How often do you hear people use the terms "artificial intelligence" and "machine learning" interchangeably? The two are definitely related, and machine learning is actually a subset of artificial intelligence. However, as a greater number of businesses begin offering "intelligent" solutions, it becomes more vital than ever before to differentiate between these two concepts. After all, you may find yourself giving a presentation or speaking with someone who specializes in one of these fields, and you want to know what you're talking about. From cancer screenings to climate change, there are numerous applications for artificial intelligence.

Note: PDF of full volume downloadable by clicking on title above (32.8 MB). Selected individual chapters available from the links below.CONTENTSINTRODUCTORY MATERIALMATHEMATICAL FOUNDATIONS1 Program scheme equivalences and second-order logic. D. C. COOPER 32 Programs and their proofs: an algebraic approach.R. M. BURSTALL and P. J. LANDIN 173 Towards the unique decomposition of graphs. C. R. SNOW andH. I. SCOINS 45THEOREM PROVING4 Advances and problems in mechanical proof procedures. D. PRAWITZ 595 Theorem-provers combining model elimination and Tesolution.D. W. LOVELAND 736 Semantic trees in automatic theorem-proving. R. KOWALSKI andP. J. HAYES 877 A machine-oriented logic incorporating the equality relation.E. E. SIBERT 1038 Paramodulation and theorem-proving in first-order theories withequality. G. ROBINSON and L. Wos 1359 Mechanizing higher-order logic. J. A. ROBINSON 151DEDUCTIVE INFORMATION RETRIEVAL10 Theorem proving and information retrieval. J. L. DARLINGTON 17311 Theorem-proving by resolution as a basis for question-answeringsystems. C. CORDELL GREEN 183MACHINE LEARNING AND HEURISTIC PROGRAMMING12 Heuristic dendral: a program for generating explanatory hypothesesin organic chemistry. B. BUCHANAN, G. SUTHERLAND andE. A. FEIGENBAUM 20913 A chess-playing program. J. J. SCOTT 25514 Analysis of the machine chess game. I. J. GOOD 26715 PROSE—Parsing Recogniser Outputting Sentences in English.D. B. VIGOR, D. URQUHART and A. WILKINSON 27116 The organization of interaction in collectives of automata. 285V. I. VARSHAVSKY COGNITIVE PROCESSES: METHODS AND MODELS17 Steps towards a model of word selection. G. R. Kiss 31518 The game of hare and hounds and the statistical study of literaryvocabulary. S. H. STOREY and M. A. MAYBREY 33719 The holophone —recent developments. D. J. WILLSHAW andH. C. LONGUET-HIGGINS 349PATTERN RECOGNITION20 Pictorial relationships — a syntactic approach. M. B. CLOWES 36121 On the construction of an efficient feature space for optical characterrecognition. A. W. M. COOMBS 38522 Linear skeletons from square cupboards. C. J. HILDITCH 403PROBLEM-ORIENTED LANGUAGES23 Absys 1: an incremental compiler for assertions; an introduction.J. M. FOSTER and E. W. ELCOCK 423PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING INTELLIGENT ROBOTS24 Planning and generalisation in an automaton/environment system.J. E. DORAN 43325 Freddy in toyland. R. J. POPPLESTONE 45526 Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificialintelligence. J. MCCARTHY and P. J. HAYES 463INDEX 505 Machine Intelligence Workshop

Many problems in artificial intelligence involve the searching of large trees of alternative possibilities--for example, game-playing and theorem-proving. The problem of efficiently searching large trees is discussed. A new method called "dynamic ordering" is described, and the older minimax and Alpha-Beta procedures are described for comparison purposes. Performance figures are given for six variations of the game of kalah. A quantity called "depth ratio" is derived which is a measure of the efficiency of a search procedure.

The problem discussed in this paper, namely that of finding a function to satisfy a given argument-value table, is by no means new to computing science, or to mathematics. Thus, for example, the problem of fitting a curve to a set of points is a part of numerical analysis. However, I am concerned with finding a function over a non-metric space, and so my work is closer to that of Feldman et al. (1969) in what they call, 'grammatical inference' or to the automaton-synthesizing programs described by Fogel, Owens and Walsh (1966).

A robot, in order to act intelligently, must be able to reason from facts which its sensors detect to conclusions which govern its actions. This reasoning process is so central to human intelligence that it seems immediately relevant to the problems of robot design to consider its properties, how it might be analysed and imitated.

This paper is a survey and discussion of research work relevant to the task of constructing some kind of reasoning robot. The emphasis is entirely on the organization of the reasoning processes, in particular planning, rather than on hardware. In practice the reasoning would most probably be carried out within a digital computer. My objective is to clarify the relationship between some superficially rather disparate approaches to this task, and simultaneously to indicate what seem to be the key problem areas. No new experimental results are presented, but the approach to the subject which I have adopted is a consequence of earlier experimentation with a simple computer simulation of a robot (Doran 1968a, 1969).

A minimal:robot,Icnown as Freddy, has been constructed with the aim of connecting a usable device online to the Department's lc L 4130, under the Multi-Pop time-sharing system, and discovering the snags. (See figure 1). 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.

It seems most unlikely that one could in general write purely applicative Schonfmkel descriptions', like (5), of functions already known to one in some other form. Fortunately there is a general procedure -- the Schonfmkel procedure -- which, when applied to any expression written in the more intuitive lambda-calculus notation, will produce a correct translation of it into the Schonfinkel notation.

Institut Blaise Pascal, C.N.R.S., 23, Rue du Maroc, 75, Paris XIX, France We study some aspects of a general game-playing program. Such a program receives as data the rules of a game: an algorithm enumerating the moves and an algorithm indicating how to win. The program associates to each move the conditions necessary for this move to occur. It must find how to avoid a dangerous move. We describe the part of the program playing the combinatorial game in order to win: how it can find the moves which lead to victory and what are the only opponent's moves with which he does not lose. This program has been tried with various games: chess, tictac-too, etc. 1. INTRODUCTION My aim was to realize a program playing several games. The rules of the particular game which it must play are given as data. If we want to have a performing program, it must be capable of studying these rules.

"A computer program has been written which can formulate hypotheses from a given set of scientific data. The data consist of the mass spectrum and the empirical formula of an organic chemical compound. The hypotheses which are produced describe molecular structures which are plausible explanations of the data. The hypotheses are generated systematically within the program's theory of chemical stability and within limiting constraints which are inferred from the data by heuristic rules. The program excludes hypotheses inconsistent with the data and lists its candidate explanatory hypotheses in order of decreasing plausibility. The computer program is heuristic in that it searches for plausible hypotheses in a small subset of the total hypothesis space according to heuristic rules learned from chemists."In Meltzer, B., Michie, D., and Swann, M. (Eds.), Machine Intelligence 4, pp. 209-254. Edinburgh University Press