K3 Th is a statement of facts and theories relevant to all the ei.

The problem we consider in this paper is that of discovering formal rules which will enable us to decide when a question posed in English can be answered on the basis of one or more declarative English sentences. To illustrate how this may be done in very simple cases we give rules which translate certain declarative sentences and questions involving the quantifiers'some', 'every', 'any', and'no' into a modified first-order predicate calculus, and answer the questions by comparing their translated forms with those of the declaratives. We suggest that in order to capture the meanings of more complex sentences it will be necessary to go beyond the first-order predicate calculus, to a notation in which the scope of words other than quantifiers and negations is clearly indicated. We conclude by describing a notational form for connected sentences, which seems to be a natural extension of Chomsky's'deep structures'. INTRODUCTION In this paper we shall consider the problem of when an English sentence, or a series of sentences, provides enough information to answer a question, also posed in English.

K.A.PATON 411 24 Centromere finding: some shape descriptors for small chromosome outlines.

K.A.PATON 411 24 Centromere finding: some shape descriptors for small chromosome outlines.

Editors' note The essay by Alan Turing, which we reproduce here, was written in September 1947, when the world's first stored-program digital computers, to a significant degree his own conceptual creation, were about to become operational. The paper was submitted in 1948 to the National Physical Laboratory, where Turing was then employed, as a report on his year's sabbatical leave which he had spent at Cambridge. During the same period Turing achieved his demonstration of the unsolvability of the word problem for semi-groups with cancellation. A condensed version is to appear in the Collected Works of A.M.Turing which is forthcoming under Dr Gandy's editorship. We also thank Mr Michael Woodger, who incidentally helped Turing finish it by drawing the original diagrams, for an unforgettable account of the furore created by Turing at N.P.L. with his prognostications of intelligent machinery: 'Turing is going to infest the countryside' some declared'with a robot which will live on twigs and scrap iron!' The anticipation of the notion of a sub-routine on page 21 and of the device of doing machine problem-solving via theorem-proving algorithms (p. Abstract The possible ways in which machinery might be made to show intelligent behaviour are discussed. The analogy with the human brain is used as a guiding principle. It is pointed out that the potentialities of the human intelligence can only be realized if suitable education is provided. The investigation mainly centres round an analogous teaching process applied to machines. The idea of an unorganized machine is defined, and it is suggested that the infant human cortex is of this nature. Simple examples of such machines are given, and their education by means of rewards and punishments is discussed. I propose to investigate the question as to whether it is possible for machinery to show intelligent behaviour. It is usually assumed without argument that it is not possible. Common catch phrases such as'acting like a machine', 'purely mechanical behaviour' reveal this common attitude. It is not difficult to see why such an attitude should have arisen. Some of the reasons are: (a) An unwillingness to admit the possibility that mankind can have any rivals in intellectual power. This occurs as much amongst intellectual people as amongst others: they have more to lose. Those who admit the possibility all agree that its realization would be very disagreeable.

G.R.KIss 155 11 Will seeing machines have illusions?

K.A.PATON 411 24 Centromere finding: some shape descriptors for small chromosome outlines.

In the course of the discussion on Reynolds' (1970) paper in this volume, it became apparent that some of our work was related to his, and we therefore present it here. R.J.Popplestone originated the idea that generalizations and least generalizations of literals existed and would be useful when looking for methods of induction. We refer the reader to his paper in this volume for an account of some of his methods (Popplestone 1970). Generalizations of clauses can also be of interest. Consider the following induction: The result of heating this bit of iron to 419 C was that it melted. The result of heating that bit of iron-to 419 C was that it melted. The result of heating any bit of iron to 419 C is that it melts.

MARK I DEVICE A minimal:robot,Icnown as Freddy, has been constructed with the aim of connecting a usable device on-line to the Department's lc L 4130, under the Multi-Pop time-sharing system, and discovering the snags. (See figure 1). Freddy Mark 1 and his world Various technical problems arise when such a device runs free. It is much easier to anchor it and allow it to push its world about. Our present world is a three-foot diameter sandwich of hardboard and polystyrene which is light and rigid. Provided that the weights of robot and slab are chosen correctly, a wide range of movements is possible.

Of course, it is not at all obvious that (5) and (1) describe the same function. In order to prove that they do, however, it is necessary only to check that the result of applying (5) to an arbitrary object z is the same as the result of applying (1) to z. In fact, we have (xx(sQRT((rimEs x)((pLus x)oNE)))z) (sQRT((TimEs z)((pLus z)oNE))) when (1) is applied to z.