Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 2 Issue 128
AIList Digest Monday, 1 Oct 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 128
Today's Topics:
Education - Top Ten Graduate Programs,
Natural Language - ELIZA source request,
AI Tools - OPS5 & VMS LISPs & Tektronix 4404 AI Machine,
Bindings - Syntelligence,
AI Survey - Tim Johnson's Report,
Expert Systems - John Dvorak's Column & Windows,
Knowledge Representation - Generalization,
Machine Translation - Natural Languages as Interlingua
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Sep 84 0:39:37-PDT (Sat)
From: hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!daryoush @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Top Ten
Article-I.D.: sdcsvax.79
What are the top ten graduate programs in AI?
MIT is first I suppose.
--id
------------------------------
Date: 24 Sep 84 13:41:12-PDT (Mon)
From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd!dual!zehntel!zinfandel!berry @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Humor - Top Ten
Article-I.D.: zinfande.199
What are the top ten graduate programs in AI?
-- Karyoush Morshedian
To the best of my knowledge, NO AI program has ever graduated from an
accredited degree-granting institution , though I do know of a LISP
program that's a Universal Life Church minister.....
Berry Kercheval Zehntel Inc. (ihnp4!zehntel!zinfandel!berry)
(415)932-6900
------------------------------
Date: 26 Sep 84 18:21:17-PDT (Wed)
From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!wdl1!jbn @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Re: Top Ten
Article-I.D.: wdl1.437
The Stanford PhD program probably ranks in the top 10. (The MS
program is much weaker).
------------------------------
Date: 29 Sep 84 17:39:34-PDT (Sat)
From: hplabs!hao!seismo!umcp-cs!koved @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Re: ELIZA source request
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.171
I would also like a copy of ELIZA if someone could send it to me.
Thanks.
Larry
koved@umcp-cs or koved@maryland.arpa
Spoken: Larry Koved
Arpa: koved.umcp-cs@CSNet-relay
Uucp:...{allegra,seismo}!umcp-cs!koved
------------------------------
Date: 26 Sep 84 18:21:31-PDT (Wed)
From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!wdl1!jbn @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Re: Info needed on OPS5
Article-I.D.: wdl1.438
OPS5 runs in Franz Lisp on the VAX, and can be obtained from
Charles Forgy at CMU. It can be obtained via the ARPANET, but an agreement
must be signed first.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Sep 84 18:21:46-PDT (Wed)
From: hplabs!hpda!fortune!wdl1!jbn @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Re: VMS LISPS
Article-I.D.: wdl1.439
And then, there is INTERLISP-VAX, the Bulgemobile of language systems.
------------------------------
Date: 27 Sep 84 10:12:10-PDT (Thu)
From: hplabs!tektronix!orca!iddic!rogerm @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Tektronix 4404 AI Machine
Article-I.D.: iddic.1822
For information on the 4404 please contact your nearest Tektronix AIM Sales
Specialist; Tektronix Incorporated.
Farwest: Jeff McKenna
3003 Bunker Hill Lane
Santa Clara, CA 95050
(408) 496-496-0800
Midwest: Abe Armoni
PO Box 165027
Irving, TX. 75016
(214) 258-0525
Northwest: Gary Belonzi
482 Bedford St.
Lexington, MA. 02173
(617) 861-6800
Southeast: Reed Phillips
Suite 104
3725 National Drive
Raleigh, NC. 27612
(919) 782-5624
This posting is to relieve tekecs!mako!janw from fielding responses that she
doesn't have time to answer after her initial posting several weeks ago.
Thank you.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 28 Sep 84 13:29:11-PDT
From: Margaret Olender <MOLENDER@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: NEW ADDRESS FOR SYNTELLIGENCE
[Forwarded from the SRI bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
Syntelligence is pleased to announce their new Headquarters at
100 Hamlin Court
P.O. Box 3620
Sunnyvale, CA 94088
408/745-6666
Effective September 1, 1984.
------------------------------
Date: Thu 27 Sep 84 08:18:14-PDT
From: C.S./Math Library <LIBRARY@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Tim Johnson's Report
On AIList today, I saw where someone was asking about the report Tim Johnson
did on Commercial Applications of AI. It was produced by Ovum Ltd. in England
and is available for about $350 from a place in Portola Valley. I have the
address at home and can send that to you later. The report covers AI
research and applications in the USA and UK but also covers the larger research
projects worldwide. It is a well written and researched report.
Harry Llull
------------------------------
Date: 28 Sep 1984 15:15:09-PDT
From: smith%umn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
Subject: John Dvorak as an information source
I assume that the John Dvorak who wrote the critique of M.1. is the same
one that writes a weekly column in InfoWorld. He is not what I would consider
a reliable source of technical information about computers. His columns
usually consist of gossip and unsupported personal opinion. What he writes
can be interesting but I like to see facts once in a while, too. I've read
exactly one good column of his -- it was about computer book PUBLISHING rather
than about computers or software. He looks to me like a talented individual
who spends too much time out of his league, but is respected for it anyway.
This is common in the 'popular' computer media these days, I guess.
Rick.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 28 Sep 84 10:44:28-PDT
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Windows and Expert Systems
Reply to Sheb's flames:
No there is no direct relationship between window systems and expert
systems. However, the goal of these vendors is to sell software
systems that make it easy to CONSTRUCT, DEBUG, and USE expert systems.
We know that high bandwidth between programmer and program makes it
easier to construct and maintain a program. Similarly, high bandwidth
(properly employed) makes it easier to use a program. The goal is to
reduce the cognitive load on the user/programmer, not to strive for
maximizing the cognitive load on the program.
Good software is 90% interface and 10% intelligence.
--Tom
------------------------------
Date: Fri 28 Sep 84 11:04:58-PDT
From: Tom Dietterich <DIETTERICH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Generalization
Reply to Shebs' other flame:
"Induction...Not too hard really;"
Shebs comments are very naive. Of course it isn't too hard to
construct a MECHANISM that sometimes performs inductive
generalizations properly. However, every mechanism developed thus far
is very ad hoc. They all rely on "having the right formalism". In
other words, the programmer implicitly tells the program how to
generalize. The programmer communicates a set of "biasses" or
preferences through the formalism. Many of us working in inductive
learning suspect that general techniques will not be found until we
have a THEORY that justifies our generalization mechanisms. The
justification of induction appears to be impossible. Appeals to the
Principle of Insufficient Reason and Occam's Razor just restate the
problem without solving it. In essence, the problem is: What is
rational plausible inference? When you have no knowledge about which
hypothesis is more plausible, how do you decide that one hypothesis IS
more plausible? A justification of inductive inference must rely on
making some metaphysical assertions about the nature of the world and
the nature of knowledge. A justification for Occam's razor, for
example, must show why syntactic simplicity necessarily corresponds to
simplicity in the real world. This can't be true for just any
syntactic representation! For what representations is it true?
--Tom
------------------------------
Date: Fri 28 Sep 84 14:58:48-PDT
From: Bill Poser <POSER@SU-CSLI.ARPA>
Subject: Natural languages as MT interlingua
I would like to hear more about the language mentioned by
briggs@riacs as a natural language suitable for use as an MT
interlanguage. Specifically, what is it called and where is
it documented? Where did he publish his demonstration that
it is equivalent to certain kinds of semantic nets?
I would also be interested to hear in what sense he means that
it is a natural language. Virtually all known natural languages
are ambiguous, in the sense that they contain sentences that are
ambiguous, but that does not mean that they cannot be used unambiguously.
An example is the use of English in mathematical writing-it is
possible to avoid ambiguity entirely by careful choice of syntax
and avoidance of anaphora. I wonder whether briggs' language is not
of the same sort-a natural language used in a specialized and restricted
way.
Bill Poser
(poser@su-csli,poser@su-russell)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 84 15:14:41 PDT
From: "Dr. Michael G. Dyer" <dyer@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
Subject: Natural Languages
A recent comment was made that natural languages can serve as an
interlingua. I disagree. There's an ancient language used by scientists
to communicate that's called "mathematics"... but is that a
"natural" language? Natural languages have certain features, namely,
ambiguity, reference to complex conceptualizations regarding human
affairs, and abbreviated messages (that is, you only say a tiny bit
of what you mean, and rely on the intelligence of the listener to
combine his/her knowledge with the current context to reconstruct
everything you left out). If that ancient language spoken by Iranian
scientists was unambiguous and unabbreviated, then it's probably
about as "natural" as mathematics is as a language. Then, also, there's
LOGLAN, where, when you say (in it) "every sailor loves some woman", you
specify whether each sailor has his own woman or whether everyone
loves the same woman. Fine, but I'd hate to have to use it as an
everyday "natural" language for gettting around. Natural languages
are complicated because people are intelligent. The job of AI NLP
researchers is to gain insight into natural languages (and the cognitive
processes which support their comprehension) by working out mappings
from natural languages into formal systems (i.e., realizable on stupid
machines). It's hard enough mapping NL into something unambiguous
without mapping it into a language that itself must be parsed to remove
ambiguities and to resolve contextual references, etc. It's conceivable
that a system could parse by a sequence of mappings into a sequence of
slightly more formal (i.e., less "natural") intermediate languages. But then
disambiguation, etc., would have to be done over and over again. Besides,
people don't seem to be doing that. Natural languages and formal languages
serve different purposes. English is currently used as an "interlingua"
by the world community, but that is using the term "interlingua" in a
different sense. The interlingua we need for NLP research should not
be "natural".
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
