The NLC system has grown out of an earlier series of studies on the "autoprogrammer" (Biermann[6]) and bears much resemblance to it. Program synthesis in both the current and the previous systems is based upon example calculations done by the user on displayed data structures. In the current system, the example is done in restricted English with all its power, which is a dramatic departure from the earlier approach, which simply involved pointing with a light pen. However, it is expected that many of the features from the autoprogrammer, such as "continue" and "automatic indexing", will transfer quite naturally into NLC. This paper emphasizes the natural language aspects of the system, while other reports deal with some of the additional automatic programming features. The relationship of NLC to other research in natural language processing is discussed in a later section. The next section presents an overview of NLC, after which subsequent sections discuss scanning, syntactic and semantic processing, and interpretation of commands in the "matrix computer". The next two sections discuss the processing of flow-of-control commands and the level of behavior achieved by the system. The final sections include a discussion of related research and conclusions.

The Hearsay-H speech-understanding system (SUS) developed at Carnegie-Mellon University recognizes connected speech in a 1000-word vocabulary with correct interpretations for 90 percent of test sentences. Its basic methodology involves the application of symbolic reasoning as an aid to signal processing. A marriage of general artificial intelligence techniques with specific acoustic and linguistic knowledge was needed to accomplish satisfactory speech-This research was supported chiefly by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency contract F44620-73- C-0074 to Carnegie-Mellon University. In addition, support for the preparation of this paper was provided by USC/ISI, Rand, and the University of Massachusetts. We gratefully acknowledge their support. Views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official opinion or policy of DARPA, the U.S. government, or any other person or agency connected with them.

"In the fall of 1978 we decided to produce a special issue of the SIGART Newsletter devoted to a survey of current knowledge representation research. We felt that there were twe useful functions such an issue could serve. First, we hoped to elicit a clear picture of how people working in this subdiscipline understand knowledge representation research, to illuminate the issues on which current research is focused, and to catalogue what approaches and techniques are currently being developed. Second -- and this is why we envisaged the issue as a survey of many different groups and projects -- we wanted to provide a document that would enable the reader to acquire at least an approximate sense of how each of the many different research endeavours around the world fit into the field as a whole. It would of course be impossible to produce a final or definitive document accomplishing these goals: rather, we hoped that this survey could initiate a continuing dialogue on issues in representation, a project for which this newsletter seems the ideal forum. It has been many months since our original decision was made, but we are finally able to present the results of that survey. Perhaps more than anything else, it has emerged as a testament to an astounding range and variety of opinions held by many different people in many different places. The following few pages are intended as an introduction to the survey as a whole, and to this issue of the newsletter. We will briefly summarize the form that the survey took, discuss the strategies we followed in analyzing and tabulating responses, briefly review the overall sense we received from the answers that were submitted, and discuss various criticisms which were submitted along with the responses. The remainder of the volume has been designed to be roughly self-explanatory at each point, so that one may dip into it at different places at will. Certain conventions, however, particularly regarding indexing and tabulating, will also be explained in the remainder of this introduction." ACM SIGART Newsletter No. 70.

To choose their actions, reasoning programs must be able to make assumptions and subsequently revise their beliefs when discoveries contradict these assumptions. The Truth Maintenance System (TMS) is a problem solver subsystem for performing these functions by recording and maintaining the reasons for program beliefs. Such recorded reasons are useful in constructing explanations of program actions and in guiding the course of action of a problem solver. This paper describes (1) the representations and structure of the TMS, (2) the mechanisms used to revise the current set of beliefs, (3) how dependency-directed backtracking changes the current set of assumptions, (4) techniques for summarizing explanations of beliefs, (5) how to organize problem solvers into "dialectically arguing" modules, (6) how to revise models of the belief systems of others, and (7) methods for embedding control structures in patterns of assumptions. We stress the need of problem solvers to choose between alternative systems of beliefs, and outline a mechanism by which a problem solver can employ rules guiding choices of what to believe, what to want, and what to do.Artificial Intelligence 12(3):231-272

Our purpose in studying natural language understanding in conjunction with problem solving is to bring together the constraints of what formal representation can actually be obtained with the question of what knowledge is required in order to solve a wide range of problems in a semantically rich domain. We believe that these issues cannot sensibly be tackled in isolation. In practical terms we have had the benefits of an increased awareness of common problems in both areas and a realisation that some of our techniques are applicable to both the control of inference and the control of parsing. Early work on solving mathematical problems stated in natural language was done by Bobrow (STUDENT - (i]) and Chamiak (CARPS - [5]). However the rudimentary parsing and simple semantic structures used by Bobrow and Charniak are inadequate for any but the easiest problems. Our intention has been to build on B/RG Chris This work was supported by SRC grant number 94493 and an SRC research studentship for Mellish.

Summary of Ph.D. dissertation, Computer Science Dept., Stanford University (1979)."TEIRESIAS is a program designed to provide assistance on the task of building knowledge-based systems. It facilitates the interactive transfer of knowledge from a human expert to the system, in a high level dialog conducted in a restricted subset of natural language. This paper explores an example of TEIRESIAS in operation and demonstrates how it guides the acquisition of new inference rules. The concept of meta-level knowledge is described and illustrations given of its utility in knowledge acquisition and its contribution to the more general issues of creating an intelligent program."Also in:Readings in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Webber, Bonnie Lynn and Nils J. Nilsson, Palo Alto, CA: Tioga Publishing Co., 1981.Orig. in IJCAI-77, vol.1, pp. 321 ff. Preprint in Stanford HPP Report #HPP-77-9.See also: Artificial Intelligence, 12[#2]:409-427. Readings in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Webber, Bonnie Lynn and Nils J. Nilsson, Palo Alto, CA: Tioga Publishing Co., 1981

Searches are conducted whenever selection cannot be done effectively by computing a function of some state description of the competing alternatives.

I will remain Ion8 and deeply indebted to Herb Simon, H. T. Kung, AI Newell, Jay

Frederick Hayes-Roth The RAND Corporation Using the concepts of stimulus and response frames of scheduled Knowledge source instantiations, competition among alternative responses, goals, and the desirability of a knowledge source instantiation, a general attentional control mechanism is developed. This general focusing mechanism facilitates the experimental evaluation of a variety of specific attentional control policies (such as best-first, bottom-up, and top-down search strategies) and allows the modular addition of specialized heuristics for the speech understanding task. Empirical results demonstrate the effectiveness of the focusing principles, and possible directions for future research are considered. INTRODUCTION The Hearsay-II (HSII) speech understanding system (Lesser, et al., 1974; Erman & Lesser, 1975; Lesser & Frman, 1977) is a complex, distributed-logic processing system. Inputs to the system are temporal sequences of sets of acoustic segments and associated hypothesized phonetic labels.

A new system for the analysis of aerial photographs of suburban areas is presented. In this system, regions are characterized by various spectral and spatial features such as brightness, color, size, shape, texture, and spatial relationships with other regions. The analysis proceeds from a global survey of the picture to the detailed analysis of specific regions. The former process extracts several kinds of characteristic regions which are supposed to include specific objects by using knowledge-free picture processing programs. In the detailed analysis, several object-detection programs perform parallel analysis of extracted characteristic regions in detail to recognize objects such as crop fields, woods, roads, and houses.