Contrary to many prevailing approaches to knowledge acquisition, Laps, our expert-interviewing software, begins by soliciting cases from the expert, but it does not end there. Its uniqueness lies in the fact that it interweaves knowledge gathering, organizing, and testing. Laps begins with a case in the form of a sample solution path elicited from the domain expert. This sample solution path is refined by a process called dechunking, which facilitates finding a model of the expert's reasoning process. The model guides the determination of the structure of alternatives tables at an effective level of abstraction. Once these tables have been set up, the expert is able to produce row after row on his own until a complete rule base is built. A rule generator currently produces rules in Clips or M.1 syntax.

On 15-16 November 1989, I attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Industrial Liaison Program entitled "Networks and Learning." The topic was neural networks, their power, potential, and promise. A dozen distinguished professors and researchers presented informative and entertaining talks to an audience of technically minded business executives and industrial researchers who subscribe to MIT's popular series of symposia offered through their Industrial Liaison Program. This informal report encapsulates the two-day event with a brief summary of each talk.

For our purposes, the goal is to make robots that are as humanlike as possible. Now the question becomes, Could we develop these systems to the point where x/h and The question of whether a computer deep interconnections among mind x/r were used interchangeably. In this can think like a person is once again and body are the crux of the issue. Somewhat to my surprise, Two basic lines of reasoning are thing when we said that Mary or R2D2 this philosophical question used to support the notion that computers understands Proust or loves John. The more common x/r could equal x/h, we must look understanding.

It (McDermott 1988), and the idea of generic also helps to explicitly focus on how to go tasks and task-specific architectures (Chandrasekaran from the knowledge level to the symbol or 1983). These various proposals are program level. I call this in-between level the obviously related to each other, which makes knowledge-use level. At the knowledge-use it desirable to construct a synthesis that combines level, we focus on issues such as how the their strengths. Such a synthesis is presented overall task will be decomposed into manageable here in the form of a componential subtasks, what ordering will be imposed framework. The framework stresses modularity on the tasks, what kind of access to knowledge and consideration of the pragmatic constraints will be needed (and, consequently, what of the domain.

Jim when we want to define the class of should be justified by something Schmolze argued that if you think of people who work in specific institutions), other than the code implementing a sort of lingua franca for knowledge (2) when a concept definition the system. However, interpreting the representation, you can't be committed depends on the assertional properties two terms efficient and principled as to the difference between terminological of its instances (as with gray elephants, worst-case tractability and soundness and assertional knowledge for example), and (3) when and completeness with respect to the or even between roles and concepts.

In this issue, Luc Steels takes a new Clay Carr, Homer Chin, Aaron Cohn, overly commercial tone, for example, and insightful look at knowledgebased Michael Compton, Ajit Dingankar, an article that serves mainly to extol systems and provides a synthesis Lance Eliot, David Fogel, Tom the virtues of a commercial product. of several different approaches to Gruber, Uma Gupta, Larry Hall, Jim Second, the article should be well analyzing expertise. It's a long article Hightower, Dwight Johnson, Bob written. We don't have the editorial but, in my opinion, an important Joyce, Murali Krishnamurthi, John staff to do extensive rewriting. I recommend it to anyone with Kunz, Douglas Leyh, Jim MacDonald, and perhaps, unfortunately, an interest in knowledge-level analysis Brigitte Maitre, Robert Newstadt, we rarely publish manuscripts of expert systems. On the same Matthew Realff, Jeff Schlimmer, Allen submitted by non-English-speaking general topic of expert systems but Sherzer, Bob Smith, Scott Staley, Lynn authors.

This article reviews research in the development of plan generation systems. Our goal is to familiarize the reader with some of the important problems that have arisen in the design of planning systems and to discuss some of the many solutions that have been developed in the over 30 years of research in this area. In this article, we broadly cover the major ideas in the field of AI planning and show the direction in which some current research is going. We define some of the terms commonly used in the planning literature, describe some of the basic issues coming from the design of planning systems, and survey results in the area. Because such tasks are virtually never ending, and thus, any finite document must be incomplete, we provide references to connect each idea to the appropriate literature and allow readers access to the work most relevant to their own research or applications.

This article examines the near-term impact of expert system technology on work and the organization. First, an approach is taken for forecasting the likely extent of the diffusion, or success, of the technology. Next, the case of advanced manufacturing technologies and their effects is considered. From this analysis, a framework is constructed for viewing the impact of these technologies -- and technologies in general -- as a function of the technology itself; market realities; and personal, organizational, and societal values and policy choices. Two scenarios are proposed with respect to the application of this framework to expert systems. The first concludes that expert systems will have little impact on the nature of work and the organization. The second scenario posits that expert system diffusion will be pulled by, and will be a contributing factor toward, the evolution of the lean, flexible, knowledge-intensive, postindustrial organization.

If classical planners are ever to automatically plan the actions of the smart machines, particularly robots for the automatic assembly of industrial objects, then they will have to know much more about geometry and topology as well as sensing. Consider that the simple act of changing an object's grasp -- the change might be necessitated by the nature of some assembly goal -- involves the interaction of the geometries of the grasping device and the object if the change is to occur without a collision between the device and the object. Of course, one could ask, Could geometric considerations be divorced from the highly developed symbolic-level planning? That is, could we first synthesize a symbolic plan and then plug in the geometry for the execution of the actions? Experience has shown the answer to, unfortunately, be a big no.

High-level robotic assembly planning is concerned with how bodies fit together and how spatial relationships among bodies are established over time. To generate an assembly task specification for robots, it is necessary to represent the geometric shapes of the assembly components in a computational form. One of the principal aspects of shape representation that is relevant for assembly tasks is the symmetry of the shape. Group theory is the standard mathematical tool for describing symmetry. The interaction between algebra and geometry within a group theoretic framework has provided us with a unified computational treatment of reasoning about how parts with multiple contacting features fit together.