nl-kr-request@cs.rpi.edu (NL-KR Moderator Chris Welty) (11/22/89)
NL-KR Digest (Tue Nov 21 16:40:23 1989) Volume 6 No. 44 Today's Topics: Second Conference on Situation Theory and its Applications: CFP Pragmatics in AI conference CFP New KIT-Reports from TU Berlin (Abstracts) RA Job -- Chart Parsing + Syntax Correction ... What is a Symbol System? Re: What is a Symbol System? Special talk by Hector Levesque Submissions: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Requests, policy: nl-kr-request@cs.rpi.edu Back issues are available from host archive.cs.rpi.edu [128.213.1.10] in the files nl-kr/Vxx/Nyy (ie nl-kr/V01/N01 for V1#1), mail requests will not be promptly satisfied. If you can't reach `cs.rpi.edu' you may want to use `turing.cs.rpi.edu' instead. BITNET subscribers: we now have a LISTSERVer for nl-kr. You may send submissions to NL-KR@RPIECS and any listserv-style administrative requests to LISTSERV@RPIECS. ----------------------------------------------------------------- To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu >From: STA II 1990 <stass90%epistemi.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK> Reply-To: stass90%epistemi.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK Subject: Second Conference on Situation Theory and its Applications: CFP Date: Thu, 09 Nov 89 17:49:59 +0000 CALL FOR PAPERS *************** Second Conference on Situation Theory and its Applications Kinloch Rannoch, Scotland, UK September 13-16, 1990 Venue The second Conference on Situation Theory and its Applications will be held between the 13th and 16th September 1990. It will be held at the secluded Loch Rannoch Hotel on the shores of Loch Rannoch in the heart of the Scottish Highlands. Lodging for 50 participants is available there on a first-come, first-served basis, but with speakers being given assured accommodations. Some financial assistance is available to help cover the cost and accommodations of speakers. Call for Papers The Program Committee welcomes theoretical and computational contributions in at least the following areas: * Logical and Philosophical foundations of Situation Theory * Application to the analysis of Natural and Artificial languages * Inference * Applications to Information Theory * Mathematical tools * Critical papers and papers on other topics are also welcome. Speakers will be selected by the program committee on the basis of ``abstracts'' of 8 to 12 pages. Following the model of the first ST&A Conference, talks will be 40 minutes in length, and will be held in the morning and evenings, with afternoons free for discussions, working groups, and walks around the Loch. Speakers are expected to contribute their papers to a Conference Proceedings, with final papers due two months after the conference. Important Dates Submission of Abstracts March 1 1990 Notification to authors May 1 1990 Submission to Proceedings November 16 1990 Program Committee Jon Barwise Stanford University Mark Gawron Simon Fraser University Gordon Plotkin Edinburgh University Syun Tutiya Chiba University Abstracts (preferably by e-mail in LaTeX) to: STASS CSLI Ventura Hall Stanford, CA. 94305 USA E-mail: STASSconference@csli.stanford.edu. Fax No: +1 (415) 723 0758 Accommodation and Local Inquiries to: Situation Theory Conference HCRC 4 Buccleuch Place Edinburgh EH8 9LW UK E-mail: stass90@cogsci.ed.ac.uk. Fax No: +44 (0)31 662 4912 ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu >From: paul@NMSU.Edu Date: Mon, 13 Nov 89 21:37:59 MST Subject: Pragmatics in AI conference CFP CALL FOR PAPERS Pragmatics in Artificial Intelligence 5th Rocky Mountain Conference on Artificial Intelligence (RMCAI-90) Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA, June 28-30, 1990 PRAGMATICS PROBLEM: The problem of pragmatics in AI is one of developing theories, models, and implementations of systems that make effective use of contextual information to solve problems in changing environments. CONFERENCE GOAL: This conference will provide a forum for researchers from all subfields of AI to discuss the problem of pragmatics in AI. The implications that each area has for the others in tackling this problem are of particular interest. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: In cooperation with: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) (pending approval) Special Interest Group in Artificial Intelligence (SIGART) (pending approval) U S WEST Advanced Technologies and the Rocky Mountain Society for Artificial Intelligence (RMSAI) With grants from: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Special Interest Group in Artificial Intelligence (SIGART) U S WEST Advanced Technologies and the Rocky Mountain Society for Artificial Intelligence (RMSAI) THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: Las Cruces, lies in THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT (New Mexico), USA and is situated in the Rio Grande Corridor with the scenic Organ Mountains overlooking the city. The city is close to Mexico, Carlsbad Caverns, and White Sands National Monument. There are a number of Indian Reservations and Pueblos in the Land Of Enchantment and the cultural and scenic cities of Taos and Santa Fe lie to the north. New Mexico has an interesting mixture of Indian, Mexican and Spanish culture. There is quite a variation of Mexican and New Mexican food to be found here too. GENERAL INFORMATION: The Rocky Mountain Conference on Artificial Intelligence is a major regional forum in the USA for scientific exchange and presentation of AI research. The conference emphasizes discussion and informal interaction as well as presentations. The conference encourages the presentation of completed research, ongoing research, and preliminary investigations. Researchers from both within and outside the region are invited to participate. Some travel awards will be available for qualified applicants. FORMAT FOR PAPERS: Submitted papers should be double spaced and no more than 5 pages long. E-mail versions will not be accepted. Send 3 copies of your paper to: Paul Mc Kevitt, Program Chairperson, RMCAI-90, Computing Research Laboratory (CRL), Dept. 3CRL, Box 30001, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003-0001, USA. DEADLINES: Paper submission: March 1st, 1990 Pre-registration: April 1st, 1990 Notice of acceptance: May 1st, 1990 Final papers due: June 1st, 1990 LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS: Jennifer Griffiths, Local Arrangements Chairperson, RMCAI-90. (same postal address as above). INQUIRIES: Inquiries regarding conference brochure and registration form should be addressed to the Local Arrangements Chairperson. Inquiries regarding the conference program should be addressed to the program Chairperson. Local Arrangements Chairperson: E-mail: INTERNET: rmcai@nmsu.edu Phone: (+ 1 505)-646-5466 Fax: (+ 1 505)-646-6218. Program Chairperson: E-mail: INTERNET: paul@nmsu.edu Phone: (+ 1 505)-646-5109 Fax: (+ 1 505)-646-6218. TOPICS OF INTEREST: You are invited to submit a research paper addressing Pragmatics in AI , with any of the following orientations: Philosophy, Foundations and Methodology Knowledge Representation Neural Networks and Connectionism Genetic Algorithms, Emergent Computation, Nonlinear Systems Natural Language and Speech Understanding Problem Solving, Planning, Reasoning Machine Learning Vision and Robotics Applications INVITED SPEAKERS: The following researchers have agreed to speak at the conference (a number of others have been invited): Martin Casdagli, Los Alamos National Laboratory USA (Dynamical systems, Artificial neural nets, Applications) Arthur Cater, University College Dublin IRELAND (Robust Parsing) James Martin, University of Colorado at Boulder USA (Metaphor and Context) Derek Partridge, University of Exeter UK (Connectionism, Learning) Philip Stenton, Hewlett Packard UK (Natural Language Interfaces) PROGRAM COMMITTEE: John Barnden, New Mexico State University (Connectionism, Beliefs, Metaphor processing) Hans Brunner, U S WEST Advanced Technologies (Natural language interfaces, Dialogue interfaces) Martin Casdagli, Los Alamos National Laboratory (Dynamical systems, Artificial neural nets, Applications) Mike Coombs, New Mexico State University (Problem solving, Adaptive systems, Planning) Thomas Eskridge, Lockheed Missile and Space Co. (Analogy, Problem solving) Chris Fields, New Mexico State University (Neural networks, Nonlinear systems, Applications) Roger Hartley, New Mexico State University (Knowledge Representation, Planning, Problem Solving) Paul Mc Kevitt, New Mexico State University (Natural language interfaces, Dialogue modeling) Joe Pfeiffer, New Mexico State University (Computer Vision, Parallel architectures) Keith Phillips, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (Computer vision, Mathematical modeling) Yorick Wilks, New Mexico State University (Natural language processing, Knowledge representation) Scott Wolff, U S WEST Advanced Technologies (Intelligent tutoring, User interface design, Cognitive modeling) REGISTRATION: Pre-Registration: Professionals $50.00; Students $30.00 (Pre-Registration cutoff date is April 1st 1990) Registration: Professionals $70.00; Students $50.00 (Copied proof of student status is required). Registration form (IN BLOCK CAPITALS). Enclose payment (personal checks and Eurochecks accepted). Send to the following address: Jennifer Griffiths, Local Arrangements Chairperson, RMCAI-90 Computing Research Laboratory Dept. 3CRL, Box 30001, NMSU Las Cruces, NM 88003-0001, USA. Name:_______________________________ E-mail_____________________________ Phone__________________________ Affiliation: ____________________________________________________ Fax: ____________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ COUNTRY__________________________________________ Organizing Committee RMCAI-90: Paul Mc Kevitt Yorick Wilks Research Scientist Director CRL CRL cut------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89 12:23:46 +0100 >From: "Christel Hecht (Secretary Projectgroup KIT)" <CISKIT%DB0TUI11.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> Subject: New KIT-Reports from TU Berlin (Abstracts) NL-KR Digest Subject: New KIT-Reports from TU Berlin - abstracts - The following reports may be obtained free of charge from: PROJECT GROUP KIT Technische Universitaet Berlin Fachbereich Informatik Sekr. FR 5 - 12 Franklinstr. 28/29 D-1000 Berlin 10, West-Germany <ciskit%db0tui11.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu> Christof Peltason, Albrecht Schmiedel, Carsten Kindermann, Joachim Quantz "The BACK System Revisited" KIT-Report no. 75, September 1989, 100 pages The "Berlin advanced computational knowledge representation system" BACK has been developed as a KL-ONE-based hybrid reasoning system since 1985. In this report the redesign and the implemention of the system (in Prolog) are described. The overall knowledge base language is sketched, syntax and semantics are given, and the usage is illustrated by examples. It is a step towards a uniform object description language for accessing knowledge bases, combining intensional and extensional aspects - and also taking into account features known from typical database query languages. The implementational issues of the recent development are sketched; algorithms and data structures are presented, efficiency aspects are discussed, and the choices made between various implementational techniques are explained The report is intended to serve not only as a platform for discussion on the technical issues and extensions yet to come, but also as a reference guide to the use of the current system. Stephan Busemann, Christa Hauenschild, Carla Umbach (eds.) \\ "Views of the Syntax/Semantics Interface" KIT-Report no. 74, July 1989, 197 pages Proceedings of the Workshop "GPSG and Semantics", organized by the project KIT-FAST, TU Berlin, Feb. 22-24, 1989. Most of the contributions are concerned with the syntax-semantics interface, which is among the hot topics' of present-day research in (computational) linguistics. The topic is discussed from many different points of view, ranging from linguistic phenomena and their syntactic and semantic aspects to representation formalisms and their special properties. Contents: Unbounded Dependencies in Machine Translation (Balari, Bel, and Gilboy); From FAS Representations to GPSG Structures (Busemann and Hauenschild); Features for Determination and Plurality for NPs (Grabski); A Logical Approach to Grammar (Keller); Semantic Emphasis and Case Frames (Kunze); Functor-Argument-Structures for the Meaning of NL Sentences and Their Formal Interpretation (Mahr and Umbach); Generalized Categorial Logic: Lambek-Gentzen Sequent Calculi (Moortgat); The Syntax-Semantics Interface in a Unification-Based Phrase Structure Grammar (Pollard); Spurious Ambiguities - On the Syntax-Semantics Relation in C(U)G (Wesche). Ruediger Oehlmann "First European Summer School on Machine Learning" KIT-Report no. 73, May 1989, 60 pages The report contains the lectures given at the First European Summer School on Machine Learning (ES2ML). The meeting was held in Les Arcs, France, from 18th to 28th July, 1988. Kai von Luck: "Repraesentation Assertionalen Wissens im BACK-System - Eine Fallstudie - " KIT-Report no. 72, May 1989, 150 pages This work is concerned with some problems of knowledge representation within the framework of Artificial Intelligence. Particular emphasis is placed on semantically well-founded formalisms and the algorithms employed to interpret them. In the last years, hybrid systems as part of the research in this field have found increasing attention. Taking the form of a case study, the construction of a semantically motivated hybrid formalism and the consequences for an implementation of this formalism are discussed, and practical solutions are provided. Special attention is directed to the problem of keeping the represented parts of a domain consistent; inference procedures are specified for mechanically computing implications of assertions entered into the system. Properties and possible weakness of the BACK-system - as a representative of logic based hybrid systems for knowledge representation in general - are discussed and potential applications of such systems are demonstrated. Werner Emde, Ingo Keller, Joerg-Uwe Kietz, Katharina Morik, Sabine Thieme, Stefan Wrobel : "Wissenserwerb und Maschinelles Lernen" - Final Report of the KIT-LERNER Project - KIT-Report no. 71, April 1989, 287 pages Acknowledge-To: <CISKIT@DB0TUI11> ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu >From: Robert Dale <rda%epistemi.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK> Date: Thu, 16 Nov 89 17:32:32 GMT Subject: RA Job -- Chart Parsing + Syntax Correction ... University of Edinburgh Centre for Cognitive Science/Human Communication Research Centre Research Assistant Applications are invited for an SERC supported post, tenable from 1st January 1990 or as soon as possible thereafter. The appointment, for a three-year period, primarily involves the development of chart-based syntax-checking mechanisms for use in a rule-based system which detects and corrects errors in real text. The project, entitled The Editor's Assistant, is concerned with the application of rule-based techniques to real text for the interactive correction of errors, ranging from low-level house style issues through to more complex syntactic and elementary semantic errors. The project, which is joint-funded by the SERC and the DTI under the IED programme, also involves two industrial collaborators, who will contribute the rule base mechanisms and a language-sensitive text editor. Candidates should ideally possess an MSc or have equivalent research or industrial experience. Knowledge of Common Lisp would be an advantage, as would some exposure to natural language processing techniques. Salary is on the RA1B scale, in the range \pounds9816--12381, dependent upon age, qualifications and experience. Registration for a higher degree may be possible. Further particulars may be obtained from Dr Robert Dale Human Communication Research Centre University of Edinburgh 2 Buccleuch Place Edinburgh EH8 9LW Telephone (031) 667 1011 x6487 Email: R.Dale@uk.ac.edinburgh with whom applications by letter including a curriculum vitae and the names of two referees should be lodged not later than Friday 8th December 1989. - ------- Robert Dale Phone: +44 31 667 1011 x6470 | University of Edinburgh UUCP: ...!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!cogsci!rda | Centre for Cognitive Science ARPA: rda%cogsci.ed.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk | 2 Buccleuch Place JANET: rda@uk.ac.ed.epistemi | Edinburgh EH8 9LW Scotland ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu >From: harnad@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. R. Harnad) Newsgroups: comp.ai,sci.logic,sci.math.symbolic Subject: What is a Symbol System? Keywords: computation, symbol manipulation, syntax, formality Date: 20 Nov 89 04:39:12 GMT What is a symbol system? From Newell (1980) Pylyshyn (1984), Fodor (1987) and the classical work of Von Neumann, Turing, Goedel, Church, etc.(see Kleene 1969) on the foundations of computation, we can reconstruct the following definition: A symbol system is: (1) a set of arbitrary PHYSICAL TOKENS (scratches on paper, holes on a tape, events in a digital computer, etc.) that are (2) manipulated on the basis of EXPLICIT RULES that are (3) likewise physical tokens and STRINGS of tokens. The rule-governed symbol-token manipulation is based (4) purely on the SHAPE of the symbol tokens (not their "meaning"), i.e., it is purely SYNTACTIC, and consists of (5) RULEFULLY COMBINING and recombining symbol tokens. There are (6) primitive ATOMIC symbol tokens and (7) COMPOSITE symbol-token strings. The entire system and all its parts - - the atomic tokens, the composite tokens, the syntactic manipulations (both actual and possible) and the rules -- are all (8) SEMANTICALLY INTERPRETABLE: The syntax can be SYSTEMATICALLY assigned a meaning (e.g., as standing for objects, as describing states of affairs). According to proponents of the symbolic model of mind such as Fodor (1980) and Pylyshyn (1980, 1984), symbol-strings of this sort capture what mental phenomena such as thoughts and beliefs are. Symbolists emphasize that the symbolic level (for them, the mental level) is a natural functional level of its own, with ruleful regularities that are independent of their specific physical realizations. For symbolists, this implementation-independence is the critical difference between cognitive phenomena and ordinary physical phenomena and their respective explanations. This concept of an autonomous symbolic level also conforms to general foundational principles in the theory of computation and applies to all the work being done in symbolic AI, the branch of science that has so far been the most successful in generating (hence explaining) intelligent behavior. All eight of the properties listed above seem to be critical to this definition of symbolic. Many phenomena have some of the properties, but that does not entail that they are symbolic in this explicit, technical sense. It is not enough, for example, for a phenomenon to be INTERPRETABLE as rule-governed, for just about anything can be interpreted as rule-governed. A thermostat may be interpreted as following the rule: Turn on the furnace if the temperature goes below 70 degrees and turn it off if it goes above 70 degrees, yet nowhere in the thermostat is that rule explicitly represented. Wittgenstein (1953) emphasized the difference between EXPLICIT and IMPLICIT rules: It is not the same thing to "follow" a rule (explicitly) and merely to behave "in accordance with" a rule (implicitly). The critical difference is in the compositeness (7) and systematicity (8) criteria. The explicitly represented symbolic rule is part of a formal system, it is decomposable (unless primitive), its application and manipulation is purely formal (syntactic, shape-dependent), and the entire system must be semantically interpretable, not just the chunk in question. An isolated ("modular") chunk cannot be symbolic; being symbolic is a combinatory, systematic property. So the mere fact that a behavior is "interpretable" as ruleful does not mean that it is really governed by a symbolic rule. Semantic interpretability must be coupled with explicit representation (2), syntactic manipulability (4), and systematicity (8) in order to be symbolic. None of these criteria is arbitrary, and, as far as I can tell, if you weaken them, you lose the grip on what looks like a natural category and you sever the links with the formal theory of computation, leaving a sense of "symbolic" that is merely unexplicated metaphor (and probably differs from speaker to speaker). Any rival definitions, counterexamples or amplifications? Excerpted from: Harnad, S. (1990) The Symbol Grounding Problem. Physica D (in press) - ---------------------------------------------------- References: Fodor, J. A. (1975) The language of thought. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Fodor, J. A. (1987) Psychosemantics. Cambridge MA: MIT/Bradford. Fodor, J. A. & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1988) Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical appraisal. Cognition 28: 3 - 71. Harnad, S. (1989) Minds, Machines and Searle. Journal of Theoretical and Experimental Artificial Intelligence 1: 5-25. Kleene, S. C. (1969) Formalized recursive functionals and formalized realizability. Providence, R.I.: American Mathematical Society. Newell, A. (1980) Physical Symbol Systems. Cognitive Science 4: 135-83. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1980) Computation and cognition: Issues in the foundations of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3: 111-169. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1984) Computation and cognition. Cambridge MA: MIT/Bradford Turing, A. M. (1964) Computing machinery and intelligence. In: Minds and machines, A.R. Anderson (ed.), Engelwood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall. - - Stevan Harnad INTERNET: harnad@confidence.princeton.edu harnad@princeton.edu srh@flash.bellcore.com harnad@elbereth.rutgers.edu harnad@princeton.uucp CSNET: harnad%confidence.princeton.edu@relay.cs.net BITNET: harnad1@umass.bitnet harnad@pucc.bitnet (609)-921-7771 ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu >From: mcdermott-drew@CS.YALE.EDU (Drew McDermott) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: What is a Symbol System? Keywords: symbol manipulation, syntax, formality, semantics Date: 20 Nov 89 18:44:01 GMT I have two quibbles with this list: (a) Items 2&3: I agree that the rules have to be explicit, but they are usually written in a different notation from the one they manipulate. Example: A theorem prover written in Lisp. Another example: The weights in a neural net. (b) Item 8: Why is it necessary that a symbol system have a semantics in order to be a symbol system? I mean, you can define it any way you like, but then most AI programs wouldn't be symbol systems in your sense. I and others have spent some time arguing that symbol systems *ought* to have a semantics, and it's odd to be told that I was arguing in favor of a tautology. (Or that, now that I've changed my mind, I believe a contradiction.) Perhaps you have in mind that a system couldn't really think, or couldn't really refer to the outside world without all of its symbols being part of some seamless Tarskian framework. (Of course, *you* don't think this, but you feel that charity demands you impute this belief to your opponents.) I think you have to buy several extra premises about the potency of knowledge representation to believe that formal semantics is that crucial. -- Drew McDermott ------------------------------ To: nl-kr@cs.rpi.edu Date: Wed, 15 Nov 89 17:25:57 PST >From: ingrid@russell.Stanford.EDU (Ingrid Deiwiks) Subject: Special talk by Hector Levesque [[ This is late, but it happened. -CW ]] BELIEF AND ABDUCTIVE REASONING Hector J. Levesque Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Thursday, 16 November 1989, 11:00 SRI International, Room AA298 While various models of belief have been proposed in the literature, properties such as logical omniscience have been understood mainly in terms of deductive reasoning. Here we examine the dependence of abductive reasoning on the underlying model of belief. In particular, we show that the ATMS as characterized by Reiter and de Kleer is appropriate for the classical model of belief, but that a more limited notion of belief leads to a more tractable form of abductive reasoning. This talk is an expanded version of one presented at IJCAI-89. ------------------------------ End of NL-KR Digest *******************