Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 3 Issue 070
AIList Digest Friday, 24 May 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 70
Today's Topics:
Queries - Reasoning by Analogy & Functional/Procedural Translation,
Books - OPS5,
Cognition - Animal Cognition Notes,
Games - Computers Cheating in Chess,
Humor - AI Limericks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 18:27:14 pdt
From: Cindy Mason <clm@lll-crg.ARPA>
Subject: Reasoning by Analogy
Does anyone have a bibliography (preferably refer format) or references
for reasoning by analogy? I'm especially interested in learning by
analogy, but any nice articles relating to this area would be helpful.
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1985 at 1634-EDT
From: jim at TYCHO.ARPA (James B. Houser)
Subject: Computer Language Translation
Has any work been done in the area of machine translation of
functional languages into procedural languages? As an example LISP ->
C or PROLOG to ADA. At first glance it seems useful but also
potentially very tricky transformation.
Also do any reasonable C compilers/environments exist for LISP
Machines? I have heard rumors that something is available for the
CADR.
------------------------------
Date: 22 May 1985 1547-EDT
From: Lee Brownston@CMU-CS-A
Subject: OPS5 Book
Forwarded from the CMU bboard by Laws@SRI-AI.]
"Programming Expert Systems in OPS5: An Introduction to Rule-Based
Programming," by Lee Brownston, Robert Farrell, Elaine Kant, and Nancy
Martin, is scheduled to be published by Addison-Wesley Publishing Company
on May 31 at a list price of $35.95.
The blurb from Addison-Wesley's flier for Spring 1985 says the following
about this book:
Presents practical techniques for rule-based programming of
expert systems in OPS5. This comprehensive book will prove
itself indispensible to the experienced programmer. The first
section of the book is a tutorial, teaching both the OPS5
language and effective programming techniques. The development
of a small, self-contained OPS5 programmed is followed from
problem definition to testing. The second section takes a
broader view, considering the nature of production-system
architectures and comparing OPS5 with other tools for
programming corporate systems.
It is also the only book-length treatment of OPS5 and production-system
programming. [...]
------------------------------
Date: 20 May 85 14:14:04 EDT
From: Tim <WEINRICH@RUTGERS.ARPA>
Subject: Animal Cognition
For those of you who missed the symposium on "The Question of Animal
Cognition", which was presented by the psychology department in early May,
I've written a paper which is somewhere between a transcription of the
notes I took and an informal summary of the proceedings of that symposium.
This is on
<Weinrich>ANIMAL.SYMPOSIUM
in case anyone is interested in reading it.
Twinerik
[I can mail a copy to interested readers who can't FTP it. -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 1985 0734-PDT
From: MEYERS%UCI-20A@UCI-ICSA
Subject: computers cheating in chess
I think there is a misconception about what it means for a computer to
"use a second board" and for a computer to have access to a book of
openings.
We don't penalize a human who has memorized a book of openings, and
we don't penalize a human who can using several "mental boards"..
I think it is proper to regard the computer memory as analogous to the
human chess player's mind -- we should not penalize the computer for
having perfect rote memory and for perfect ability to "mentally"
visualize the chess board, just as we allow any mental capabilities
and mental acts of the human chess player.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 07:40:01 EDT
From: cugini@NBS-VMS
Subject: cheating at chess
> * Tournament rules forbid the players to consult books during the game.
> Most programs rely on a book to play openings.
This raises some interesting points. It seems that the thrust of the
rules is that a player should play with no "external" help - ie the
player is expected to rely solely on his/her/its internalized
knowledge of the game. For humans, the interpretation is clear -
ie I assume it would be cheating if a human utilized *any*
externally recorded knowledge or advice (say on a handy micro).
But what interpretation can this idea have for a computer? Well,
there is a long tradition of referring to "external" storage,
ie disk, drum, and tape. Conversely "main" storage (known as "core"
to the old-timers) does really seem to be "inside" of the computer,
more an intrinsic part of it.
Sooo... rather than bend the rules to allow humans to cheat also,
why not restrict computers to the use of internal storage during
play? ie they can load up from disk, tape, whatever, but once the clock
starts, we unplug all the I/O ports, and may the best rational agent win.
John Cugini <Cugini@NBS-VMS>
National Bureau of Standards
Bldg 225 Room A-265
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
phone: (301) 921-2431
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 85 15:08 IDT
From: Henry Nussbacher <vshank%weizmann.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA>
Subject: Humor
>From Datamation - March 15, 1985 - page 166:
AI YI YI
The following can be attributed to a novice system with an ignorance
base and an unnatural language interface, programmed to produce
Artifical Humor (AH).
Of a planning aid using AI,
A customer said with a sai,
"If they think we know whai,
We decide what to trai,
There's no chance that their product will flai."
After giving a robot AI,
An inventor rushed out the next dai.
With a tear in his ai,
He gave a sad crai,
"I've made a machine that can lai!"
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
