rshu@zodiac.ADS.COM (Richard Shu) (07/08/89)
In article <4279@tank.uchicago.edu> converse@tartarus.uchicago.edu (timoshenko) writes: > > Some time ago there was a posting to comp.ai calling >for discussion on the creation of a group to be called either >comp.ai.planning or comp.planning. Does anyone know the status >of this? I.E. is it still in the discussion phase? was the call >for discussion done properly? (I don't recall whether the original >posting went to news.groups as well.) > > If the original poster is not pursuing it, I'd be willing >to deal with posting a call for votes and collecting responses ... Sorry, I've been meaning to post after the discussion phase was over but I got tied up. There were about 12 responses. One of the reasons that I haven't been more motivated to do something about this was the fact that it seemed unlikely that we would muster the 100 votes necessary to start a new news group. I'd like to hear suggestions on how we should proceed. We could start a mailing list. We could wait until September and see if we get more response when people are "back in school". We could try to publicize the list at IJCAI (I'm not going, someone else will have to volunteer). For your reference, here are the responses that were emailed to me or posted to comp.ai. Rich Original Posting: Subject: Proposal for new group called comp.ai.planning Reply-To: rshu@ads.com (Richard Shu) Yeah, I know, it's pushing towards more specialization of groups but I don't think it's more specialized than some of the other groups that already exist. I just don't have time to read everything that gets posted to comp.ai and my particular focus of interest is in planning techniques. It doesn't even have to be AI. Perhaps interested parties can comment on whether it should be comp.ai.planning or just comp.planning. Let's run the discussion period and voting until June 15th. I'll put out a call for votes then. If there is software out there that automatically handles the voting process, I'd like to hear about it. Rich Responses: Return-Path: <ssc-vax!ted@beaver.cs.washington.edu> I've been interested in and active in developing knowledge based planning systems for the past six years. Would certainly be interested in a group to focus on the many unsolved problems in this area. Count my vote yes. TJ {With Amazing Grace} The Piper aka Ted Jardine CFI-ASME/I Usenet: ...uw-beaver!ssc-vax!ted Internet: ted@atc.boeing.com =============================================================================== From knaredd1@ub.D.UMN.EDU Thu May 18 19:10:59 1989 Hi, I am for comp.ai.planning. I didn't hear the term 'planning' being used in other fields of AI (I could be wrong. Please correct me if necessary). Hope you get enough votes for the group. Thanks, krishna =============================================================================== From: ldi@rayssd.RAY.COM (Louis P. DiPalma) Message-Id: <8905221742.AA02958@RAY.COM> I am in favor of starting the new group!!!!! =============================================================================== From ukc!axion.bt.co.uk!hfnet.bt.co.uk!colin@uunet.UU.NET Fri May 26 06:44:24 1989 From: Colin Hopkins <colin@hfnet.british-telecom.co.uk> Date: Fri, 26 May 89 13:39:59 BST Message-Id: <1544.8905261239@hfserver.hfnet.bt.co.uk> Count me in, especially distributed/cooperative/multiagent planning. By the way, I'm just finishing my thesis in this area, anybody care to mention any work in this area? Colin =============================================================================== Reply-To: converse@tartarus.uchicago.edu.UUCP (Tim Converse) Good idea. I sometimes scan the headers of comp.ai, looking for articles not about the Chinese room :-), but I would probably actually read a planning newsgroup. I probably prefer comp.ai.planning, since I suspect the time is ripe for more such proliferation of AI subgroups, but comp.planning would also be fine. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Tim Converse-- | "And of course the tautology is, converse@tartarus.uchicago.edu | after all, the foundation of all Work: 702-0024 Home: 643-3582 | tautological thought." =============================================================================== Reply-To: feldy@cs.ucla.edu (Bob Felderman) I vote for comp.ai.planning Bob Felderman feldy@cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science ...!{rutgers,ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!feldy =============================================================================== References: <8905191246.AA27547@decwrl.dec.com> Reply-To: eliot@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Eliot Handelman) Organization: Princeton University, NJ Lines: 1 I vote do it. =============================================================================== Reply-To: jml@cl.cam.ac.uk (J Levine) comp.ai.planning would certainly be a step in the right direction. Ideally there should be general purpose discussion newsgroups for all major aspects of current AI research and comp.ai.philosophy for discussion of free will, the possibility of strong AI, etc. John M. Levine, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory. =============================================================================== I am in favor: let's call it comp.planning. There is more to discuss on planning than just the AI aspects. Lots of people are working on this subject. It could become a very interesting group! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Verbraeck e-mail: Delft University of Technology winfave@hdetud1.bitnet Department of Information Systems winfave@dutrun.uucp PO Box 356, 2600 AJ The Netherlands =============================================================================== Reply-To: lisplog@uklirb.UUCP (Bernd Bachmann AG Richter) Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, W-Germany I support the suggestion to install a new group on this subfield of AI (as we did with comp.ai.shells: CAUTION: this is an ad -:). The overall structure of complete AI seems not to be similarly represented in the USENET newsgroups' structure. Preferably the name should be comp.ai.planning instead of comp.planning; it better fits in the newsgroup hierarchy: comp.ai (for general topics, mostly philosophical), comp.ai.digest (moderated), comp.ai.shells (moderated, expert system shells), comp.ai.vision (vision), comp.ai.neural-nets, etc. It is not clarified now whether this newsgroup will be a moderated one ?! Good luck for fulfilling the requests for installation. - Bernd Bachmann =============================================================================== Sender: pim@unl.fctunl.rccn.pt Organization: Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal First of all I would like to register my agreement to the creation of the pruposed group "comp.ai.planning". There are lots of important matters related to this topic that deserve the apropriate discussion. I couldn't help disagreeing from Alexander Verbraekc's article, <728@dutrun.UUCP> where he proposes changing the name of the group to 'comp.planning' because, traditionally, that kind of planning I assume we're talking about is, "automatic plan generation" which as been, for a long time, a specific branch of Artificial Intelligence, and I, for once, am in favour of giving credits where credits are due. Hopping that this does not generate a big discussion, I would like to state that the most important topic here is my positive vote to the creation of such a group; if there is an agreement in creating the group as 'comp.planning' I also give my agreement... Specifically to Alexander Verbraek, I would personally apreciate some comments on the topic, which I assume, could be sent to me by e-mail. -- ------ Joao Paulo B. Pimentao | BITNET/Internet: pim@host.fctunl.rccn.pt Departamento de Informatica | PSI/VMS: PSI%(+2680)05010310::HOST::pim Fac. de Ciencias e Tecnologia | UUCP: pim@unl.uucp Universidade Nova de Lisboa | ARPA: pim%hara.fctunl.rccn.pt@mitvma.mit.edu 2825 Monte de Caparica | Fax: (+351) (1) 295-4461 PORTUGAL | Phone: (+351) (1) 295-4464 x.0460 =============================================================================== Organization: Systems & Computer Eng. Dept., Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada In order to escape some of the psychological discussions that seem to go in circles in the comp.ai group (ie. surrealism of dreams, free will, add nausium) it would be nice to be able to read a group that actually discussed an application/technique. A number of my colleagues have stopped reading comp.ai because of this problem. I realize that some of the psychological discussions are important parts of ai but I feel that they belong in their own group so that that those concerned with other aspects of ai can ignore them. I am currently doing postgraduate work in the area of AI and Planning and would welcome such a new group. I have compiled an extensive bibliography that I would be willing to post if requested. Carl Roth Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario, Canada roth@sce.carleton.ca roth@sce.uucp =============================================================================== Reply-To: due@iesd.dk (Jan Michael Due) Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Aalborg University, Denmark In article <JTR.89May24103543@exsc.cs.exeter.ac.uk> jtr@cs.exeter.ac.uk (Jason Trenouth) writes: > >I suggest (not propose) that perhaps what is required is >a group: > comp.ai.philosophy I've thought about the same thing. I think philosophical subjects takes up surprisingly much of this general newsgroup. The philosophy is the main reason for me to read comp.ai. But I think a proper labelled newsgroup like mentioned by Jason would be better. Jan Michael Due (due@iesd.auc.dk) =============================================================================== Organization: U of Ky, Math. Sciences, Lexington KY In article <7929@zodiac.UUCP>, rshu@macarthur.ADS.COM (Richard Shu) writes: > > Perhaps interested parties can comment on > whether it should be comp.ai.planning or just comp.planning. > > Let's run the discussion period and voting until June 15th. I would like a discussion group devoted to planning and I would favor comp.planning though comp.ai.planning would be acceptable. With either name the group is a good idea; there's a lot of work being done in the area. -- Richard Shelby rshelby@ms.uky.edu Department of Health Services rshelby@ukma.BITNET University of Kentucky {rutgers,uunet}!ukma!rshelby (responsible-p ADS message) NIL (si:halt)