Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 2 Issue 116
AIList Digest Monday, 10 Sep 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 116
Today's Topics:
AI Tools - FRL in Franz,
Robotics - Symbolic Programming Query,
Psychology - Memory Tests,
Knowledge Representation - OPS5 Problem,
LISP - Delayed Reply About muLISP,
Speech Recognition - Syllables,
Philosophy - Correction,
Expert Systems - Personal Assistants,
Seminar - Semantic Modulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 Sep 84 10:08:15-PDT (Wed)
From: decvax!mcnc!duke!ucf-cs!bethel @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Help : need a Full implementation of FRL.
Article-I.D.: ucf-cs.1468
Does anyone have a full implementation of Minsky's FRL, running
under Unix 4.2 and Franz Lisp ? If so would you please respond and
let me know where you are. I would like to get the sources if
they are available and not protected by company/university policy.
Thanks in advance,
Robert C. Bethel
...decvax!ucf-cs!bethel or ...duke!ucf-cs!bethel
bethel.ucf-cs@Rand-Relay
------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 84 12:35:53-PDT (Mon)
From: hplabs!hao!denelcor!csu-cs!walicki @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: prolog/lisp/robotics - query
Article-I.D.: csu-cs.2619
I am looking for information on applications of symbolic computing
(lisp, prolog) in the area of robotics. I do not have any specifics
in mind; I am interested in any (even fuzzy) intersections of the
abovementioned domains.
Please respond by mail, and I will post a summary in net.ai.
Jack Walicki
Colorado State U.
Computer Science Dept.
(Fort Collins, CO 80523)
{hplabs,hao}!csu-cs!walicki
------------------------------
Date: 9 Sep 84 18:11:40 PDT (Sunday)
From: wedekind.es@XEROX.ARPA
Subject: Memory tests
Someone I know is looking for a battery of well-documented,
self-administered memory tests. Does anyone know of an accessible
source?
thank you,
Jerry
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 8-Sep-84 18:35:50-BST
From: O'KEEFE HPS (on ERCC DEC-10) <okeefe.r.a.@EDXA>
Subject: OPS5 problem
An MSc student came to me with a problem. He had a pile of OPS5 rules
and was a bit unhappy about the means he had adopted to stop them
looping. Each rule looked rather like
(p pain77
(task ^name cert)
(injury ^name injury6 ^cert <C>)
(symptom ^name symptom9 ^present yes)
-(done pain77)
-->
(make done pain77)
(modify 2 ^cert (compute ....))
)
There were dozens of them. The conflict resolution rule of never
firing the same rule on the same data more than once didn't help, as
modify is equivalent to a delete and a make. What he actually wanted
can be expressed quite neatly in Prolog:
candidates(BestToWorst) :-
setof(W/Injury, weight(Injury, W), BestToWorst).
weight(Injury, MinusCertainty) :-
prior_certainty(Injury, Prior),
findall(P, pro(Injury, P), Ps),
product(Ps, 1.0, P),
findall(C, con(Injury, C), Cs),
product(Cs, 1.0, C),
MinusCertainty is -(1 - P + P*C*Prior).
pro(Injury, Wt) :-
evidence_for(Injury, Symptom, Wt),
present(Symptom).
con(Injury, Wt) :-
evidence_against(Injury, Symptom, Wt),
present(Symptom).
product([], A, A).
product([W|Ws], A, R) :-
B is A*W,
product(Ws, B, R).
We managed to produce something intermediate between these two, it
used evidence-for and evidence-against tables in working memory, and
had just two hacky rules instead of the scores originally present.
I did spot a way of stopping the loop without using negation, and
that is to make the "certainty" held in the (injury ^name ^cert)
WM elements a gensym whose value is the desired number, then as far
as OPS5 is concerned the working memory hasn't been changed. Of
course that makes patterns that use the number harder to write, and
seems rather hacky itself.
To come to the point, I have two questions about OPS5.
1) Is there a clean way of coding this in OPS5? Or should I have
told him to use EXPERT?
2) As I mentioned, we did manage to do considerably better than his
first attempt. But the thing that bothered me was that it hadn't
occurred to him to use the WM for tables. The course he's in
uses the Teknowledge(??) "OPS5 Tutorial" (the one with the Wine
Advisor) and students seem to copy the Wine Advisor more or less
blindly. Is there any generally available GOOD course material on
OPS5, and if so who do we write to? Are there any moderate-size
examples available?
------------------------------
Date: 10 May 84 11:33:00-PDT (Thu)
From: hplabs!hp-pcd!hp-dcd!hpfcls!hpbbla!coulter @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Delayed Reply About muLISP
Article-I.D.: hpbbla.4900001
It may not be what you are looking for, but there are several LISP
implementations that run on CP/M. I bought muLISP which is
distributed by MICROSOFT. It cost $200. Because of its larger
address space, you should be able to get a more capable LISP for the
IBM/PC, but it will cost more. The muLISP is fairly complete, although
the only data type is integer (it can represent numbers up to 10**255).
The DOCTOR (a.k.a. ELIZA) program is supplied with it and it runs.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 84 17:44 EST
From: Kurt Godden <godden%gmr.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: understanding speech, syllables, words, etc.
Which hip was burned?
Which ship was burned?
which chip was burned?
Which Chip was spurned?
First of all, I disagree that all 4 sound 'the same' in conversational
speech, esp. the last. The final [z] in 'was' gets devoiced because of
the voiceless cluster that follows in 'spurned'. However, of course I do
agree that often/usually context is necessary to DISAMBIGUATE, tho' not
necessarily to understand in the first place. Since I am already writing
this I might as well give my originally suppressed comments on the first
person's statement that syllable identification requires understanding.
I definitely do not agree with that claim. Others have mentioned learning
a foreign language by first tuning the ear to the phonetics of the target
language including that target's syllable types, and this is a point well
taken. The notion of syllable is certainly different in different lgs,
but apparently can be learned without understanding.
The point is even clearer in one's native language. We have all heard
Jabberwockish type speech and can clearly recognize the syllables and
phonetic elements as 'English', yet we do so without any understanding.
All this assumes that we know just what a syllable is, which we don't,
but that's another argument and is not really suitable for ailist.
-Kurt Godden <godden.gmr@csnet-relay>
------------------------------
Date: 7 Sep 84 9:13:41-PDT (Fri)
From: ihnp4!houxm!vax135!ariel!norm @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Re: Now and Then
Article-I.D.: ariel.751
>
> From: TONY HASEMER (on ALVEY at Teddington) <TONH%alvey@ucl-cs.arpa>
>
> (Tony Hasemer challenges Norm Andrews' faith about cause and effect)
>
> You say: "logical proof involves implication relationships between
> discrete statements...causality assumes implication relationships
> between discrete events".
>
Hold on here! I, Norm Andrews, didn't say that! You are quoting someone
going by the name "Baba ROM DOS" who was attempting to disprove my
statement that "The concept of proof depends upon the concepts of cause
and effect, among other things." Please don't assign other peoples'
statements to me!
I haven't time now to reply to any other part of your posting...
Norm Andrews
------------------------------
Date: 6 Sep 84 7:14:39-PDT (Thu)
From: decvax!genrad!teddy!mjn @ Ucb-Vax.arpa
Subject: Personal Assistants
Article-I.D.: teddy.391
FINANCIAL ASSISTANT
I think this would be a good one to add to the list of personal
assistants which would be valuable to have. It could be a great
aid to budgeting and guiding investments. It should go beyond
simple bookkeeping and offer advice (when it can). If conficts
arise in where to spend money, it should be capable of asking
questions to determine what you consider to be more important.
Additional functionality might include analysis of spending
patterns. Where does my money go? Such a question could be
answered by this assistant. It might include gentle reminders if
you are overspending, or not meeting a payment schedual, or forget
something.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Sep 1984 15:04-EDT
From: Brad Goodman <BGOODMAN at BBNG>
Subject: Seminar - Semantic Modulation
[Forwarded from the MIT bboard by SASW@MIT-MC.]
David McAllester will give the next BBN AI Seminar at 10:30 AM on
Wednesday September 12. The talk is in the 3rd floor large conference room
at 10 Moulton St. Title and abstract follow.
Semantic Modulation: A New General Purpose Inference Technique
David McAllester
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Semantic modulation is a general purpose inference technique
based on the "modulation" of the interpretations of parameters which
appear free in an assertional data base. A semantic modulation system
includes a finite and fixed set Delta of formulae. By varying the
interpretation of the free parameters in Delta it is possible to use
the finite and FIXED data base Delta to perform a large set of
inferences which involve reasoning about quantification. Semantic
modulation is a way of reasoning with quantifiers that does not
involve unification or the standard techniques of universal
instantiation. Semantic modulation replaces these notions with the
notion of a "binding premise". A binding premise is a propositional
assumption which constrains the interpretation of one or several free
parameters.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
