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 Stanford Ph.D. dissertation, Computer Science Dept. Stanford University (1977).Artificial Intelligence 12(2): 73-119.

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

"Computing can change our ways of thinking about many things, mathematics, biology, engineering, administrative procedures, and many more. But my main concern is that it can change our thinking about ourselves: giving us new models, metaphors, and other thinking tools to aid our efforts to fathom the mysteries of the human mind and heart. The new discipline of Artificial Intelligence is the branch of computing most directly concerned with this revolution. By giving us new, deeper, insights into some of our inner processes, it changes our thinking about ourselves. It therefore changes some of our inner processes, and so changes what we are, like all social, technological and intellectual revolutions." This book, published in 1978 by Harvester Press and Humanities Press, has been out of print for many years, and is now online, produced from a scanned in copy of the original, digitised by OCR software and made available in September 2001. Since then a number of notes and corrections have been added. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.

Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, Calif.

IJCAI 5, 196-202.

See also: Stanford Heuristic Programming Project Memo HPP-77-25Proc. IJCAI-77: Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp 1014-1029

Proc. IJCAI 77 VOL 1 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS, USA AUGUST 22 - 25 , 1977, pp. 67-76 (reprinted in RNLP: 353-362)

SRI Tech. Note 131, AI Center, SRI International, Inc., Menlo Park, Calif.