Technically the underlying optimization development of online commerce forced problem is either NP or P-space businesses to question the week-plus supply-chain complete (depending on the details of the planning cycles that had been domain). Furthermore, the problem mixes the norm. Finally, the year 2000 (Y2K) a dozen or so classic optimization problems problem caused an across-the-board from AI and operations research (OR), replacement of enterprise software, allowing and much of the expected savings from many businesses to update their global supply-chain optimization are lost if approach to supply-chain planning. The end result of all of these factors was This article describes our experience a huge upswing in demand for supplychain from four years of solving supply-chain planning tools from i2 Technologies planning and optimization problems and other vendors. When I joined i2 in across industries, and some of the lessons 1996 as optimization architect, the company we learned.

Extempo Systems, Inc. was founded in 1995 to commercialize intelligent characters. Our team built innovative software and novel applications for several markets. We had some early-adopting customers during the Internet boom, but the company was not quite able to survive the significant downturn in corporate IT spending when the bubble burst. In 2004, Extempo ceased operations and was formally liquidated. Although our commercial venture failed, we learned a lot, had fun, and are trying again with a new company. To others who aspire to commercialize their AI technology, I say: ";;Take a chance!";;

In fact, DARPA, which funded the project, ways. Elves) (Scerri, Pynadath, and Tambe 2002; Finally, we will present some lessons Pynadath and Tambe 2003) and required learned and recent research that was motivated detailed information about the calendars by our experiences in deploying the of people using the system. Thus, we decided to deploy a new application of the Electric The Travel Elves introduced two major Elves, called the Travel Elves. This application advantages over traditional approaches to appeared to be ideal for wider deployment travel planning. First, the Travel Elves provided since it could be hosted entirely outside an interactive approach to making an organization and communication travel plans in which all of the data could be performed over wireless devices, required to make informed choices is such as cellular telephones. For example, when The mission of the Travel Elves (Ambite deciding whether to park at the airport or et al. 2002, Knoblock 2004) was to facilitate take a taxi, the system compares the cost planning a trip and to ensure that the of parking and the cost of a taxi given other resulting travel plan would execute selections, such as the airport, the specific smoothly. Initial deployment of the Travel parking lot, and the starting location Elves at DARPA went smoothly.

This was a large applied research effort that presented many opportunities for unusual experiences. In one such experience, I was called in, at the last minute, to help improve our ALV proposal. The proposal was a 300-page document that segued smoothly from problem description to corporate capabilities and managerial plan, omitting any mention of technical approach. This taught me a rule of thumb I have seen validated many times: the larger the project (in dollars and scope), the poorer the technical proposal. In a second experience, I was demonstrating a dynamic programming algorithm at a quarterly review.

It seemed miraculous at the time; a situated automaton that knew things without needing any models. However, I thought of it as (sensor-driven) feedback control, versus (plan driven, eyes shut) feed-forward control. I then used Mike Georgeff's procedural reasoning system (PRS) to make Flakey not only drive but navigate an office building. In some respects this project succeeded: the robot's "domain knowledge" was nothing more than a static connection graph--no distances to drive, no widths of halls or doorways, no a priori obstacles--such information was acquired en route from sensory input. In other respects, however, progress was unsatisfying.

Software personal assistants continue to be a topic of significant research interest. This article outlines some of the important lessons learned from a successfully-deployed team of personal assistant agents (Electric Elves) in an office environment. In the Electric Elves project, a team of almost a dozen personal assistant agents were continually active for seven months. Each elf (agent) represented one person and assisted in daily activities in an actual office environment. This project led to several important observations about privacy, adjustable autonomy, and social norms in office environments. In addition to outlining some of the key lessons learned we outline our continued research to address some of the concerns raised.

On March 27, 2006, I gave a light-hearted and occasionally bittersweet presentation on “Whatever Happened to AI?” at the Stanford Spring Symposium presentation – to a lively audience of active AI researchers and formerly-active ones (whose current inaction could be variously ascribed to their having aged, reformed, given up, redefined the problem, etc.)  This article is a brief chronicling of that talk, and I entreat the reader to take it in that spirit: a textual snapshot of a discussion with friends and colleagues, rather than a scholarly article. I begin by whining about the Turing Test, but only for a thankfully brief bit, and then get down to my top-10 list of factors that have retarded progress in our field, that have delayed the emergence of a true strong AI.

In response, AI the poster's size, artistic constraints, Magazine has developed a poster to and diversity of perspectives, not all help educate students, faculty, and the suggestions could be included in the public about AI and to spur them to final design, but all were greatly appreciated. I also thank AAAI, the National The poster's design was based on Science Foundation, Microsoft input from experts on how to convey Research, and Yahoo!Research for their key aspects of AI and to capture the generous support. The are included at the poster web design does not attempt the impossible site, www.aaai.org/AILandscape.php. Nor does it present a list of new support of the poster project, especially advances, which would soon become Mike Hamilton, whose many contributions obsolete. Instead, it presents a snapshot played a key role throughout. of a few aspects of AI selected to catalyze interest and to prompt viewers The poster was designed by James to find out more by exploring AAAI Gary, of Brooklyn, New York.

This special issue of AI Magazine is dedicated to the proposition that problems populate the path to insight, implying the experiences and lessons learned should be shared.

Real-time heuristic search is a challenging type of agent-centered search because the agent's planning time per action is bounded by a constant independent of problem size. A common problem that imposes such restrictions is pathfinding in modern computer games where a large number of units must plan their paths simultaneously over large maps. Common search algorithms (e.g., A*, IDA*, D*, ARA*, AD*) are inherently not real-time and may lose completeness when a constant bound is imposed on per-action planning time. Real-time search algorithms retain completeness but frequently produce unacceptably suboptimal solutions. In this paper, we extend classic and modern real-time search algorithms with an automated mechanism for dynamic depth and subgoal selection. The new algorithms remain real-time and complete. On large computer game maps, they find paths within 7% of optimal while on average expanding roughly a single state per action. This is nearly a three-fold improvement in suboptimality over the existing state-of-the-art algorithms and, at the same time, a 15-fold improvement in the amount of planning per action.