AAAI Presidential Address. A classic article describing the differences in viewing computer programs at the symbol level or the knowledge level. "This is the first presidential address of AAAI, the American Association for Artificial Intelligence. In the grand scheme of history of artificial intelligence (AI), this is surely a minor event. The field this scientific society represents has been thriving for quite some time. No doubt the society itself will make solid contributions to the health of our field. But it is too much to expect a presidential address to have a major impact. So what is the role of the presidential address and what is the significance of the first one? I believe its role is to set a tone, to provide an emphasis. I think the role of the first address is to take a stand about what that tone and emphasis should be-set expectations for future addresses and to communicate to my fellow presidents. Only two foci are really possible for a presidential address: the state of the society or the state of the science. I believe the latter to be correct focus. AAAI itself, its nature and its relationship to the larger society that surrounds it, are surely important. However, our main business is to help AI become a science -- albeit a science with a strong engineering flavor. Thus, though a president's address cannot be narrow or highly technical, it can certainly address a substantive issue. That is what I propose to do." AI Magazine 2(2): Summer 1981, 1-20, 33.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 1980.MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ENGINEERING.Includes bibliographical references.

In Lea, Trends, 294-315.

In Clarke, M. R. B. (Ed.), Advances in Computer Chess 2, pp. 103-109. Edinburgh University Press

Technical Report AIM-340, Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, September, 1980.

In Lea, Trends, 125-138.

Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. See also: An Overview of a Theory of Syntactic Recognition for Natural Language. MIT AIM-531. 1979 (http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/6316).

This paper describes a generative theory of bugs. It claims that all bugs of a procedural skill can be derived by a highly constrained form of problem solving acting on incomplete procedures. These procedures are characterized by formal deletion operations that model incomplete learning and forgetting. The problem solver and the deletion operator have been constrained to make it impossible to derive “star-bugs”—algorithms that are so absurd that expert diagnosticians agree that the alogorithm will never be observed as a bug. Hence, the theory not only generates the observed bugs, it fails to generate star-bugs.

In Lea, W, (Ed.). Trends in speech recognition. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980, 39-89

The performance of a voice- and touch-driven natural language editor is described as subjects used it to do editing tasks. The system features the abilities to process imperative sentences with noun phrases that may include pronouns, quantifiers and references to dialogue focus. The system utilizes a commerical speaker-dependent connected-speech recognizer, and processes sentences spoken by human subjects at the rate of five to seven sentences per minute. Sentence recognition percentages for our expert speaker and for subjects, were 98 and around the mid 70s, respectively. Subjects had more difficulty learning to use connected speech than had been the case in earlier experiments with discrete speech.