Procedures as a Representation for Data in a Computer Program for Understanding Natural Language

This paper describes a system for the computer understanding of English. The system answers questions, executes commands, and accepts information in normal English dialog. It uses semantic information and context to understand discourse and to disambiguate sentences. It combines a complete syntactic analysis of each sentence with a "heuristic understander" which uses different kinds of information about a sentence, other parts of the discourse, and general information about the world in deciding what the sentence means. It is based on the belief that a computer cannot deal reasonably with language unless it can "understand" the subject it is discussing. The program is given a detailed model of the knowledge needed by a simple robot having only a hand and an eye. We can give it instructions to manipulate toy objects, interrogate it about the scene, and give it information it will use in deduction. In addition to knowing the properties of toy objects, the program has a simple model of its own mentality. It can remember and discuss its plans and actions as well as carry them out. It enters into a dialog with a person, responding to English sentences with actions and English replies, and asking for clarification when its heuristic programs cannot understand a sentence through use of context and physical knowledge.

Behavioral Measures and their Correlation with IPM Iteration Counts on Semi-Definite Programming Problems

We study four measures of problem instance behavior that might account for the observed differences in interior-point method (IPM) iterations when these methods are used to solve semidefinite programming (SDP) problem instances: (i) an aggregate geometry measure related to the primal and dual feasible regions (aspect ratios) and norms of the optimal solutions, (ii) the (Renegar-) condition measure C(d) of the data instance, (iii) a measure of the near-absence of strict complementarity of the optimal solution, and (iv) the level of degeneracy of the optimal solution. We compute these measures for the SDPLIB suite problem instances and measure the correlation between these measures and IPM iteration counts (solved using the software SDPT3) when the measures have finite values. Our conclusions are roughly as follows: the aggregate geometry measure is highly correlated with IPM iterations (CORR = 0.896), and is a very good predictor of IPM iterations, particularly for problem instances with solutions of small norm and aspect ratio. The condition measure C(d) is also correlated with IPM iterations, but less so than the aggregate geometry measure (CORR = 0.630). The near-absence of strict complementarity is weakly correlated with IPM iterations (CORR = 0.423). The level of degeneracy of the optimal solution is essentially uncorrelated with IPM iterations.