Classics


The sharing of structure in theorem-proving programs

Classics

We introduce the concept of the value of an expression in a binding environment which we use to standardize clauses apart and share the structure of parents in representing the resolvent. Lists provide the most obvious and natural representation of literals because lists perfectly reflect function nesting structure. Therefore, we introduce the concepts of an expression, a binding environment, and the value of an expression in a binding environment. If VALI and VA L2 have no common instance, then the call will return false.


Mathematical and computational models of transformational grammar

Classics

We were led to this comparison by the observation that the computer model is weaker in three important ways: search depth is not unbounded, structures matching variables cannot be compared, and structures matching variables cannot be moved. Thus, every recursively enumerable language is generated by a transformational grammar with limited search depth, without equality comparisons of variables, and without moving structures corresponding to variables. On the other hand, both mathematical models allow unbounded depth of analysis; both allow equality comparisons of variables, although the Ginsburg-Partee model.compares


Some techniques for proving correctness of programs which alter data structures

Classics

We will extend Floyd's proof system for flow diagrams to handle commands Which process lists. McCarthy and Painter (1967) deal with arrays by introducing'change' and'access' functions so as to write a[i]: a[j] 1 as a: change (a, i, access 24 BURSTALL King (1969) in mechanising Floyd's technique gives a method for such assignments which, however, introduces case analysis that sometimes becomes unwieldy. Let us recall briefly the technique of Floyd (1967) for proving correctness of programs in flow diagram form. We will here retain the inductive method of Floyd for dealing with flow diagrams containing loops, but give methods for coping with more complex kinds of assignment command.


Understanding natural language

Classics

This paper describes a computer system for understanding English. It is based on the belief that in modeling language understanding, we must deal in an integrated way with all of the aspects of language--syntax, semantics, and inference. It enters into a dialog with a person, responding to English sentences with actions and English replies, asking for clarification when its heuristic programs cannot understand a sentence through the use of syntactic, semantic, contextual, and physical knowledge. By developing special procedural representations for syntax, semantics, and inference, we gain flexibility and power.


Semantic categories of nominals for conceptual dependency analysis of natural language

Classics

Abstract: A system for the semantic categorization of conceptual objects (nominals) is provided. The system is intended to aid computer understanding of natural language. Specific implementations for noun-pairs and prepositional phrases are offered.


The technology chess program

Classics

See also: Performance Analysis of the Technology Chess Program. Carnegie Mellon University interim report citation at DTIC OnlineArtificial Intelligence 3:145-163


An approach to the frame problem, and its implementation

Classics

This paper proposes a method for handling the frame problem in representing conceptual, or natural-language-type information. The method is part of a larger calculus for expressing conceptual information, called P c F-2, which is described in Sandewall (1972), and which is a modification and extension of Sandewall (1971a). When the STRIPS schema adds a fact, PLANNER would add the corresponding fact to the data base using the primitive thassert. In this context, by epistemological information we mean a notation together with a set of rules (for example, logical axioms) which describe permissible deductions.


The technology chess program

Classics

A chess program has been developed which plays good chess (for a program) using a very simple structure. It is based on a brute force search of the move tree with no forward pruning, using material as the only terminal evaluation function, and using a limited positional analysis at the top level for a tiebreak between moves which are materially equal. Because of the transparent structure, this program is proposed as a technological benchmark for chess programs which will continue to improve as computer technology increases.