Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Tel . No. NEH' IOJ/
Ext. No. 629l>
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMMING UNIT
Hope Park Square
1\1 eadow Lane
Edinburgh, 8
11th August, 1966
Professor John McCarthy , Stanford University , Palo Alto , Stanford , California , U. S. A.
Dear John ,
Since you left the encloseJ article in my apartment , I had the opport uni ty to read it , so that from !!!r point of vie\{ this was a piece of good Iud. . I hope that you have not been hinderec by the lack of it , and that I have done right in returninG it directly to Stanford. You also left a sealed envelope addressed to someone in Stanford University , and this I stamped and posted airmail.
It \'las most invigorating to Meet you , and I look for\{ard to many future occasions to rene" this scientific friendship and to maintain cordial links oet\'leen the Stanford and Edinburgh projects .
Hith my best wishes,
Yours sincerely ,
DONALD l,nCHIE
* I run sending it on separately by second- class airmai l .
~ -~=:::;:z~:::~ -'
Professor John HcCarthy, ........................................................................................................... _ .... ~ .... -.. -
t 1 J. f' ~ I· . .....................................................................................................
0' ...... ...•....... _ .................................... .............•...•..•.....................•...................... _ ........................................... _ .••. s: .... Second fold here .....
Sender's D:;Ime and :;Iddrcss:
Dr . Donald Eiclde, Experiment.al ProO''''' " J L I r i i >
!Jl'iYl~J"I"i:i1.~' fir Ltl;nhurgh.
AN AIR LETTER SHOULD NOT CONTAIN ANY ENCLOSURE: IF IT DOES IT WILL BE SURCHARGED
OR SENT BY ORDINARY MAIL
Forro approved by [he postmaster General, No. 71995128
IMPERIAL AIR MAIL AER O GF\A M MES
E"WE/DS 25th March, 1966.
Professor M. f.'linsky t Massachusetts Institute o~ Technology, Boston, Massachusetts, U.SoA.
Dear Professor Minsky,
Universities of Aberdeen and Edinburgh Summer School
I would be grateful if you could let me know in detail when you would lik.e us to arrange aocommodation for yourself and your wife at the Summer Sohoole lYe would lik.e to schedule your le~tures for the period August 1st to August 6th, and ~f' this does not fit in with your plans we would like to know as soon as possible.
To help with the planning and integration of lectures, could you please send me a synopsis of your course, brok.en down in to 4/5 lectures with reasonable documentation of topics to be covered.
If' you would like to assume that the participants of the School have a certain speoi~ic background knowledge (published papers; non-published "knowhowu ), would you indioate this. It is possible that we might devote the first two days of the School to a oonoentrated orientation course in which background material could be covered.
It would help us oonsiderably if your synopsis and suggestions for back.ground material reaohed me by April 21st.
(E. lV'. Elcock).
Tel. No. 40241
UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY
ABERDEEN
SCOTLAND
EWE/LMC 28th January, 1966
Professor John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stamford University, Stamford, California, U.S.A.
Dear Professor McCarthy,
Thank you for your letter of January 17th. We are delighted that you will be able to attend the Advanced Study Institute.
I shall be getting in touch with you about the more detailed planning of the Institute in the very near future.
Yours sincerely,
~1-kor/{ (E. W. Elcock)
for,
E. W. Elcock, and S. Michaelson, Joint Directors.
',~' . , ~t ..
'---;("'-. ;
0' :
.~ ::: -:
:;1
) , .; .. ' ..
-.:.:., ,'.:-. \., .:.'
i: I • r
: ." - ;
- :::-J>~~}.~j ~; .~:
":.'0' <~.~.~;-".:.~-~
" -~.: ,.,
\.: - :_r 1--":-':" -; ~..; _L . .; __ -:',_,' :-... ~
_. ·'f ,~. ~ . ; ~ . .... : ."
.... ';
.0:- "
UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN DEPARTME N T OF N ATURAL PHILOSOPHY
Tel. No. 40241
EWE/DS
Professor J . McCarthy , Pro f e ssor of Computer Science , Stan ford University, Stanfo rd , California 94305 .
Dear Professor McCarthy ,
25th March , 1966 .
Universities of Aberdeen and Ed i nburgh Summer School
ABERDEEN
SCOTLAND
This is to confirm that 've have scheduled your lectures for the period July 25th to July 30th . I~ however, you can confirm that you will be at the S chool during the f i rst week, we would like to bring some of these lectures forward .
To help with the planning and integration of lecture s, could you please send me a synopsis of your course , broken do",n in to 4 / 5 lectures with reasonable documentation of topics to be covered .
If you ",ould like to assume that the participants of the School have a certain s pe cific background knowledge (published papers ; non- publ i shed "knowho",") , ",ould you ind i cate this . It is p ossible that we might devote the fi r st two days of the S chool to a concentrated orientation course in "'hich background material could be covered.
It would help us considerably if your synopsis and s u ggestions for background mater i al reached me by Apr il 21st .
Yours sincere ly ,
~~ (E . 1"- Elco ck) .
~--------------------------------
• '. \; t " .. ~ ~.", ) •
", - .\
~ - .~~ • ' •.••• J'" j.
~ • ..;;:. :.. .. .. 'O .. "' 0.,::: ! ' ; c ; -: ; .. r. \,' J , : ,
( ,
. . -" ,- i; '~ () ::~ :' I ~
,.:.!::-:"~]~ .. ()? -~
i \t ~
,.',
\. .
\ \,
..... '.' :. ~. (" . " .. .. .. ~
-,- ') .IL'- '.-, I. t . i
f,,(;_,j(~I~·~t Fj-~·.:~t:;t·i (':1~:f ::!-:-~':<"~~:r('L: t~("f1:;: .. ~:·~·":;
,.) .{~: ~:,~ ~:. l~ {~ ·'i:r i~·l· •. ~ :";;_f'_t.J r~:::', ~:!J~..I ;;,,:f~::':':;-!~ .r.·:·':1
,' .. ':1- :: ,; J C .P.! !i,; :"11 )
l,. ~-o
, .. ' : ._) : .a ~ ( ; " •• ~' I
,.'»:'::J:.~~.~_L '~·cT r:,!:c",; : C :, ': : ; ~~ -r ; ; i. )
.': (; ~ it. () ~
,t..(I,!:
" ~ ': .~", . ~.
.: : ~: :. : : , ",
- .... --.~-----
1.'\ ... , . i'l.
'~~ ,' ...
~( .. l ; . '
/ '. to, _* '.
t' C·" .. _
January 17, 1966
Dr . E. ~T . Elcock Dept . of Natural Philosophy Uni versity of Aberdeen Scotland, U.K.
Dear Dr. Elcock:
This is to accept your invitation to lecture at the Advanced Study institute . I shall be able to attand for at least the middle week and possibly for the other two weeks . I don ' t ~,nether it tlill be possible to prepare materia~in publishable form on the assigned topic .
Sincerely yours,
John McCarthy Professor of Computer Science
.n~cC fst
, \
\
\ ' \
NA TIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20550
Division of Computer Research Special Projects
Professor John McCarthy Professor of Computer Science Computer Science Department School of Humanities and Sciences Stanford University Stanford, California 94305
Dear Professor McCarthy:
February 20, 1974
We regret ~o inform you that the National Science Foundation is unable to support your proposal, P3J0230, Research Aimed at Home Computer Terminal Systems.
In evaluating proposals for the support of computer science activities the Foundation considers a number of factors including scientific merit, relation to other proposals, potential for furthering educational objectives, and the geographical distribution of support by the Foundation. Only a fraction of deserving proposals can be supported by the funds available for this program.
Even though we are unable to support this proposal, we would be pleased to consider other proposals which you might wish to submit.
Sincerely·yours,
Fred W. Weingarten Program Director
.,
11 Mar 1374 21:23 MORGAN. LE2 [LET, JI1C)
\\M0BDR25;\F1BDI25 , \F0
Dear Dr. Morgan:
\J Thanks f or send i ng the detai led commentary on We do p l an another proposal . I think we can meet ob j ections of the rev i e~ er s but not all. Let sys tema t i ca I I y through your l et ter .
PAGE 1-1
our proposa I. some of the me pr oceed
1 . The rev i ewers are correct 1n the i r criticism that the proposa l i s not as concrete as it should be. I had hoped to get by ~ i th fe" detai I s for hlO reasons: F ir s t, many of the services and exper imenta l home term i nal system shou l d provide wi I I depend on gett i ng access to ot her peop l e's comput er systems . finding whether a i r l ine or p l ay reservat i ons are avai lable, and negot-iating access to t hese sys t ems i s a major j ob ~hich I hoped to undertake as par t of the project rather t han before it. Get t ing and keeping our access to t he Associated Press wi r e has i nvo l ved about ten l etters and t wo tri ps to New Yo r k, - and I fear t hat some of the other nego ti ations el i II be j ust as l engthy. I guess there is no choice, but to do at l east some of thi s work on speculation. The second prob l em is t hat I had hoped to be ab l e to adapt the projects to be undertaken to t he in te r ests and i deas of the graduate students and programmers that wou l d be emp l oyed on the pr oject. We can ce r tain l y g i ve t h is up .
The om i 55 i on 0 f message send i n9 i n the proposa I was a mi stake. I have f ound the ARPA network message l ac i I i t i es very use tu I as we li as t he mes sage fae i i i ties i n our mm compu ter . However , i t i s a bit mor e d i If i cu I t to see how much bene l i t a sma I I random l y se l f se l ected group of home terminal subscribers wi I I get from message fae ii i t i es .
I can trea t t he costs of home termina l s in the new proposa l. I think it wi II be possible to make S500 termina l s , and that this pr i ce wi I I come alJout i n f i ve years without a special project on beha l I of home t erm i na l s .
2. Severa l of the rev i ewers take the proposa l to t ask for not involving socia l scientists. The first r~evi e wer even says, "Bu t I be l l eve that fundamentally the major i ssue i s one of economics and one of changing ex i sting social structures to a ll ow this new revo l utionary developmenL II I thi nk this reviewer is mistaken in suppos i ng tha t soc i a I s truc tUres have to be changed to a I l ow home termina l s; home t erm i na l s wi II be purchased i n the presen t socia l structure if the price is r ight and the services are elorthwh i I e. The !.-lidespread use of home term inals wi II then cause changes in soci a l structure.
am not ve r y enthusiastic about invo l v i ng socia l sc i enti sts lJut ",au l d lJe happy to do i t if NSF is "ii I I ing to pay lor i t. I don' t knoel what question they would i nvestigate . The simp l e fut uro l ogy of home term ina l s has been done by the Inst i tute f or the Future, and it didn 't seem to me t hat anyt h ing clear but non- obvious came 0 1 it .
3 . Here ar e some rema r ks concer ning the budget :
a. The ma in compute r resources the pro j ect wi II use ar e compu t er t i me and disk space , and moreover our low speed mul t i pleMor is i nadequate to add a number of exter nal terminals. However, we are not a cost center and ar e not a ll owed to charge d i rectly fo r comput er
11 Mar 1974 21:29 MORGAN.LE2[LET,JMC] PAGE 1-2
time. Therefore, we proposed hardware that, in combination with money we hope to get from other sources, will enable us to improve the system to where it can handle the additional load coming from this and other projects.
b. Whi Ie we do not propose to develop the themselves, we need some in order to have some customers.
terminals Suitable
terminals today are quite expensive.
c. Leaving out the biographies of Earnest and Winograd was a goof.
4. Concerning the analysis of the effects on users.
In my opinion, not much can be done beyond measuring how much they use the system, what services are used how much, and whether they are wi I ling to pay for the services. This is because effects on users of a pi lot project will be minor until a system becomes quite widespread.
I· suppose th is view wi I I worry some rev i ewers, because i f you can't measure the effects until the system is widespread, what if the effect is bad. I don't consider this much of a problem, because if the users don't like the system, they won't use it. All we need to prejudge is that home terminals are not like heroin, bad for you but addi ct i ng.
5. The third reviewer doesn't see the terminals. He thinks that being able to publish trivial effort is trivial. I thought that the Home went into that, and I can't tell what else to say being able to question him.
point of home something with Terminals paper
to him without
He also wants an elaborate paper study about the long range social implications of home terminals. It seems to me that such a study would be as speculative as my original paper, and I don't want to take part in it. Perhaps I am being unimaginative here, and some social scientist could convince me otherwise.
6. Naturally I like the fourth reviewer, because he likes our proposal. His worry that making everything available would lead to an overload is mistaken. If readers today found their reading matter by going through the card catalog of the Library of Congress seriatim, they would also be overloaded. People's need for help would make a market for periodical documents in the system pointing to what the reviewers thought worthwhile. However, the system itself need not have an official opinion about what is important, and different "reviewing journals ll would have different opinions. I agree with his concern that efforts in privacy and security not become an effort sink, and don't plan to put a substantial fraction of our effort into it.
7. The fourth reviewer thinks that al I the applications wi I I be developed as the demand develops. In my opinion, a systematic effort is required to reach a collection of applications sufficient to justify a user getting a terminal. He also finds this topic inappropriate for an AI laboratory. Our interests are broader than AI.
He also questions whether the work will have impact outside
11 Mar 1974 21:29 MORGAN.LE2[LET,JMC] PAGE 1-3
the AI Lab. I think our A.P. based news service already has had such impact and we haven't even published a paper about it yet. I think publication of the results of our experiments together with letting people log in from afar and experiment with the services wi I I have an impact.
8. We have discussed the possibi lity of a joint project with TYMSHARE, a large national time-sharing service organization located near us and having a number of PDP-las. They are interested in collaborating with us and are considering putting in some resources of their own. Would this make the project more attractive to NSF?
We wi I I make another proposal unless it seems hopeless. Here are some considerations:
1. We wi I I not propose a pure paper study of the effects of home terminals. As far as I am concerned, the results of such a study are incorporated in the Computer Terminals in the Home paper.
2. The minimal proposal would be to develop some home terminal appl ications and test them in the lab without install ing terminals in homes. This would allow ~uite a small proposal~ whereas instal I ing terminals in homes is fairly expensive and perhaps not worthwhi Ie unless a sUbstantial number of services are made avai lable. We have already developed one more application, namely book reading (someone gave us a mag tape of \FIWuthering Heights\Fa and we have just finished but not tested a program for reading books on a display terminal and remembering one's place.
3. An intermediate level would be to make some terminals with suitable services avai lable in the Stanford Library and in the StUdent Union. We can propose this if we can think of a set of services useful in this context. This would be relatively inexpensive ~ince we could expect to learn more from a few terminals than if we put them in homes.
4. wi I I send you another letter with some appl ications that we might work on shortly. However, phone you shortly to get your reaction to this 'letter.
specific will also
Stanford experience in time-sharing:
At Stanford, we have had experience with four timesharing systems. This experience will be described.
Time-sharing hardware:
Neither present computers nor present input-output equipment has been designed ~th time-sharing in mind. The ways in which the equipment affects the services to the user and the number of users that can be handled will be examinedo
On line languages:
The language with which a user interacts with a timesharing system must satisfy a number of requirements if it is not to be a bottleneck in the userls interaction with the machineo It must allow the user to be brief and to· control the verbosity of the machineo It must provide access to a certain collection of program operating, compiling, editing and file handling facilities. It must allow the user to define 'new modes of interaction. An algebraic time-sharing control language will be described.
Present and planned time-sharing systems:
A number of time-sharing systems have been built or announced by manufacturers, universities and othe'r organizations" We propose to survey them and criticize them. '
Public utility computing:
The coming availability of computing and file handling as public services presents interesting opportunities' and problems.
,
------. ----
Stanford experience in time-sharing:
At Stanford, we have had experience with four timesharing systems. This experience will be described.
Time-sharing hardware:
Neither present computers nor present input-output equipment has been designed ~th time-sharing in mind. The ways in which the equipment affects the services to the user and the number of users that can be handled will be examinedo
On line languages:
The language with which a user interacts with a timesharing system must satisfy a number of requirements if it is not to be a bottleneck in the user's interaction with the machine o It must allow the user to be brief and to· control the verbosity of the machineo It must provide access to a certain collection of program operating, compiling, editing and file handling facilities. It must allow the user to define 'new modes of interaction. An algebraic time-sharing control language will be described.
Present and planned time-sharing systems:
A number of time-sharing systems have been built or announced by manufacturers, universities and other organizations. We propose to survey them and criticize themo .
Public utility computing:
The coming availability of computing and file handling as public services presents interesting opportunities' and problemso.
May 4, 1966
Professor E. W. Elcock Universi ty of Aberdeen Department of Natural Philosophy Aberdeen, Scotland
Dear Professor Elcock:
Enclo ;ed are synposes of my planned lectures . Part of the reason for the delay in sending them wa3 the dif ficulty of guessing what the other lecturers Iqere goi ng to talk about . Finally, I simply settled on tho .e issues about which I have something new to say.
Sincerely yours,
John McCarthy Professor of Computer Science
JMcC/ fst
Encl
P. S. Naturally, at the time of the meeting some adjustments can be made to avoid redundancy or fill gaps .
) p,..,.,
o T
Stanford experience in time-sharing:
At Stanford, we have had exper ience with four timesharing systems . This experience will be described .
Time - sharing hardware:
Neither present computers nor present input-output equipment has been des i gned with time-sharing in mind. The ways i n '~hich the equipment affects the services to the user and the number of users that can be handled will be examined.
On line languages :
The language l1ith which a user interacts with a time sharing system mu ;t sati sfy a number of requir ,ments if it is not to be a bottleneck in tae user ' s i nteraction with the machine . It must allow the user to b~ bri ef and to control the verbosity of the machine. It must provide access to a certain collection of program operating , compiling, editing and file handling facilities . It must allO\'/ the user to define new modes of interaction. An algebraic time - sharing control language will be descr ibed.
Present and planned time-sharing systems :
A number of time- sharing systems have been built or announced by manufacturers, universities and other organi zations . Iqe propose to survey them and criticize them.
Public utility computing :
The coming availability of computing and file handling as public services presents interesting opportunities and problems .
'.0 jT ~ > . -" • + ,'.
,J. ~,.
'1 .L • • r.tl ,. ,; ' .. F r. , )0
T
" 0 • ,.
II r ,)( 1 "
.~'t.l- r
Stanford experience in time-sharing:
At Stanford, we have had experience with four timesharing systems. This experience will be described.
Time-sharing hardware:
Neither present computers nor present input-output equipment has been designed ~th time-sharing in mind. The ways in which the equipment affects the services to the user and the number of users that can be handled will be examinedo
On line languages:
The language with which a user interacts with a timesharing system must satisfy a number of requirements if it is not to be a bottleneck in the user's interaction with the machineo It must allow the ·user to be brief and to· control the verbosity of the machineo It must provide access to a certain collection of program operating, compiling, editing and file handling facilities. It must allow the user to define ·new modes of interaction. An algebraic time-sharing control language will be described.
Present and planned time-sharing systems:
A number of time-sharing systems have been built or announced by manufacturers , universities and othe'r organizations. We propose to survey them and criticize them. '
Public utility computing:
The coming availability of computing and file handling as public services presents interesting opportunities' and problems.
• I
.--......... ---.-~------
SCI ENe ERE SEA A C H c o U Ncr l -
ATLAS COMPUTER LABORATORY CHI LTON· DIDCOT BERKSHIRE
Telephone : ABINGDON 1900 21st December, 1966,
Professor J. McCarthy, Stanford University, Stanford, California , U.S .A.
Dear Professor McCarthy,
Mike Baylis,of this Laboratory, says he r ecently met you at Stanford and you expressed an interest in the Simulation of Behaviour work done at the Atlas Laboratory. A brief resume follows: -
1. CHESS - A chess playing program was written for Atlas in 1961 . The strategy was very simple, namely to investigate a very small number of moves very deeply. Six moves were selected for study on the basis of one simple question .
£. - If I make this move what is the ratio of my number of moves to his number of moves? The "best" 6 moves were taken and to each the "best" 6 replies were calculated etc . The level of mini- maxing was indefinite being a function of the ratio of the number of moves . The r esult was that captures and gambits were studied to unspecified levels. The game played seemed better than Bernstein and was fairly fast (1 minute per move) .
2 . KALAH - We are aware of the work done by Russell at Stanfor d and admir e it; he has, in fact , beaten Kalah to death .
The Laboratory is studying on- line pr oblems and the program is linked to a typewriter; in the initial stages it is easily beaten but each time it loses it attempts to discover why in the following two ways:
. (i) It r ecords each move in the game and is looking ahead 1t moves from each position . When it realises it will lose from a given position it stores this position as a ' loser' i . e. a good one to give to the apponent if possible;. it then stores the opponent 's previous move as a II winner" i . e . a bad one to give to the opponent and a good. one to try for itself . A count is then taken of 1,000 and the program backtracks, analysing the game situation through 1 ,000 variations at the point it lost. In simple games e . g . 2 in cell, it could possibly analyse the complete losing path. The number 1,000 is chosen because it takes Atlas 1 minute approximately. The program then asks for another game.
- 1 -
c:. : ...
',. , ... , . -.' - -
t .... ',' ,- :~ t·!' .. 1: ~.:
"", ••• ,.1- 4 ,', : 4'. \
"
,;
-=- -.---~-~
Professor J. MoCarthy, Stanford University, California. 21st Deoember, 1966.
(ii) When a 'winner' or 'loser' is 'remembered' it is analysed for its "oharacteristics" i.e. what are the relevant oells and oontents of oells whioh oause the win. For example:-
- 1 - 1 - -
17
1 0 1 0 - -
- means immaterial
When a position is assessed, therefore, the question is
IS (POSITION & CHARACTERISTICS) - CHARACTERISTICS = O?
If so then could possibly have a winning position. If a win does ~esult eventually from suoh a half recognition then the CHARACTERISTIC is re-inforced to aid in its future possible selection. If a loss occurs it is weakened.
The result is that the 'learning' is unpredictable and the program reaots to a strong player by recording good moves.
3. ~ - This game is a problem in list prooessing. Like all games it must aooess legal moves quiokly in respect to KO, Suicide and capture in that order. This is done as follows:
(i) KO - the KO marker is set when a oapture of one and only one of Of the opponents men occurs.
The next move may not capture the KO pieoe alone. After the move the KO is unset.
(ii) SUICIDE - a move is suicide if it has no degrees of freedom and does not adjoin an enemy army with only one degree of freedom.
(iii)C.APTURE - capture moves are moves which are next to an enemy army having only Gne degree of freedom. KO may be set.
The guts of the problem is having lisiB of armies with their assooiated degrees of freedom. When an interseotion is considered as a move (i.e. it is neither suicide nor KO) a table look up should ~ive the number of degrees of freedom of adjoining enemy armies (if any). Simul taneously an updating of the army lists takes plaoe.
- 2 -
Professor J. McCarthy, Stanford University, California. 21st December, 1966.
This ensures that moves are assessed fairly quickly. The strategy is rather harder to define and I think that "characteristics" as in KALAB is possible a good method but we have not got this far.
This resum~ is vague about many points, giving only a broad outline of' some work that Baylis said you may find interesting.
Yours sincerely,
&u/.~ Ao Go Bell
- 3 -
~ ~: .' 0:· ., .. -'1' - " .''-':4 -.::
~ ",," .
. , ., ,
r'
'\ - .. ::'} '\~:'.;' " ";"'" '.:0
(. ~,'
.. ;': .
. ' ...... ....... . .. ~
....- -. ...:~.-.-'":"'::
"':';-._-.:,
,.
-' .....
NA TIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20550 JUN 11 1974
Division of Computer Research Computer Science & Engineering Section
Drs. John McCarthy and Yorick Wilks Department of Computer Science Stanford University Stanford, California 94305
Dear Drs. McCarthy and Wilks:
We regret to inform you that the National Science Foundation is unable to support your proposal, "Computer Understanding and Translation of Natural Language. II
In evaluating proposals for the support of computer science activities the Foundation considers a number of factors including scientific merit, relation to other proposals, potential for furthering educational objectives, and the geographical distribution of support by the Foundation. Only a fraction of deserving proposals can be supported by the funds available for this program.
Even though we are unable to support this proposal, we would be pleased to consider other proposals which you might wish to submit.
If further information about this action is required, please contact Mr. Val G. Tareski, Associate Program Director of the Theoretical Computer Science Program.
Copy to: D' Ann B. Downey Assistant Sponsored
Projects Officer
Sincerely yours,
Mj{Pt--~ Kent K. Curtis Head, Computer Science and Engineering Section
~~G~SC~8 D~~lCGL ~-:~?~_8 ;:~-r-tJ.~ :·.!~C~~;3CT.S{J
f)! 9Ji:J ~.. J)C'!"'l!";tS ~
". c~ (-~O:t:hIq:E?J. ~~c:p;I.ic.s I, J:"i)~'::S::j·· r. S"Cf- I,,:J:· I!:. ~!].. {::.' ~~ SI.S9ICr : ": .. ~;:: (~r:-:r :':f.':!? I; I. c:. R:;: ~,-!j: r~!· ~~:. .. ~ cr.: ~)A. (o' ~~~ :':~ i:; ~·~r·r~:-~~ 1: ':~:r -. ~:~"~ :f!::r.l7~:.r.. ::rq;r.n:.m":::f,:To;.r O::J~)(Hl~ :·!:PTB· 'd'C+=:[OH .!.J :.Gdn~·}::;·; ~ ;:T-:~':";~::'" ,:;,.-:
~) ~!.':7 ~':-: : •. ~ (S r: c (;Q.~J8:r~~~;!. C·f~.f:~:r. ;.: 1:00 Oac~rrp. '-:f!~f:r ~~.T r .. C ~J l:rf ~i; r. :"~:r:~:j ::!J ':.~ ~:'~ li;·r :: •
. -~~_~1.~:.r .. ::~70!'"::~·!r f~.~ F~·..i:G r~:.JS·:)J·~:; r:O 2f.!r::.i)·C~."':.f. '_~~J:r2 hJ:(100~?n·: 115 l~ .. ~J!"fJ··:"~
r:;~ :.·C~j.~:r~,)T;~~j- (;;-~ oJ ~~ r;I::f :~";;'~;\ s:.:Cf f."l is r~t~ (~~~s-tJ~::f c~t ; .. }~~-~: i=J:~~)!T~ _f'1Tj q !~; ~ rr::::> :'? .. (:
~:f f:rc: _tr~G"':'1··~· ~. ~.~:r.:')I.r:~: ();:: ~~ 'J~:JJ'r~ l:. I·, !:O~; 03 9'J'? 1 b 0f.6':I ~:T-::J" .l~O~ t ·-1':-. ~:;_:r.:- ;:~:'7-; ~~_
~:r~_a _-~jJ,';- E-?,,-~·-~~'"'''~:rO~J C~':J~.!::q~':::·3 S' +111!!J1I~~:jr. ot t~-:r:;:Q.j:~ ~rrJ~:=c::~r~·~J:-~~ .~C:r:::-:1".
'I1J' -S .. t::3':rrf~;'~7":::-f; h~:c~'p2.~:r~ --t~I.. ~:-~:;~: ~11'I:-:;o;:~ Of ~C!1:f;~tff:G;: ~c~~-~r.r(:.~ scr-~~·f\.:r--
::·r::·:~7:::J"~:~~C·7l· [~:~~ ~·~_~:~fJj.:::J 1"!IT.!~~!f8"~~~_r;;'
.r;-:_:S!")T<=; !:('; 2trj·~i..:~~]·.~ j:,·~)!1r.. ;.1r_-Jf,-c':~2I~ ·u.(~!");;:I)f;:::~:C n!J(fr::::7~~::~.:~-;!::-r:~··f·:'j~) -:!:::~:.
·C:1~:J~·.L~~:'f."'.:: . t~.·~·_~·J:::4 !:::~-,. .. ~:.,";t:.c
~-~ f: :Jr;~~':l:'~ r)tT ~-J.;'~ }:~:~ ~~:..
T~~~!:r:-:J:':~~:G'r::~: (]~. ~()l:!0r!·:7GT. 8(:rr-:·~:C'3"
~.r;:; ). f).t.~~\..~I·: .. ::--.::-~::
rs::-~· 1()~~-'J ~':C(:7T~r;.~:~r::~
'S-c :-l)'n ~:=:~:(.--~-::f:;:70:::--f·-~;!::~{i~Fs~: ::~::~r ::; ~ -En" OfT
~~T !'.fi"i:r;n o'f ':~i);;'-f);i.~-GT..--rTR;':GEiE~;
January 12, 1965
Mr. Dean N. Arden Rennsselaer Polytechnic Institute School of Engineering Department of EE Russell Sage Laboratory Troy, Ne~T York
Dear Dean:
The current literature on LISP consists of the "LISP 1.5 Programmer ' s Manual", M. 1. T. Press, $3 . 00 and the book "The Programming Language LISP: Its Operation and Applications" available from t he Office of Technical Services for $4 .50. There is no present plan for LISP on the IBM 360 but I think that there will be sooner or later. LISP 2 will be written for the several computers relati vely soon including the GE 635 and the Q-32 computers. You should get in touch ,.,ith Ed Fredkin at Information International, Cambridge , Massachusetts about this.
It is hard to say what to r ecommend right now in the area of time sharing . I have not published anything r ecently and won ' t until our time-sharing system involving the PDP-l and 90 is working better. I assume you have the CTSS manual and I don ' t think that Corby has published very much since that time. I have two concrete suggesti ons for pursuing an interest in time sharing.
1. Heckl e IBM about time sharing for the 360. I believe Nat Rochester knows something about i t.
2. Acquire a 1WX station from your local te lephone company with the TWX ' modification and try to get permission from Ivan Sutherland. The Pentagon, Room 3D-200, Advanced Research Projects Agency (A.R.P.A) , Washington , D. C. 20301 to use the Q-32 computer at. System Development Corporation in Santa Monica.
Sutherland, ,.,hom you probably knO,T from MIT (he did sketch pad as a Ph.D thesis under Minsky) is Director of Information Processing for the Advanced Research Proj ects Agency. You might also see if Fano will let you use Project MAC. You ma.', if you ::'i ke, pJ.ay with our t i me-shari ng system which may be reached by dialing TWX' 910-373-1276 to speak to the machine or TWX 910-373-1252 to speak to people. I enclose a manual from the ODIN preliminary time-sharing system with the ,,,arni ng that the system is not exactl y as described as in t he manual.
Best regards with your 360 system. We hope to get a PDP-6.
JMcC f st Encl
Sincerely yours,
John McCarthy
-
• .f
, I '1
c' " " , r t'
1
d ... •
i
"
"
'£ •
, j
l!. 1 ... ,
.. J '\t",..: ,
! ,
J. ).
'\" r
I! I.'
" J
t r ..... 1\ '
J
, 1 ,I
I t
t r:
\
... ;j 11 L'" ~~r ':..:
') r r
l.
" , I. •
sri .1 ;
c· J'
l •
w T
, U
,.
•
<.'
.. '
\. " ...
'" ~Jlf'
J." .1 .t(..
. .t t,I'''
t
L.
. ~!~,
.. i'
A \ }
'J
;-
~ (), j
:.0
J
'.
• . . t I'
.J
I
-.'" .JJ , M'
,
~ I L
c, I T
.,.' .
,
., <
I
r
I .
, ,., J'
~(\ !J.
'j
I
[It
.-
reI
{ I 1 r .. , . }
o
J'Ij,
_ L
t 1:
• 1 ,I
-- #
..
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
SCHOO L OF E NGINEE RI NG
Department of Electri cal Engineering
Russell Sage Labor:l.tory
Profess or John McCarthy Computation Center Stanford University Palo Alto, California
Dear John:
TROY, NEW YORK
January 6, 1965
R. P. I. has ordered an IBM 360 model 50 ,lith bull: core so we wi ll soon be in the computer business . ~;o of our students have expressed some interest in LISP programs . I would reciate it very much if you will send me the current literature on ime sharing and LISP so we can put t hem to 1-lOrk .
DNA: jh
:?f "'at-Dean N. Ar en Profess or of Electrical Engineering
DeceJllber 9, 1966
Mr . Sidney Michaelson University of Edinburgh Edinburgh 8, Sco'bland
Dear Sid.:
The check for expenses for the summer school seems to have gotten lost. My secretary took it to the bank on August 17. The bank claims they have no record of it. Could you inquire as to whether it was cashed?
If not, can they stop payment on it and send me a duplicate and if so, can they send full particulars and if possible photographs of the endorsements.
Sincerely yours,
J ohn McCarthy Professor of Computer Science
JMcC/fst
r· , r r
T.
11 ,,\, ,..
c •• rr "}'-r ,,1: u",
r ll~ ~ .1 p • V .f' .~
IJl • 1L
t tJr T.
-• '.or: J.. .f"' l' T.'·' . r. • ..0' I
1: LlOt.
'1"'~; l.I' L "'./\.
"'T'; ,C h .. ..
C . ] f'i. .r .. , • ., "lJ
" . ~ '::1 ~
, ...
"" ;''' .;.ir; ,. , .,. t; ,
, .. " 0 .- • J' At ... l:1 . • f
" r~-.r.~ , ..,
()
• + . ... \"+
rr-. ; L T •
. I
r,; .... L , r
•
..... • l"
:l
III IJr
q oI r
7
-. -.
OFFICE ME MORANDU M . STANFORD UNIVERSIT Y • OFFICE ME MO RA NDUM' STANFORD UNIVERSIT Y • OFFICE MEMORANDUM
A~a ~ ,dt-U ~
DATE : January 31, 1966
To Drs . Hubert Heffner and Lincoln Moses
FROM L. D. Earnest
SUBJECT: Near - term Space for the Artificial Intelligence Project
This memo is intended to amplify our recent discussions concerning space for the Computer Science Department . All interested parties seem to agree that a way must be found to construct a building for Computer Science "ithin the next year or two , although neither the financing nor the chronology has been worked out completely. While there appears to be adequate space in the Computation Center to house the CSD Faculty for the interim, additional space must be found for the Artificial Intelligence Project if it is to survive .
Bob Langl e is writing up the longer term financial problem, so I shall focus on near - term planning factors for the AI Project .
Goals : \
We wish to provide adequate space for both the planned equipment ( about 2,500 square feet net) and the Project staff (about 30 persons, needing at least 3,500 square feet net ) . Since we "ish to attract graduate students and members of other departments to the Pro j ect, a campus location is desirable. Since "e are a part of CSD, a location near Polya is preferable.
Constraints:
Deli very of the PDP- 6 computer system is nOl, scheduled for late March. We have no place to put it . In addition, the planned i ncrease in the Computati on Center staff will require the space we no" occupY ' "i thin the next six months or sofr
Project funds may be used to pay for special facilities needed forequipmment (e . g . leased computer space ) . Since overhead charges include office space costs (currentl y about 4 percent of project salaries ) , the University must either provide this space or relinquish the space charge and permit it to be leased from a third party.
'" " c: Z
< m
'" ~ .... -<
•
n m
3: m 3: o '" > z " c: 3:
• ~ .... > z ~
o '" " c: z < m
'" ~ .... -<
• o ~ ~
n m
3: m 3: o '" > z
" c: 3:
• ~ .... > z ~
o Our ARPA sponsor has expressed strong reservations concerning the possibil ity of placin~
the project equipment in a remote location. Without his cooperation, we will not be able c: to pay for needed ancillary equipment out of project funds. Z
Alternatives
Several possible solutions to the near-term space problem have been examined.
Existing Campus Space - adequate space. has not been found thus far. Tentative offers of space in the Hansen -Microwave Buildi ng and in the Medical Center "ere examined, but neither had sufficient 'room.'
* Upon reading this Bob Langl e informs me that the Computation Center actually needs the space now.
< m
'" ~ .... -<
n m
3: m 3: o '" > Z
" c 3:
GT and E Building - The former General Telephone Building on Arastradero offers ample space in.a somewhat remote location. The cost of finishing the interior construction and
. providing special laboratory facilities would be approximately $110,000, of which about $50,000 could be charged to the Project leaving $60,000 to be covered by general University funds. When the project left this site (presumably upon completion of the neW CSD building) the project would retrieve the false floor and extra air conditioning (worth about $31,000) and the University would be left with finished office space. The time that would be required to make a detailed design and complete construction is estimated to be two to four months.
Leased Temporary Building - Buildingsof the "mobile classroom" type could be leased and placed on a campus site somewhere near Polya. The cost of providing 6,000 square feet of office and laboratory space would be about $77,000 for one year (including site preparation and bringing in utilities). The second and subsequent years (if needed) would cost about $13,000 each. All of this could be charged to the Project, although the University would be expected to give up its overhead space charge, amounting to about $12,000 per year. When the project left this facility, it would retrieve the false floor (worth about $9,000) and the contractor would remove the buildings and concrete foundation. Normal delivery and installation time for this type of building is 45 to 60 days. One contractor offers to deliver and install sufficient modules to house the computer within three weeks from date of contract.
Discussion and Recommendation: \
Putting all the stated cost factors together (and giving credit for retrievable expenses), the. net cost of the two alternatives as a function of time is as follows:
GT and E Building
Temporary Building
University cost
Project cost
Total
(Project Cost)
2 years 3 years '$36k $24k $4~ear k .
31 43 ---::;5..,5 __
$79k $79k $79k
$68k $81k $94k
While the total dollar costs are similar, choosing the GT and E Building would be less expensive to the Project, and would help qualify that building as an overhead facility for the University. On the other hand, the remoteness of GT and E would present a barrier to the use of the computer facilities by Project participants other than full-time staff and would inhibit associations with the Computer Science Department, among others.
The chief objection to the temporary building would appear to be a University policy against temporary buildings, based on aesthetic considerations. It may be borne in mind that the primary site under consideration for such a building is adjacent to the storage area behind Polya. Without a detailed analysis of the mobile classroom's aesthetic qualities, it may be said to compare favorably with the existing storage facility back of Polya (Which some occupants unkindly refer to as the "junkyard It) • .
Considering all factors, I recommend the u~e of a temporary building until a new facility for the Computer Science Department can be constructed. The main consideration supporting this view is that it will belp sustain contact with other on-campus groups, especailly graduate stUdents.
-2-
'~.'''''''''~f._ .. ________________ ._¥'br_'~_ ... t_.-.. ''''''''' ,o'r'.-, " y, ... _. 'I
While a temporary building theoretically can be constructed in time to match the imminent delivery of our computer the following steps are known to be needed:
1) obtain approval of the plan (at least informally)by the University administration,
2a) request an~ obtain approval of the expenditure by the government contracting officer,
2b) select and obtain approval of a building site,
2c) formulate detailed building specifications,
3a) let contract(s) for bringing utilities to site and for site leveling and surfacing,
3b) let contract for building,
3c) let contract for false floor,
4) execute construction, appropriately time-phased, and
5) move in.
The critical path through this sequence is believed to consist of steps 1, 2a, 3b, and 4. The time required for step I is not known, although it has occupied two weeks so far. It has been our experience that step 2a normally takes three to six months although it is hoped that a suitable number of telephone calls may reduce this to as little as two weeks. Steps 3b and 4 should take between three ·and eight weeks.
Considering the planned computer delivery date (late March), the prospective availability date for a building is at best marginal. However; we choose to resolve the near-term housing problem, it is important that a decision be made soon •
LDE/fst
... c. ~
cc: J. McCarthy, S. Russell, R. Langle, G. Forsythe, E. Feigenbaum
-3-
INFORMATION: A SPECIAL ISSUE OF SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
1. Introduction.
Invited author: John McCarthy (Stanford University).
2. The Processing of Information I: Systems Analysis, Computer Programming and Computer Languages.
Invited author: Christopher Strachey (University of Oxford) •
3. The Processing of Information II: Computer Logic and Computer Memories.
Invited author: .David Evans (University of California).
4. The Processing of Information III: Computer Inputs and Outputs.
Invited author: Ivan Sutherland (Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Defense).
5. The Processing o~ Information IV: Time-Sharing, or ·the Simultaneous Use of Computers.
!~vit~~ ~11thor: R. M. Fano (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
6. The Processing of Information V: The Transmission of Data.
Invited author: John R. Pierce (Bell Telephone Laboratories).
7. The Uses of Computers I: Scientific Applications of Computers, with Special Reference to the Syntactic AnalysIs of Language.
Invited author: Anthony G. Oettinger (Harvard University).
- 2 -
8. The Uses of Com uters II: of Computers, with Special Reference to the Design of Machines and Components.
/'
Invited author: Stephen Coons (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
9. The Uses of Computers III: Applications of Computers in Commerce and Administration.
Invited author: Martin Greenberger (University of California).
10. The Uses of Computers IV: The Role of Computers in Education.
Invited author: Patrick Suppes (Stanford University).
11. Artificial Intelligence.
Invited author: Marvin L. Minsky (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
-.~
/'
\
December 9, 1966
Mr. Sidney Michaelson University ~f Edinburgh Edinburgh 8, Scotland
Dear Sid:
The check for expenses for the summer school seems to have gotten lost.· l(y secretary took it to the bank on August 17. The bank claims they have no record of it. Could you inquire as to whether it was cashed?
If not, can they stop paplent on it and send me a duplicate and 11' 80, can they send full particulars and if' possible photographs of the endorsements.
Sincerely yours,
John McCarthy Professor of Canputer Science
J1:IJ.cC/ fst
• • , ,
"" " ~ " G f 1
J A , • J
cr· . o . ... 1
,A 1
(
I '" '1~
Tl:!(.
'U
• !
L
.
,
•
.'7.\
,
c- ff' " , U'
,.. j (
-ft
OFFICE MEMORANDUM • STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY. OFFICE MEMORANDUM
f'~~:
DATE: re1mlal7 3. 1966
To
FROM Associate hovost fo~ Reseaftb
SUBJECT: Spacef. the ktlft.cda1 .",el11 __ ,".,ect
I .... jut bat • di8CU8aioa with DeaD LtDcola lIo88a ngadiDs pnvidOD of apace '01' .oth the Camputec •• '81108 Depan:mea& .. f. the Antflcial laul11seue "ject. We bave decided to pee. aIlead 01l ."nmal for "'-~al.iDB ami 81Ib881plellt .... authoduttea fOI' some '-'.000 a,. ft. 0' apace foi' ,tbQ ,Camputft ScieIlce ",tmeDt. l1IdepeAC1eatly of whecheJ: AUA caD pmvlde lauds fo~ addid .. 1 space low the Mtllietal htelUaeace hoject. It wOuld, o' couse, be Wahl, '~8bab1e to bave ARM approval 80 that we could IMd.W a 1aqe 8IlOII8b bulldlag to 8CCOIllnPdate htb aee4e. to t14. end. I 8118Pst tbat we peen .. am eal), ded.sloD em the put of ~A 88 to w1lethu fuadtaa 10 .. A.I. space C8D be provided.
I tldak tbat: OU~ poattioD aluIuld be aaadeolea to AUA, vbich is daat .. caD pI'OVlde space vlcb __ nnnaCloa eapendttue at a at:te _te £com the campus (aarael". t:Iae GlIB bdldt.ns) but tluat if die IJ'GflUlnmaDtB of tile ..... seem to lIIdicate dlat eampua space is tmICh IIO'I'e dealUb1e. we CD do tb£e 01117 if ABtA pcavldes "'e tbhush a dlnot peat cur aa acce~ted 1eaae anaqemeDc. III tile eveat t1Iat ARPA caD &lve some 888UH1lC8 of fall fundi .. IIeI.Da aval1a1tle. we will be ill • poattlOD co ask '-rmstee appwoval '01' p1acemeat of tempaI'., ftlWlap aeu: tile dte of the .-.teet.. ft888I'Cla ana to houee the project Ia tile IAteI'VeDl1Ia dme. It seeII8 .I"tale, hawevel'. tbae the load of lnatee8 WOIIld at
.,... 8ppnve tile l~tIDS of ~ IRIlWlap iD the audemte ana _le8S then wen some olea aaiuaace that lbeJ' woalcl be ...,.. iDa na8OD8b1e leaath .f time.. .1thaut P"opeI' fuadlDs fo:r' COD8tn.etlOD: of space. 11.0 aucb aaauaace could 'be atvea.
I tId.Dk 1au G8D use the' oUCleal' Clmet8ti1e which 70uface as a meaas of pnesiDs MM' fo.. .' eul), decisloa. If JOII need dle aseiateDCe of ., office '0 7OUl" cltseusioas' vitia _. please do DOt bee'ce. to call oa me.
eel 8. A. retseUaum .I. IICCgthr L. B. ~8 J. !lDa¥"1'
/JP4-
-t ,. Z "'II o :Ia a c: Z <: m :Ia en ... -<
• o "'II
:!! n m
• CIt -t ,. Z "'II o '" a c: z < m :Ia en -t -< • o "'II :!! n m
• CIt -t ,. Z "'II o :Ia a c: z < m :Ia en -t -< • o "'II on n m
~ I 0l1AROM3M D HO • YTI<R.V/I1U ar.O'lVl,\TG' MUCo,IARO",,", D"~O • YTIZ~3V/o,Ill OROll1ATZ • MU~I1""CM:;M DIHO
.... VLN 'b>~~ p-'"}.!}.~~Ll
'" 0-ct S ~
o ~
"
•
•
" S :; '" .. • >-• n T
!!' " m
l' '" l' o .. « s " ::> 'i
• " .. «
"" n-
° .. " :J
>.n .. ~
;.
• o ". ,...
r
•
..
>rJ • n .. ,CJ
oT
• :T:>3l8UG
J
S' j A: l ~
Jr~\ t
t ., . ..
OFFICE MEMORANDUM ,. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY. OfFICE MEMORANDUM
To
FROM
SuBJECT:
DATE: February 10, 1966
Space Distribution List
Edward A. Feigenbaum Director, Stanford Computation Center
Space Memo 12
In ~ Space Memo #1, I promised a procedure in terms of which space would be made available in Polya Hall to satisty Computation Center requirements. This memo fulfills this promise. The procedure is given in terms of an ordered set of rules for deciding who will be displaced as space needs arise.
1. Displace student research assistants in the Artificial Intelligence and Numerical Analysis Projects, and other Computer Science Department research projects. Students well along in Ph.D. dissertation projects may be exempted, on ~ decision. Since these departures will not have to take place all at one time, principal investigators will be asked to provide a rank~.9rdered removal lfst-:--
2. Displace Computation Center student research assistants. In this case the rank ordering will be done by the Associate Director for the Campus Facility, Rod Fredrickson, on the basis of levels of programming and consulting service to users performed by the various individuals. The most valuable research assistants will remain longest.
3. Squeeze more tightlY full-time members of the professional staff of the various research projects.
4. Displace the individuals mentioned in 3 above. Again, this will be done in consultation with the principal investigators.
5. Squeeze more tightlY Computer Science Department visiting faculty and/or junior faculty. This will be done in consultation with Professor Forsythe, who will be asked to give priorities to the different squeezing operations.
I hope that ways out of the space crisis can be found so that most of these steps will never have to be implemented. Unless something unforeseen happens, however, I think steps 1 and 2 are unavoidable.
On the question of IBM space in Polya Hall, this square footage is contractually committed and is therefore difficult to retrieve.
I welcome your comments to this memo since the procedure presented is bound to affect numerous individuals and projects adversely.
• '" -4 ~ Z .,. o ~ g
C Z
< m ,., '" ::; -C
• o .,. :!! n m
• '" -4 ~ Z .,. o ::e o C z :( m ~
~ -4 -c
• o .,.
.::!! n m
• '" -4 ~ Z ." o ~ c c z < m ::e '" -4 -c
• o .,. .,. n m
~ m ~ o ,., ~ z o c ~
OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY. OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To
FROM
SUBJECT:
(
V Feigenbaum, Earnest, McCarthy
George E. Forsythe
Space
DATE: 10 February 1966
I happened to be speaking with Heffner late on 8 February, and, of course, complained about space. He told me he felt pretty much sandbagged because:
(1) The Computation Center did not present any need for space at the time the 360/67 proposal went to the Trustees.
(2) The AI project did not claim any need for space at the time the proposal for the PDP 6 went to ARPA. In fact it was explicitly stated that Lederberg would provide the necessary space.
These arguments seem embarrassing. Any strong answers for Heffner? \
My only I-to1d-you-so is a memorandum to Feigenbaum of. 16 July 1965 in which I strongly urged that space be included in the total Computation Center plan.
GEF:js
• '" ... ~ Z ,.. o ,., a c z < m ,., '" :; -< • o ,.. :!! n m
~ m ~ o ,., ~ z o c ~
• CIt ... ~ z ,.. o ,., o c Z
< m ,., CIt ... -<
• o ,.. :!! n '" ~ m ~ o ,., ~ z o c ~
• '" ... ~ Z ." o :III a c Z < m :III
'" ... -<
• o ,.. "ft
n '" ~ m ~ o ,., ,. Z o c ~
OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM • STANFORD UNIVERSITY. OFFICE MEMORANDUM
--DATE: January 31, 1966
To Drs. Hubert Heffner and Lincoln Moses
FROM L. D. Earnest
SUBJECT: Near-term Space for the Artificial Intelligence Project
This memo is intended to amplify our recent discussions concerning space for the Computer. Science Department. All interested parties seem to agree that a way must be found to construct a building for Computer Science within the next year or two, although neither the financing nor the chronology has been worked out completely. While there appears to be adequate space in the Computation Center to house the CSD Faculty for the interim, additional space must be found for the Artificial Intelligence Project if it is to survive.
Bob Langle is writing up the longer term financial problem, so I shall focus on near-term planning factors for the AI Project.
Goals: \
We wish to provide adequate space for both the planned equipment (about 2,500 square feet net) and the Project staff (about 30 persons, needing at least 3,500 square feet net). Since we wish to attract graduate students and members of other departments to the Project, a campus location is desirable. Since we are a part of CSD, a location near Polya is preferable.
Constraints:
Delivery of the PDP-6 computer system is now scheduled for late March'. We have no place to put it. In addition, the planned increase in the Computation Center staff will require the space we now occupy· within the next six months or so~
• III -4 ~ Z -n o ::III C
C Z < m ::III III ... 00(
• o -n -n n m
~ m ~ o :10 > Z c c ~
• en ... ~ z on o ::III C
C Z < m ::III en ... 00(
• o on ::!! n m
Project funds may be used to pay for special facilities needed forequipmment (e.g. leased computer space). Since overhead charges include office space costs (currently • about 4 percent of project salaries), the University must either provide this space or ~ relinquish the space charge and permit it to be leased from a third party. ~
-n o
Our ARPA sponsor has expressed strong reservations concerning the possibility of placi~ the project equipment in a remote location. Without his cooperation, we will not be able c to pay for needed ancillary equipment out of project funds. ~
Alternatives
Several possible solutions to the near-term space problem have been examined.
m
'" en ... ~
o Existing Campus Space - adequate space. has not been found thus far. Tentative offers of space in the Hansen-Microwave Building and in the Medical Center were examined, but neither n m
."
."
had --sufficient ·room.· - . - -
* Upon reading this Bob Langle informs me that the Computation Center actually needs the space now.
~ m ~ o '" > z c c ~
GT and E Building - The former General Telephone Building on Arastradero offers ample space in a somewhat remote location. The cost of finishing the interior construction and providing special laboratory facilities would be approximately $110,000, of which about $50,000 could be charged to the Project leaving $60,000 to be covered by general University funds. When the project left this site (presumably upon completion of the new CSD building) the project would retrieve the false floor and extra air conditioning (worth about $31,000) and the University would be left with finished office space. The time that would be required to make a detailed design and complete construction is estimated to be two to four months.
Leased Temporary Building - Buildingsof the "mobile classroom" type could be leased and placed on a campus site somewhere near Polya. The cost of providing 6,000 square feet of office and laboratory space would be about $77,000 for one year (including site preparation and bringing in utilities). The second and subsequent years (if needed) would cost about $13,000 each. All of this could be charged to the Project, although the University would be expected to give up its overhead space charge, amounting to about $12,000 per year. When the project left this facility, it would retrieve the false floor (worth about $9,000) and the contractor would remove the buildings and concrete foundation. Normal delivery and installation time for this type of building is 45 to 60 days. One contractor offers to deliver and install sufficient modules to house the computer within three weeks from date of contract.
Discussion and Recommendation: \
Putting all the stated cost factors together (and giving credit for retrievable expenses), the net cost of the two alternatives as a function of time is as follows:
$4~ear 2 years 3 years GT and E Building University cost k . $36k $24k
Project cost 31 43 ___ 5-...;5 ___ _
Total $79k $79k $79k
Temporary Building (Project Cost) $68k $81k $94k
While the total dollar costs are similar, choosing the GT and E Building would be less expensive to the Project, and would help qualify that building as an overhead facility for the University. On the other hand, the remoteness of GT and E would present a barrier to the use of the computer facilities by Project participants other than full-time staff and would inhibit associations with the Computer Science Department, among others.
The chief objection to the temporary building would appear to be a University policy against temporary buildings, based on aesthetic considerations. It may be borne in mind that the primary site under consideration for such a building is adjacent to the storage area behind Polya. Without a detailed analysis of the mobile classroom's aesthetic qualities, it may be said to compare favorably with the existing storage facility back of Polya (vThich some occupants unkindly refer to as the fljunkyard").
Considering all factors, I recommend the u~e of a temporary building until a new facility for the Computer Science Department can be constructed. The main consideration supporting this view is that it will help sustain contact with other on-campus groups, especailly graduate students.
-2- .
While a temporary building theoretically can be constructed in time to match the imminent delivery of our computer the following steps are known to be needed:
1) obtain approval of the plan (at least informally)by the University administration,
2a) request an~ obtain approval of the expenditure by the government contracting officer,
2b) select and obtain approval of a building site,
2c) formulate detailed building specifications,
3a) let contract(s) for bringing utilities to site and for site leveling and surfacing,
3b) let contract for building,
3c) let contract for false floor,
4) execute construction, appropriately time-phased, and
5) move in.
The critical path through this sequence is believed to consist of steps 1, 2a, 3b, and 4. The time required for step 1 is not known, although it has occupied two weeks so far. It has been our experience that step 2a normally takes three to six months although it is hoped that a suitable number of telephone calls may reduce this to as little as two weeks. Steps 3b and 4 should take between three. and eight weeks.
Considering the planned computer delivery date (late March), the prospective availability date for a building is at best marginal. However; we choose to resolve the near-term housing problem, it is important that a decision be made soon.
LDE/fst
cc: J. McCarthy, S. Russell, R. Langle, G. Forsythe, E. Feigenbaum
-3-
, ."
"
STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM • STANFORD UNIVERSITY •. OFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 2, 1966
:.' fROM : L. D. Earnest
.: SUBJECT: NSF Funding vs. ARPA Accelerated Depreciation for New Building
This memorandum compares the costs to the University of funding space for the AI Project in the planned Computer Science building in two different ways. The conclusion reached is that NSF funding has both short-and long-term cost advantages over a possible "accelerated depreciation" arrangement with ARPA.
NSF Funding
It appears feasible to obtain half the cost of the new building (including space for AI research) from NSF. Under this arrangment, the University would still collect from ARPA the standard overhead space charge for the AI Project. For the near future, this will'amount tv about $12,000 per year. Both the space charge rate and the wages to which it applies have been increasing and may be expected to continue in that direction. Thus if the' project continues, the annual space charge may be expected to rise.
ARPA Accelerated Depreciation
It might be'possible to arrange with ARPA for accelerated depreciation payment on a new building, by obtaining an exception to the Armed Services Procurement Regulations. Under this arrangement, the University would initially finance the entire cost of the AI space and would be reimbursed by ARPA at a rate of one-tenth the construction cost each year for a max~um of ten years. The overhead space charge would be waived during this period, but would be ~~sumed at the end of ten years.
Sample Calculation
It is necessary for the University to finance at least part of the construction cost under either arrangement. In order to compare them, we use the well-known capitalistic difference equation:
where
(i = 0,1,2,: •• ,10)
x. = principal amount· at the end of the ith year 1
c = interest rate
a. = payment made in the ith year. 1
• U'I -4
> Z
"'" o ;10
o c Z =< m ;10 CIt
=4 -< • o "'" :!! n rn
• CIt -4 ~ Z
"'" o ;10
o c z < m ;10 CIt
-4 -< • o "'" :!! n m
• CIt -4 ~ Z ." o " o c z < m ;10 CIt
-4 -<
• As a basis of comparison, I shall use the building cost given in Bob Langlets memorandum of 1 February 1966, namely $213,000 for AI space (9100 sq. ft. @ $30/sq. ft.) .. ~ I shall assume an interest rate of 5 percent Cc = 0.05). n
m
,
Under NSF funding, only half of the construction cost would be borne by the University, so Xo = 136,500. Making the conserative assumption that the ARPA overhead charges remain fixed, rather than increasing, we get a. = 12,000 (i=1,2, ••• ,10). Under accelerated depreciation, Xo = 273,000 and ai = 27,300.
The results of running the calculation through the possible ten year life of the accelerated depreciation agreement are given in Table 1.
Year
o 1
2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
NSF Funding
136,500
131,325
125,891
120,186
114,195
107,905
101,300
94,365
87,083
79,437
7~,409
Accelerated Depreciation
2:73,000
259,350
245,018
229,969
214,167
197,575
180,154
161,862
142,655
122,~88
101,312
Table 1. Comparison of Amounts Owed by the University
It can be seen from Table 1.that the NSF funding arrangement would be significantly advantageous at every time in the future. The outcome is not sensitive to the interest rate used, but the difference increases locally with increasing interest. The fact . that overhead space charges will almost certainly rise further increases the NSF funding advantage.
Since ARPA is not firmly committed to continuing, support under either arrangement, there is some risk that the University may have to ~ind another use for the space at some time in the future. As can be seen from the table, early termination of the accelerated depreciation agreement would be much more costly to the University than NSF funding.
Recommendation
Since there is considerable uncertainty about whether an accelerated depreciation agreement could be obtained and it would not be to our advantage anyway, it is recommended that NSF support be sought for the entire Computer Science building •.
WE/fst "Ie·
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPAR.TMENT
Mr. R. C. Brewster Mobile Rentals Inc. 3240 North Durfee Avenue El Monte, California
Dear Mr. Brewster:
• STANFORD. CALIFORNIA 9430,
February 7, 1966
Enclosed is a preliminary floor plan for the expanded facility we discussed. This building is to house the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Project which consists of about 28 persons plus a PDP-6 computer and related equipment. As you can see, I have based the floor plan on ten sixty-foot modules, which looks about right;
For the most partl the specific dimensions pf the various rooms are not imp.ortant, although the areas should be approximately as shown. The first of the two room dimensions is always taken to be in the direction parallel to the long dimension of the building. The dimensions are gross (i.e., I have neglected wall thicknesses).
Computer Laboratory
We plan to purchase and have installed a conventional pedestal-type false floor in this area. TPe ramps and steps leading into adjacent areas will be part of the false floor installation.
The PDP-6 computer, consisting of rack-mounted electronic equipment,
Telephone: .1'/3U - 1300
will be installed above the false floor in the L-shaped region shown. This equipment consumes about 45 kilowatts. of 110 volt power, which may be distributed among a number of power circuits. The PDP-6 equipment receives its cooling air from below the false floor, so ducting must be provided to feed this plenum~
A disc file weighing 4,600 pounds and measuring 36" x 138" is to be ~laced in about the location shown. This equipment uses 3 phase power t208 volt, 4 wire, Y connected, starting current: 80 amps. per phase). About 60 percent of the disc-file heat load is carried off by chilled water, to be provided by a chilling unit (38" x 40") that could be placed in the room or just outside (with suitable shelter).
The total heat dissipated by the equipment in the computer laboratory will be about 170,000 Btu./hour.
1
Shop Storage
A hydraulic power supply weighing about 2000 pounds and measuring 2 x 4 feet is to be placed in the Shop Storage Room as shown. It will be necessary to penetrate the partition into the computer lab at a level below the false floor in order to feed through high-pressure hydraulic lines. The power supply uses three phase power with 38 amps per phase.
Display Room
The Display Room is also to have a false floor. The six display units to be located here will be driven by the computer equipment and will dissipate about 30,000 Btu./hr. Up to ten people may be in the room for extended periods.
Rest Rooms
The Men's Room is to contain a toilet, a urinal, and a wash basin. The Women's Room is to contain a toilet and a wash basin.
Utility/Janitor's Rooms
The Utility Room is to be used for coffee making. It should contain a sink and a power outlet for a refrigerator. The Janitor l s Closet should contain a suitable sink. There is to be a water cooler just outside, as shown.
Information Desired
Assuming that we do the site preparation and bring in the utilities, I would like to know the following for the building described above:
a) the initial purcha~e price,
b) the installation charge and annual charge for a two-year lease,
c) based on b), the purchase prices at the end of one and two years,
d) based on b), the penalty that would be charged for terminating so~e time during the second year.
I would appreciate your getting this information together as quickly as possible, since our compu~er is now scheduled to arrive in late March.
IJ'JE/fst
Very truly yours,
M~ L. D. Earnest. Executive Officer of the Artificial Intelligence Project
SNaP 5T ol\M!
lOJ;IS
5"OP
2.0 'tJ'i.f
lo':lt;'
---/ ',,-
OFF Ie £. II )(17
0,.,,«( I'l-tll
2 I 1~ I - :RA"1f: '<
.,..A, f / I,
fJISPUt't' /l.dDM
(RAIS!~ FJOO~) 2.'3)CIS
COMPcJT~A t.1l6 (MlSfO f LbOR)
50 ~30
L __ 1_ ._
J--___ -po-p_-_' _~~~pur~R. J I DISC - ---J
O,F/C.!.
12.,,,,1
OFfICE.
"Jr 17
\ , HAL.L - 4
MUJS ROOM
t,,~
.,/
JftlIIT0t\5 CL~Ss..'r witTU.
5' )C 3 CWLtA.
VTIJ..TY ~l)OM-
7 Xb
(..OrJFE/J.ENC!' ~OGPt
2.0 ~ 15'
OFFICE.
13 )( 15"
S7ftrJ~"I{D ~-Al(iIFI(/~t.. J~~:;;~/J;;--;;;;;(cr '--4-~,A7 PltiF.: '9" j:fB-7
Of'I(!
"¥/7
)}a.ES.f
""ell J4x l1
'"
orFlcE I~ X JS'
8Y: l. ,~~£#
'- .
0"/«(
''L~ /1
WOMeN's Rae" , x<i
HA].l- 4-
SECRET/MY IJ~£II
I
, q x II
~FF"£ 11)' IS
OF;'C€
" xi}
It
oFF'C,1S.
"lC t l
SiO~A';£
J J Ie 8
c,'IC:! " )( IS
S(A~£; J/8 II -::; {'
.. STANFORD UNIVERSITY . STANFORD. CALIFORNIA 9430,
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT February 7, 1966 Telephone: 4l'/3U -1.300
Mr. R. C. Brewster Mobile Rentals Inc. 3240 North Durfee Avenue El Monte, California
Dear Mr. Brewster:
Enclosed is a preliminary floor plan for the expanded facility loTe
discussed. This building is to house the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Project which consists of about 28 persons plus a PDP-6 computer and related equipment. As you can see, I have based the floor plan on ten sixty-foot modules, Which looks about right; .
For the most part, the specific dimensions Of the various rooms are not important, although the areas should be approximately as shown. The first of the two room dimensions is always taken to be in· the direction parallel to the long dimension of the building. The dimensions are gross (i.e., I have neglected wall thicknesses).
Computer Laboratory
We plan to purchase and have installed a conventional pedestal-type false floor in this area. ~he ramps and steps leading into adjacent areas will be part of the false floor installation.
The PDP-6 computer, consisting of rack-mounted electronic equipment, will be installed abqve the false floor in the L-shaped region shown. This equipment consumes about 45 kilowatts of 110 volt power, which may be distributed among a number of power circuits. The PDP-6 equipment receives its cooling air from beloW the false floor, so ducting must be provided to feed this plenum!
A disc file weighing 4,600 pounds and measuring 36" x 138" is to be ~laced in about the location shown. This equipment uses 3 phase power t208 volt, 4 wire, y connected, starting current: 80 amps. per phase). About 60 percent of the disc-file heat ioad is carried off by chilled water, to be provided by a chilling unit (38" x 40") that could be placed in the ro.om or just outside (with suitable she.lter).
The total heat dissipated by the equipment in the computer laboratory loTill be about 170,000 Btu. /hour.
Shop Storage
A hydraulic power supply weighing about 2000 pounds and measuring 2 x 4 feet is to be placed in the Shop Storage Room as shown. It will be necessary to penetrate the partit~on into the computer lab at a level below the false floor in order to feed through high-pressure hydraulic lines.
Display Room
The Display Room is also to have a false floor. The six display units to be located here will be driven by the computer equipment and will dissipate about 30,000 Btu./hr. Up to ten people may be in the room for extended periods.
Rest Rooms
The Men's Room is to contain a tOilet, a urinal, and a wash basin. The Women's Room is to contain a toilet and a wash basin.
Utility/Janitor's Rooms
~e Utility Room is to be used for coffee making. It should contain a sink and a power outlet for a refrigerator. The Janitor's Closet should contain a suitable sink. There is to be a water cooler just outside, as shown.
Information Desired
Assuming that we do the site preparation and bring in the utilities, I would like to know the following for the building described above:
a) the initial purcha?e price,
b) the installation charge and annual charge for a two-year lease,
c) based on b), the purchase prices at the end of one and two years,
d) based on b), the penalty that would be charged for terminating some time during the second year.
I would appreciate your getting this information together as q~ickly as possible, since our compu~er is now scheduled to arrive in late March.
LDE/fst
Very truly yours,
L. D. Earnest Executive Officer of the Artificial Intelligence Project
OFfJ(';c MI:MV"'''''''''''''I ... - .... ~ ••• _ .. __
To
FROM
SUBJECT:
DATE: .January 24, 1966
Dr. Elliot Levinthal
L. D. Earnest
Leasing of Space Under Government Contract
This memo amplifies our recent telephone conversation concerning the ways in which the cost of providing space may be charged to government research contracts. It is my understanding the the following alternatives exist.
V\ -i
> Z on o :;1:1
c c: Z
=< m :10 VI ... -< • o "n
:!! n m
:: m :: o :;1:1
> z c c ~
1. Overhead. The standard approach is, of course, to include the space • in "indirect costs", for which Stanford is currently reimbursed 46 percent VI
of project salaries. Costs that are directly attributable to special equipment ~
(e.g. air conditioning, false floor, and special wiring for computers) may be ~ charged as additional items. Theoretically, it should be possible to pay a g third party for hoursing the special equipment (e.g. a leased temporarr structure) C
out of project funds. So-called "general purpose" space (e.g. offices) must be ~ pr9vided by the University at no additional charge under this arrangement. <
\ ~ 2. Lease. It is possible to lease space, including Qffices, out of ~
project funds. Not surprisingl~ the government expects a reduction in overhead ~ charges under this arrangement. I have been informed that MIT, for example, • reduces its overhead charges from 40 percent to 19.5 percent of salaries in this situation. This arrangement supposedly cannot be used if the University owns the buildings. However, it should be noted that Project MAC is leasing space in Technology Square that is owned and' controlled by MIT through an intermediate corporation. I understand that special permission of the government was needed.
3. Accelerated Depreciation. Under certain circumstances, the government will agree to pay a "space utilization" charge for space in new construction costing no more than $35 per· square foot. For example, the new Materials Research Laboratory on campus will'be billed to the government at one-tenth of the cost for a maximum of ten years. The government is morally (but not firmly) committed to supporting the project that long. Approval of this arrangement under a Defense Department contract, I am told, requires an exception to the Armed Services Procurement Regulations, whiGh requires high level DOD action and is likely to be time consuming.
For the AI Project, we are currently planning to use approaches, 1 and 2 in the short term, but to apply for 3 for projected Computer Science Laboratory.
If you are interested, additional information on Project MAC's arrangements can be obtained from Dick Mills of MIT (6l7/UN4-6900'x 5853). Information about the accelerated depreciation approach can be obtained from Jess Wilson of Stanford's Material Research Center (x 4118).
WE/fst
c ! ('
" 3
OFFICE MEMORANDUM • STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 6, 1965
To G. Forsythe
FROM J. McCarthy
SUBJECT: New Computer Building
Moses phoned and said that they had been discussing the question of the Computer Science building and thought that they could start a 15,000 sq. ft. gross building at a cost of about $30.00 a square foot if ARPA would agree to payout charges over a ten-year period for 6,000 net and 8,000 gross square feet. This is the arrangement with the McCullough building. The rest would come partly out of a NSF matched grant, which would be matched half out of general funds and half out of money CSD would raise from local industry.
I shall call Ivan.
~ fst
• V\ ~
> Z " o ;:Q
c c: z < m ;:Q V\
.... -< o
o " " n m
~ m ~ o ;:Q
> z c c: ~
o
V\ ... > Z ." o ;:Q
c
c: z <: m ;:Q
'" -4 -< o
o ."
~ n m
!t m ~ o ::r:I
> Z o c: ~
o
V\ -4 > Z " o ::r:I o
c: Z < m ;:Q
'" ... -< o
o ." -n n m
~ m ~ o ::r:I
> Z o c: ~
OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY. OFFICE MEMORANDU M
To Lincoln Moses, Associate Dean Humanities and Sciences
F.OM , Robert Langle
DAT E, J anuary 28, 1966
SUBJECT, Indirect cost adjustment "i th a space utilization charge
I have checked .'lith the Controller ' s Office and find that there is an adjustment of t he indirect costs "Ihen ARPA pays for a buil ding such as the Material s Science Center . Actually, the full indirect costs are charged against the projects housed i n that center, but ARPA is granted a credit equal to the space occupancy increment in the indirect cost formula .
This increment is not as large as I thought it might be . Currently it's just under four percent ; but it is rising steadily, and it is estimated that it "ill quite likely be as high as eight points by the end of the tenyear period "e are considering .
In the case of the Artifi cial Intelligence Project , "hose salaries total $300, 000 a year , the credit this year "ould amount to $l2, OOO or almost half of the potential space occupancy charge . By the end of the ten years the t>lO " ould approximately offset each other .
The follm-ling chart is my estimate of adequate >lorking space for the Artifici al Intelligence Proj ect and the Computer Science Department for the next three years . I realize this exceeds a first approximation you and Hu Heffner have been "orking "ith by 5, 000 square feet , but I "ould like to present the total need so that "e can realize "here cut s are made if "e have to make them.
RJL : ss
cc : L. Earnest G. Forsythe E. Feigenbaum J. McCarthy .,./ D. Price
•
•
()
'" ~
'" ~ o '" ,. z o c ~
•
c Z < '" '" ~ .... -<
•
()
'" ~
'" ~ o '" ,. z o c ~
•
c: Z
< '" '" ~ .... -<
•
() m
~ m ~ o '" ,. z o c ~
,
Needs (gross) Financing
A. I. Project 9,100 sq. ft. $273,000 by ARPA ? *
C.S.D. presently in Polya 3,600 sq. ft. ~SF
$264,000
su
88,000
C.S.D. expansion through '69- '70 5,200 176,000
8,800
Library expansion 1,250 46,500
Conference room 400 $93,000
Seminar/lounge 1,000 46,500
Secretarial workroom 300
Storage 150
3,100 Recap
TOTAL Project 21,000 sq. ft. ARPA $273,000
$30 NSF 134,500
$630,000 SU 222z500
$630,000
*Charges to ARPA would be incrementally over a ten-year period if project were continued. Stanford would have to assume risk and financing.
OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM. STANFORD UNIVERSITY • OFFICE MEMORANDUM ..
To
FROM
SUBJECT:
DATE: November 18, 1965
The Space File
Geqrge E. Forsythe
Meeting of 16 November 1965
Met with Langle, McCarthy, Moses and Price for about an hour and a half in Polya 152 on Tuesday, 16 November.
It is likely that there is room south of Polya Hall for an Eichler of 15,000 to 20,000 gross sq. ft. of space. It is almost certain that an Eichler-type building would be approved for this site.
The site just north of the Pine Hall parking lot is intended for a large (60,000 sq. ft. 1) permanent building, and there would be considerable resistence towards putting an Eichler of 30,000 sq. ft. in it.
Considering the critical nature of Computer Science basic needs, Moses recommended that we break our building needs into two parts:
(1) An immediate need for something like 12,000 net sq. ft.
(2) A ten-year need for another 12,000 net sq. ft. By going first for (1) we 'can increase the probability of getting authority and dollars to build (1) right away.
It was agreed that if an Eichler of 15,000 to 20,000 gross sq. ft. can be built south of Polya Hall, that we make this the first. order of business. We could include with it the extension of the Polya Hall library by 1500 sq. ft.
The estimated cost would be $30/sq. ft., for a total of about $600,000. We should be able to get $300,000 from NSF, and thus need $300,000 of privately raised funds.
It was agreed that this building should have very little classroom space -- at most one classroom.
Moses said he thinks the Computer Science Department should now start to prepare a list of potential donors, which would later be approved by the administration.
In case the site south of Polya Hall could not take a building of 15,000 to 20,000 sq. ft., then we should switch and request an extension of Pine Hall by as much as possible.
• VI -4
> Z ."
o ;;Q
c c: Z < m ;;Q VI
-4 ~
• o on :'! n m
~ m ~ o ;;Q
> z c c: ~
• VI -c > Z ." o ;;Q
c c: z < m ;;Q VI
-4 ~
o
o ."
~ n m
3: m ~ o ;lCI
> z c c: ~
o
VI -4 > Z ." o ;;Q
c c: Z < m ;Ig VI
-4 ~
• o ." ."
n m
~ m ~ o ;;Q
> z c c: 3:
The Space File November 18, 1965 Page 2
By copy of this memorandum, I am asking members of our department to suggest possible donors of $300,000 or so. Incidentally, if we could come up with substantially more money, we could go ahead with our longrange needs for 24,000 net sq. ft.
For your information, the conversion is 1 net sq. ft. = 1.5 gross sq. ft.
I think of Bank of America and insurance companies as possible donors; they benefit enormously from computing.
GEF:jas cc: R. Langle
L. Moses L. Price CS Faculty
Amdahl ~8:Eieft .. Butcher Cole Dantzig Feigenbaum Friedman Golub Herriot Kolsky /' McCarthy ../ Miller Oakford Raphael Reynolds SelWia BI!'S
Schechter Watson Wirth
Memo To: Research Administration Mailing List
74ft:.~4
November 4. 1965 .sp~
From: D. V. Heebink, Research Administrator
Subject: Some Random Comments
(SPACE~SIDERATIONS IN RESEARCH PROPOSAIS
-----~reparing proposals for sponsored research, it is sometimes necessary to consider the need for additional space t either on the campus or elsewhereo Under such circumstances Jtm Thurber (ext. 2185) should be contacted for information as to the availability of space on campus.
If it is determined that space will definitely not be available on c~us, Dwight Adams (ext 0 2234) should be consulted regarding the prospective need for off-campus spaceo Dave Casto (ext 0 2229) can then assist in defining likely costs of procuring appropriate space off campus for budget purposes and, on acceptance of the proposal, stands ready to negotiate for the space and prepare the 1easeo
RECENT SPONSOR CAVEATS
We have been reminded by some of our government sponsors of certain matters of ybich y~u should be aware:
10 Agencies want to know immediately if the percentage of time yhich senior research personnel offer as available ;.n a proposal. should change during the proposal review period, by virtue of acceptance of other outstanding proposals in the meanttme, or for some other reason. lnlen this occurs, please infor,m Research Administration so we can notify the agency or agencies involved.
2. If the same or a similar proposal is already under consideration at othel: agencies or is being simul~aneously submitted elsewhere, this should, of course~ b! indicated to Research Administration so the information can be included in letters of transmittal.
3c Agencies are apparently watching expendi~ure patterns more closely O~ research they sponsor~ and are particularly sensitive to upward trends in spendins to'(o7ard the end of a grant or contract. It is suggested that, if it is necessary to increase the rate of spending toward the end of a project period, either a lett :r of explanation be written in advance to the fiscal monitor at the agency or~ preferably, Research Administration be contacted to request a no-cost extension. In contract situations where a no-cost extension is not practical, and the work is expected to continue under the agency's sponsorship, the funds can often be carri~:': forwa.rd to the next instrument. It is most important to avoid the appearance of comn~tting funds to avoid their 108s, and investigators are urged to maintain a relatively even pattern of expenditure to the fullest extent possibleo
TAX ADVICE TO EMPLOYEES AND VISITORS
Faculty and staff members should avoid giving visiting faculty, research fell, NS, research associates, and others income tax advice relative to payments received by them from the University, for whatever purposeo In no case should tax advice be giv~n in wr~ting, as this can have embarrassing after-effects for all concerned. Noel Fletcher of the University's Payroll Office (ext. 2258) can often be of assistance in connection with tax matters. While he cannot render official counsel, he can g:i.¥JC helpful information to those with questionso
:, ) ''--'
Planning Office October 27, 1965
OFF(CE RECORD
Re: General Telephone Building - Computer Sciences
A request from Jim Thurber relayed by Dwight Adams on October 26 has been received for assistance In choosing and designing space In the General Telephone Building for Computer Sciences.
The general Idea Is to establ Ish a computer and related activity to work on a project called Artificial Intelligence. (This Is the same project for which spacel In Cllnlca) Sciences was considered.) This would be an Interim location (thought to be three years) until additions are made at the Computation Center.
Federal money for the scIence pr.,oJect Is assured but not actually In hand. It Is believed that this money will pay for some of the essentials In connection with the equipment such as the special floor, but It Is expected that some additional funds will have to be found for construction work •
.,.... From twenty to thirty-five people will be engaged In this program. I met with Bob Langle at the site and Inspected two areas at the westerly end. These arevqn
~ the main floor and the level below It. The lower level Is presently assigned to' Engineering, the upper Is unassigned. Both will require finishing and the Installation of air conditIoning (fifty tons). ~~
Planning Is asked to assist In choosing between the locations and recommend ways in which work can be completed In time for January occupancy.
Action:
Bob Langle will furnish a relat lonshlp of funct Ion diagram. drf,~,,.1' I 'fJbg Planning will Investigate the general space characteristics.
~ After development of further detail on use requirements, Planning will recommend ; \ a procedure for accomplishment. Ty"~,., w,'11 t!ll/ ~r .,t?vrllfl'~ ~~.f,t;;, ;:' I
~,l . /V,'/U , (r~ I.. .. t:-f- I~r~o",.,~ I d./4,J rr,aCy t.(..~ V cc: Mr. LangleJ . ~RHTYSon:sam ~/t!l1l1lJ1/i ~ rJ~{' hI('~,/t"'i'
, :
Mr. Thurber Mr. Adams
~ J. d I1f i ~ /./ ry .r~1t -fAt -I ti" -At:'t) /1-7 qI /4- t rrl ,!. ~;;rf/,'r. h IP~v/t:!
nJ.ye h Sh~l-/k DH:k v...,?Jrlt i fAd! ""t:)~h~r /4-rr~tf)~.r pv~lcI te .;; II fi;1'~ ./.-f- G r~~ 6/t/f . '
"" of- 1(~ ... 6" (S.E..J!)dl!d' ;(JII'ffe de /1",/J'jN'e w,'./~ :)(s:c.~ / ?L", .. .,c fos;I,'.." 0'1 .IiI!. J.it:'l v4 C ,! of Tho-. d.,·v co"d,~~"I'/.i· A1",bc. 1£ "'1 J ~'n7 .1'1 1'1 ~f-Prl ~r(I- t!..lerf ~~ 14 Ii /.lev ~1""'''H,'£.r IMvo/V'/ i" -I-/e.. C!>r',//rld/ de.flf'q "'/' f/e. df//lo1:.t,.
~~~~G~~~~~
OFFICE MEMORAND UM . STANFORD UNIVERSITY ' OFFICE MEMORANDUM' STANFORD UNIVERSITY , OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To J. McCarthy
FROM George E. Forsythe, Executive Head Computer Scienc e Department
SUBJECT, Space for Artificial Intelligence project
DATE, Augu st 11, 1965
Let me put my other (and sole remaining) hat on, and di scuss space "lith you . I have had lunch Hith Lederberg and visited his site, and Langle has discussed the Medical School space Hith Levinthal. I think the situation is thi s: Lederberg is Hilling to furnish something on the or der of 3000 sq. ft . of gross space (~ 2000 sq. ft . of net space) , provided that you are sincerely interested in a reasonable degree of common interest . He certainly isn ' t just a broker of space, and is not offering pure space to you if you have no common interests at all .
If you do not "lant the Lederberg space in this spirit , then Langle tells me that there may be 8500 sq. ft . of space in the former General Telephone site on Arastradero Road . This seems to me to be much farther m'lay from here in every sense .
Langle needs to knml your ",ishes nOH, since he has a responsibility for Horking out the possibilities .
I hope that your group is housed close to us, and therefore I hope that you can get together Hith Lederberg . But I guess it depends on hml closely you Hant to ",ork Hith him.
We must all do everything 1'le can to get permanent space near Pine Hall as soon as He can .
GEF : S "lS
cc : R. Langle
• ~ .... " Z ~
o " c c: z < m
" ~ .... -<
•
n m
3: m 3: o " " z c c: 3:
• ~ ....
" z ~
o " c c: z < m
" ~ .... -<
•
n m
3: m 3: o " " z c c: 3:
• ~ ....
" z ~
o " c
c: z < m
" ~ .... -<
• o ~ ~
n m
3: m 3: o " " z c c: 3:
![SM2220 Generative Art & Literaturesweb.cityu.edu.hk/sm2220/Experimental-literature[1].pdfExperimental literature SM2220 Generative Art & Literature Linda C.H. LAI. March 2009](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/5aa1d6ea7f8b9ac67a8c4eb2/sm2220-generative-art-1pdfexperimental-literature-sm2220-generative-art-literature.jpg)
