Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 5 Issue 273
AIList Digest Wednesday, 25 Nov 1987 Volume 5 : Issue 273
Today's Topics:
Seminars - Notes Toward a New Philosophy of Logic (SUNY) &
The Soar Project (ISI) &
Theories of Comparative Analysis (BBN) &
Performance in Practical Problem Solving (Bell Labs),
Conference - Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic (England) &
CMU Meeting on Metadeduction &
Prolog Benchmarking Workshop &
AI in Economics and Management
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 87 12:09:44 EST
From: rapaport@cs.Buffalo.EDU (William J. Rapaport)
Subject: Seminar - Notes Toward a New Philosophy of Logic (SUNY)
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO
BUFFALO LOGIC COLLOQUIUM
COLIN McLARTY
Department of Philosophy
Case Western Reserve University
NOTES TOWARD A NEW PHILOSOPHY OF LOGIC
Today, logic is generally conceived as, more or less, describing pure
laws of thought. But categorial logic has given an extensive, rigorous,
formalized version of the claim that logic is simply the most abstracted
aspect of concrete knowledge. In particular, different subject matters
may have different logics.
Categorial logic also urges a kind of structuralism: A subject matter
(represented by a category) is seen as being determined by the relations
to be considered among objects rather than by any specification of the
individual constitutions of the objects.
These points are illustrated by two examples. Differential geometry is
one abstract representation of the world, one subject matter, with its
own non-classical logic. Set theory is another, later, subject, with
classical logic. I discuss the way set theory was derived from geometry
in the 19th Century.
Other philosophic applications of topos theory are based on the idea of
a topos as a world in which truth varies over a range of viewpoints,
which might be the situations of situation semantics or times in tense
logic. All these considerations together argue that there is no one
logic or one fundamental structure to the world.
Wednesday, December 2, 1987
4:00 P.M.
Diefendorf 8, Main Street Campus
For further information, contact John Corcoran, (716) 636-2438.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 87 09:56:21 PST
From: Ana C. Dominguez <anad@vaxa.isi.edu>
Subject: Seminar - The Soar Project (ISI)
Date: Wednesday, November 25th
Time: 1:00pm - 3:00pm
Place: Information Sciences Institute/USC
11th Floor Large Conference Room
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina Del Rey, CA 90292-6695
The Soar Project
Current Status and Future Plans
Paul Rosenbloom
The Soar project is an interdisciplinary, multi-site, research group that is
attempting to build a system capable of general intelligent behavior. Our
long-term goal is to build a system that is capable of working on the full
range of tasks -- from highly routine to extremely difficult open-ended
problems -- and of employing the full range of problem solving, knowledge
representation, learning, and perceptual-motor capabilities required for
these tasks. In this talk I will describe the current status of the
project, including the version of the system currently implemented (Soar
4.4) and the results that have been generated to date, and describe our
research plans for the next couple of years.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 24 Nov 87 18:22:10-EST
From: Marc Vilain <MVILAIN@G.BBN.COM>
Subject: Seminar - Theories of Comparative Analysis (BBN)
BBN Science Development Program
AI Seminar Series Lecture
THEORIES OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Daniel S. Weld
MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
(WELD@REAGAN.AI.MIT.EDU)
BBN Labs
10 Moulton Street
2nd floor large conference room
10:30 am, Tuesday December 1
This talk analyzes two approaches to a central subproblem of automated
design, diagnosis, and intelligent tutoring systems: comparative
analysis. Comparative analysis may be considered an analog of
qualitative simulation. Where qualitative simulation takes a structural
model of a system and qualitatively describes its behavior over time,
comparative analysis is the problem of predicting how that behavior will
change if the underlying structure is perturbed and also explaining why
it will change.
For example, given Hooke's law as the model of a horizontal,
frictionless spring/block system, qualitative simulation might generate
a description of oscillation. Comparative analysis, on the other hand,
is the task of answering questions like: ``What would happen to the
period of oscillation if you increase the mass of the block?'' I have
implemented, tested, and proven theoretical results about two different
techniques for solving comparative analysis problems, differential
qualitative (DQ) analysis and exaggeration.
DQ analysis would answer the question above as follows: ``Since force is
inversely proportional to position, the force on the block will remain
the same when the mass is increased. But if the block is heavier, then
it won't accelerate as fast. And if it doesn't accelerate as fast, then
it will always be going slower and so will take longer to complete a
full period (assuming it travels the same distance).''
Exaggeration can also solve this problem, but it generates a completely
different answer: ``If the mass were infinite, then the block would
hardly move at all. So the period would be infinite. Thus if the mass
was increased a bit, the period would increase as well.''
Both of these techniques has advantages and limitations. DQ analysis is
proven sound, but is incomplete. It can't answer every comparative
analysis problem, but all of its answers are correct. Because
exaggeration assumes monotonicity, it is unsound; some answers could be
incorrect. Furthermore, exaggeration's use of nonstandard analysis makes
it technically involved. However, exaggeration can solve several
problems that are too complex for DQ analysis. The trick behind its
power appears to have application to all of qualitative reasoning.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 23:10:39 1987
From: dlm%research.att.com@RELAY.CS.NET
Subject: Seminar - Performance in Practical Problem Solving (Bell
Labs)
Date: November 20 (Friday)
Time: 1:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m.
Place: AT&T Bell Labs Murray Hill 3D-473
Speaker: Leo Hartman
Department of Computer Science
University of Rochester
Rochester, New York
Performance in practical problem solving
Abstract
The quantity of resources that an agent expends in solving problems in a
given domain is determined by the representations and search control
strategies that it employs. The value of individual representations or
strategies to the agent is determined by their contribution to the
resource expenditure. We argue here that in order to choose the component
representations and strategies appropriate for a particular problem domain
it is necessary to measure their contribution to the resource expenditure
on the actual problems the agent faces. This is as true for a system
designer making such choices as it is for an autonomous mechanical agent.
We present one way to measure this contribution and give an example in
which the measure is used to improve problem solving performance.
Sponsor: Henry Kautz
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 87 10:29:26 GMT
From: mcvax!ux63.bath.ac.uk!cc_is@uunet.uu.net
Subject: Conference - Workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic (England)
WORKSHOP ON META-PROGRAMMING IN LOGIC PROGRAMMING
A 3-day workshop on Meta-Programming in Logic Programming will
be held at the University of Bristol on June 22-24, 1988. The workshop
will be both small and informal. In particular, attendance will be
strictly limited to the first 60 people who register.
The workshop will cover (but not be limited to) the following
topics:
* Foundations of meta-programming
* Design and implementation of language facilities for
meta-programming
* Knowledge representation for meta-programming
* Meta-level reasoning and control
* Applications of meta-programming
Submitted papers will be refereed by a program committee
consisting of Harvey Abramson, Pat Hill, John Lloyd, Mike Rogers
and John Shepherdson. Authors should submit full papers of at most
12 A4 pages. Accepted papers will appear without revision in the
proceedings. The timetable for submission of papers is as follows:
Closing date April 15, 1988
Acceptance/rejection notification May 15, 1988
Papers should be submitted to:
John Lloyd
Department of Computer Science
University of Bristol
University Walk
Bristol BS8 1TR
U.K.
(JANET: jwl@uk.ac.bristol.compsci)
Registration forms for the workshop will be available in
January 1988. Bristol is about 120 miles due west of London.
Heathrow Airport is about 1 3/4 hours away by a direct bus service.
There is also a local airport at Bristol. Accommodation for
registrants will be booked in nearby university halls of residence.
All e-mail enquiries should be directed to (JANET:)
meta88@uk.ac.bristol
--
Mr I. W. J. Sparry Phone: +44 225 826826 x 5983
University of Bath JANET: cc_is@UK.AC.BATH.UX63
Bath BA2 7AY UUCP: seismo!mcvax!ukc!bath63!cc_is (bath63.UUCP)
England ARPA: cc_is%ux63.bath.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa
------------------------------
Date: 16 Nov 1987 10:17:49-EST (Monday)
From: DANIEL.LEIVANT%THEORY.CS.CMU.EDU@forsythe.stanford.edu
Reply-to: TheoryNet List
Subject: Conference - CMU meeting on metadeduction
[Forwarded from TheoryNet.]
Below is the schedule of a meeting that has taken place at
Carnegie Mellon University, on
METALANGUAGE AND TOOLS FOR MECHANIZING FORMAL DEDUCTIVE THEORIES
Please address requests for abstracts of talks
to jfm@k.gp.cs.cmu.edu (ARPAnet).
Friday, November 13
9:00 Using a Higher-Order Logic Programming Language to Implement
Program Transformations
Dale Miller, University of Pennsylvania
9:45 Building Proof Systems in an Extended Logic Programming Language
Amy Felty, University of Pennsylvania
10:45 The Categorical Abstract Machine, State of the Art
Pierre-Louis Curien, Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris VII
1:15 A Very Brief Look at NuPRL
Joseph Bates, Carnegie Mellon University
1:45 Reasoning about Programs that Construct Proofs
Robert Constable, Cornell University
2:30 Theorem Proving via Partial Reflection
Douglas Howe, Cornell University
3:15 MetaPrl: A Framework for Knowledge Based Media
Joseph Bates, Carnegie Mellon University
4:00 Discussion: The Role of Formal Reasoning in Software Development
5:00 Demos until 6:30
NuPRL in Wean Hall 4114 by Doug Howe
Lambda Prolog in WeH 4623 by Dale Miller, Gopalan Nadathur, and Amy Felty
Saturday, November 14
9:00 A Framework for Defining Logics
Robert Harper, Edinburgh University
9:45 The Logician's Workbench in the Ergo Support System
Frank Pfenning, Carnegie Mellon University
10:45 A Tactical Approach to Algorithm Design
Douglas Smith, Kestrel Institute
11:30 Reusing Data Structure Designs
Allen Goldberg, Kestrel Institute
1:15 Paddle: Popart's Development Language
David Wile, University of Southern California
2:00 Mechanizing Construction and Modification of Specifications
Martin Feather, University of Southern California
3:00 The TPS Theorem Proving System
Peter Andrews, Carnegie Mellon University
3:45 ONTIC: Knowledge Representation for Mathematics
David McAllester, Cornell University
4:30 Demos until 6:00
Popart and Paddle in the KBSA, Wean Hall 4114,
by David Wile and Martin Feather
The LF Proof Editor, Wean Hall 4623, by Robert Harper
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 87 15:20:20 cst
From: stevens@anl-mcs.ARPA (Rick L. Stevens)
Subject: Conference - Prolog Benchmarking Workshop
ANNOUNCING
=============
A PROLOG BENCHMARKING WORKSHOP
During the last SLP there was some concern that the benchmark programs
being quoted in the literature did not reflect real Prolog programming
practices. Now is your chance to do something about it. A workshop
on benchmarking Prolog programs will be held at The Aerospace
Corporation in Los Angeles. The main function of this workshop is to
collect and measure a large number of modern production (real
application) Prolog programs.
The workshop will last three days, and will be held sometime during
the first two weeks of February. The exact date will be selected to
enable the most people to attend. The workshop will be sponsored by
The Aerospace Corporation and is being held under the auspices of the
Association of Logic Programming. Since resources for running the
benchmarks will be limited the meeting will be open only to those who
contact the organizers.
The first half of the workshop will be spent discussing the performance
issues we wish to address, porting of code, and instrumenting of
Prolog programs and implementations. The second half will be spent
running the code and collecting and analyzing the data.
We hope to publish the results either as a widely available Technical
Report or as a special journal article in a journal such as the Journal
of Logic Programming or New Generation Computing.
Attendance at the workshop will be limited to those who either bring
an implementation of Prolog or 1,000 or more lines of "original"
Prolog source. Programs with more than 1,000 lines will certainly be
accepted. The thing we wish to guard against is toy programs that
don't reflect the serious use of the language.
Of course, we would like code that has been written recently and that
reflects the best of Prolog style. But any ``real'' Prolog application
would be acceptable. ( No code with more that 3 cuts per clause.
:-)). Hopefully those in attendance will represent a balance between
University and Commercial applications.
The code brought should be covered by a GNU type ``copyleft''. That
is unlimited distribution of unmodified sources. The object is to get
unmodified copys of programs and input data sets to as many people as
possible. The Aerospace Corporation, a non-profit organization will
distribute the benchmark suite.
We would like to have the environment set up in advance so as much time
as possible can be spent on performance analysis. To do this
we will set up a mail address where code can be e-mailed in advance.
Participants can also bring a UNIX tar tape. The computers available at
Aerospace include a Sequent, VAXes, Suns, and various types of
PCs. We will try to have as many different implementations of Prolog
available as possible.
A limited amount of financial support from the Aerospace Corporation
will be available for University attendees.
Please let us know by December 15, 1987 if you intend to attend.
If you want to attend, please send us your
name,
e-mail address,
country of citizenship,
smail address,
date, if you have a preference
if you will need financial support
date that would be best for you, and
what you'll bring.
Send responses to:
prolog-workshop@anl-mcs.arpa
If you can't get ahold of us through e-mail, you can use:
Carl Kesselman Rick Stevens
MS M1/102 Math and Computer Science Division
The Aerospace Corporation Argonne National Laboratory
P.O. Box 92957 Argonne IL 60439
Los Angeles, CA 90009-9295 (312) 972-3378
(213) 336-6691
If you have a problem with the distribution agreement, questions or
suggestions, please contact us at the above address.
Hope to see you there.
Rick Stevens Carl Kesselman
stevens@anl-mcs.arpa carl@aerospace.aero.org
Argonne National Laboratory The Aerospace Corporation
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 87 16:30:21 SST
From: Joel Loo <ISSLPL%NUSVM.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
Subject: Conference - AI in Economics and Management
+-----------------+
! CALL FOR PAPERS !
+-----------------+
2nd International Workshop
on Artificial Intelligence
in Economics and Management
11-13 January,1989
Singapore
This workshop will address research and applications of AI in the areas
of finance, banking, insurance, economics, DSS, public and private
services, OA, law, manufacturing planning, personnel and assets admini-
stration.
The techniques to be presented should include knowledge representation,
search and inference, knowledge acquisition, intelligent interfaces,
KB validation, planning procedures and task support systems.
For details contact:
Desai Narasimhalu
Institute of Systems Science
National University of Singapore
Kent Ridge, Singapore 0511
Singapore
or,
BITNET: ISSAD@NUSVM
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
