science Seminar 10:00 A.M. WYSIWYG PROGRAMMING 2C-012 Though single-user workstation hardware has evolved rapidly to the point of rivaling the mainframes of a few years ago, software has generally failed to keep pace. "What you see is what you get" (WYSIWYG) software for text processing and other applications has shown the feasibility of performing applications by direct manipulations of visual objects. But programming languages are still based on a "typewriter" model of communication which has remained essentially unchanged since the 1950's. This model has now been antiquated by the advent of high resolution displays and accurate pointing devices. WYSIWYG applications are often dramatically easier to use than their traditional command-based counterparts. This talk will describe a project to design and prototype an interactive facility for building programs as WYSIWYG objects, by capturing direct manipulations of visual objects on a display screen. The resulting programs are animations which act like virtual users, doing the same things that a real user can do. Building these programs is totally continuous with normal hands-on manipulation of the objects, while writing programs in traditional programming languages is quite discordant with that process. D. Hatfield, IBM Cambridge Scientific Center Host: D. Chamberlin [...] ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 28-Aug-84 22:11:45-PDT,13261;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 28-Aug-84 22:06:10 Date: Tue 28 Aug 1984 21:58-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #111 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Wednesday, 29 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 111 Today's Topics: Hardware - Touch Screen, Games - Chess Notation, Conferences - AAAI-84 Review, Hardware - Cellular Logic, AI Tools - Taxonomy Assistant, Speech Understanding - Hearsay II, Seminar - Speech Acts as Summaries of Plans ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 August 1984 16:43-EDT From: Roland Ouellette Subject: Who knows about TOUCH SCREEN? My group wants to buy a touch screen for our Symbolics 3600. I would appreciate any information about interfacing one to a 3600 or any other machine. Please, also, send me reviews, who's products are great and who's aren't so hot, price, and anything else that you might think of. If you could send me information about who to get in touch with, too, (i.e. address and/or phone) that would be fantastic. Send mail to Roly at MIT-MC.ARPA Many thanks in advance, Roland Ouellette ------------------------------ Date: 26 August 1984 06:17-EDT From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: number-cruncher vs. humans: 9th move query: is there a program that can convert from the algebraic notation to descriptive notation? I learned P-K4 and like that, and there is no possibility that I will ever have an intuitive feel for cxd4 and the like. Can it be converted for those of us who are algebraic cripples? ------------------------------ Date: 21 Aug 84 13:38:10-PDT (Tue) From: ihnp4!mhuxl!mhuxm!sftig!sfmag!eagle!prem @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: AAAI-84 - a short subjective report Article-I.D.: eagle.1187 The feelings evoked by the tremendous increase in interest, funding, media participation and products available are best described by this excerpt from W. B. Yeats : "And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches toward Bethlehem to be born? " - W. B. Yeats, from "The Second Coming" allegra!eagle!prem ------------------------------ Date: 9 Aug 84 10:23:00-PDT (Thu) From: hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcnml!robert @ Ucb-Vax.arpa Subject: Re: Hardware Implementations of Cellular Article-I.D.: hpfcnml.3400002 The latest Discover magazine mentions a hardware implementation of cellular automata in their article on the topic. Interesting, readily available, light reading. -Robert (animal) Heckendorn hplabs!hpfcla!robert ------------------------------ Date: Fri 24 Aug 84 22:26:52-EDT From: Wayne McGuire Subject: Taxonomy Assistant The problems of systematically representing the conceptual relations among a set of abstract objects in any knowledge domain go right to the heart of much leading-edge AI research. All inferencing is based, among other things, on implicit taxonomic understanding. It seems to me that in the knowledgebase management systems which I hope we will see developed in the near future will be embedded rich resources for evoking and representing taxonomies. Semantic nets provide an ideal scheme with which to do just that. The most useful thinking about taxonomies and classification theory appears not in the computer science literature, but at the interface of library science, information science, and philosophy. The leading journal in the field is _International Classification_ (which should be available in any world class humanities library). It is published (as I recall) three times a year, and is chockfull of pointers to articles, books, dissertations, etc. in the world literature on all aspects of classification theory. You might want to scan the following subject headings in some recent editions of the index _Library Literature_ (published by H. W. Wilson): Classification analysis, Subject headings, Thesauri. File 57 (Philosopher's Index) and File 61 (LISA -- Library and Information Science Abstracts) on Dialog are also fertile sources of information on the literature about taxonomies and classification theory. There are many insights in the theoretical writings on classification theory in the library science literature which could be handily transferred to advanced AI research and systems. It occurs to me that what we need is a _meta-taxonomy_, that is, a thorough inventory of all the fundamental conceptual structures by which objects in _any_ domain can be taxonomically related. One way a taxonomy assistant might operate is to combine each and every significant term in a knowledge domain with every other term, and offer a list of possible relations with which to tag each offered matching set. Someday, perhaps, we will be able to buy off the shelf "taxonomy packs" (dynamic thesauri) in many domains. -- Wayne -- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Aug 84 01:36 EDT From: Sidney Markowitz Subject: Hearsay II question in AIList Digest V2 #110 Date: 22 Aug 1984 22:05:18-PDT From: doshi%umn-cs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa Subject: Question about HEARSAY-II. I have a question about the HEARSAY-II system [Erman et.al.1980]. What exactly is the HEARSAY system required/supposed to do ? i.e. what is the meaning of the phrase : "Speech Understanding system" I am not familiar with the HEARSAY-II system, however I am answering your question based on the following lines from the quotes you provided, and some comments of yours that indicate that you are not familiar with certain points of view common among natural language researchers. The quotes: (1) page 213 : "The HEARSAY-II reconstructs an intention .... " (2) on the strong syntactic/semantic/task constraints (3) - with a slightly artificial syntax and highly constrained task (4) - tolerating less than 10 % semantic error Researchers pretty much agree that in order to understand natural language, we need an understanding of the meaning and context of the communication. It is not enough to simply look up words in a dictionary, and/or apply rules of grammar to sentences. A classic example is the pair of sentences: "Time flies like an arrow." and "Fruit flies like a banana." The problem with speech is even worse -- It turns out that even to separate the syllables in continuous speech you need to have some understanding of what the speaker is talking about! You can discover this for yourself by trying to hear the sounds of the words when someone is speaking a foreign language. You can't even repeat them correctly as nonsense syllables. What this implies is an approach to speech recognition that goes beyond pattern recognition to include understanding of utterances. This in turn implies that the system has some understanding of the "world view" of the speaker, i.e., common sense knowledge and the probable intentions of the speaker. AI researchers have attempted to make the problem tractable by restricting the "domain" of a system. A famous example is the "blocks world" used by Terry Winograd in his doctoral thesis on a natural langugage understanding system, SHRDLU. All SHRDLU knew about was its little world of various shapes and colors of blocks, its robot arm and the possible actions and interactions of those elements. Given those limitations, and the additional assumption that anything said to it was either a question about the state of its world or else a command, Winograd was able to devise a system in which syntax, semantics and task performance all interacted. For example, an ambiguity in syntax could be resolved if only one grammatical interpretation made semantic sense. You can see how this approach is implied by the four quotes above. With this as background, lets proceed to your questions... Let me explain my confusion with examples. Does the system do one of the following : - 1) Accepts speech as input; Then, tries to output what (ever) was spoken or might have been spoken ? - 2) Or, accept speech as input and UNDERSTAND it ? Now, the 1) above is, I think speech RECOGNITION. DARPA did not want just that. Then, what is(are) the meaning(s) of UNDERSTAND ? - if I say "Alligators can fly", should the system repeat this and also tell me that that is "not true"; is this called UNDERSTANDING? - if I say "I go house", should the system repeat this and also add that there is a "grammetical error"; is this called UNDERSTANDING? - Or, if HAYES-ROTH claims "I am ERMAN", the system should say "No, You are not ERMAN" - I dont think that HEARSAY was supposedd to do this (it does not have Vision etc). But you will agree that that is also UNDERSTANDING. Note that the above claim by HAYES-ROTH would be true if : - he had changed his last name - he was merely QUOTING what ERMAN might have said somewhere - etc In light of the above examples, what does it mean by saying that HEARSAY-II understands speech ? The references to "tasks" in the quotes you provided are a clue that the authors are thinking of "understanding" in terms of the ability to perform a task that is requested by the speaker. The examples in your questions are statements that would need to be reframed as tasks. It is possible that the system could be set up so that a statement like "Alligators can fly" is an implied command to add that fact to the knowledge base, perhaps first checking for contradictions. But you probably ought to think of an example of a restricted task domain first, and then think about what "understanding" would mean in that context. For example, given a blocks world domain the system might respond to a statement such as "Place a blue cube on the red pyramid" by saying "I can't place anything on top of a pyramid". There's much that can be done with modelling the speaker's intentions and assumptions which would affect the sophistication of the resulting system, but that's the general idea. -- Sidney Markowitz ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 1984 15:31-EDT From: Brad Goodman Subject: Seminar - Speech Acts as Summaries of Plans [Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.] Speech Acts as Summaries of Plans Phil Cohen SRI International and Center for the Study of Language and Information Stanford University BBN AI Seminar 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 5th Third floor large conference room at 10 Moulton St., Cambridge. Many theories of communication require a hearer to determine what illocutionary act(s) (IA's) the speaker performed in making each utterance. This talk will sketch joint work, with Hector Levesque, that aims to call this presumption into question, at least for some kinds of illocutionary acts. Such acts will be shown to be definable on a "substrate" of interacting plans --- i.e., as beliefs about the conversants' shared knowledge of the speaker's and hearer's goals and the causal consequences of achieving those goals. In this formalism, illocutionary acts are no longer conceptually primitive, but rather amount to theorems that can be proven about a state-of-affairs. The important point here is that the definition of, say, a request is derived from an independently-motivated theory of action, rather than stipulated. Just as one need not determine if a proof corresponds to a prior lemma, a hearer need not actually characterize the consequences of each utterance in terms of the IA theorems, but may simply infer and respond to the speaker's goals. However, the hearer could retrospectively summarize a complex of utterances as satisfying an illocutionary act. This move of defining illocutionary acts in terms of plans may alleviate a number of technical obstacles in applying speech act theory to extended discourse. It formally characterizes a range of indirect requests in terms of conversants' plans, and demonstrates how certain conventionalized forms can be derived from and integrated with plan-based reasoning. Finally, it gives a formal foundation to the view that speech act characterizations of discourse are not necessarily those of the conversants but rather are the work of the theorist. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ******************** 31-Aug-84 10:55:56-PDT,12731;000000000001 Mail-From: LAWS created at 31-Aug-84 10:53:57 Date: Fri 31 Aug 1984 10:47-PDT From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws Reply-to: AIList@SRI-AI US-Mail: SRI Int., 333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (415) 859-6467 Subject: AIList Digest V2 #112 To: AIList@SRI-AI AIList Digest Friday, 31 Aug 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 112 Today's Topics: Books - AI Handbook, LISP - VMS LISPs, AI Tools - Metataxonomies, Speech Understanding - Word Recognition, Natural Language - No Crime Rate & DWIM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 29 Aug 84 12:56:04-CDT From: Werner Uhrig Subject: Lib of CS intro offer: Handbook of AI Vols 1-3 for $5 In Sept issue of Scientific American. Club members agree to buy 3 other books during the next year. Given that one can buy books priced under 20$, it's a bargain, any way you look at it. Having to send in their monthly reply card is a nuisance, of course, but quickly buying 3 books cuts that short. And I have no doubt, that anyone serious about CS can find 3 interesting books in their 'Recent Selections' catalogue. Over the years, I bought dozens, which makes me 'a satisfied customer', I guess. Other than that, I have no connections .... ------------------------------ Date: 29 Aug 1984 12:50-EST From: Todd.Kueny@CMU-CS-G.ARPA Subject: VMS LISPs > I would appreciate information about LISP interpreters for a VAX > 11/780 running VMS. Thanks in advance. We use something called PSL (Portable Standard Lisp) from Univ. of Utah. It has both a compiler and interpreter and *opinion* seems to be a heck of a lot faster and far more efficient than DEC COMMON LISP. We have a version we created from Utah's Vax UNIX version; I think Utah will have a VMS version of their own very soon. PSL has a COMMON LISP compatability package, an object oriented programming facility, and loads of other handy stuff. Unlike COMMON LISP PSL has a fixed sized heap with a two state garbage collector. A properly tuned PSL can be very fast (better than C in many cases) and five or six can be run at one time (while still doing other things). Three DEC COMMON LISPs can bog down a VMS 780 system. -Todd K. Unilogic ------------------------------ Date: Wed 29 Aug 84 09:31:47-MDT From: Stan Shebs Subject: Re: Taxonomies Some of the most recent KR systems attempt to provide meta-taxonomies; I know of RLL/Eurisko, MRS, and AGE, all Stanford products. Am not sure what LOOPS provides in the way of knowledge about representation schemes (although one could build something to recommend whether a given piece of information should be a logical assertion, an object, an instance variable of an object, Lisp code, etc). Meta-taxonomies are HARD. The ability to create a taxonomy of some body of knowledge implies that one has both a deep and broad understanding of that body. The creation of a meta-taxonomy implies that there is a similar level of understanding for many issues in knowledge representation, which is definitely *not* the case. We're still lacking adequate theories of multiple inheritance, nor have we plumbed the depths of strange logical systems. Looking at library science is an interesting idea; while I imagine that many of the classification schemes are informal (probably relying on human judgement), librarians have been classifying massive databases (books) for a long time. Moving farther afield, taxonomies in other AI areas are lacking. I asked a while back about taxonomies for rule systems, and found that there was about one paper, by Davis and King in a ca. 1976 MI. This, however, was an informal taxonomy, and not particularly susceptible to mechanization. Am still waiting for a tree that puts OPS5, Emycin, and Prolog on different leaves... stan ------------------------------ Date: Wed 29 Aug 84 10:12-EDT From: Aaron F. Bobick Subject: Understanding speech versus hearing words About speech recognition: From: Sidney Markowitz It turns out that even to separate the syllables in continuous speech you need to have some understanding of what the speaker is talking about! You can discover this for yourself by trying to hear the sounds of the words when someone is speaking a foreign language. You can't even repeat them correctly as nonsense syllables. What this implies is an approach to speech recognition that goes beyond pattern recognition to include understanding of utterances. This in turn implies that the system has some understanding of the "world view" of the speaker, i.e., common sense knowledge and the probable intentions of the speaker..... Many psycho-lingists would dispute this. The problem with the foreign language example is that you don't recognize WORDS, not that you don't understand the utterance (for now let us define understanding as building some sort of SEMANTIC model, the details don't matter). Consider the classic: "Green ideas sleep furiously." I doubt one can "understand" this in any plausible way yet it's encoding is easy. Even if one removes grammar and is listening to a randomized listing of Websters dictionary, one can easily parse the string into syllables and words. In fact, *except under noise conditions much worse than normal conversation*, there is psycho-linguistic evidence that context does not greatly affect word recognition by humans in terms of the parsing of the input signal. .... (I am over simplifying a little; there is also evidence that context can help you make judgements about incoming words and syllables. However, this may be a post-access phenomena, sort of a surprise effect when an anomalous word or syllable is encountered; the jury is still out. Regardless, it is certainly reasonable to consider a context independent word recognition system. ) ..... Therefore, it is clearly possible to consider speech *recognition* as separate from understanding. Hearsay (I or II) does not; some psychologists (and, by the way, many AI speech hackers) do. Stuck in the middle again ...... aaron bobick (afb%mit-oz@mit-mc) ------------------------------ Date: Thu 30 Aug 84 04:59:09-CDT From: Werner Uhrig Subject: Re: On having virtually no crime rate. RE: "Saudi Arabia has virtually no crime rate," (Olympic commercial) Every time I heard it, there was this little alarm going off in my head saying: "Think about it. There is something wrong here." To which my semi-automatic stress-reduction program (always running in the "background") responded: "Don't think about it. This is just another unimportant question which, at most, is going to mess up the priorities of other, more important tasks you have to worry about." Of course, now Wayne has found the "weak spot" in my 'semi-automatic ...' Turning to Bantam for enlightenment, I find: virtual [ML virtualis] adj existing in effect though not in name or fact virtually adv almost; for the most part And, out of habit, I double-check in Webster (the Time-freeby with nearly unreadable typeset) and get rewarded with: virtual adj equivalent to, though somewhat different or deficient - virtuality, n. That didn't put me at ease at all, and I grabbed the "New American Computer Dictionary" (by Ken Porter) .... well, excuse me, the computer was involved in presenting me with Wayne's article, right ? virtual Giving an appearance of being without actually; an important concept in medium- to large-scale data-processing systems, in which virtual techniques "trick" the computer system or a program into "believing" that there are more resources available than there actually are. For further discussion, see 'virtual machine', 'virtual storage' Aha, me thinks, the Saudis must have applied a new police technique, where something or someone is doing some 'tricky' stuff ... but wait, '... being without actually' ??? Wasn't it the other way around? Better check that in German - and Langenscheidt says...: virtual dem Wesen nach, eigentlich well, that doesn't help much, so I do a 'reverse check' to see what I come up with (an important technique. with often surprising results, remember the first Russian automatic translations???) eigentlich (genau) proper; (tatsaechlich) actual; (wirklich) true, real; (dem Wesen nach) virtual; adv properly; actually; really; (genau gesagt) properly speaking; 'das ~e London' London proper; 'Ich bin ~ froh' AmF I am sort of glad; 'was wollen Sie ~?' what do you want? See what I mean? Is it 'real' now or 'virtual'? 'What do you want?' Well, you have to endure my excursion into Spanish, too, but I spare you the Latin.: 'Diccionario Larousse del Espanol Moderno' says: virtual adj Posible, que no tiene efecto actual. || 'Fis' Que tiene existencia aparente pero no real: 'imagen, objecto virtual' virtualidad f. Posibilidad. (dabbling in this 'foreign' mumble makes me wish that everyone had a Mac so I could use the proper foreign characters, like 'Umlauts' in German, etc. of course, there'd still be the 'minor' problem of making the main-frames cooperate, of course .....) What's the point of all this? Well, that's the ultimate test for AI. You folks can go off now to write a program which will understand, when the Arabs and I together throw our hands up into the air and say: WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT WE MEANT TO SAY ..... But seriously now, folks .... Maybe, DWIM is the real test of artificial intelligence, no more worries about proper spelling, syntax, or semantics. No more error messages from compilers, no more bugs in programs. For that matter, no more machines with a habit of crashing. Why limit ourselves to require AI to be able to do what we humans can do? Our 'REAL' intelligence is so bug-ridden that we are on the verge of self-extinction as a result of our progress. What I'd like to see is a Master-Robot of the world, programmed to DWIM (do what I mean) with one overriding GOAL: BUT NO MATTER WHAT I SAY OR DO - DON'T ALLOW ME TO SELF-DESTRUCT !!! The idea that the human drive to survive has left us with 'defensive' weapons which will most likely guarantee our ultimate and definite demise from this universe makes me want to 'stop the world and get off'. It makes me SO angry to know that most of this AI-stuff is being developed to make better instruments of killing and destruction (looked at who's doing the funding, lately?) - and so sad at the same time, knowing that the last thing the people doing the developing want, is to help blowing up the world, or any small part of it, for that matter. I am afraid that the AI-community will find itself in a similar situation one day, as the nuclear phycisists, asking themselves the question: "But how could we have prevented it?" There is one thing to be learnt from the Nueremberg trials after WW2: There is no sympathy earned with this statement. BTW, for all you Commie-hunters out there, I'm as suspicious as the next fellow of Russian intensions, but I think that these days it's more likely that some lunatic from some smaller country (no need to focus on anyplace in particular, really) will light the match which will lead to the ultimate explosion. What I am concerned about is, is the fact that we all cooperated in developing the technology which makes the blast so effective and deadly. And .... 'being sorry' isn't going to do a damn bit of good ! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, Wayne, aren't you as sorry as I that you got me started? I know that wasn't your intension, but ... so what? ... off and fix my 'semi-automatic...' so people like Wayne will have a harder time messing with the priorities of things I need to do do .... ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ********************