LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA (01/24/85)
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI.ARPA>
AIList Digest Thursday, 24 Jan 1985 Volume 3 : Issue 8
Today's Topics:
Inference - Multisensor Integration Techniques,
Symbolic Algebra - Computer_Algebra_List_P,
AI Tools - MULTILISP & AI for Microcomputers,
Logic Programming - Recent Article,
Conferences - Tabulation of IJCAI Papers,
Psychology - Modalities List,
Seminars - Telling Lies (UCB) &
Hierarchical Evidential Reasoning (SU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon 21 Jan 85 10:39:40-PST
From: Len Karpf <KARPF@SRI-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Multisensor integration techniques
I am currently trying to put together a survey of multisensor integration
(a/k/a information fusion, sensor fusion, picture compilation) techniques.
Any references or information about work that is being done in this area
would be greatly appreciated. I am concerned primarily with the techniques
utilized. Thanks.
Len Karpf
KARPF@SRI-AI
SRI International - AH153
333 Ravenswood Ave.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
(415) 859-2592
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 22-Jan-85 16:43:52-GMT
From: GORDON JOLY (on ERCC DEC-10) <GCJ%edxa@ucl-cs.arpa>
Subject: Computer_Algebra_List_P ?
Is there a Computer Algebra list, similar to AIList?
Thanks in advance,
Gordon Joly.
[There is none on the Arpanet list of lists. Are there any
such local or private discussion lists? -- KIL]
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jan 1985 10:26:55 EST (Wednesday)
From: Karl Schwamb <m13820@mitre>
Subject: MULTILISP
I've heard that there is a version on Lisp being developed for parallel
processing called MULTILISP (possibly at MIT). Does anyone know if there
is such a beast, and if so who is working on it? Any other comments about
it would also be greatly appreciated.... Thanks, Karl
send to schwamb at mitre
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 85 21:05:56 CST
From: Werner Uhrig <werner@ut-ngp.ARPA>
Subject: DDJ of March 85 focuses on AI for MICROCOMPUTERS
[ figured some of you may want to get that issue. as many people are not
familiar with Dr. Dobb's Journal, I'll include a short overview below ]
A quick overview, in case you missed reading page 4 in the Dec 84 issue ...
NOV-84 p74 - A Guide to Resources for the C Programmer.
including a bibliography and lists of program and product
sources, this resource guide can help you start tackling the
material available.
DEC-84 the theme of the issue is "INSIDE UNIX". relevant articles are:
p24 - Varieties of Unix. a comparitive overview of Unixes for micros
with a brief history of Unix and comments on its future,
plus a guide to choosing a Unix
p38 - Unix Device Drivers. Version 7 drivers are the point of departure
for this inside look at the Unix I/O subsystem and device
drivers.
p50 - A Unix Internals Bibliography. .. so you won't have to "grep
for it"
p96 - C/Unix Programmer's Notebook.
JAN-85 theme: FATTEN YOUR MAC - step by the step instructions to increase RAM
in the Macintosh to 512K
FEB-85 Gala Anniversary Issue 100 months of DDJ
Mar-85 theme: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR MICROCOMPUTERS and announcement
of the winner of the AI-competition.
APR-85 theme: HUMAN INTERFACE DESIGN
MAY-85 theme: GRAPHICS ALGORITHMS
JUN-85 theme: SPECIAL COMMUNICATIONS ISSUE
[PS: has anyone approached some of the magazine publishers to see if they are
willing to provide TOCs in advance of publication, or whenever, in
machine-readable form? I'm sure they could as they have it in their
machines, and it sure wouldn't hurt their sales. and as it is
welcome information for us that does not require typing, I'm sure
that no one would consider such postings as improper advertising.
Dr Dobbs headquarters seem to be located in Palo Alto, if someone
there wouldn't mind making a local call there to ask the question]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 85 17:43:26 cst
From: Laurence Leff <leff%smu.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Recent Article - Prolog
Sigplan Notices Volume 20 Number 1 January 1985
M. A. Covington: Eliminating Unwanted Loops in Prolog
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 85 20:08 EST
From: Tim Finin <Tim%upenn.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: ijcai note
The following table summarizes the papers submitted to IJCAI-85:
length source
____________ _____________________
Area Total Long Short US Asia EUR CAN
____________________________ _____ ____ ____ ___ ___ ___ ___
Expert Systems 111 59 52 64 23 20 3
Natural Language 99 54 45 57 9 27 5
Knowledge Representation 77 46 31 53 4 16 4
Learning & Know. Acquisition 75 38 37 59 2 12 2
Perception 61 46 15 33 11 11 6
Automated Reasoning 49 32 17 36 1 9 2
Planning & Search 48 28 20 36 2 7 2
Cognitive Modelling 41 24 17 26 0 13 2
Robotics 37 27 10 22 11 4 0
AI Architecture 27 19 8 18 3 6 0
Logic Programming 25 17 8 9 10 5 1
Theorem Proving 19 17 2 9 2 7 1
Automated Programming 18 15 3 13 0 5 0
Philosophical Foundation 16 10 6 11 0 5 0
AI in Education 15 5 10 10 1 3 1
Social Implications 4 1 3 4 0 0 0
____________________________________________________________________________
TOTALS 722 438 284 460 79 150 29
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 85 18:10:27 pst
From: Douglas young <young%uofm-uts.cdn%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa>
Subject: Modalities list
Jan.21 85
There seem to be quite a few people who, following my message in
AIList #174 ( Dec 9), have read one or other of the two papers in
Medical Hypotheses (9:55-70; 10:5-25) I referred to and who would
like a copy of the updated list of modalities. I have mailed out
a few, but in order to save time and postal charges I am giving
the complete list below. It would unfortunately take too long to
explain the significance of the modalities not listed previously,
but I shall willingly explain some to any individuals who are
interested.
May I remind AIListers, though, of two things I pointed out
in #174 : (1), that both the above papers, while they provide the
principles and grounds of the theory of modal meaning, are, in most
other respects, substantially out-of-date; and, (2), that no claims
are made for any neurological foundations for the " mental modalities";
these are simply categories of mental experience that are unrelated
directly to any sensorimotor systems. The significance of these
categories lies, as it does for the sensorimotor modalities, in
the representations or codes of individual members of each of these
categories.
SENSORIMOTOR AND MENTAL MODALITIES.
___________________________________
Primary Sensorimotor Modalities Compound Sensorimotor Modalities
and Submodalities ________________________________
_______________________________
1. (RET) Visual pattern 16. (HAP) Haptic
2. (VDM) Visual detection of 17. (GUS) Gustatory
movement
3. (COL) Colour 18. (EMP) Emotio-expressive
proprioception and control.
4. (RIL) Retinal illumination 19. (CAP) Central autonomic
proprioception and control.
5. (VRA) Visual ranging and 20. (VES) Vestibular
depth perception.
6. (OCM) Oculomotor 21. (STE) Stereognostic
7. (AUD) Auditory pattern 22. (LES) Sense of location in
immediate extrapersonal space.
8. (ADS) Auditory direction 23. (VPC) Verbal perception
sensing.
9. (KIN) Kinaesthetic 24. (TPC) Tonal perception
10. (TAC) Tactile 25. (VXP) Verbal expression
11. (PAI) Pain 26. (TXP) Tonal expression
12. (TMP) Temperature 27. (CMD) Command
13. (OLF) Olfactory
14. (TST) Taste Mental modalities
_________________
15. (MOT) Motor
28. (MET) Metaconceptual
29. (TIM) Mental time
30. (EMS) Emotive mental states.
31. (CMS) Cognitive mental states.
32. (CMA) Cognitive mental acts.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 85 15:32:55 pst
From: chertok%ucbcogsci@Berkeley (Paula Chertok)
Subject: Seminar - Telling Lies (UCB)
BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM
SPRING 1985
Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237B
TIME: Tuesday, January 29, 11 - 12:30
PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center
DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 2 in 200 Building T-4
SPEAKER: Paul Ekman, University of California, San
Francisco; Computer Scientist, SRI Interna-
tional
TITLE: ``Telling Lies''
The question I will address is why liars sometimes betray
themselves despite their intention to mislead. Why can't
liars prevent a slip of the tongue, or what I term leakage
in expression, voice or gesture? Why can't liars prevent
these behavioral betrayals? Sometimes they do. Some lies
are performed perfectly; nothing in what the liar says or
does betrays the lie. Why not always? There are two rea-
sons, I will suggest, one that involves cognition and the
other emotions. Understanding them requires an analysis of
lies, liars, and lie catchers.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 22 Jan 85 11:00:01-PST
From: Paula Edmisten <Edmisten@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Seminar - Hierarchical Evidential Reasoning (SU)
[Forwarded from the Stanford SIGLUNCH distribution by Laws@SRI-AI.]
A Method for Managing Evidential Reasoning in a
Hierarchical Hypothesis Space
SPEAKER: Ted Shortliffe
Medical Computer Science Group, Stanford Knowledge
Systems Laboratory
DATE: Friday, January 25, 1985
LOCATION: Chemistry Gazebo, between Physical and Organic Chemistry
TIME: 12:05
Many of the underlying reasoning models used in expert systems have
assumed that purely categorical inference is adequate for the domain.
However, there are many settings in which the inferential rules are
inexact and the evidence for a given conclusion is suggestive at best.
Expert systems researchers have wrestled with this problem for the
last ten years, turning both to normative decision models and to
psychological experiments for ideas on how best to handle inexact
inference in advice systems. Many ad hoc approaches have been devised
and have demonstrated good performance in limited domains. However,
it is generally difficult to define the range of their applicability.
In addition, they have not provided a basis for coherent management of
evidence bearing on hypotheses that are related hierarchically, a
phenomenon that is recognized in several common problem solving
domains.
In this presentation, I will briefly describe the motivation for
dealing with hierarchical relationships among hypotheses in expert
systems and review the related limitations of the certainty factor
model developed for MYCIN. I will then focus on the Dempster-Shafer
(D-S) theory of evidence, an approach to evidential reasoning that is
appealing in part because it suggests a coherent approach for dealing
with such hierarchical relationships. However, the theory's
complexity and potential for computational inefficiency have tended to
discourage its use in reasoning systems. I will describe the central
elements of the D-S theory, basing the exposition on simple examples
drawn from the field of medicine. Finally, I will present an
adaptation of the D-S approach that achieves improved computational
efficiency while permitting the management of evidential reasoning
within an abstraction hierarchy. The analysis in the talk, plus the
new approach to applying the D-S theory, are largely the work of Jean
Gordon, a medical student and mathematician who has been working with
me on the problem for approximately the last two years.
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************