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

Summary This paper aescriDes a program, called "PRUW", which writes programs. PROW accepts the specification of the program in the language of predicate calculus, decides the algorithm for the program and then produces a LISP program which is an implementation of the algorithm. Since the construction of the algorithm is obtained by formal theorem-proving techniques, the programs that PROW writes are free from logical errors and do not have to be debugged. The user of PROW can make PROW write programs in languages other than LISP by modifying the part of PROW that translates an algorithm to a LISP program. Thus PROW can be modified to write programs in any language.

In this section we discuss how theorem-proving methods are being tested for several applications in the Stanford Research Institute Artificial Intelligence Group's Automaton (robot). We emphasize that this section describes work that is now in progress, rather than work that is completed. These methods represent explorations in problem solving, rather than final decisions about how the robot is to do problem solving. An overview of the current status of the entire SRI robot project is provided by Nilsson. Coles has developed an English-to-logic translator that is part of the robot.

Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

In IEEE Conference Record of the 1969 Tenth Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory, pp. 74–81.

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).

Machine Intelligence 5. B. Meltzer & D. Michie (eds.), 78-98. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

A computer program capable of acting intelligently in the world must have a general representation of the world in terms of which its inputs are interpreted. Designing such a program requires commitments about what knowledge is and how it is obtained. Thus, some of the major traditional problems of philosophy arise in artificial intelligence. More specifically, we want a computer program that decides what to do by inferring in a formal language that a certain strategy will achieve its assigned goal. This requires formalizing concepts of causality, ability, and knowledge. Such formalisms are also considered in philosophical logic. The first part of the paper begins with a philosophical point of view that seems to arise naturally once we take seriously the idea of actually making an intelligent machine.

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.