THE FRAME PROBLEM One of the central principles upon which intelligent devices seem to operate is that of maintaining internal models of their external environments. In artificial systems which have been constructed to date various representations for this internal model have been used; but in every nontrivial case the need arises to consider the effect, upon the structure of the model, of the performance by the system of actions in the external world, so that their potential consequences may be reckoned. How difficult this is, depends upon both the complexity of the model and its method of representation. In particular, it is usually easy when the problem is posed in the classical heuristic search paradigm, and the data structures used to represent static configurations of the puzzle are relatively unproblematic (arrays, lists, and so on). For in this case [see, for instance, Manna (1970) and Pikes (1970) for examples] one can use the ordinary device of assignment to model the changes in the world.which The lack of side-effects reflects the simplicity of the physics which such models embody. This limitation to elementary forms of interaction is not, of course, intrinsic to the heuristic search method; but when more complex models are constructed it becomes less trivial to pursue the consequences of performing an action. The use of assignment to portray the doing of actions does seem to presuppose a trivial physics. Another method of constructing microcosms is to use a logical language to describe the real world (McCarthy 1959, McCarthy and Hayes 1969). This approach is more general than the heuristic search method (but the latter -- when it has sufficient expressive power -- wins at present by its computational advantage). The key idea is to use expressions denoting situations to separate out assertions according to which (static) state of the world they purport to describe. Assertions mentioning several different situations can then be used to describe dynamical laws which move us from one situation to another. But in some ways the resulting sharp separations between states of affairs are an embarrassment. For if we distinguish two situations s1 and s2, then from the fact, if such it be, that a predicate p is true of Si, nothing whatever follows concerning s2. And this is true even when s2 is directly associated with sl. Say s2 results from s1 by the performance of some action: s2 do (a, si) then no matter how remote -- speaking intuitively -- the connection between the property p and the action a, it still does not follow that p is true of s2. If we want it to so follow we must state this explicitly. Now, unfortunately, there are innumerable facts which might remain unchanged when actions are performed. So instead of writing a law of motion' in the form A(s) B(do(a, s)) where A and B are fairly short expressions, we are apparently obliged to list systematically all conceivable facts which are not changed.

We have written a program which will recognize a range of objects including a cup, a wedge, a hammer, a pencil, and a pair of spectacles. A visual image, represented by a 64.x 64 array of light levels, is first partitioned into connected regions. These regions are chosen to have welldefined edges. Having chosen the regions, the program then computes properties of and relations between regions. Properties include shape as defined by Fourier analysis of the s--tfr equation of the bounding curve. A typical relation between regions is the degree of adjacency. Finally, the program matches the actual relational structure of the regions of the picture with ideal relational structures representing various objects, using a heuristic search procedure, and selects that object whose relational structure best matches the actual picture. INTRODUCTION In November 1969, a Mark i robot device (Barrow and Salter 1970) was connected on-line to the ICI, 4130 computer of the Department of Machine Intelligence and Perception, University of Edinburgh.

K.A.PATON 411 24 Centromere finding: some shape descriptors for small chromosome outlines.

The solution to this simple problem would then guide the solution of the original problem. Minsky (1961) has discussed complex planning of this'homomorphic model' type, and has stressed the potential reduction in total search effort to be won. In the same paper he has also considered the use of semantic models' as a form of complex planning in a mathematical context. The successful geometry theorem-proving program of Gelernter (1959), which used a diagram' to test the validity of propositions, is a wellknown example of this form of planning. Recently Sandewall (1969) has defined a Planning Problem Solver (P P This is an attempt to explore in detail complex planning of the homomorphic model' type as applied to the

A formal description is given of GT 4, a revised and extended version of the Graph Traverser. Methods are described whereby GT4 can improve its performance at run time (a) by automatic optimization of parameters used by the evaluation function and (b) by dynamic re-ordering of operators. Neither method depends upon there being any successful searches in the program's past experience of a given problem. The essential feasibility of both approaches has been validated in experimental tests using sliding block puzzles. Two planned extensions, 'local smoothing' and'regionalization' are described. INTRODUCTION The Graph Traverser (Doran and Michie 1966), and subsequent work based on it, represents an attempt to adapt game-playing methods, particularly those of Samuel (1959), to automatic problem-solving. The design objective is not the simulation of human problem-solving as a study in psychology, but rather to provide an efficient general-purpose search procedure appropriate to non-numerical problem domains. There is a parallel with the development of direct search techniques for numerical function minimization, for example pattern search (Hooke and Jeeves 1961), simplex (Spendley, Hext and Himsworth 1962, Nelder and Mead 1965).

In particular its task domain is the analysis of mass spectra, chemical data gathered routinely from a relatively new analytical instrument, the mass spectrometer. This collaboration of chemists and computer scientists has produced what appears to be an interesting program from the viewpoint of artificial intelligence and a useful tool from the viewpoint of chemistry. For this discussion it is sufficient to say that a mass spectrometer is an instrument into which is put a minute sample of some chemical compound and out of which comes data usually represented as a bar graph. This is what is referred to here as the mass spectrum. The x-points of the bar graph represent the masses of ions produced and the y-points represent the relative abundances of ions of these masses. The first, preliminary inference (or planning), obtains clues from the data as to which classes of chemical compounds are suggested or forbidden by the data.

We will define the notions of abstract theorem-proving graph, abstract theorem-proving problem g and search strategy E for g. These concepts generalize the usual tree (or graph) searching problem and admit Hart, Nilsson and Raphael (1968) and Pohl (1969) theories of heuristic search. In particular the admissibility and optimality theorems of Hart, Nilsson and Raphael generalize for the classes 0 and 0" of diagonal search strategies for abstract theorem-proving problems. In addition the subclass au of 0 is shown to be optimal for 2. Implementation of diagonal search is treated in some detail for theorem-proving by resolution rules (Robinson 1965). SEARCH STRATEGIES, COMPLETENESS AND EFFICIENCY Completeness and efficiency of proof procedures can be studied only in the context of search strategies. A system T of inference rules and axioms can be complete or incomplete for a given class of intended interpretations. Similarly a search strategy E for T may or may not be complete for ...

The equivalence problem for program schemes, or for programs, is reduced to the proving of a theorem in second-order logic. This work extends Manna's first-order logic reductions. Some examples of the technique are given together with a suggested method for obtaining proofs in special cases by firstorder methods. INTRODUCTION Several workers in recent years have considered using techniques and ideas of various mathematical theories of computation for proving interesting results about computer programs. This paper is concerned with two of these approaches.

R.M.BURSTALL 373 23 Assertions: programs written without specifying unnecessary order.

Networks as models of word storage: G. R. Kiss