LAWS@SRI-AI.ARPA (11/14/84)
From: AIList Moderator Kenneth Laws <AIList-REQUEST@SRI-AI> AIList Digest Thursday, 1 Nov 1984 Volume 2 : Issue 148 Today's Topics: Linguistics - Bibliography Request, AI Tools - Workstations under $50K, News - IJCAI Awards, Linguistics - Sastric Sanscrit, Conference Review - Southern California AI Society, Seminar - Coherence in Life Stories ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 30 Oct 1984 20:15:33 EST From: Miroslav Benda <BENDA@USC-ISI.ARPA> Subject: linguistics bibliography Several years ago, Gazdar & Klein published a "Bibliography of Contemporary Lingustic Reasearch", which was an indexed guide to papers and books on generative linguistics. Is there anything similar online somewhere? Something that is kept up to date (and not several years behind, like "Bibliografie Linguistique"). Miroslav Benda Boeing Computer Services ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Oct 84 13:45:48 pst From: (Marvin Erickson [pnl]) erickson@lbl-csam Subject: AI Workstations under $50K I am interested in comments on the performance of low cost (under $50K) AI Workstations. Applications include expert system development and Landsat image processing. I am particularly interested in the availability of tools for either application that run under common Lisp on a PERQ and provide object oriented capabilities in addition to Lisp. Ron Melton Battelle/Pacific Northwest Laboratory (509) 375-2932 erickson@lbl-csam ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Oct 84 10:43:32 pst From: Alan Mackworth <mack%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> Subject: IJCAI Awards The IJCAI Award for Research Excellence The Board of Trustees of International Joint Confer- ences on Artificial Intelligence Inc. is proud to announce the establishment of The IJCAI Award for Research Excellence to honour sustained excellence in Artificial Intelligence research. The Award will be made every second year, at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, to a scientist who has carried out a program of research of consistently high quality yielding several substantial results. If the research program has been carried out col- laboratively the award may be made jointly to the research team. The Award carries with it a certificate and the sum of $1,000 plus travel and living expenses for the IJCAI. The researcher(s) will be invited to deliver an address on the nature and significance of the results achieved. Primarily, however, the award carries the honour of having one's work selected by one's peers as an exemplar of sustained research in the maturing science of Artificial Intelligence. We hereby call for nominations for The IJCAI Award for Research Excellence to be made at IJCAI-85 in Los Angeles. The accompanying note on Selection Procedures for IJCAI Awards provides the relevant details. The Computers and Thought Award The Computers and Thought Lecture is given at each International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence by an outstanding young scientist in the field of artificial intelligence. An award of $1,000 and payment for travel and subsistence expenses are provided to the recipient. Nomina- tion and selection procedures are outlined in the note Selection Procedures for IJCAI Awards. The Lecture is given one evening during the Conference, and the public is invited to attend. The Lectureship was established with royalties received from the book Computers and Thought, edited by Feigenbaum and Feldman; it is currently supported by income from IJCAI funds. Past recipients of this honour have been Terry Winograd (1971), Patrick Winston (1973), Chuck Rieger (1975), Douglas Lenat (1977), David Marr (1979), Gerald Sussman (1981) and Tom Mitchell (1983). Nominations are invited for The Computers and Thought Award to be made at IJCAI-85 in Los Angeles. The note on Selection Procedures for IJCAI Awards covers the nomination procedures to be followed. Selection Procedures for IJCAI Awards Nominations for The Computers and Thought Award and The IJCAI Award for Research Excellence are invited from all in the Artificial Intelligence international community. The procedures are the same for both awards. There should be a nominator and a seconder, at least one of whom should not have been in the same institution as the nominee. The nominee must agree to be nominated. The nominators should prepare a short submission less than 2,000 words for the voters, outlining the nominee's qualifications with respect to the criteria for the particular award. The award selection committee is the union of the Pro- gram, Organizing and Conference Committees of the upcoming IJCAI and the Board of Trustees of IJCAII with nominees excluded. Nominations should be submitted before March 31, 1985 to the IJCAI-85 Conference Chair: Alan Mackworth Department of Computer Science University of British Columbia Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5 Canada Tel. (604) 228-4893 Net Addresses CSnet: mack@ubc ARPAnet: mack%ubc@CSNet-Relay UUCP: mack@ubc-vision ------------------------------ Date: 29 Oct 1984 10:04-PST (Monday) From: Rick Briggs <briggs@RIACS.ARPA> Subject: Re: AIList Digest V2 #146 I have been challenged to defend some of my recent assertions. Bill Poser should be more careful when he criticizes ("Finally, Briggs mistakenly characterizes linguists as prescriptivists" -- I said the exact opposite on AIList of Thursday Oct. 18, that is that lingiustics has become descriptive rather than prescriptive: my own humble opinion is that non-prescriptive linguistics will be the death of english). With regards to machine translation, the "aesthetic amenities" could be an advantage rather than a disadvantage, since it might be possible to encode poetic constructions in the interlingua, otherwise many subtleties will be lost in the translation. The Sanskrit scholars have done a lot of work in formulating a mechanism for expressing natural language entities unambiguously. All I am saying is that it would be unwise to sweep under the carpet millenia (yes, millenia) of research without attempting to learn soemthing from it. Word ambiguity exists in Classical Sanskrit but is not a serious problem in the Sastra, since the level of representation of meaning is usually below the word level. While Caitra is Caitra, cook is a process of softening etc. By going one level of representation deeper, ambiguity between two possible meanings of the same word is avoided. The use of Sastric Sanskrit can be dated back at least as far as Patanjali's Mahabhashya (1st millenia B.C.). The tradition continued through Bhartrhari (the Vakyapadiya), Kaundabhatta, Dikshita (Vaiyakarana- bhusanasara) and (in the 19th century) Nagesha (Vaiyakaranasiddhantamanjusa). That it was spoken is evidenced from the fact that many Sastric works are actually transcripts of long dialogues between the different "schools" (e.g. the grammarians and the logicians). Their arguments were expressed in Sastric Sanskrit. Arguing about whether or not it was actually spoken is similar to asking the same of the Platonic dialogues. Admittedly, its use was limited to the scientific community to a large extent. The same can be said about the type of language used in today's scientific community, with its own specialized jargon and style. Is Mr. Poser suggesting that this also is not a natural language? I do not understand exactly what Kiparsky means when he asserts that there is ambiguity in whether or not Caitra or rice is in the pot. What resides in the pot is a "locality", which as an object "rice". Caitra is the agent of that activity; in no way can he be construed to be in the pot. Nothing is said about where Caitra is, I suppose he could be in the pot, but the notion of unspecified slots being filled in by defaults would be used. Normally, the agent of cooking is not in the pot and if he were it would probably be explicitly specified. With regards to definiteness ("the pot" or "a pot"): "pot" is defined as that which has potness (ghatatvam) in it. More exactly, a pot (or any other object) is defined by three terms (the determinant of meaninghood (shaakyatavacchedaka) is made up of three elements). The first is the genus (potness), the second is the form (or akrti) ("having a conch-like appearance about its neck [kambugrivadimatvam]"), and the third is the individual (pot "ghata"). I think that much of the confusion results from too close a correspondence being assumed from Classical to Sastric Sanskrit. Much of so called "ambiguity" does not exist as the words themselves are discarded for deeper representation. Syntactic cases are also changed when they are expressed as semantic cases since "over a fire" can mean "by means of a fire" in the case of cooking. Let me state exactly what Sastric Sanskrit is: it is "The most sophisticated stage of the developement of Sanskrit (through Vedic, Classical etc.) in which a very sophisticated philosophy of "the meaning of a sentence" was developed, and in which unambiguity was strived for and obtained to a large extent." By large extent I mean that it is ambiguous as a description in semantic nets (say conceptual dependency), in fact it is more precise. What I suggest is that the Linguistic and AI community, and especially those who are involved in both, take a very close look at the Sastric methodology and its philosophy, with natural language processing in mind. They did much research in how the mind perceives the meaning of words, and it is surprising how little exposure it has gotten. Rick Briggs ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Oct 84 10:18:47 PST From: Scott Turner <srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA> Subject: SCAIS Review The first meeting of the Southern California AI Society was a major success, with over 200 people from all walks of life (and industry too :-) attending. The event was held at the Faculty Center at UCLA, and arrangements were very comfortable. The agenda included almost 8 hours of talks by over 50 speakers. This rather long format was intended to allow all the participants to become familar with AI activities all around Southern California, but the great length proved to be a drawback. By the end of the day the crowd had thinned considerably. Most of the talks were short overviews of ongoing work, but among the more interesting talks were Rogers Hall of UC Irvine, "Learning in Multiple Knowledge Sources", Erik Mueller of UCLA "Daydreaming and Story Invention", and Chuck Williams of Inference Corp., "ART: Automated Reasoning Tool." A short business meeting was held after the talks were finished, where preparations for IJCAI-85 were discussed and an interim governing board for SCAIS was selected (i.e., people volunteered). In all likelihood future SCAIS meetings will occur monthly or bi-monthly at rotating hosts. Each host will showcase their AI acitivities and invite speakers on a selected topic. This format will give SCAIS members a chance to visit all the local AI Labs over the course of the year, without unduly straining the capacity of any single Lab. After the business meeting there was a demonstration session in the UCLA AI Lab, hosted by the infamous UCLA Airheads. Erik Mueller demonstrated his Daydreamer, Sergio Alvardo demonstrated OpEd, a program that models reading editorials, Uri Zernik demonstrated GATE, the UCLA Graphical AI Tools Environment, Charlie Dolan demonstrated Aesop, a program that learns planning knowledge from reading Aesop's fables, and a number of other students demonstrated other software and current work. Scott R. Turner UCLA Computer Science Department 3531 Boelter Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90024 ARPA: srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Oct 84 17:33:44 pst From: chertok@ucbcogsci (Paula Chertok) Subject: Seminar - Coherence in Life Stories BERKELEY COGNITIVE SCIENCE PROGRAM Fall 1984 Cognitive Science Seminar -- IDS 237A TIME: Tuesday, November 6, 11 - 12:30 PLACE: 240 Bechtel Engineering Center DISCUSSION: 12:30 - 2 in 200 Building T-4 SPEAKER: Charlotte Linde, STRUCTURAL SEMANTICS TITLE: ``The Creation of Coherence in Life Stories: Commonsense Philosophy and Special Explana- tory Systems'' This talk reports on a study of the creation of coherence in oral life stories. Such coherence is not a property of a particular life, but rather an achievement of the speaker in constructing the story. Studying the creation of coherence permits us to examine the implicit assumptions which are made about the nature of socially accepted reasons for life decisions. For example, when a speaker tells us how he became an optometrist, the way he makes this story coherent can give us insight into folk beliefs about proper causes, the nature of accident, etc. The first level of the creation of coherence is the level of implicit, commonsense philosophical categories, such as, in English, causality, accident, continuity and discontinuity. Speakers must show that their lives exhibit proper reasons for major decisions. If they can not frame their stories as exhibiting such causality, they must then analyze them as involving accident or discontinuity. Stories about accident or discontinuity tend to be organized to show that the accident is purely local, that is, that only one small part of an otherwise well-motivated life is accidental. Simi- larly, discontinuity is managed by a variety of strategies, such as discontinuity as only apparent, discontinuity as sequence, and discontinuity as metacontinuity. All these strategies work to show that the speaker's life is not as discontinuous as it might look. A more complex level of coherence is the level of explana- tory systems. These are non-expert versions of various expert systems in the culture, such as popular Freudian theory, behaviorism, feminism, and astrology. The systems at this level all presuppose the categories of the previous level. That is, they all assume the existence of causality, but specify possible causes which are somewhat different from the causes permitted by the commonsense system. ------------------------------ End of AIList Digest ********************