Advertisement

Jack Minker — A profile

  • Jorge Lobo
  • Arcot Rajasekar
Article

Abstract

This introduction provides a brief synopsis of Jack Minker's career. It discusses his contributions as a teacher, a researcher, as one who has served the computer science and logic programming communities, as an individual deeply committed to human rights, and as a person.

Keywords

Neural Network Artificial Intelligence Complex System Computer Science Nonlinear Dynamics 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    K.R. Apt, H.A. Blair and A. Walker, Towards a theory of declarative knowledge, in:Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, Washington, D.C., 1988) pp. 89–148.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    C. Asper, D. Cao, U.S. Chakravarthy, A. Csoek-Poeskh, S. Kasif, M. Kohli, J. Minker, R. Piazza and D. Wang, Parallel problem solving on ZMOB,Proc. Trends and Applications 83 (1983) pp. 142–146.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J.G. Augustson and J. Minker, An analysis of some graph theoretical cluster techniques, J. ACM 17(1970)571–588.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J.S. Augustson and J. Minker, Deriving term relations from a corpus by graph theoretical techniques, J. Amer. Soc. Inf. Sci. 21(1970)101–111.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    C. Baral, S. Kraus and J. Minker, Combining multiple knowledge bases, IEEE Trans. Knowledge and Data Eng. 3(1991)208–220.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C. Baral, S. Kraus, J. Minker and V.S. Subrahmanian, Combining default logic databases, J. Int. Inf. Syst. 3(1994)319–348.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    C. Baral, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Generalized well-founded semantics for logic programs, Technical Report, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1989).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    C. Baral, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Generalized disjunctive well-founded semantics for logic programs: Declarative semantics, in:Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, eds. Z.W. Ras and M.L. Emrich, Charlotte, NC, 1990 (North-Holland) pp. 465–473.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    L. Brotman and J. Minker, Digital simulation of complex traffic problems in communcations systems, Oper. Res. 5(1957)670–679.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    U.S. Chakravarthy, D.H. Fishman and J. Minker, Semantic query optimization in expert systems and database systems (1984).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    U.S. Chakravarthy, J. Grant and J. Minker, Foundations of semantic query optimization for deductive databases, in:Proc. Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker, Washington, D.C. (1986) pp. 67–101.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    U.S. Chakravarthy, J. Grant and J. Minker, Semantic query optimization: Additional constraints and control strategies, in:Proc. Expert Database Systems, ed. L. Kerschberg, Charleston (1986) pp. 259–269.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    U.S. Chakravarthy, J. Grant and J. Minker, Logic based approach to semantic query optimization, ACM Trans. Database Syst. 15(1990)162–207.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    U.S. Chakravarthy, Semantic query optimization in deductive databases, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1985).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    U.S. Chakravarthy, S. Kasif, M. Kohli, J. Minker and D. Cao, Parallel logic processing and ZMOB,1982 Int. Conf. on Parallel Processing (1982) pp. 347–349.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    K.L. Clark, Negation as failure, in:Logic and Data Bases, eds. H. Gallaire and J. Minker (Plenum Press, New York, 1978) pp. 293–322.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    N. Eisinger, S. Kasif and J. Minker, Logic programming: A parallel approach,Proc. Logic Programming Conf. (1982) pp. 71–77.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J.A. Fernández, J. Grant and J. Minker, Model theoretic approach to view updates in deductive databases (1994), in preparation.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    D.H. Fishman, Experiments with a resolution-based deductive question-answering system and a proposed clause representation for parallel search (1973).Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    J.A. Fernández, J. Lobo, J. Minker and V.S. Subrahmanian, Disjunctive LP+integrity constraints=stable model semantics, Ann. Math. and AI 8(1993)449–474.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    D.H. Fishman and J. Minker, Pi-representation: A clause representation for parallel search, Artificial Intelligence 6(1975)103–127.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Bottom-up evaluation of hierarchical disjunctive deductive databases, in:Logic Programming Proc. of the 8th Int. Conf., ed. K. Furukawa (MIT Press, 1991) pp. 660–675.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Computing perfect models of disjunctive stratified databases, in:Proc. ILPS '91 Workshop on Disjunctive Logic Programs, eds. D. Lovemand, J. Lobo and A. Rajasekar, San Diego, CA (1991) pp. 110–117. An extended version has been submitted to J. Logic Progr.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Semantics of disjunctive deductive databases, in:Int. Conf. on Database Theory, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 646 (Springer, 1992) pp. 21–50 (Invited Paper).Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Bottom-up computation of perfect models for disjunctive theories, J. Logic Progr., submitted. Preliminary version presented at the ILPS '91 Workshop on Disjunctive Logic Programs, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Theory and algorithms for disjunctive deductive databases, Programmirovanie 3(1993)5–39 (in Russian), Invited Paper by the Academy of Sciences of Russia.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    J.A. Fernández, J. Minker and A. Yahya, Computing perfect and stable models using ordered model trees, J. Comp. Intellig., submitted.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    T. Gaasterland, Generating cooperative answers in deductive databases, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1992).Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    A. Gal, Cooperative responses in deductive databases, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1988).Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    A. Van Gelder, Negation as failure using tight derivations for general logic programs, in:Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, 1988) pp. 1149–1176.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    T. Gaasterland, M. Giuliano, A. Litcher, Y. Liu and J. Minker, Using integrity constraints to control search in knowledge base systems, Technical Report CS-TR-2416, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1990).Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    T. Gaasterland, P. Godfrey and J. Minker, Relaxation as a platform of cooperative answering, in:Proc. 1st Int. Workshop on Nonstandard queries and answers, Vol. 2, ed. T. Imielinski, Toulouse, France (1991) pp. 101–120.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    T. Gaasterland, P. Godfrey and J. Minker, An overview of cooperative answering, J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 1(1992)123–157 (Invited Paper).Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    T. Gaasterland, P. Godfrey and J. Minker, Relaxation as a platform for cooperative answering, J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 1(1992)293–321.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    T. Gaasterland, P. Godfrey, J. Minker and L. Novik, A cooperative answering system, in:Proc. Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning Conf., ed. A. Voronkov, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1992, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 634 (Springer), pp. 478–480.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    J. Grant, J. Horty, J. Lobo and J. Minker, View updates in stratified disjunctive databases, J. Autom. Reasoning 11(1993)249–267.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    M. Giuliano, The control and execution of parallel logic programs, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1990).Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz, Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases, New Generation Computing 9(1991)365–385.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    H. Gurk and J. Minker, The design and simulation of an information processing system, J. ACM 8(1961)260–270.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.),Logic and Databases (Plenum Press, New York, 1978).Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    J. Grant and J. Minker, Optimization in deductive and conventional relational data base systems, in:Advances in Data Base Theory, Vol. 1, eds. H. Gallaire, J. Minker and J.-M. Nicolas (Plenum Press, New York, 1981) pp. 195–234.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    J. Grant and J. Minker, On optimizing the evaluation of a set of expressions, Int. J. Comp. Inf. Sci. 11(1982)179–191.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    J. Grant and J. Minker, A set optimizing algorithm, in:Proc. Conf. on Information Sciences and Systems (1982) pp. 259–263.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    J. Grant and J. Minker, Inferences for numerical dependencies, Theor. Comp. Sci. 41(1985)271–287.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    J. Grant and J. Minker, Normalization and axiomizations for numerical dependencies, Inf. Contr. 65(1985)1–17.Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    H. Gallaire, J. Minker and J.-M. Nicolas (eds.),Advances in Database Theory, Vol. 1 (Plenum Press, New York, 1981).Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    H. Gallaire, J. Minker and J.-M. Nicolas (eds.),Adcances in Database Theory, Vol. 2 (Plenum Press, 1984).Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    H. Gallaire, J. Minker and J.-M. Nicolas, Logic and databases: A deductive approach, ACM Comp. Surveys 16(1984)153–185.Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    P. Godfrey, J. Minker and L. Novik, An architecture for a cooperative database system, in:Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Applications of Databases, eds. W. Litwin and T. Risch, Vadstena, Sweden, 1994, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 819 (Springer) pp. 3–24.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    P. Kanellakis,Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Chap: Logic programming and parallel complexity (Morgan Kaufmann, 1988) pp. 547–585.Google Scholar
  51. [51]
    S. Kasif, Analysis of parallelism in logic programs, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1984).Google Scholar
  52. [52]
    S. Kasif, M. Kohli and J. Minker, Prism: A parallel inference system for problem solving, in:Proc. 8th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (1983) pp. 544–546.Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    M. Kohli and J. Minker, Specifying control logic programs, Technical Report UMIACS-TR-87-51, CS-TR-1935, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1987).Google Scholar
  54. [54]
    M. Kohli, Controlling the execution of logic programs: Specification and compilation of control knowledge, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1987)Google Scholar
  55. [55]
    R.A. Kowalski, Predicate logic as a programming language, Proc. IFIP 4(1974)569–574.Google Scholar
  56. [56]
    Z. Lin, Task scheduling for parallel execution of logic programs, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1992).Google Scholar
  57. [57]
    L. Miller, J. Minker, W.G. Reed and W.E. Shindle, A multi-level file structure for information processing, in:Proc. Western Joint Computer Conf., San Francisco, CA (1960) pp. 53–59.Google Scholar
  58. [58]
    J. Lobo, J. Minker and A. Rajasekar,Foundations of Disjunctive Logic Programming (MIT Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  59. [59]
    J. Lobo, A. Rajasekar and J. Minker, Weak completion theory for non-Horn Programs, in:Proc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. on Logic Programming, eds. R.A. Kowalski and K.A. Bowen, Seattle, Washington, 1988 (MIT Press) pp. 828–842.Google Scholar
  60. [60]
    J.R. McSkimin, Techniques for employing semantic information in question-answering systems, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1976).Google Scholar
  61. [61]
    J. Minker, D.H. Fishman and J.R. McSkimin, Maryland refutation proof procedure system, Technical Report, Computer Science Center, University of Maryland (1972).Google Scholar
  62. [62]
    J. Minker, D.H. Fishman and J.R. McSkimin, The Q* algorithm — a search strategy for a deductive question answering system (1973).Google Scholar
  63. [63]
    J. Minker and J. Grant, Answering queries in indefinite databases and the null value problem, in:Advances in Computing Research, ed. P. Kanellakis (JAI Press, 1986) pp. 247–267.Google Scholar
  64. [64]
    J. Minker, Computer scientists whose scientific freedom and human rights have been violated: A Report of the ACM Committee on Scientific Freedom and Human Rights, ed. J. Minker, Commun. ACM 24(1981)134–139.Google Scholar
  65. [65]
    J. Minker, Computer professionals whose scientific freedom and human rights have been violated — 1982: A Report of the ACM Committee on Scientific Freedom and Human Rights, Commun. ACM 25(1982)888–894.Google Scholar
  66. [66]
    J. Minker, On indefinite databases and the closed world assumption, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 138 (Springer, 1982) pp. 292–308.Google Scholar
  67. [67]
    J. Minker, Computer professionals whose scientific freedom and human rights have been violated — 1985: A Report of the ACM Committee on Scientific Freedom and Human Rights, Commun. ACM 28(1985)69–78.Google Scholar
  68. [68]
    J. Minker (ed.),Proc. Workshop on Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming (1986).Google Scholar
  69. [69]
    J. Minker, Scientific freedom and human rights of computer professionals — 1989: A Report of the ACM Committee on Scientific Freedom and Human Rights, Commun. ACM 32(1989)957–974.Google Scholar
  70. [70]
    J.R. McSkimin and J. Minker, Predicate calculus based semantic network for deductive searching.Google Scholar
  71. [71]
    J.R. McSkimin and J. Minker, The use of a semantic network in deductive question-answering systems, Proc. IJCAI 5(1977)50–58.Google Scholar
  72. [72]
    J. Minker and R.G. Minker, Optimization of Boolean expressions — historical developments, Ann. History of Comp. 2(1980)227–238.Google Scholar
  73. [73]
    J. Minker, J.R. McSkimin and D.H. Fishman, MRPPS — an interactive refutation proof procedure system for question-answering, Int. J. Comp. Inf. Sci. 3(2)(1974).Google Scholar
  74. [74]
    J. Minker and J.-M. Nicolas, On recursive axioms in deductive databases, Inf. Syst. 7(1982)1–15.Google Scholar
  75. [75]
    J. Minker, E. Peltola and G. Wilson, Document retrieval experiments using cluster analysis, J. Amer. Soc. Inf. Sci. 24(1973)246–260.Google Scholar
  76. [76]
    J. Minker and A. Rajasekar, A fixpoint semantics for disjunctive logic programs, J. Logic Progr. 9(1990)45–74.Google Scholar
  77. [77]
    J. Minker and C. Ruiz, On extended disjunctive logic programs, in:Proc. 7th Int. Symp. on Methodolgies for Intelligent Systems, eds. J. Komorowski and Z.W. Raś, Lecture Notes in AI (Springer, 1993) pp. 1–18 (Invited Paper).Google Scholar
  78. [78]
    J. Minker and C. Ruiz, Sematics for disjunctive logic programs with explicit and default negation, Fundamenta Informaticae 20(1994)145–192, Anniversary Issue edited by H. Rasiowa.Google Scholar
  79. [79]
    J. Minker and C. Ruiz, Computing the stable and partial stable models of extended disjunctive logic programs (1995), submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  80. [80]
    J. Minker and J. Sable, Relational data system study, Technical Report RADC-TR-70-180, Rome Air Development Center (1970).Google Scholar
  81. [81]
    J. Minker, G. Wilson and B. Zimmerman, An evaluation of query expansion by the addition of clustered terms for a document retrieval system, Inf. Storage and Retrieval: Theory and Practice 8(6)(1972).Google Scholar
  82. [82]
    J. Minker and G. Zanon, An extension to linear resolution with selection function, Inf. Processing Lett. 14(1982)191–194.Google Scholar
  83. [83]
    J.-M. Nicolas and J.-C. Syre, Natural questions — answering and automatic deduction in system syntex,Proc. IFIP Congress 1974 (1974) pp. 595–599.Google Scholar
  84. [84]
    S. Pradhan, J. Minker and V.S. Subrahmanian, Combining databases with prioritized information, Int. J. Intellig. and Cooper. Inf. Syst., to appear.Google Scholar
  85. [85]
    T.C. Przymusinski, On the declarative semantics of deductibe databases and logic programming, in:Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, ed. J. Minker (Morgan Kaufmann, Washington, D.C., 1988) Chap. 5, pp. 193–216.Google Scholar
  86. [86]
    A. Rajasekar, J. Lobo and J. Minker, Skeptical reasoning and disjunctive programs,Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (Morgan Kaufmann, 1989) pp. 349–357.Google Scholar
  87. [87]
    J.A. Robinson, A machine-oriented logic based on the resolution principle, J. ACM 12(1)(1965).Google Scholar
  88. [88]
    D. Sherlekar, Graph dissection techniques for VLSI and algorithms, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1987).Google Scholar
  89. [89]
    M.H. van Emden and R.A. Kowalski, The semantics of predicate logis as a programming language, J. ACM 23(1976)733–742.Google Scholar
  90. [90]
    G.A. Wilson and J. Minker, Resolution, refinements and search strategies — a comparative study, IEEE Trans. Comp. C-25(1976)782–800.Google Scholar
  91. [91]
    G.A. Wilson and J. Minker, Resolution, refinements and search strategies — a comparative study, Technical Report (1976).Google Scholar
  92. [92]
    A. Yahya, J.A. Fernández and J. Minker, Ordered model trees: A normal form for disjunctive deductive databases, J. Autom. Reasoning 13(1994)117–143.Google Scholar
  93. [93]
    A. Yahya and J. Minker, Query evaluation in partitioned disjunctive deductive databases, Technical Report CS-TR-3104, UMIACS-TR-93-64, University of Maryland (1993).Google Scholar
  94. [94]
    A. Yahya and J. Minker, Representations for disjunctive deductive databases, Technical Report CS-TR-3111, UMIACS-TR-93-70, University of Maryland (1993).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J.C. Baltzer AG, Science Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jorge Lobo
  • Arcot Rajasekar

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations