On the problems of time retrieval of temporal relations causality, and coexistence

  • Nicholas V. Findler
  • David Chen
Article

Abstract

Intelligent question-answering programs do more than retrieve “raw” data; they make deductive inferences in order to return all valid responses. They report logical inconsistencies, possibly at the data input phase. Similarly, more information is requested from the user if a question asked proves to be ambiguous. A question-answering system of the above type has been designed and implemented. Besides retrieving explicit and implicit temporal relations, the system discovers potentially causal relationships which also satisfy different time restrictions. Questions concerning a generalized concept of coexistence can also be answered. It is hoped that programs of a similar nature will become of much pragmatic use to researchers in physics, chemistry, biology, and so on, in evaluating complex, interrelated experimental data. Several additional applications for this type of program are mentioned, ranging from problems in criminology to air traffic control. The Associative Memory, Parallel Processing Language, AMPPL-II, was found rather satisfactory for the project. It is finally suggested that the system being described could serve as a component in a complex cognitive mechanism.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    N. V. Findler, “A survey of seven projects using the same language,” inArtificial Intelligence and Heuristic Programming, N. V. Findler and B. Meltzer, eds. (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 1971).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. V. Findler and W. R. McKinzie, “On a new tool in artificial intelligence research,”in Proc. First Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 259–270 (Washington, D.C., 1969).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    N. V. Findler, J. L. Pfaltz, and H. J. Bernstein,Four High Level Extensions of FORTRAN IV: SLIP, AMPPL-II, TREETRAN, and SYMBOLANG (Spartan Books, New York, 1972).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. A. Simon,The Sciences of the Artificial (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1969).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. J. Moder and C. R. Philips,Project Management with CPM and PERT (Reinhold, New York, 1964).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. A. Bull, “An algebraic study of tense logics with linear time,”J. Symb. Logic 33:27–39 (1968).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. N. Castañeda, “The logic of change, action, and norms,”J. Phil. 62: 333–344 (1965).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. H. von Wright, “The logic of action—A sketch,” inThe Logic of Decision and Action, N. Rescher, ed. (University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1966).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Davidson, “The logical form of action sentences,” inThe Logic of Decision and Action, N. Rescher, ed. (University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1966).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. O. Evans, “States, activities and performances,”Austral. J. Phil. 45: 293–308 (1967).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. N. Prior,Time and Modality (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1957).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. N. Prior,Past, Present and Future (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1967).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Reichenbach,Elements of Symbolic Logic (The Free Press, New York, 1947).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Y. P. Terletskiy, Paradoxes in the Theory of Relativity (Transl. by B. Hoffmann) (Plenum, New York, 1968).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas V. Findler
    • 1
  • David Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceState University of New York at BuffaloAmherst

Personalised recommendations