The M & N procedure is an improvement to the mini-max backing-up procedure widely used in computer programs for game-playing and other purposes. It is based on the principle that it is desirable to have many options when making decisions in the face of uncertainty. The mini-max procedure assigns to a MAX (MIN) node the value of the highest (lowest) valued successor to that node. The M & N procedure assigns to a MAX (MIN) node some function of the M (N) highest (lowest) valued successors. An M & N procedure was written in LISP to play the game of kalah, and it was demonstrated that the M & N procedure is significantly superior to the mini-max procedure.

A parsing algorithm which seems to be the most efficient general context-free algorithm known is described. It is similar to both Knuth's LR(k) algorithm and the familiar top-down algorithm. It has a time bound proportional to n3 (where n is the length of the string being parsed) in general; it has an n2 bound for unambiguous grammars; and it runs in linear time on a large class of grammars, which seems to include most practical context-free programming language grammars. In an empirical comparison it appears to be superior to the top-down and bottom-up algorithms studied by Griffiths and Petrick.

Russian Mathematical Surveys, 25, 221-262

Russian Mathematical Surveys, 25, 221-262

Arguably the first article discussing the uses of AI in the law beyond straightforward information retrieval.Although the computer has worked its way out of the laboratory and into common experience, lawyers have made slim progress towards finding useful computer applications. Research in artificial intelligence, a branch of computer science, has illuminated our capacity to use computers to model human thought processes. This research suggests that computer science may assist lawyers in both the study and performance of their reasoning processes. In this Article we will argue that the time has come for serious interdisciplinary work between lawyers and computer scientists to explore the computer's potential in law.Stanford Law Review vol.23, no.1, November, 1970

In Linguaggi nella Societ`a e nella Tecnica, pp. 189– 224. Edizioni di Comunit`a.

Ph.D. dissertation "Bi-directional and heuristic search in path problems" (Stanford, Computer Science, 1970) summarized in this article in Machine Intelligence 6 (1971).In the uni-directional algorithms, the search proceeds from an initial nodeforward until the goal node is encountered. Problems for which the goal nodeis explicitly known can be searched backward from the goal node. Analgorithm combining both search directions is bi-directional.This method has not seen much use because book-keeping problems werethought to outweigh the possible search reduction. The use of hashingfunctions to partition the search space provides a solution to some of theseimplementation problems. However, a more serious difficulty is involved.To realize significant savings in bi-directional search, the forward andbackward search trees must meet in the 'middle' of the space. The potentialbenefits from this technique motivates this paper's examination of thetheoretical and practical problems in using bi-directional search.

This paper explores new approaches to the symmetric traveling-salesman problem in which 1-trees, which are a slight variant of spanning trees, play an essential role. A 1-tree is a tree together with an additional vertex connected to the tree by two edges. We observe that (i) a tour is precisely a 1-tree in which each vertex has degree 2, (ii) a minimum 1-tree is easy to compute, and (iii) the transformation on “intercity distances” cij → Cij + πi + πj leaves the traveling-salesman problem invariant but changes the minimum 1-tree. Operations Research, 18, 1138–1162.

See also: ACM Digital Library.CACM 13 (1):15-30

Some of the world's most advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems, at least the ones the public hear about, are famous for beating human players at chess or poker. Other algorithms are known for their ability to learn how to recognize cats or their inability to recognize people with darker skin. But are current AI systems anything more than toys? Sure, their ability to play games or identify animals is impressive, but does this help toward creating useful AI systems? To answer this, we need to take a step back and question what the goals of AI are.