Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 4 Issue 257
AIList Digest Saturday, 8 Nov 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 257
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Net.ai is Being Renamed Comp.aim
Queries - TCPIP Between Symbolics, Xerox 1100s and VAXs &
Connectionism & Neural Modeling,
Learning - Boltzmann Machines and Simulated Annealing,
Expert Systems - Performance Analysis/Tuning Query,
Education - Cognitive Science Grad Schools,
Logic - Nonmonotonic Reasoning,
Literature - Sentient-Computer Novels & The AI Gang
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 86 20:01:25 GMT
From: cbosgd!mark@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Mark Horton)
Subject: net.ai is being renamed comp.ai
This newsgroup is being renamed from net.ai to comp.ai.
This renaming will gradually take place over the next few weeks.
More and more messages posted to this newsgroup will be aliased
into the new newsgroup as they pass through the net, and people
will begin to post to the new group. After a few weeks, the
old name will be removed.
This note is to inform you of the renaming so you can begin to
read the new group as well as the old group.
Mark Horton
Director, the UUCP Project
------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 86 19:29:27 GMT
From: ihnp4!ihwpt!clarisse@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (olivier clarisse)
Subject: Do YOU TCPIP between: Symbolics, Xerox 1100's and VAX's?
Does anyone of you AI WORKSTATION USERS work on a local network
(ethernet) running TCPIP and have used SYMBOLICS 3600s and (or)
VAXes running UNIX (system 5 for example) as hosts for FTP to
XEROX 1186 (or 110X)?
IF YOU HAVE experienced such things, please let me now how it goes:
great or terrible? Is the communication smooth (or like a dotted
line?) Do you use the SYMBOLICS (VAX) as a file server? Have you
purchased a software to be able to use the 110X as a host too?
Which one? (The 110X as a host is not supported on TCPIP by XEROX,
I just heard, while FTP is supposed if someone else is the host.)
Please let me know about your exciting experiences with TCPIP/FTP
and be as specific as possible with respect to the system/software
used. THANKS AN 1186 TIMES!
Olivier Clarisse
clarisse@ihesa@ihnp4.uucp
(312) 979-3558
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 86 22:06:21 GMT
From: mcvax!cernvax!ethz!wyle@seismo.css.gov (Mitchell Wyle)
Subject: Connectionism, neural networks: new mail list or group?
Is anyone interested in a net.connectionism group? What about a mailing
list? If anyone is interested in contributing to or receiving a
tentative bibliography of connectionism/neural nets, let me know.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mitch Wyle ...!decvax!seismo!mcvax!cernvax!ethz!Wyle
Institut fuer Informatik Wyle%ifi.ethz.cernvax.<network of your choice>
ETH / SOT
8092 Zuerich, Switzerland "Ignore alien orders."
------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 86 11:25:18 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!strath-cs!jrm@seismo.css.gov (Jon R Malone)
Subject: Request for information (Brain/Parallel fibers)
<<<<Lion eaters beware>>>>
Nice guy, into brains would like to meet similiarly minded people.
Seriously : considering some simulation of neural circuits. Would
like pointers to any REAL work that is going on (PS I have read the
literature).
Keen to run into somebody that is interested in simulation at a low-level.
Specifically:
* mossy fibers/basket cells/purkyne cells
* need to find out parallel fiber details:
* length of
* source of/destination of
Any pointers or info would be appreciated.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 86 18:40:15 GMT
From: mcvax!ukc!stc!datlog!torch!paul@seismo.css.gov (paul)
Subject: Re: THINKING COMPUTERS ARE A REALITY (?)
People who read the original posting in net.general (and the posting about
neural networks in this newsgroup) may be interested in the following papers:
Boltzmann Machines: Constraint Satisfaction Networks that Learn.
by Geoffrey E. Hinton, Terrence J. Sejnowski and David H. Ackley
Technical Report CMU-CS-84-119
(Carnegie-Mellon University May 1984)
Optimisation by Simulated Annealing
by S. Krikpatrick, C.D.Gelatt Jr., M.P.Vecchi
Science Vol. 220 No. 4598 (13th May 1983).
...in addition to those recommended by Jonathan Marshall.
Personally I regard this type of machine learning as something of a holy grail.
In my opinion (and I stress that it IS my own opinion) this is THE way to
get machines that are both massively parallel and capable of complex tasks
without having a programmer who understands the in's and out's of the task
to be accomplished and who is prepared to spend the time to hand code (or
design) the machine necessary to do it. The only reservation I have is whether
or not the basic theory behind Boltzmann machines is good enough.
Paul.
------------------------------
Date: Fri 7 Nov 86 12:30:49-MST
From: Sue Tabron <TABRON@SIMTEL20.ARPA>
Subject: expert systems for performance analysis/tuning?
I am interested in finding public domain or commercial expert systems
that can be used to analyze and tune the performance of computer
systems. I would like to hear from anyone with experience in this
area or who is developing these applications..
Mott Given <tabron@simtel20>
(614)238-9431
------------------------------
Date: 6 Nov 86 17:51:11 GMT
From: tektronix!orca!tekecs!mikes@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Michael
Sellers)
Subject: choosing grad schools
[Note: This is a new subject. The words "Turing", "Searle", "ducks",
and "categories" do not appear in this posting...okay, so I lied :-)]
There was a little discussion some time ago regarding grad programs
in cognitive science. Well, its that time of year when I begin to
dream about selling the house and going for the old P, h, & D. So: For
those of you who are in doctrate programs (or master's programs, too)
in cognitive science, how did you choose the program you're in? What
do you like/dislike about it? What are your employment prospects when
you're done? What sorts of things drove your decision of what school
to go to? What is your personal situation (single/married x number of
kids, x years work experience, etc)? What I'm hoping to get is an idea
of what the various programs are like from the inside; I can get all the
propoganda I can stomach from various admissions offices.
Thanks for your help. Post or e-mail as you want; if there is a lot
of mail I'll summarize and post it.
--
Mike Sellers
UUCP: {...your spinal column here...}!tektronix!tekecs!mikes
"In a quiet moment, you can just hear them brain cells a-dyin'"
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 86 15:34:47 GMT
From: sdics!norman@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (Donald A. Norman)
Subject: Re: choosing grad schools
(Weird that so many Cognitive Science issues end up in the Cognitive
Engineering and AI newsgroups. Cog-Eng was originally human-computer
interaction (the engineering, applied side of studies of cognition).
As for AI, well, the part that deals with the understanding and
simulation of thought is a subset of Cognitive Science, so it
belongs.)
Grad schools in Cognitive Science. I would ike to hear a summary
(from knowledgable folks) of what exists. Here is what I know.
There are NO departments of Cognitive Science.
I know of only three places that offer degrees that have the phrase
"Cognitive Science" in them (and 3 more that might, but I am not
sure). The three I know of are Brwon, MIT, and UC San Diego (UCSD).
The three I am not sure about are Rochester, SUNY Buffalo, and UC,
Berkeley (UCB).
Brown has a department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science. MIT has
a department of Brain and Cognitive Science. UCSD has a "program in
Cognitive Science" that offers a degree that reads "PhD in X and
Cogntive Science", where X is one of the particpating departments
(Anthropology, Computer Science, Linguistics, Music, Neuroscience,
Philosophy, Psychology, Sociology)
Rochester, SUNY Buffalo, and UCB have programs that might also offer
some sort of degree, but I am not certain. Many other places have
research programs in Cognitive Science, but as far as I know, no
degree program.
The UCSD program, for example, does not admit students directly into
the program (we can't: we are not a department). Students apply to
and are admitted into one of the coperating departments. At the end
of the first year of stuidy, they apply to and enter the joint program
with Cog Sci. At the end, the degree reads "PhD in X and Cognitive
Science."
There is a major debate in the Cognitive Science community over
whether or it is is premature to offer PhDs in Cognitive Science.
There are no departments yet (so no jobs in academia) and most
industry has not heard of the concept. (There are some exceptions in
industry, mostly the major research labs (Xerox PARC, IBM, MCC, Bell
Labs, Bellcore).
UCSD is considering starting a department. The Dean is establishing a
high powered committee to look over the program and make
recommendations. It would take from 2 to 5 years to get a department.
(Establishing a new department in a new field is a major undertaking.
And it requires approval of umpteen campus committees, umpteen
state-wide committees, a state overseeing body for higher education in
general, the regents, and probably the US senate.)
I would appreciate hearing updates from people associated with other
programs/departments/groups in Cognitive Science.
Donald A. Norman
Institute for Cognitive Science C-015
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
norman@nprdc.arpa norman@ics.ucsd.EDU
------------------------------
Date: Thu 6 Nov 1986 10:17:14
From: ether.allegra%btl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: non-monotonic reasoning
John Nagle, in a recent posting, writes:
> Non-monotonic reasoning is an attempt to make reasoning systems
> less brittle, by containing the damage that can be caused by
> contradiction in the axioms. The rules of inference of non-monotonic
> reasoning systems are weaker than those of traditional logic.
Most nonmonotonic reasoning formalisms I know of (default logic,
autoepistemic logic, circumscription, NML I and II, ...) incorporate
a first-order logic as a subset. Their rules of inference are thus
*stronger* than traditional logics'. I think Nagle is thinking of
Relevance Logic (see Anderson & Belnap), which does make an effort
to contain the effects of contradiction by weakening the inference
rules (avoiding the paradoxes of implication).
As for truth-maintenance systems, contrary to Nagle and popular
mythology, these systems typically do *not* avoid contradictions
per se. What they *do* do is prevent one from 'believing' all
of a set of facts explicitly marked as contradictory by the
system using the TMS. These systems don't usually have any
deductive power at all, they are merely constraint satisfaction
devices.
David W. Etherington
AT&T Bell Laboratories
600 Mountain Avenue
Murray Hill, NJ 07974-2070
ether%allegra@btl.csnet
------------------------------
Date: 7 Nov 86 23:06:28 GMT
From: voder!lewey!evp@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Ed Post)
Subject: Re: Canonical list of sentient computer novels
> Xref: lewey net.sf-lovers:5135 net.ai:549
>
>
>
> I am trying to compile a canonical list of SF *novels* dealing with (1)
> sentient computers, and (2) human mental access to computers or computer
> networks.....
Some of the classics:
RUR (Rossum's Universal Robots), Carel Capek(?)
Asimov's entire robot series
When Harlie was One, David Gerrold
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Robert Heinlein
Colossus (sp?), The Forbin Project
--
Ed Post {hplabs,voder,pyramid}!lewey!evp
American Information Technology
10201 Torre Ave. Cupertino CA 95014
(408)252-8713
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 86 09:40 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim@cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: AI in Literature
AIList used to include frequent notes about how AI was being presented in
literature, movies and TV shows. I just ran across a new wrinkle.
My daughter recently bought several paperbacks published by New American
Library (Signet) in a series called "The AI Gang". Here is the text from
the jacket of the first book in the series, "Operation Sherlock":
"Five whiz kids who call themselves the AI gang -- for Artificial
Intelligence -- accompany their scientist parents to a small secluded
island. While their parents are teaching a secret computer to think for
itself, the kids try their hand at programming a sleuthing computer named
Sherlock. They soon discover that there is an evil spy out to destroy their
parents' project. When three of the gang are almost killed in an explosion,
the kids and their specially developed crime computer must race against time
to reveal the spy's identity ... before all of them are blown to smithereens
..."
My daughter thought all of the books in the series were pretty good, btw.
Tim
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
