nl-kr-request@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU (NL-KR Moderator Brad Miller) (12/01/88)
NL-KR Digest (11/30/88 19:54:03) Volume 5 Number 29
Today's Topics:
NEW NL-KR MODERATOR SOUGHT
BBN AI Seminar -- Tom Knight
ai colloquia
BBN AI/Education seminar: John Dixon
BBN AI/Education Seminar: Susanne Lajoie
Generation And Recognition Of Affixational Morphology
From CSLI Calendar, November 10, 4:8
From CSLI Calendar, November 17, 4:9
BBN AI Seminar: Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Conceptual Graphs Workshop '89 (Second call for papers)
ai talk abstracts
SUNY Buffalo Cog Sci: Nakhimovsky
Submissions: NL-KR@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU
Requests, policy: NL-KR-REQUEST@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 88 19:04 EST
From: Brad Miller <miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU>
Subject: NEW NL-KR MODERATOR SOUGHT
As most of you have noticed, the postings to this list have gotten pretty
sporadic of late. This has not been due to a dearth of articles to be sent
(after filtering), but to the other demands on yours truely, the moderator.
Unfortunately, I expect these outside activities to continue to preclude
more timely moderation of this list. I would like to ask for volunteers to
take over this list, who have the time to do the work, and whose machine has
the necessary connectivity (USENET, ARPANET, possibly BITNET) to continue
sending out the list.
If you are interested, please send mail to miller@cs.rochester.edu for more
information on what is involved. Your time commitment would be about an hour
or so a week, your technical commitment is some knowledge of the groups
topics (obviously), as well as parsing failed mail messages, mail addresses
in various domains, etc. You may need to have intimate knowledge of the
mailer on your machine, or have someone next door who has it.
Thanks!
----
Brad Miller U. Rochester Comp Sci Dept.
miller@cs.rochester.edu {...allegra!rochester!miller}
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 88 11:17 EST
From: Marc Vilain <MVILAIN@G.BBN.COM>
Subject: BBN AI Seminar -- Tom Knight
BBN Science Development Program
AI Seminar Series Lecture
SPECIALIZATION IS FOR INSECTS
Tom Knight
MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
(tk@AI.AI.MIT.EDU)
BBN Labs
10 Moulton Street
2nd floor large conference room
10:30 am, Tuesday 8 November
The chaos of the last decade in parallel computer architecture
is largely due to the premature specialization of parallel computer
architectures to support particular programming models. The careful
choice of the correct primitives to support in hardware leads to a
general purpose parallel architecture which is capable of supporting a
wide variety of programming models.
This talk will argue that low latency communication emerges as
the essential component in parallel processor design, and will
demonstrate how to use low latency communication to support other
programming models such as data level parallelism and coherent shared
memory in large processor arrays.
We are now designing a very low latency, high bandwidth, fault
tolerant communications network, called Transit. It forms the
communications infrastructure - the replacement of the bus - for a high
speed MIMD processor array which can be programmed using a wide variety
of parallel models. Transit achieves its high performance through a
interdisciplinary approach to the problem of communications latency.
The packaging of Transit is done using near isotropic density
three dimensional wiring, allowing much tighter packing of components,
and routing of wires on a 3-D grid. The network is direct contact
liquid cooled with Fluorinert. The use of custom VLSI pad drivers and
receivers provides very high speed signalling between chips. The
topology of the network provides self-routing, fault tolerant, short
pipeline delay communications between pairs of processors. And finally,
the design of the processor itself allows high speed message dispatching
and low latency context switch.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 88 10:49 EST
From: Ron Loui <loui@wucs1.wustl.edu>
Subject: ai colloquia
COMPUTER SCIENCE COLLOQUIUM
Washington University
St. Louis
4 November 1988
TITLE: Why AI needs Connectionism? A Representation and Reasoning Perspective
Lokendra Shastri
Computer and Information Science Department
University of Pennsylvania
Any generalized notion of inference is intractable, yet we are capable of
drawing a variety of inferences with remarkable efficiency - often in a few
hundered milliseconds. These inferences are by no means trivial and support a
broad range of cognitive activity such as classifying and recognizing objects,
understanding spoken and written language, and performing commonsense
reasoning. Any serious attempt at understanding intelligence must provide a
detailed computational account of how such inferences may be drawn with
requisite efficiency. In this talk we describe some work within the
connectionist framework that attempts to offer such an account. We focus on
two connectionist knowledge representation and reasoning systems:
1) A connectionist semantic memory that computes optimal solutions to an
interesting class of inheritance and recognition problems extremely
fast - in time proportional to the depth of the conceptual hierarchy. In
addition to being efficient, the connectionist realization is based on an
evidential formulation and provides a principled treatment of exceptions,
conflicting multiple inheritance, as well as the best-match or
partial-match computation.
2) A connectionist system that represents knowledge in terms of multi-place
relations (n-ary predicates), and draws a limited class of inferences based on
this knowledge with extreme efficiency. The time taken by the system to draw
conclusions is proportional to the length of the proof, and hence,
optimal. The system incorporates a solution to the "variable binding" problem
and uses the temporal dimension to establish and maintain bindings.
We conclude that working within the connectionist framework is well motivated
as it helps in identifying interesting classes of limited inference that can
be performed with extreme efficiently, and aids in discovering constraints
that must be placed on the conceptual structure in order to achieve extreme
efficiency.
host: Ronald Loui
________________________________________________________________________________
1988-89 AI Colloquium Series (through February)
Sep 16 Michael Wellman, MIT/Air Force
"The Trade-off Formulation Task in Planning under
Uncertainty"
30 Kathryn Laskey, Decision Science Consortium
"Assumptions, Beliefs, and Probabilities"
Nov 4 Lokendra Shastri, University of Pennsylvania
"Why AI Needs Connectionism? A Representation and Reasoning
Perspective"
11 Peter Jackson, McDonnell Douglas
"Diagnosis, Defaults, and Abduction"
18 Eric Horvitz, Stanford University
Dec 2 Mark Drummond, NASA Ames
Feb 3 Fahiem Bacchus, University of Waterloo
10 Dana Nau, University of Maryland
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 88 16:51 EST
From: Marc Vilain <MVILAIN@G.BBN.COM>
Subject: BBN AI/Education seminar: John Dixon
BBN Science Development Program
AI/EDUCATION Seminar Series Lecture
WRITING AND READING: THE VIEW FROM THE U.K.
John Dixon
BBN Labs
10 Moulton Street
2nd floor large conference room
10:30 am, Thursday November 10
********************************************************
* *
* No abstract was available for this presentation. *
* Below is a short biography of the speaker. *
* *
********************************************************
John Dixon is an educational writer and consultant from London,
England, who has been a teacher in an inner-city school in London
as well as a Senior Lecturer in a teacher training college at Leeds.
Dixon is the author of "Growth through English", the major report of
the Anglo-American Dartmouth Seminar in 1966. His writing since then
has included anthologies for school use and a number of books on the
teaching of writing, the most recent of which is "Writing Narrative -
and Beyond".
For many years a member of and then chair of The Schools Council
Committee on English, Dixon has directed research and studies on
Teaching English to the School Leaving Age and has investigated
the effect of the questions asked on university examinations on
the teaching of literature in schools.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 88 16:52 EST
From: Marc Vilain <MVILAIN@G.BBN.COM>
Subject: BBN AI/Education Seminar: Susanne Lajoie
BBN Science Development Program
AI Seminar Series Lecture
SHERLOCK: A COACHED PRACTICE ENVIRONMENT
FOR AN ELECTRONICS TROUBLESHOOTING JOB
Susanne P. Lajoie
Learning Research and Development Center,
University of Pittsburgh
(LAJOIE%LRDCA@Vms.Cis.Pittsburgh.Edu)
BBN Labs
10 Moulton Street
2nd floor large conference room
10:30 am, Tuesday November 15
Sherlock is a computer-based practice environment for teaching
first-term airmen avionics troubleshooting skills. Sherlock's
instructional goals were determined by a cognitive task analysis of
skill differences in this domain. The predominant instructional
strategy is to support holistic practice of troubleshooting rather
than train discrete knowledge skills. Instruction is based on complex
decision graphs of skilled and less skilled plans and actions for each
troubleshooting problem. As a trainee works through a problem Sherlock
observes the quality of decisions the trainee makes and uses that
information to provide the level of hint explicitness necessary at
particular decision points in the problem. In this way, specific
competency building is situated within the troubleshooting context and
is sharpened to the extent that satisfies each individual's needs.
Sherlock was field tested in a controlled study that compared tutored
trainees with a control group that received no extra training other than
"on-the-job" experience. Pre and post tests of verbal troubleshooting
indicated that the tutored group performed better than the control group
on post tests of troubleshooting proficiency. Not only were more
problems solved but there were several indications of emerging
competence over the course of tutoring that demonstrated that trainees
were becoming more "expert-like" in the overall troubleshooting process.
In an independent evaluation the Air Force found the Sherlock treatment
to be equivalent to 47-51 months of "on the job" experience.
Enhancements have been added to Sherlock that could increase its
effectiveness even more. An explicit articulation of expert and
student problem solving traces now exists that could facilitate the
comparison process of different levels of expertise. At the completion
of each problem trainees will be able to interrogate the trace of the
expert problem solution and see why an expert would make a particular
move as well as see the mental models used by an expert to test
different paths in the problem space.
-----
This research was made possible through the combined efforts of the
following individuals: Alan Lesgold, Jaya Bajpayee, Marilyn Bunzo,
Gary Eggan, Linda Greenberg, Debra Logan, Thomas McGinnis, Cassandra
Stanley, Arlene Weiner, Richard Wolf, and Laurie Yengo, as well as
researchers at AFHRL Brooks, and the Air Force personnel that made our
study possible.
-------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 88 09:50 EST
From: Kent Wittenburg <HI.WITTENBURG@MCC.COM>
Subject: Generation And Recognition Of Affixational Morphology
HUMAN INTERFACE LAB SEMINAR
John Bear, IBM Germany and SRI International
GENERATION AND RECOGNITION OF AFFIXATIONAL MORPHOLOGY
Abstract: A major contribution to computational morphology
in recent years has come from a two-level finite state ap-
proach to the analysis and generation of the morphology
of natural languages. The source for this approach is
Kimmo Koskenniemi's dissertation work in Finland. Many
others, including Lauri Karttunen, Ron Kaplan, and Mar-
tin Kay of Xerox PARC have elaborated on the original
model. The Kimmo approach is characterized by a phono-
logical rule component based on finite-state transduction
where lexical and surface levels represent the two tapes of
the transducer. A second level of information is mor-
phosyntactic information where, for example, one would state
that a language such as English allows plural affixes to
follow noun roots but not verbs. In the Kimmo model, mor-
phosyntactic information is stated as a set of continuation
classes, again a finite state model. In this talk it will
be argued that the morphosyntactic component is better
represented as a unification grammar. The particular imple-
mentation of the author's has used a unification grammar
for the morphosyntax component similar to the PATR
system developed at SRI. A second extension of the
author's to the original Kimmo system involves incor-
porating the negative rule features into the pho-
nological rule interpreter. The resulting system can be
made to do generation and recognition of words using the
same grammars.
Where: Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation
Balcones Research Center
3500 West Balcones Center Drive
HI Conference Room - 2.806
When: Friday, November 11, 1:30 P.M.
Host: Kent Wittenburg, Kent@mcc.com
-------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 88 11:38 EST
From: Emma Pease <emma@csli>
Subject: From CSLI Calendar, November 10, 4:8
NEXT WEEK'S TINLUNCH
Reading: "E-Type Pronouns in 1987"
by Irene Heim
Discussion led by Fernando Pereira
(pereira@ai.sri.com)
November 17
We will discuss Irene Heim's draft "E-Type pronouns in 1987." This
paper considers the question of whether there are good reasons to
prefer DRT or situation-theoretic treatments of bound anaphora to an
older approach, due to Evans, Cooper, and others, for which she coins
the term "E-type analysis." In an E-type analysis, a pronoun is
represented in LF as a term of the form f(v1,...,vn) where f is a
function made salient in the context and the vi are variables
associated to quantified expressions on which the pronoun depends.
Farmers, donkeys, paychecks, sage plants, spare pawns, and other
famous characters of semantics play excellent roles in a plot with
many unexpected turns.
____________
NEXT WEEK'S CSLI SEMINAR
The Resolution Problem for Natural-Language Processing
Weeks 8: Some Aspects of the Connectionist Approach
to Ambiguity Resolution
David Rumelhart
(der@psych.stanford.edu)
November 17
I will try to sketch the "connectionist program" for linguistic
information processing. In particular, I will challenge the idea of a
fixed lexicon and rather suggest how "word meanings" might be
"synthesized" as required by the contexts in which they occur. I will
offer slightly different instantiations of this idea---one of them
primarily due to Kowamoto and one due to McClelland and St. John. I
will also, time permitting, sketch the rather different connectionist
approach represented by the work of Gary Cottrel (among others).
____________
SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS FORUM
Logic and Information in Symbolic Systems
Jon Barwise and John Etchemendy
Friday, 11 November, 3:15
Sweet Hall, room 026 (basement)
Many cognitive scientists, though not all, take cognition to be
intrinsically symbolic. In particular, they view inference as symbol
manipulation. However, another view is that inference is the
extraction of information. How do these two views fit together?
The two of us are currently engaged in a project with SSP major
Alan Bush to build a computer system, Hyperproof, that allows the user
to reason by manipulating information, not symbols. The question is,
how can one get one's hands on information? To find out, come to our
talk.
Next week, 18 November, the Symbolic Systems Internship Forum will
be held: in it, each student and faculty sponsor will discuss how the
summer project went. This forum is open to the public and will be of
special interest to: (1) students interested in obtaining Symbolic
Systems Internships and (2) faculty interested in having interns.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 19:46 EST
From: Emma Pease <emma@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: From CSLI Calendar, November 17, 4:9
NEXT CSLI SEMINAR
The Resolution Problem for Natural-Language Processing
Week 9: Interpretation as Abduction
Jerry Hobbs
(hobbs@ai.sri.com)
December 1
We will return to a discussion of knowledge-based AI approaches to the
resolution problem, and in particular to an approach using a scheme
for abductive inference developed in the TACITUS project at SRI. It
will be argued that to interpret a text, one must prove the logical
form of the text from what is already mutually known, merging
redundancies where possible and making assumptions where necessary.
It will be shown how the problems of, among others, reference,
ambiguity, and metonymy can be addressed with this method. This
approach, in addition, suggests an elegant and thorough integration of
syntax, semantics, and pragmatics---one moreover that works for
integration and generation both. This will be described, and its
significance for modularity will be discussed.
____________
STASS SEMINAR
Multimodal, Information-based Inference
Jon Barwise, Alan Bush, and John Etchemendy
(barwise@csli.stanford.edu,
bush@csli.stanford.edu, etch@csli.stanford.edu)
Cordura Conference Room
December 1, 4:00-5:30
We will talk about our work designing an inference system that allows
the direct manipulation of information provided via different
modalities (e.g., visual and sentential). We will demonstrate a
mock-up of a program we are developing to teach this approach to
inference.
Time and place subject to change due to the availablity of equipment.
____________
PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT TALK
"Unless"---Norms and Default Reasoning
Professor Irina Gerasimov
Institute of Philosophy
Soviet Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Thursday, 17 November, 4:15 p.m.
Ventura Seminar Room
____________
SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS FORUM
Symbolic Systems Internship Forum
Friday, 18 November, 3:15
Bldg. 60:62N
In the Symbolic Systems Internship Forum, each student and faculty
sponsor will discuss how the summer project went. This forum is open
to the public and will be of special interest to: (1) students
interested in obtaining Symbolic Systems Internships and (2) faculty
interested in having interns.
____________
CSLI TALK
External and Internal Logics
Professor Vladimir Smirnov
Institute of Philosophy
Soviet Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Sponsored by
Department of Philosophy, CSLI, and IMSSS
Tuesday, 22 November, 4:15 p.m.
Ventura Seminar Room
Tea will be held at 3:45 in the Ventura Lounge
____________
ANNOUNCEMENT
The Stanford Department of Philosophy announces a new special program
within their Ph.D. program: Philosophy and Symbolic Systems. The
program is designed to allow students to do interdisciplinary
coursework and research in the area of symbolic systems. For more
information, contact the philosophy department (723-2547) or Jon
Barwise (barwise@csli.stanford.edu).
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 88 17:40 EST
From: Marc Vilain <MVILAIN@G.BBN.COM>
Subject: BBN AI Seminar: Peter F. Patel-Schneider
BBN Science Development Program
AI Seminar Series Lecture
COMPLEXITY AND DECIDABILITY OF TERMINOLOGICAL LOGICS
Peter F. Patel-Schneider
AI Principles Research Department
AT&T Bell Laboratories
(pfps@allegra.att.com)
BBN Labs
10 Moulton Street
2nd floor large conference room
10:30 am, Tuesday November 29
Terminological Logics are important formalisms for representing
knowledge about concepts and objects, and are attractive for use in
Knowledge Representation systems. However, Terminological Logics with
reasonable expressive power have poor computational properties, a fact
which has restricted their use and utility in Knowledge Representation
systems. This talk gives a brief description of Terminological Logics,
presents some results concerning their tractability and decidability,
and discusses the role of Terminological Logics in Knowledge
Representation systems.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 88 23:49 EST
From: ERIC Y.H. TSUI <munnari!aragorn.oz.au!eric@uunet.UU.NET>
Subject: Conceptual Graphs Workshop '89 (Second call for papers)
Dear Colleague,
Last year, the second Annual Conference on conceptual graphs was organised by
Jean Fargues at the IBM Paris Scientific Center.
In 1989, I shall organise the Annual Conference on conceptual graphs at
Deakin University on the 9th and 10th of March, 1989.
I wish to invite you to attend this workshop, and I am looking forward to a
possible contribution you could propose, such as a 30 minutes presentation
with some handouts or an article. If you are interested in attending,
please notify
Professor Brian J. Garner
Division of Computing and Mathematics
Deakin University
Geelong, Victoria 3217
Australia
Phone: 61 52 471 383
Telex: DUNIV AA35625
FAX: 61 52 442 777
Email: brian@aragorn.oz (CSNET)
Expenses will be the responsibility of the participants but there is no special
fee for attending the workshop. I am looking forward to your participation and
possible contribution.
Brian J. Garner
Professor of Computing
Deakin University
Geelong, Victoria 3217
AUSTRALIA
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 88 21:55 EST
From: Ron Loui <loui@wucs1.wustl.edu>
Subject: ai talk abstracts
COMPUTER SCIENCE COLLOQUIUM
Washington University
St. Louis
2 December 1988
Planning and Plan Execution
Mark Drummond
NASA Ames
We are given a table on which to place three blocks (A, B, and C). We begin
in a state where all the blocks are available for placement; there is also an
unspecified means of transporting each block to its target location on the
table. We might imagine that there are an unlimited number of
interaction-free robot arms, or that each block may be levitated into place
once it is available. The exact means for moving the blocks does not matter:
given that a block is available it may be placed. The only constraint is that
B cannot be placed last. We call this the "B-not-last" problem.
We must produce a plan which is as flexible as possible. If a block can be
placed then our plan must so instruct the agent. If a block cannot be placed
according to the constraints then our plan must prevent the agent from
attempting to place the block. The agent must never lock up in a state from
which no progress is possible. This would happen, for instance, if A were on
the table, and C arrived and was placed. B could then not be placed last.
It takes four totally ordered plans or three partially ordered plans to deal
with the B-not-last problem. In either representation there is no one plan
that can be given to the assembly agent which does not overly commit to a
specific assembly strategy. Disjunction is not the only problem. Actions
will often fail to live up to the planner's expectations. An approach based
on relevancy analysis is needed, where actions are given in terms of the
conditions under which their performance is appropriate. The problem is even
harder when there can be parallel actions.
Our approach uses a modified Condition/Event system (Drummond, 1986a,b) as a
causal theory of the application domain. The C/E system is amenable to direct
execution by an agent, and can be viewed as a nondeterministic control
program. For every choice point in the projection, we synthesize a "situated
control rule" that characterizes the conditions under which action execution
is appropriate. This can be viewed as a generalization of STRIPS' algorithm
for building triangle tables from plan sequences (Nilsson, 1984).
________________________________________________________________________________
5 December 1988
Coping with Computational Complexity in Medical Diagnostic Systems
Gregory Cooper
Stanford University/Knowledge Systems Laboratory
Probabilistic networks will be introduced as a representation for medical
diagnostic knowledge. The computational complexity of using general
probabilistic networks for diagnosis will be shown to be NP-hard. Diagnosis
using several important subclasses of these networks will be shown to be
NP-hard as well. We then will focus on some of the approximation methods
under development for performing diagnostic inference. In particular, we will
discuss algorithms being developed for performing diagnostic inference using a
probabilistic version of the INTERNIST/QMR knowledge base.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Computation and Inference Under Scarce Resources
Eric Horvitz
Stanford University
Knowledge Systems Laboratory
I will describe research on Protos, a project focused on reasoning and
representation under resource constraints. The work has centered on building
a model of computational rationality through the development of flexible
approximation methods and the application of reflective decision-theoretic
control of reasoning. The techniques developed can be important for providing
effective computation in high-stakes and complex domains such as medical
decision making. First, work will be described on the decision-theoretic
control of problem solving for solving classical computational tasks under
varying, uncertain, and scarce resources. After, I will focus on
decision-theoretic reasoning under resource constraints. I will present work
on the characterization of partial results generated by alternative
approximation methods. The expected value of computation will be introduced
and applied to the selection and control of probabilistic inference. Plans
for extending the work to inference in a large internal-medicine knowledge
base will be described. Finally, I extend the techniques beyond the tradeoff
between computation time and quality of computational results to explore
issues surrounding complex reasoning under cognitive constraints.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 88 14:24 EST
From: William J. Rapaport <rapaport@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Subject: SUNY Buffalo Cog Sci: Nakhimovsky
UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
GRADUATE GROUP IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE
PRESENTS
ALEXANDER NAKHIMOVSKY
Department of Computer Science
Colgate University
GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES AND SHAPES OF EVENTS
Tuesday, December 13, 1988
4:30 P.M.
280 Park Hall, Amherst Campus
This talk traces recurrent patterns in two linguistic and two ontologi-
cal domains: (1) grammatical categories of the noun, (2) grammatical
categories of the verb, (3) shapes of visually perceived objects, and
(4) aspectual classes of events. Correspondences between noun
categories and visual properties of objects are shown by comparing the
semantics of noun classifiers in classifier languages with some computa-
tional objects and processes of early and late vision.
Among grammatical categories of the verb, only those having to do with
aspect are discussed, and three kinds of phenomena identified: the
perfective-imperfective distinction, corresponding to the presence vs.
absence of a contour, at a given scale, in the object domain (and thus
to the count-mass distinction in the noun-categories domain); the aspec-
tual types of verb meanings (a.k.a. Aktionsarten); and coersion, or
nesting, of aspectual types. Unlike previous treatments, a distinction
is drawn betweem aspectual coersion within the word (i.e., in word for-
mation and inflection) and aspectual coersion above the word level, by
verb arguments and adverbial modifiers. This makes it possible to
define the notion of an aspectual classifier and (on analogy with noun-
classifier languages) the notion of an aspectual language. Several pro-
perties of aspectual languages are identified, and a comparison is made
between the ways aspectual distinctions are expressed in aspectual
languages (e.g., Slavic languages), predominantly nominal languages
(e.g., Finnish, Hungarian), and a weakly typed language like English.
The similarities between the object-noun domains and the event-verb
domains point to a need for topological (rather than logical) represen-
tations for aspectual classes, representations that could support the
notions of connectedness, boundary, and continuous function. One such
representation is presented and shown to explain several facts about
aspectual classes. Tentative proposals are made toward defining the
notion of an ``aspectually possible word''. In conclusion, I discuss
the implications of the presented material for the problem of naturalis-
tic explanation in linguistics and the modularity hypothesis.
There will be an evening discussion at Stuart Shapiro's house,
112 Park Ledge Drive, Snyder, at 8:15 P.M.
Contact Bill Rapaport, Dept. of Computer Science, 673-3193, for further details.
------------------------------
End of NL-KR Digest
*******************