[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
CSLI Calendar, 26 November 1997, vol. 13:11
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
______________________________________________________________________
26 November 1997 Stanford Vol. 13, No. 11
______________________________________________________________________
A weekly publication of the
Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI)
Stanford University, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305-4115
____________
ACTIVITIES DURING 1 DECEMBER TO 6 DECEMBER 1997
MONDAY, 1 DECEMBER
3:30pm Psychology Social Lab
Jordan Hall 420:100
Suspicion and Enmity in Ghanaian Conceptions of the
Social World
Glenn Adams
SSPP
4:30pm Stanford Digital Libraries Seminar
Gates B08
Bill Janssen
Xerox Parc
[http://diglib.stanford.edu/diglib/seminars/seminars.html]
TUESDAY, 2 DECEMBER
4:15pm Logic Seminar
Math 380:381T
Applicative theories and variable types IV (conclusion)
Sol Feferman
WEDNESDAY, 3 DECEMBER
12:15pm Developmental Brownbag
Jordan Hall 420:286
Brigid Barron
Stanford University
4:15pm Computer Musings
Gates B01
Fifth Annual `Christmas Tree Lecture'
Lattices of Trees
Don Knuth
Stanford University
4:15pm EE380: Computer Systems Laboratory Colloquium
Gates B03 (NEC Auditorium)
Computer Chess: the Deep Blue Saga
Feng-hsiung Hsu
IBM Watson Research Center
Abstract below
THURSDAY, 4 DECEMBER
4:00pm Xerox PARC Forum
George Pake Auditorium, Xerox PARC
Microcantilevered Scanning Probes -- A New Wave in
Microscopy and Sensors
Calvin F. Quate
Stanford University
Abstract below
4:15pm Symbolic Systems Forum
History 200:205 (note change in usual location)
Douglas Hofstader
Cognitive Science, Indiana University
Abstract below
4:15pm Math Colloquium
Math 380:380W
Proof polynomials
Sergei Artemov
Moscow and Cornell
Abstract below
7:30pm Stanford Phonology Workshop
Margaret Jacks Hall 460:146
Phonological and Morphological Constraints
Paul Kiparsky
Stanford University
Abstract below
FRIDAY, 5 DECEMBER
12 noon CSLI CogLunch
Cordura Hall, Room 100
Ray Jackendoff
Brandeis University
Note change in usual date
12 noon Logic Lunch
Room 380:383N
Complexity of disjunction and existence properties for
intuitionistic logic (joint work with S. Buss)
Grigori Mints
Abstract below
12:30pm Seminar on People, Computers, and Design
Gates B01 (HP classroom)
Open Research Questions about Virtual Communities
Amy Bruckman
Georgia Tech
Abstract below
3:15pm Cognitive Seminar
Jordan Hall 420:100
Inhibitory Mechanisms in Retrieval and Forgetting
Jessica Lang
3:30pm Linguistics Department Colloquium
Margaret Jacks Hall 460:146
What's in the Lexicon?
Ray Jackendoff
Brandeis University
Abstract below
SATURDAY, 6 DECEMBER
10am-3pm Symposia: Are Computers Approaching Human-Level
Creativity?
Gates B01 (HP Classroom)
Symposium IV: The Big Picture: Computer Creativity Today
http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/CCARH/events/courses/symp97f.html
____________
EE380 COMPUTER SYSTEMS COLLOQUIUM
on Wednesday, 3 December 1997, 4:15pm to 5:30pm
NEC Auditorium (B03), Gates Computer Science Building
[http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/]
Computer Chess: the Deep Blue Saga
Feng-hsiung Hsu
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
mailto:fhh@watson.ibm.com
In 1972, when Bobby Fischer played Boris Spassky for the World Chess
Championship, chess became front page news worldwide for the first
time. The two matches in 1996 and 1997 between Deep Blue, an IBM
RS/6000 supercomputer, and Gary Kasparov, the human World Chess
Champion, were more than just front page news. The matches went beyond
chess and computer chess. A collective human nerve was touched, and it
resonated. The events redefined our view of ourselves and our
relationship with the technology that we create. The success of Deep
Blue was in part the success of technological advances, but more
importantly, it was the result of the team work from a dedicated team
of computer scientists. A team of tool makers. We human beings had
built a new tool that gave us a way to best the greatest human chess
mind in the world.
How did this new tool come about? The convergence of parallel
supercomputing technology and the ever improving semiconductor
technology, which enabled the Deep Blue chess accelerator chips,
played an important role. But the chain of events triggered when
Claude Shannon gave his computer chess lecture in 1949 planted the
seed. By the time the precursor project to Deep Blue was started in
1985, the following fact had been known for several years. That is, a
chess program will play much stronger when it runs faster. For the
next ten years or so, a continuous drive to attain greater search
speed was launched until in 1996, the first Deep Blue was put together
and played its first match with Kasparov. The result of the first
match proved that the basic technology was in place but something else
was needed to defeat the human World Champion than just
technology--better tuned domain knowledge and a better prepared team.
The team learned from the first match and addressed the problems in
the year that followed. When 1997 came, the newer Deep Blue was
beating Grandmasters and the older version of Deep Blue consistently.
Finally, in May 1997, 48 years after Shannon's lecture, Kasparov, the
human World Champion, lost the rematch to Deep Blue and thus ended the
quest for one of the oldest holy grails in computer science.
Where do we go from here? There is certainly more work that can be
done in computer chess, but there is also more in life than just chess
and computer chess. Deep Blue achieved its great speed through the
combination of a general purpose parallel supercomputer with special
purpose accelerator chips. The same approach could be applied to a
number of fields, including molecular dynamics, datamining, and
financial modeling. Alternatively, one could explore the possibility
of special purpose accelerators for wider classes of applications. The
emerging field of reconfigurable computing holds some promise for this
line of attack. Last but not least, as the Deep Blue events
demonstrated, there is no real limit to what we humans can achieve
when we put our minds together. The future is full of possibilities.
Maybe it is time for something completely new...
Biography: Born in Keelung, Taiwan. Hsu got the nickname "Crazy Bird"
in high school for his tendency to do "insane" stuff. The name has
stuck since. While studying for his Ph.D. in computer science at
Carnegie Mellon University, he started alone in 1985 a computer chess
project that would later be known as Deep Thought. Deep Thought became
the first computer to play at Grandmaster level in 1988, and the Deep
Thought team received the Fredkin Intermediate Prize as a result. For
his work on Deep Thought, Hsu received the ACM Grace Murray Hopper
Award in 1990. Hsu joined IBM in 1989 to continue the computer chess
work, acting as the system architect and principal designer of an
unnamed new chess machine. In 1996, the new machine, named Deep Blue,
lost its first match but won the first ever regulation game by a
computer over the World Chess Champion. Deep Blue won the rematch in
1997, and Hsu, along with Murray Campbell and Joseph Hoane, was
awarded the Fredkin Prize for building the first computer to defeat
the World Chess Champion in a regulation match.
Hsu received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from Carnegie Mellon
University in 1989 and his Bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering
from National Taiwan University in 1980.
____________
XEROX PARC FORUM
on Thursday, 4 December 1997, 4:00pm - 5:00pm
George Pake Auditorium, Xerox
[http://www.parc.xerox.com/ops/projects/forum/]
Microcantilevered Scanning Probes:
A New Wave in Microscopy and Sensors
Calvin Quate
Stanford University
A new trend in instrumentation which employs scanning probes mounted
on microcantilevers is enjoying great popularity in a diverse array of
fields. These microcantilevered probes improve greatly on the
resolution and sensitivity of conventional instruments, and so are
becoming standard tools in many areas of science and technology.
We will review the wide variety of uses for microcantilevered scanning
probes. Microscopic imaging is just one area that has been touched by
these probes. They are also being promoted as key elements in systems
for high density storage, fine line lithography, and MEMS and
microchip fabrication. In biology they are used to measure the
elastic properties of individual molecules. In physics the mechanical
devices are replacing electronic circuits in areas such as Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance.
In spite of this wide popularity, microcantilevered scanning probes
still have limitations. Primarily, the rate of collecting data is
very slow. We will conclude with a discussion of current efforts
designed to overcome this limitation. The effort is focused on
parallel data processing with arrays of cantilevers where each element
in the array is individually controlled by a computer.
Biography: Calvin F. Quate, Ph.D., is the Leland T. Edwards Professor
of Electrical Engineering and, by courtesy, Applied Physics
(Research), Stanford University. He was a Senior Research Fellow of
the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center from 1984-1994. He has received
the Rank Prize for Opto-Electronics (1982), the IEEE Medal of Honor
(1988), and the National Medal of Science (1992). He is a member of
the National Academy of Engineering, the National Academy of Science,
and the Royal Society, London.
____________
SYMBOLIC SYSTEMS FORUM
on Thursday, 4 December 1997, 4:15pm
History Corner 200:205
[http://www.stanford.edu/dept/symbol/forum.html]
Douglas Hofstader
Cognitive Science, Indiana University
Author of "Godel, Escher, Bach" and "Le Ton beau de Marot"
Developer of computer models of analogy-making
and the creative process
In his own words:
"I will use my talk as an occasion to warm up for the final symposium
in my series (which will be on Dec. 6), and to discuss the degree to
which I see genuine human creativity being approached by AI programs
today (and in the near future). It will be an impressionistic talk,
rather than a talk about some specific scientific contribution."
____________
MATH COLLOQUIUM
on Thursday, 4 December 1997, 4:15pm
Math 380:380W
[http://math.stanford.edu/upcoming/upcoming.html]
Proof Polynomials
Sergei Artemov
Cornell and Moscow
Provability is one of the central concepts of mathematical logic and
related areas.
In 1933 Goedel introduced an axiomatic system S4 for an absolute
notion of provability (i.e. not depending on the formalism chosen),
but left open the problem of finding a mathematical provability model
for it. The famous formal provability predicate which first appeared
in the Goedel Incompleteness Theorem does not do this job: the logic
of formal provability is not compatible with S4.
As was discovered in 1995, this defect of the formal provability
predicate can be bypassed by adding an extra dimension and replacing
hidden quantifiers over proofs by "proof polynomials" in a certain
finite basis.
The resulting "Logic of Proofs" provides an exact mathematical model
for major constructions in pure and applied logic based on the concept
of provability, including modal logic, intuitionistic logic with its
Brouwer-Heyting- Kolmogorov interpretation, lambda calculus and modal
lambda calculus. In particular, the Goedel provability logic S4
becomes a forgetful projection of the Logic of Proofs and thus meets a
desired fair provability model. It answers the question left open by
Goedel in 1933.
____________
STANFORD PHONOLOGY WORKSHOP
on Thursday, 4 December 1997, 7:30pm
Margaret Jacks Hall 460:146
Phonological and Morphological Constraints
Paul Kiparsky
Stanford University
To be marked means to have privileged status with respect to all
faithfulness constraints. In an earlier talk I argued that this is
what lies behind the markedness asymmetries seen in phonological
inventories, and in processes of assimilation, deletion, and
epenthesis. Here I extend this idea to morphology. I motivate a
class of morphological DEP and MAX constraints, taking the input to be
the word as a morphological object, and the output the word as a
morphosyntactic object, and provide evidence that all of them have
specific versions that single out marked feature values. This
correctly predicts the kinds of asymmetries seen in phonologically
triggered paradigmatic gaps. It also accounts for some basic
typological generalizations about the structure of words and
inflectional paradigms.
____________
LOGIC LUNCH
on Friday, 7 March 1997, 12 noon
Math Corner 380:383N
[http://math.stanford.edu/upcoming/upcoming.html]
Complexity of Disjunction and Existence Properties
for Intuitionistic Logic
(joint work with S. Buss)
Grigori Mints
We consider the problem P of finding a provable component of a
provable disjunction or existence from a proof (non-normal in general)
of the composite formula.
Theorem. Problem P is polynomial for proofs in the propositional logic
and hyperexponential for proofs in the predicate logic.
The bound for the propositional case uses partial normalization, Short
derivations of disjunctions and existential formulas in the predicate
logic which do not admit short derivations of components use a device
from Gentzen's proof of transfinite induction in PA.
____________
SEMINAR ON PEOPLE, COMPUTER, AND DESIGN
on Friday, 5 December 1997, 12:30-2:00pm
Gates B01 (HP Classroom)
[http://www-pcd.stanford.edu/seminar/]
(SITN Channel E2)
Open Research Questions about Virtual Communities
Amy Bruckman,
Georgia Tech
mailto:asb@cc.gatech.edu
[http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~asb/]
Virtual communities are everywhere: national policies are influenced
by debates on mailing lists like com-priv and cypherpunks. Our
children flirt on AOL and our parents debate Medicare changes (and
flirt) on Third Age. But what are virtual communities? How are they
designed? When do they enhance the lives of their members, and when
are they a big waste of time? As these technologies increasingly
surround our lives, will real people have meaningful control over
them, or will that remain the privilege of specialists? In this talk,
I will outline what I see as some of the important outstanding
research questions about virtual communities, focusing in particular
on issues of end-user programming. I'll present results from two
ongoing projects: MediaMOO (a MUD designed to be a professional
community for media researchers) and MOOSE Crossing (a MUD designed to
be a constructionist learning environment for kids), and share early
progress on Net Flyer (a distributed, 3D, multi-user environment
designed to encourage high-school students to learn about computation,
math, and art).
Biography: Amy Bruckman is an Assistant Professor in the College of
Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where she does
research on virtual communities and education. Amy received her PhD
from the MIT Media Lab's Epistemology and Learning group in 1997. She
received her master's degree from the Media Lab's Interactive Cinema
Group in 1991, and her bachelors in physics from Harvard University in
1987.
____________
LINGUISTICS DEPARTMENT COLLOQUIUM
on Friday, 5 December 1997, 3:30pm
Margaret Jacks Hall, Room 460:146
[http://www-linguistics.stanford.edu/colloq/colloq.html]
What's in the Lexicon?
Ray Jackendoff
Brandeis University
A basic psychological question about the lexicon that has not received
quite enough attention in the theoretical literature is: What words
and uses of words must be stored in long-term memory, and which ones
can be computed online in short-term memory? This question leads to a
distinction among two kinds of regularities that have both been called
'lexical rules': productive rules, for which one always knows, given
an appropriate input, what the output will be (e.g. regular
inflection, diminutives, and expletive infixation); and semiproductive
rules, for which one has to know whether the output is an actual word
and what its peculiarities might be (e.g. much derivational morphology
and irregular inflection). I will argue that the productive cases
warrant setting up independent lexical entries for the productive
affixes, within-word combination being accomplished online by rules of
the same character as regular phrasal rules; while the instances of
semiproductive regularities must be listed individually and related by
inheritance hierarchies.
I then will look at idioms, and show that they form a continuum with
constructional idioms such as the resultative, way-construction, and
time-away construction. The latter have often been treated as
argument-structure-changing lexical rules; but in fact they fall in
with productive rather than semiproductive rules, so they should not
be encoded as alternative lexical meanings for verbs. Rather they
should be viewed as online construction of argument structure, with
the verb's argument structure as one input -- essentially the
Construction Grammar approach. The constructions turn out to be
written in the same format as more stereotypical lexical items, and
like lexical items they turn out to be related in terms of inheritance
hierarchies. In turn this leads to questions about the status of
ordinary rules of phrase structure: Are they lexical items too?
____________
END MATERIAL
The CSLI Calendar appears weekly on Wednesdays throughout the academic
year. Announcements, abstracts, and other information to appear in
the Calendar should be submitted to the editor, who reserves the right
to decide what does or does not go in the calendar
[mailto:incalendar@csli.stanford.edu].
Requests to be added to the mailing list should be sent to
[mailto:majordomo@csli.stanford.edu]. With the lines in the body of
the text of either
subscribe csli-calendar
for the long form or
subscribe csli-short-calendar
for the short form. Problems with subscribing or unsubscribing should
be sent to owner-csli-calendar@csli.stanford.edu.
The full current issue is at
[http://www-csli.stanford.edu/csli/Archive/calendar/1997-98/current.html]
and the archives at
[http://www-csli.stanford.edu/csli/Archive/calendar/].
People on most of the CSLI computers can type 'help csli-calendar' to
see the current issue. They can also type 'help quip' to see the
Linguistics Department newsletter, the Sesquipedalian,
[http://www-linguistics.stanford.edu/Linguistics/].
The CSLI Calendar is also posted each week to
[news://nntp-csli.stanford.edu/csli.bboard].
Information about CSLI's research program is available at
[http://www-csli.stanford.edu/csli/].
For maps to the Stanford University campus see
[http://www.stanford.edu/home/visitors/maps.html].
____________