Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 6 Issue 021
AIList Digest Monday, 1 Feb 1988 Volume 6 : Issue 21
Today's Topics:
Queries - Self_Organizing Systems & TURBO PROLOG Problem &
Ambiguous Speech & Radio Gear for Mobile Robots &
Pattern Recognition Papers & 1981 BBN Technical Report,
Neuromorphics - Dreyfus on Connectionism & Genetic Algorithms,
AI Tools - XLISP 1.5,
Application - Ping Pong,
Software Engineering - Modular Expert Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 88 14:21:17 EST
From: Peter Beck (LCWSL) <pbeck@ARDEC.ARPA>
Subject: self organizing systems
COMPLEXITY OF SYSTEMS VS THEIR COMPONENTS
RECENTLY I ASKED SOMEBODY IF PEOPLE ORGANIZATIONS (EG, AN EMPLOYEE UNION) COULD
BE CONSIDERED A "SELF-ORGANIZING" SYSTEM THAT IS "SYMBIOTIC" WITH ITS HOST. I
RECIEVED, WHAT I THINK IS A RATHER DISTURBING AND TYPICAL ANSWER TO BE EXPECTED
FROM HUMANS:
> It is hard to call any human organization a "self organizing system"
> since its parts (humans) are so much more - % complex %- than the
> system itself.
Is this a generally accepted proposition, ie, that complex constituent elements
can "NOT" form self organizing systems??
the future is puzzling,
but CUBING is forever !!
pete beck <pbeck@ardec>
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 88 00:30:30 GMT
From: ihnp4!alberta!pat@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Patrick Fitzsimmons)
Subject: Do you consider yourself a TURBO PROLOG expert?
If so, then I need your help.
I am a new Turbo Prolog user having great difficultly trying
to implement a prolog program in Turbo Prolog. The program works
fine in other prologs. My problem is in the DOMAINS sections trying
to get it to accept what I put. I thought that a more experienced
user may be able to offer some help.
Don't ask why I am using Turbo Prolog, I really don't want to but I
must. To expand on my problem a bit, I currently have in the DOMAINS
section:
entry = symbol ;
n(entry)
list = entry*
The n(entry) is meant to represent NOT entry.
I have a negate predicate defined as:
negate(n(G), G) :-
ne(n(_), G).
negate(G, n(G)) :-
ne(n(_), G).
ne(X, Y) :-
not(X = Y).
P.S. Sorry if I have posted this to an inappropriate newsgroup.
Please send responses my e-mail and I will summarize in
comp.lang.prolog if there is enough interest.
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Patrick Fitzsimmons | pat@alberta.UUCP |
| Computing Science Department | |
| University of Alberta | |
| Edmonton, Alberta | |
| T6G 2H1 | |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jan 88 19:20:59 GMT
From: ulysses!sfmag!sfsup!saal@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (S.Saal)
Subject: ambiguous speech
I don't know if speech recognition is still considered a part of
AI, but I thought these two groups would be the most appropriate
for this question.
One of the difficulties of speech recognition is to have the
computer understand whether the statement "makes sense." this is
something (most) humans do automatically. When the sentence
doesn't make sense we slow down our assimilation rate or, if
necessary, ask the speaker to repeat. computers can't/don't do
that. The classic example is:
"It's hard to wreck a nice beach." vs
"Its hard to recognize speech."
(If you don't see the difficulty, say each one out loud.)
What I am looking for is more examples of these sentence pairs.
Here is another example - one that a human listener would be able
to discern easily, though I have my doubts about the computer.
"She bought her son dresses for $5." vs
"She bought her sundresses for $5."
Please send all sentence pairs to me directly (via email) instead
of posting them.
rec.humor folks, no need to re-start the discussion on
misunderstood song lyrics.
Thanks.
--
Sam Saal ..!attunix!saal
It's a retelling of the campaigns of Julius Ceasar, with the addition
of aircraft. ... I call it "Veni, Vidi, Vici Through Air Power."
from "God Save the Mark"
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jan 88 06:07:02 GMT
From: glacier!jbn@labrea.stanford.edu (John B. Nagle)
Subject: Radio gear for mobile robots
I'm looking for a good way to establish two-way digital
radio communication between a mobile vehicle and a base station.
1200 or 2400 baud is sufficent. Small size (cigarette-pack or
smaller) is esssential. Some scheme involving modified model R/C
gear would be ideal. Before getting into such modifications
ourselves, we'd like to find out if anyone has an off-the
shelf solution.
John Nagle
(Sadly, comp.ai is the most relevant newsgroup available.)
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 88 03:43:57 GMT
From: CENTRO.SOAR.CS.CMU.EDU!acha@PT.CS.CMU.EDU (Anurag Acharya)
Subject: pattern recognition papers sought
Does any one in the netland have either of the following papers ?
i) C. W. Therrien et al , " Application of Feature extraction to Radar
Signature Classification", Proceedings of the Second International
Joint Conference on Pattern Recognition, 1974
ii) F. LeChevalier, G. Bohillot, and C. Fugier-Garrel, "Radar Target and
Aspect Angle Identification", Proceedings of the IEEE International
Association of Pattern Recognition Conference, 1978
The second reference might be slightly off the mark in the name of the
Conference.
Thanx in advance,
-- anurag
Anurag Acharya
Computer Science Department
Carnegie Mellon UNiversity, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
USA
--
Anurag Acharya arpanet: acharya@cs.cmu.edu
bitnet : acharya@cs.cmu.edu@cmuccvma
"Programming is debugging the null program until it does what you want"
------------------------------
Date: 28 Jan 88 23:40:02 GMT
From: CENTRO.SOAR.CS.CMU.EDU!acha@pt.cs.cmu.edu (Anurag Acharya)
Subject: Another pattern recognition request
I am looking for a copy of the following Tech. Report. Could someone
give me a pointer ?
"Implementation and Testing of Ship Classifier Algorithm -
Task II", Norden Systems Inc., Final Technical Report
1288 R0014, Jan 4, 1979
Thanx in advance,
-- anurag
--
Anurag Acharya arpanet: acharya@cs.cmu.edu
bitnet : acharya@cs.cmu.edu@cmuccvma
"Programming is debugging the null program until it does what you want"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 88 09:55:04 PST
From: Marie Bienkowski <bienk@spam.istc.sri.com>
Subject: 1981 BBN Technical Report
I am trying to find a copy of:
C. Steinberg and A. Stevens, "A Typology of Explanations and
its Application to Intelligent Computer-Aided Instruction."
According to BBN, it is no longer available. If anyone has
it, please e-mail to bienk@istc.sri.com as I'd like to try
to get a copy.
Thanks,
Marie
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 88 06:09:06 GMT
From: g451252772ea@deneb.ucdavis.edu (0040;0000005410;0;327;142;)
Subject: Dreyfus on connectionism
Would anyone who attended S. Dreyfus' public talk on connectionism at
U.C. Berkeley (Friday, 1/29) give a summary?
S. and H. Dreyfus (brothers) are Berkeley's "loyal opposition" to AI work
in the 'GOFAI' tradition (Haugeland's Good Old-Fashioned AI, based on
symbolic/logical manipulations). Their assessment of the neural net
pre-symbolic paradigm should have been interesting.
thanks!
Ron Goldthwaite / UC Davis, Psychology and Animal Behavior
'Economics is a branch of ethics, pretending to be a science;
ethology is a science, pretending relevance to ethics.'
------------------------------
Date: Sun 31 Jan 88 21:57:28-PST
From: Ken Laws <LAWS@KL.SRI.COM>
Subject: Dreyfus on Connectionism
I didn't attend the lecture, but have read the Dreyfuses' paper in
the new Daedalus issue previously mentioned in AIList. The paper
says little about connectionism specifically (except that it may now
be getting a deserved chance to fail just as symbolic AI has done),
but the authors are favorable to holistic approaches in general and
seem less negative about an AI field that includes this emphasis.
Their paper and one by Papert were mainly concerned with the
history of AI and how the symbolic paradigm gained supremacy.
Almost every paper in the Daedalus issue comments on (or indeed
focusses on) connectionism and neural models, mainly at a
philosophical level of discussion. Sherry Turkle, for instance,
discusses connectionism and psychoanalysis as resonant fields
that need to initiate a dialog about object-oriented mental models.
It's a very interesting collection of essays.
-- Ken
------------------------------
Date: 26 Jan 88 14:42:20 GMT
From: dg1v+@andrew.cmu.edu (David Greene)
Subject: Re: Cognitive System using Genetic Algorithms.
>P.S.: Does any one know the email addresses of J. Holland( U of Michigan),
>S.F. Smith ( Carnegie-Mellon, I guess) or anyone who've been related in
>genetic algorithms ?
For Steve Smith try:
stephen.smith@cs.cmu.edu
or sfs@isl1.cmu.edu
-David
dg1v@andrew.cmu.edu
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jan 88 06:39:33 GMT
From: g451252772ea@deneb.ucdavis.edu (0040;0000006866;0;327;142;)
Subject: Re: Cognitive System using Genetic Algorithms.
About a month or so ago I complained of the engineering focus of disserta-
tions done by Holland's students. I got a very nice reply from a former
student, Lashon Booker, who cited a number of more abstract projects
(including his own). All these theses are available through U. Microfilms
(which happens to be based in Michigan), at about $25 each.
Lashon is still quite active; he's at booker@nrl-aic.ARPA. There is a BBS
for genetic algorithms; to subscribe, send mail to GA-List-Request@nrl-aic.ARPA.
(I did some time ago but have no reply yet... hmmm)
And a standard set of C subroutines for classifier systems is available for
media cost from Rick Riolo at U.Mich. Contact him at
Rick_Riolo@ub.cc.umich.edu for details - I got mine on a 1.2 meg AT disc (just
fits). Other formats available (Sun, Mac, ... ). This is ver 0.98, so it's
not totally stable yet. I'm slowly getting acquainted with it all...
Oh yes: the books INDUCTION, 1986, by Holland et al; GENETIC ALGORITHMS AND
SIMULATED ANNEALING, 1987, L. Davis; and GENETIC ALGORITHMS AND THEIR
APPLICATION, Proceed. 2nd Intl. Conf. Gen. Alg. (L. Erlbaum Assoc, Pub),
are all of interest.
I, for one, would be curious what else you learn, although my interests are
more in the theoretical arena (population genetics, et al).
Ron Goldthwaite / UC Davis, Psychology and Animal Behavior
'Economics is a branch of ethics, pretending to be a science;
ethology is a science, pretending relevance to ethics.'
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 88 16:07:37 EST
From: "Bruce E. Nevin" <bnevin@cch.bbn.com>
Subject: XLISP
You can get a copy of 1.5 from Public Brand Software (call 1-800-IBM-DISK)
for about $5. Oops, that's 1.6. You can get a copy of 2.0 by writing the
author, Dave Betz and sending him a formatted diskette and a stamped,
self-addressed diskette mailer. His address is 127 Taylor Road, Peterborough,
NH 03458. His number is 603/924-6936. He's a real nice guy. Release 2.0
has 1.7 documentation plus update patches that have not been integrated into
the document, if you can't live with that then ask for 1.7, or maybe it's
1.8. Actually, that is what he will send you unless you specify that
you want 2.0 with the doc as-is. It's ready for release but for that,
and I believe is supposed to be full CommonLisp, plus the OO extensions
that are after all the main motivation for XLISP.
Cheers,
Bruce
Bruce Nevin
bn@cch.bbn.com
<usual_disclaimer>
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 88 10:01:14 CST (Sun)
From: texsun!killer!aimania@Sun.COM (Walter Rothe)
Subject: Re: Query - XLISP 1.5
You can find latest version of XLISP on BYTE information exchange.
Phone is 1-800-227-2983.
---
Walter Rothe at the UNIX(Tm) Connection, Dallas, Tx
UUCP: {rutgers}!smu.killer.aimania
------------------------------
Date: Fri 29 Jan 88 17:52:14-PST
From: Ken Laws <LAWS@IU.AI.SRI.COM>
Subject: Ping Pong
Oscar Firschein has pointed out to me a paper on the AT&T ping-pong
robot:
R.L. Andersson, Investigating Fast, Intelligent Systems with a
Ping-Pong Playing Robot, Proc. 4th Int. Symp. of Robotics
Research, Santa Cruz, California, pp. 1-8.
------------------------------
Date: 31 Jan 88 14:40:41 GMT
From: mcvax!chorus.fr!will@uunet.UU.NET (Will Neuhauser)
Subject: Re: Software Development and Expert Systems
In article <8801270004.AA12634@nrl-rjkj.arpa>, jacob@NRL-CSS.ARPA
(Rob Jacob) writes:
> Saw your message about software engineering techniques for expert
> systems on the AIList. [...] Our basic solution is to divide
> the set of rules up into pieces and limit the connectivity of the
> pieces. [...]
This would appear to be the basic definition of "modularity", and
the usual hints should apply given a little thought.
To achieve greater modularity in a prototype expert system, in C++,
I created classes for "expert systems" (inference engines),
for rule-bases, and for fact-bases.
Inference Engines.
-----------------
Separate engines allows the user to select an appropriate inference
engine for the tasks at hand. It would have been nice to add a
language construct for defaulting engines; as it was you had to
code these. The expert sytems could be organized hierarchically.
Each system had a pointer to its parent(s) and vice versa. In truth,
I only ever used one engine because I was really more interested in
modularizing the rule-base, but the potential was there, right?
Fact-bases.
----------
Separate fact-bases allowed for the use of the same rule-base in
different situations: when a rule-base appeared more that once,
it was given a new fact-base, and the rule-base was re-used.
Hypothetically, the separate fact-bases could have been useful
in "trial and error" situations: one could create new fact-base
instances (objects) and then throw them away when they didn't
pan out. I never had a chance to try it out.
Rule-bases.
----------
Separate rule-bases were the important factor in this current
discussion, and my main interest. I used a very simple default,
that could obviously be extended to provide finer control.
The separate rule-bases were very useful for modularizing the
total rule-base. Each "coherent set of rules" was located in a different
file, and when read in, was read into a separate rule-base instance
(it was a prototype so don't give me too much grief!). The
default rule for connection was that terminal goals, those which
never appeared on the left-hand side of a rule, were automatically
exported to the calling expert system(s) (via the parent-pointers).
This was sort of nice in that when a sub-expert-system had new
goals added, they were automatically made a part of the callers
name space. (Of course there could be conflicts, but in the prototype
I just lived with the problem and the new meanings suddenly given to
existing names, but, again, I was just trying out some modularization
concepts in a prototype.)
Aside from the obvious advantages of modularization to reduce the
size of the name space and thus the difficulty of understanding
a single giant set of rules (actually, it seemed that 100 rules
was hard for one person to remember for long), I had another
reason for wanting modularization: I wanted to clearly separate the
experts, facts, and rules into different computational tasks (coherent
systems of sub rules) so that one could divide the rule-base up onto
separate processors in a multi-processor computer. (Again, never tried.)
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
