Expert system technology has been successfully applied to many practical problems, but. In this paper we discuss some of the problems confronting computer vision and present an approach to the development of general knoledge-based vision systems. The primary mechanism is a rule-based approach for the generation of initial object hypotheses, which allow focus of attention strategies. The rule set, applied to the attributes of the lines, regions, and surfaces in an intermediate symbolic representation, is constructed interactively with visual feedback to the user. Simples rules are defined as ranges over a feature value which are converted to a vote for an object label; complex rules are constructed via a functional combination of the output from the simple rules.

We present a rule-based system for computer-aided circuit analysis. The set of rules, called EL, is written in a rule language called ARS. Rules are implemented by ARS as pattern-directed invocation demons monitoring an associative data base. Deductions are performed in an antecedent manner, giving EL's analysis a catch-as-catch-can flavour suggestive of the behavior of expert circuit analyzers. We call this style of circuit analysis propagation of constraints.

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

"We define the concept of meta-level Knowledge, and illustrate it by briefly reviewing four examples that have been described in detail elsewhere. The examples include applications of the idea to tasks such as transfer of expertise from a domain expert to a program, and the maintenance and use of large Knowledge bases. We explore common themes that arise from these examples, and examine broader implications of the idea, in particular its impact on the design and construction of large programs."IJCAI 5, 920-927

Computer-Based Medical Consultations: MYCIN focuses on MYCIN, a novel computer-based expert system designed to assist physicians with clinical decisions concerning the selection of appropriate therapy for patients with infections. It discusses medical computing, artificial intelligence, and the clinical problem areas for which the MYCIN program is designed, and it describes in detail how the MYCIN program helps physicians in making decisions. Comprised of seven chapters, this volume begins with an overview of MYCIN and the criteria used in its design. The book also explores MYCIN'S ability to answer questions with respect to its knowledge base and the details of a specific consultation, evaluation and future extensions of the MYCIN system, the limitations and accomplishments of MYCIN, and its contributions in artificial intelligence and computer-based medical decision making. This book is a valuable source of information for computer scientists and members of the medical community.

This text is a description of a computer-based system designed to assist physicians with clinical decision-making. This system, termed MYCIN, utilizes computer techniques derived principally from the subfield of computer science known as artificial intelligence (AI). MYCIN's task is to assist with the decisions involved in the selection of appropriate therapy for patients with infections.

MYCIN contains considerable medical expertise and is also a novel application of computing technology. Thus, this text is addressed both to members of the medical community, who may have limited computer science backgrounds, and to computer scientists with limited knowledge of medical computing and clinical medicine. Some sections of the text may be of greater interest to one community than to the other. A guide to the text follows so that you may select those portions most pertinent to your particular interests and background.

The complete book in a single file.

Also see book version (1980), IJCAI-77. Also Rep. No. TR-347, AI Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Reprinted in Readings in Uncertain Reasoning, G. Shafer and J. Pearl, eds., pp. 259-273, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1990.See also: Stanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research (BMIR).… quantifying confirmation and then manipulating the numbers as though they were probabilities quickly leads to apparent inconsistencies or paradoxes. Carl Hempel presented an early analysis of confirmation (Hempel, 1965), pointing out as we have that C[h,e] is a very different concept from P(hle ). His famous Paradox of the Ravens was presented early in his discussion of the logic of confirmation. Let hl be the statement that "all ravens are black" and h2 the statement that "all nonblack things are nonravens." Clearly hi is logically equivalent to h,2. If one were to draw an analogy with conditional probability, it might at first seem valid, therefore, to assert that C[hl,e] = C[h2,e] for all e. However, it appears counterintuitive to state that the observation of a green vase supports hi, even though the observation does seem to support h,2. C[h,e] is therefore different from P(hle) for it seems somehow wrong that an observation of a vase could logically support an assertion about ravens. Another characteristic of a quantitative approach to confirmation that distinguishes the concept from probability was well-recognized by Carnap (1950) and discussed by Barker (1957) and Harrd (1970). They note it is counterintuitive to suggest that the confirmation of the negation of a hypothesis is equal to one minus the confirmation of the hypothesis, i.e., C[h,e] is not 1 - C[-qh,e]. The streptococcal decision rule asserted that a gram-positive coccus growing in chains is a Streptococcus with a measure of support specified as 7 out of 10. This translates to C[h,e]=0.7 where h is "the organism is a Streptococcus" and e is the information that "the organism is a gram-positive coccus growing in chains." As discussed above, an expert does not necessarily believe that C[mh,e] = 0.3. The evidence is said to be supportive of the contention that the organism is a Streptococcus and can therefore hardly also support the contention that the organism is not a Streptococcus. Ch.13 of Mycin Book; revised from Math. Biosci. 23:351-379

"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

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