Motivated Action Theory: A Formal Theory of Causal Reasoning

When we reason about change over time, causation provides an implicit preference: we prefer sequences of situations in which one situation leads causally to the next, rather than sequences in which one situation follows another at random and without causal connections. In this paper, we explore the problem of temporal reasoning --- reasoning about change over time --- and the crucial role that causation plays in our intuitions. We examine previous approaches to temporal reasoning, and their shortcomings, in light of this analysis. We propose a new system for causal reasoning, motivated action theory, which builds upon causation as a crucial preference creterion. Motivated action theory solves the traditional problems of both forward and backward reasoning, and additionally provides a basis for a new theory of explanation.

Theories of Comparative Analysis

Comparative analysis is the problem of predicting how a system will react to perturbations in its parameters, and why. For example, comparative analysis could be asked to explain why the period of an oscillating spring/block system would increase if the mass of the block were larger. This thesis formalizes the task of comparative analysis and presents two solution techniques: differential qualitative (DQ) analysis and exaggeration. Both techniques solve many comparative analysis problems, providing explanations suitable for use by design systems, automated diagnosis, intelligent tutoring systems, and explanation based generalization. This thesis explains the theoretical basis for each technique, describes how they are implemented, and discusses the difference between the two. DQ analysis is sound; it never generates an incorrect answer to a comparative analysis question. Although exaggeration does occasionally produce misleading answers, it solves a larger class of problems than DQ analysis and frequently results in simpler explanations.

Determining the Scope of English Quantifiers

How can one represent the meaning of English sentences in a formal logical notation such that the translation of English into this logical form is simple and general? This report answers this question for a particular kind of meaning, namely quantifier scope, and for a particular part of the translation, namely the syntactic influence on the translation. Rules are presented which predict, for example, that the sentence: Everyone in this room speaks at least two languages. has the quantifier scope AE in standard predicate calculus, while the sentence: At lease two languages are spoken by everyone in this room. has the quantifier scope EA. Three different logical forms are presented, and their translation rules are examined. One of the logical forms is predicate calculus. The translation rules for it were developed by Robert May (May 19 77). The other two logical forms are Skolem form and a simple computer programming language. The translation rules for these two logical forms are new. All three sets of translation rules are shown to be general, in the sense that the same rules express the constraints that syntax imposes on certain other linguistic phenomena. For example, the rules that constrain the translation into Skolem form are shown to constrain definite np anaphora as well. A large body of carefully collected data is presented, and used to assess the empirical accuracy of each of the theories. None of the three theories is vastly superior to the others. However, the report concludes by suggesting that a combination of the two newer theories would have the greatest generality and the highest empirical accuracy.

Formal Multilevel Hierarchical Verification of Synchronous MOS Circuits

I have designed and implemented a system for the multilevel verification of synchronous MOS VLSI circuits. The system, called Silica Pithecus, accepts the schematic of an MOS circuit and a specification of the circuit's intended digital behavior. Silica Pithecus determines if the circuit meets its specification. If the circuit fails to meet its specification Silica Pithecus returns to the designer the reason for the failure. Unlike earlier verifiers which modelled primitives (e.g., transistors) as unidirectional digital devices, Silica Pithecus models primitives more realistically. Transistors are modelled as bidirectional devices of varying resistances, and nodes are modelled as capacitors. Silica Pithecus operates hierarchically, interactively, and incrementally. Major contributions of this research include a formal understanding of the relationship between different behavioral descriptions (e.g., signal, boolean, and arithmetic descriptions) of the same device, and a formalization of the relationship between the structure, behavior, and context of device. Given these formal structures my methods find sufficient conditions on the inputs of circuits which guarantee the correct operation of the circuit in the desired descriptive domain. These methods are algorithmic and complete. They also handle complex phenomena such as races and charge sharing. Informal notions such as races and hazards are shown to be derivable from the correctness conditions used by my methods.

The Logical Problem of Language Change

This paper considers the problem of language change. Linguists must explain not only how languages are learned but also how and why they have evolved along certain trajectories and not others. While the language learning problem has focused on the behavior of individuals and how they acquire a particular grammar from a class of grammars ${cal G}$, here we consider a population of such learners and investigate the emergent, global population characteristics of linguistic communities over several generations. We argue that language change follows logically from specific assumptions about grammatical theories and learning paradigms. In particular, we are able to transform parameterized theories and memoryless acquisition algorithms into grammatical dynamical systems, whose evolution depicts a population's evolving linguistic composition. We investigate the linguistic and computational consequences of this model, showing that the formalization allows one to ask questions about diachronic that one otherwise could not ask, such as the effect of varying initial conditions on the resulting diachronic trajectories. From a more programmatic perspective, we give an example of how the dynamical system model for language change can serve as a way to distinguish among alternative grammatical theories, introducing a formal diachronic adequacy criterion for linguistic theories.