DOCSLIB.ORG

[Thesis Title Goes Here]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
[Thesis Title Goes Here] TURING AWARD SCIENTISTS: CONTRIBUTION AND RECOGNITION IN COMPUTER SCIENCE A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Irina Nikiforova In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the History and Sociology of Technology and Science in the School of History, Technology, and Society Georgia Institute of Technology August, 2012 COPYRIGHT 2012 BY IRINA NIKIFOROVA TURING AWARD SCIENTISTS: CONTRIBUTION AND RECOGNITION IN COMPUTER SCIENCE Approved by: Dr. Mary Frank Fox, Advisor Dr. Kenneth Knoespel School of Public Policy School of History, Technology, & Society Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Wenda Bauchspies Dr. John Walsh School of History, Technology, & Society School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Amanda Damarin Dr. Gerhard Sonnert Department of Sociology Center for Astrophysics Georgia Perimeter College Harvard University Date Approved: April 23, 2012 To my grandmother, Alexandra Fedorovna, and to those women and men who in their seemingly ordinary lives achieve extraordinary results ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people and organizations directly and indirectly contributed to this project. My appreciation goes to my advisor, Dr. Mary Frank Fox, for her support, patience, and guidance. Dr. Fox supported my graduate studies in a multitude of ways (including financially) from my first year at Georgia Tech (2004) to graduation. Her research lab provided the environment where, in addition to research, I learned about the norms, values, and the quality of research products, as well as the art and science of getting things done. Dr. Fox set an exceptional example of success for all her students that I aspire to live up to in my professional career. I would also like to thank my committee for their valuable comments throughout the development of this dissertation. Dr. Damarin helped to clarify theoretical foundations. Dr. Bauchspies encouraged taking a more critical perspective. Dr. Walsh raised challenging questions that were constructive and extremely helpful. Dr. Sonnert provided critical suggestions regarding the design of the study for which I am very grateful. Data collection was facilitated by a few key people and organizations. I would like to thank the Association for Computing Machinery and the Charles Babbage Institute for providing fellowships for archival visits. My department of History, Technology, and Society supported one archival trip, and I thank Dr. Krige for his support of research, and Ladonna Bowen-Chavers for her excellent academic advising over the years. Finding and ordering materials at the Georgia Tech library was facilitated by Betty Finn, Bruce Henson, Katharine Calhoun, and Jay and RaeAnne Forrest. Access to the vast collection of the Georgia State University library and Atlanta-Fulton Public Library Gale Virtual Reference Database was indispensable. My gratitude extends to a number of other libraries, their staff, and my friends who provided various assistance, in particular, Hedva Milo from the Weizmann Institute of Science Libraries, Aurora Schmidt from Carnegie Mellon University, and Kata Zsofia Vincze from Eötvös Loránd University. To get to this point in my career I crossed great distances, embraced new cultures, and learned in new languages, and disciplines. I am fortunate to have excellent teachers, iv Jane Chisholm and Earle Bidwell, who provided guidance and helped to refine my expressions. I very much enjoyed the company, discussions, and mutual learning with colleagues at our research lab: Holly Brown, Hillary Alberta, Hallie Willis, and Jiyoung Yun. And last but not the least, I thank my families, Russian and American, and two very close friends who became my family, Muslim Baig and Balazs Aron Vincze, for their love and support during these years. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv LIST OF TABLES ix LIST OF FIGURES xi LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS xii SUMMARY xiv CHAPTER CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 Research Questions 2 Significance of the Study 5 Context of the Study 8 Theoretical Perspectives 10 Hypotheses 18 Corresponding Models 26 Methods and Organization of Chapters 26 CHAPTER 2: THE FORMATION, HISTORY, AND NATURE OF THE FIELD OF COMPUTING 28 History 28 Formation of Computer Science 33 Nature of Computing 50 Conclusion 58 CHAPTER 3: METHODS 61 First Question 62 Second Question 65 vi CHAPTER 4: AWARD-WINNING CONTRIBUTIONS 88 Introduction 88 Questions 92 Background 93 Findings 94 Conclusion 112 CHAPTER 5: EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENTS OF THE AWARDEES 118 Introduction 118 Findings 120 Discussion 137 Conclusion 143 CHAPTER 6: CAREER ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE AWARDEES 145 Introduction 145 Background 147 Findings 150 Correlation Analysis 155 Logistic Regression Analysis 159 QCA Analyses 163 Discussion and Conclusion 168 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS 176 Summary 176 Implications 183 Limitations of the Study 190 Contributions 190 vii APPENDIX A: NOTE ON ORIGIN OF THE TURING AWARD AND COMPARISON WITH THE NOBEL PRIZE 193 APPENDIX B: NOTE ON INDUSTRY SCIENTISTS, TURING AWARD WINNERS WITH A PH.D., N=3 198 APPENDIX C: NOTE ON WOMEN TURING AWARD WINNERS, N=2 200 APPENDIX D: COLLECTED DATA AND VARIABLES 205 APPENDIX E: NOTES ON THE RANKING OF INSTITUTIONS 208 APPENDIX F: TURING AWARD COMMITTEE AND THE DIVISION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 211 APPENDIX G: PUBLICATION PRACTICES IN COMPUTER SCIENCE 213 APPENDIX H: DOCTORATES AWARDED, BY MAJOR FIELD, 1920-99 217 APPENDIX I: DEVIATIONS AND IMPORTANCE OF DEGREES 218 REFERENCES 221 viii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1: Universities offering a computer science Ph.D. curriculum in 1967 42 Table 2.2: Growth of ACM membership, 1947-1961 45 Table 2.3: Growth of Computer Installations, 1950-1975 45 Table 2.4: Evolution of the foci of the ACM, 1947-2010 49 Table 3.1: Independent Variables Used for Comparative Analyses 76 Table 3.2: Proposed Models of Recognition 84 Table 3.3: Factors Relevant to Recognition by Turing Award used in QCA 86 Table 4.1: Time Profile of Turing Award Winners (1966-2008), N=55 94 Table 4.2: Types of Contributions Acknowledged in Award Citations (1966-2008), N=101 95 Table 4.3: Areas of Awarded Contributions Across Decades (1966-2008), N=56 97 Table 4.4: Sub-areas of Awarded Contributions Across Decades (1966-2008), N=56 98 Table 5.1: Turing Award Winners (1966-2008) by Country of Affiliation, N=55 122 Table 5.2: Universities Attended for the Last Degree Received by Turing Award Winners (1966-2008), N=55 126 Table 5.3: Fields of Study for the Last Degree Received by Turing Award Winners (1966-2008), N=55 127 Table 5.4: Productivity and Impact Measures of Advisors of Turing and Control Group Scientists at Different Time Periods 130 Table 5.5: Productivity and Impact Measures for Turing Award (N=30) and Control Group (N=30) Students Compared to Their Advisors (N=30) 134 Table 5.6: Productivity and Impact Measures for Turing and Control Group Students Who Published With Their Advisors (N=13) Compared to Their Advisors (N=30) 135 Table 5.7: Place of First Job of Turing Award (N=30) and Control Group (N=30) Scientists, 1930s-1980s 136 ix Table 6.1: Years of Experience of Turing and Control Group Scientists in a Sector as a Percentage of Work History (from Graduation Year up to the Year of the Turing Award) 149 Table 6.2: Years of Experience of Turing and Control Group Scientists in Different Institutional Units as a Percentage of Work History (from Graduation Year up to the Year of the Turing Award) 150 Table 6.3: Descriptive Statistics, Career Measures for Turing Award and Control Group Scientists 151 Table 6.4: Sectors of Employment of Turing and Control Group Scientists for their First Jobs, 1930s-1980s 152 Table 6.5: Pairwise Correlations Among Variables 156 Table 6.6: Results of Logistic Regression for Models 1 and 2: Turing Award (N=30) and Control Group Scientists (N=30), 1966-2008 161 Table 6.7: Results of Logistic Regression for Models 3, 4 and 5: Turing Award and Control Group of Scientists, 1966-2008 162 Table 6.8: QCA, The Most Frequent Combinations of the Six Conditions 165 Table 6.9: QCA Complex Solution Explaining Winning Outcome 166 Table 6.10: QCA Parsimonious Solution Explaining Winning Outcome 167 Table C.1: Descriptive Statistics: Career Measures for Women and Men Computer Scientists 204 Table D.1: Collected Data: Variables and Their Definitions 203 x LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.1: Representation of Factors Associated with the Receipt of the Turing Award 25 Figure 4.1: Major Areas of Contributions Awarded Over Time (1966-2008), N=56 96 Figure 4.2: Sub-areas of Contributions Awarded Over Time (1966-2008), N=56 96 Figure 5.1: Percentage of Terminal Degrees Received by Turing Award Winners (N=55), Over Time (1930s-1980s) 123 Figure 5.2: Types of Terminal Degrees Received by Turing Award Winners (N=55), Over Time (1930s-1980s) 124 Figure 5.3: Fields of Degree Pursued by Turing Award Scientists (N=55), Over Time 128 Figure H.1: Doctorates Awarded, by Major Field, 1920-1999 215 xi LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS AAAI American Association for Artificial Intelligence ACL Association for Computational Linguistics ACM Association for Processing Machinery AEC Atomic Energy Commission AFIPS American Federation of Information Processing Societies AIEE American Institute of Electrical Engineers ASCC Automatic Sequence Controlled Calculator ASIS American Society for Information Science AT&T American Telephone and Telegraph Company (Corporation) Caltech California Institute of Technology CBI Charles Babbage Institute
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Available in PDF Format
    Defining Business Rules ~ What Are They Really? the Business Rules Group formerly, known as the GUIDE Business Rules Project Final Report revision 1.3 July, 2000 Prepared by: Project Manager: David Hay Allan Kolber Group R, Inc. Butler Technology Solutions, Inc. Keri Anderson Healy Model Systems Consultants, Inc. Example by: John Hall Model Systems, Ltd. Project team: Charles Bachman David McBride Bachman Information Systems, Inc. Viasoft Joseph Breal Richard McKee IBM The Travelers Brian Carroll Terry Moriarty Intersolv Spectrum Technologies Group, Inc. E.F. Codd Linda Nadeau E.F. Codd & Associates A.D. Experts Michael Eulenberg Bonnie O’Neil Owl Mountain MIACO Corporation James Funk Stephanie Quarles S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Galaxy Technology Corporation J. Carlos Goti Jerry Rosenbaum IBM USF&G Gavin Gray Stuart Rosenthal Coldwell Banker Dyna Systems John Hall Ronald Ross Model Systems, Ltd. Ronald G. Ross Associates Terry Halpin Warren Selkow Asymetrix Corporation CGI/IBM David Hay Dan Tasker Group R, Inc. Dan Tasker John Healy Barbara von Halle The Automated Reasoning Corporation Spectrum Technologies Group, Inc. Keri Anderson Healy John Zachman Model Systems Consultants, Inc. Zachman International, Inc. Allan Kolber Dick Zakrzewski Butler Technology Solutions, Inc. Northwestern Mutual Life - ii - GUIDE Business Rules Project Final Report Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 Project Scope And Objectives 1 Overview Of The Paper 2 The Rationale 2 A Context for Business Rules 4 Definition Of A Business Rule 4 Categories of Business Rule 6 2. Formalizing Business Rules 7 The Business Rules Conceptual Model 8 3. Formulating Business Rules 9 The Origins Of Business Rules — The Model 10 Types of Business Rule 13 Definitions 14 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Communications of the Acm
    COMMUNICATIONS CACM.ACM.ORG OF THEACM 11/2014 VOL.57 NO.11 Scene Understanding by Labeling Pixels Evolution of the Product Manager The Data on Diversity On Facebook, Most Ties Are Weak Keeping Online Reviews Honest Association for Computing Machinery tvx-full-page.pdf-newest.pdf 1 11/10/2013 12:03 3-5 JUNE, 2015 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM Course and Workshop C proposals by M 15 November 2014 Y CM Paper Submissions by MY 12 January 2015 CY CMY K Work in Progress, Demos, DC, & Industrial Submissions by 2 March 2015 Welcoming Submissions on Content Production Systems & Infrastructures Devices & Interaction Techniques Experience Design & Evaluation Media Studies Data Science & Recommendations Business Models & Marketing Innovative Concepts & Media Art TVX2015.COM [email protected] ACM Books M MORGAN& CLAYPOOL &C PUBLISHERS Publish your next book in the ACM Digital Library ACM Books is a new series of advanced level books for the computer science community, published by ACM in collaboration with Morgan & Claypool Publishers. I’m pleased that ACM Books is directed by a volunteer organization headed by a dynamic, informed, energetic, visionary Editor-in-Chief (Tamer Özsu), working closely with a forward-looking publisher (Morgan and Claypool). —Richard Snodgrass, University of Arizona books.acm.org ACM Books ◆ will include books from across the entire spectrum of computer science subject matter and will appeal to computing practitioners, researchers, educators, and students. ◆ will publish graduate level texts; research monographs/overviews of established and emerging fields; practitioner-level professional books; and books devoted to the history and social impact of computing. ◆ will be quickly and attractively published as ebooks and print volumes at affordable prices, and widely distributed in both print and digital formats through booksellers and to libraries and individual ACM members via the ACM Digital Library platform.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles Bachman
    Charles Bachman Born December 11, 1924, Manhattan, Kan.; Proposer of a network approach to storing data as in the Integrated Data Store (IDS) and developer of the OSI Reference Model. Education: BS, mechanical engineering, Michigan State University, 1948; MS, mechanical engineering, University of Pennsylvania, 1950. Professional Experience: Dow Chemical Corporation, 1950-1960; General Electric Company, 1960-1970; Honeywell Information Systems, 1970-1981; Cullinet, 1981- 1983; founder and chairman, BACHMAN Information Systems, 1983-present. Honors and Awards: ACM Turing Award, 1973; distinguished fellow, British Computer Society, 1978. Bachman began his service to the computer industry in 1958 by chairing the SHARE Data processing Committee that developed the IBM 709 Data Processing Package (9PAC), and which preceded the development of the programming language Cobol. He continued this development work through the American National Standards Institute SPARC Study Group on Data Base Management Systems (ANSI/ SPARC/DBMS) that created the layer architecture and conceptual schema for database systems. This work led to the development of the international “Reference Model for Open Systems Integration,” which included the basic idea of a seven- layer architecture, the basis of the OSI networking standard. Bachman received the 1973 ACM Turing Award for his development of the Integrated Data Store, which lifted database work from the status of a specialty to first-class citizenship in computing. IDS provided an elegant logical framework for organizing large on-line collections of variously interrelated data. The system had pragmatic significance also in taking into account advice on expected usage patterns, to improve physical data layouts. The facilities of IDS were fully integrated into the Cobol language and so became available for full-scale practical use.
    [Show full text]
  • Prominence of Expert System and Case Study- DENDRAL Namita Mirjankar, Shruti Ghatnatti Karnataka, India [email protected],[email protected]
    International Journal of Advanced Networking & Applications (IJANA) ISSN: 0975-0282 Prominence of Expert System and Case Study- DENDRAL Namita Mirjankar, Shruti Ghatnatti Karnataka, India [email protected],[email protected] Abstract—Among many applications of Artificial Intelligence, Expert System is the one that exploits human knowledge to solve problems which ordinarily would require human insight. Expert systems are designed to carry the insight and knowledge found in the experts in a particular field and take decisions based on the accumulated knowledge of the knowledge base along with an arrangement of standards and principles of inference engine, and at the same time, justify those decisions with the help of explanation facility. Inference engine is continuously updated as new conclusions are drawn from each new certainty in the knowledge base which triggers extra guidelines, heuristics and rules in the inference engine. This paper explains the basic architecture of Expert System , its first ever success DENDRAL which became a stepping stone in the Artificial Intelligence field, as well as the difficulties faced by the Expert Systems Keywords—Artificial Intelligence; Expert System architecture; knowledge base; inference engine; DENDRAL I INTRODUCTION the main components that remain same are: User Interface, Knowledge Base and Inference Engine. For more than two thousand years, rationalists all over the world have been striving to comprehend and resolve two unavoidable issues of the universe: how does a human mind work, and can non-people have minds? In any case, these inquiries are still unanswered. As humans, we all are blessed with the ability to learn and comprehend, to think about different issues and to decide; but can we design machines to do all these things? Some philosophers are open to the idea that machines will perform all the tasks a human can do.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Patent [19] [11] E Patent Number: Re
    United States Patent [19] [11] E Patent Number: Re. 33,629 Palmer et a1. [45] Reissued Date of Patent: Jul. 2, 1991 [54] NUMERIC DATA PROCESSOR 1973, IEEE Transactions on Computers vol. C-22, pp. [75] Inventors: John F. Palmer, Cambridge, Mass; 577-586. Bruce W. Ravenel, Nederland, Co1o.; Bulman, D. M. "Stack Computers: An Introduction," Ra? Nave, Haifa, Israel May 1977, Computer pp. 18-28. Siewiorek, Daniel H; Bell, C. Gordon; Newell, Allen, [73] Assignee: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, Calif. “Computer Structures: Principles and Examples," 1977, [21] Appl. No.: 461,538 Chapter 29, pp. 470-485 McGraw-Hill Book Co. Palmer, John F., “The Intel Standard for Floatin [22] Filed: Jun. 1, 1990 g-Point Arithmetic,“ Nov. 8-11, 1977, IEEE COMP SAC 77 Proceedings, 107-112. Related US. Patent Documents Coonen, J. T., "Speci?cations for a Proposed Standard Reissue of: t for Floating-Point Arithmetic," Oct. 13, 1978, Mem. [64] Patent No.: 4,338,675 #USB/ERL M78172, pp. 1-32. Issued: Jul. 6, 1982 Pittman, T. and Stewart, R. G., “Microprocessor Stan Appl. No: 120.995 dards,” 1978, AFIPS Conference Proceedings, vol. 47, Filed: Feb. 13, 1980 pp. 935-938. “7094-11 System Support For Numerical Analysis,“ by [51] Int. Cl.-‘ ........................ .. G06F 7/48; G06F 9/00; William Kahan, Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of G06F 11/00 Toronto, Aug. 1966, pp. 1-51. [52] US. Cl. .................................. .. 364/748; 364/737; “A Uni?ed Decimal Floating-Point Architecture For 364/745; 364/258 The Support of High-Level Languages,‘ by Frederic [58] Field of Search ............. .. 364/748, 745, 737, 736, N.
    [Show full text]
  • Faster Math Functions, Soundly
    Faster Math Functions, Soundly IAN BRIGGS, University of Utah, USA PAVEL PANCHEKHA, University of Utah, USA Standard library implementations of functions like sin and exp optimize for accuracy, not speed, because they are intended for general-purpose use. But applications tolerate inaccuracy from cancellation, rounding error, and singularities—sometimes even very high error—and many application could tolerate error in function implementations as well. This raises an intriguing possibility: speeding up numerical code by tuning standard function implementations. This paper thus introduces OpTuner, an automatic method for selecting the best implementation of mathematical functions at each use site. OpTuner assembles dozens of implementations for the standard mathematical functions from across the speed-accuracy spectrum. OpTuner then uses error Taylor series and integer linear programming to compute optimal assignments of function implementation to use site and presents the user with a speed-accuracy Pareto curve they can use to speed up their code. In a case study on the POV-Ray ray tracer, OpTuner speeds up a critical computation, leading to a whole program speedup of 9% with no change in the program output (whereas human efforts result in slower code and lower-quality output). On a broader study of 37 standard benchmarks, OpTuner matches 216 implementations to 89 use sites and demonstrates speed-ups of 107% for negligible decreases in accuracy and of up to 438% for error-tolerant applications. Additional Key Words and Phrases: Floating point, rounding error, performance, approximation theory, synthesis, optimization 1 INTRODUCTION Floating-point arithmetic is foundational for scientific, engineering, and mathematical software. This is because, while floating-point arithmetic is approximate, most applications tolerate minute errors [Piparo et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix - IEEE Spectrum Page 1 of 6
    The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix - IEEE Spectrum Page 1 of 6 COMPUTING / SOFTWARE FEATURE The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix The classic operating system turns 40, and its progeny abound By WARREN TOOMEY / DECEMBER 2011 They say that when one door closes on you, another opens. People generally offer this bit of wisdom just to lend some solace after a misfortune. But sometimes it's actually true. It certainly was for Ken Thompson and the late Dennis Ritchie, two of the greats of 20th-century information technology, when they created the Unix operating system, now considered one of the most inspiring and influential pieces of software ever written. A door had slammed shut for Thompson and Ritchie in March of 1969, when their employer, the American Telephone & Telegraph Co., withdrew from a collaborative project with the Photo: Alcatel-Lucent Massachusetts Institute of KEY FIGURES: Ken Thompson [seated] types as Dennis Ritchie looks on in 1972, shortly Technology and General Electric after they and their Bell Labs colleagues invented Unix. to create an interactive time- sharing system called Multics, which stood for "Multiplexed Information and Computing Service." Time-sharing, a technique that lets multiple people use a single computer simultaneously, had been invented only a decade earlier. Multics was to combine time-sharing with other technological advances of the era, allowing users to phone a computer from remote terminals and then read e -mail, edit documents, run calculations, and so forth. It was to be a great leap forward from the way computers were mostly being used, with people tediously preparing and submitting batch jobs on punch cards to be run one by one.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix - IEEE Spectrum
    The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix - IEEE Spectrum http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/the-strange-birth-and-long-li... COMPUTING / SOFTWARE FEATURE The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix The classic operating system turns 40, and its progeny abound By WARREN TOOMEY / DECEMBER 2011 They say that when one door closes on you, another opens. People generally offer this bit of wisdom just to lend some solace after a misfortune. But sometimes it's actually true. It certainly was for Ken Thompson and the late Dennis Ritchie, two of the greats of 20th-century information technology, when they created the Unix operating system, now considered one of the most inspiring and influential pieces of software ever written. A door had slammed shut for Thompson and Ritchie in March of 1969, when their employer, the American Telephone & Telegraph Co., withdrew from a collaborative project with the Photo: Alcatel-Lucent Massachusetts Institute of KEY FIGURES: Ken Thompson [seated] types as Dennis Ritchie looks on in 1972, shortly Technology and General Electric after they and their Bell Labs colleagues invented Unix. to create an interactive time-sharing system called Multics, which stood for "Multiplexed Information and Computing Service." Time-sharing, a technique that lets multiple people use a single computer simultaneously, had been invented only a decade earlier. Multics was to combine time-sharing with other technological advances of the era, allowing users to phone a computer from remote terminals and then read e-mail, edit documents, run calculations, and so forth. It was to be a great leap forward from the way computers were mostly being used, with people tediously preparing and submitting batch jobs on punch cards to be run one by one.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Contrattbr 4Report 178229 S E M I a N N U a L R E P O
    NASA Contrattbr 4Report 178229 ICASE SEMIANNUAL REPORT April 1, 1986 through September 30, 1986 Contract No. NAS1-18107 January 1987 INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTER APPLICATIONS IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia 23665 Operatsd by the Universities Space Research Association National Aeronautics and Space Ad minis t rat ion bnglay Research Center HamDton,Virginia23665 CONTENTS Page Introduction .............................................................. iii Research in erogress ...................................................... 1 Reports and Abstracts ..................................................... 32 ICASE Colloquia........................................................... 49 ICASE Summer Activities ................................................... 52 Other Activities .......................................................... 58 ICASE Staff ............................................................... 60 i INTRODUCTION The Institute for Computer Applications in Science and Engineering (ICASE) is operated at the Langley Research Center (LaRC) of NASA by the Universities Space Research Associat€on (USRA) under a contract with the Center. USRA is a nonpro€it consortium of major U. S. colleges and universities. The Institute conducts unclassified basic research in applied mathematics, numerical analysis, and computer science in order to extend and improve problem-solving capabilities in science and engineering, particularly in aeronautics and space. ICASE has a small permanent staff. Research
    [Show full text]
  • Awards and Distinguished Papers
    Awards and Distinguished Papers IJCAI-15 Award for Research Excellence search agenda in their area and will have a first-rate profile of influential re- search results. e Research Excellence award is given to a scientist who has carried out a e award is named for John McCarthy (1927-2011), who is widely rec- program of research of consistently high quality throughout an entire career ognized as one of the founders of the field of artificial intelligence. As well as yielding several substantial results. Past recipients of this honor are the most giving the discipline its name, McCarthy made fundamental contributions illustrious group of scientists from the field of artificial intelligence: John of lasting importance to computer science in general and artificial intelli- McCarthy (1985), Allen Newell (1989), Marvin Minsky (1991), Raymond gence in particular, including time-sharing operating systems, the LISP pro- Reiter (1993), Herbert Simon (1995), Aravind Joshi (1997), Judea Pearl (1999), Donald Michie (2001), Nils Nilsson (2003), Geoffrey E. Hinton gramming languages, knowledge representation, commonsense reasoning, (2005), Alan Bundy (2007), Victor Lesser (2009), Robert Anthony Kowalski and the logicist paradigm in artificial intelligence. e award was estab- (2011), and Hector Levesque (2013). lished with the full support and encouragement of the McCarthy family. e winner of the 2015 Award for Research Excellence is Barbara Grosz, e winner of the 2015 inaugural John McCarthy Award is Bart Selman, Higgins Professor of Natural Sciences at the School of Engineering and Nat- professor at the Department of Computer Science, Cornell University. Pro- ural Sciences, Harvard University. Professor Grosz is recognized for her pio- fessor Selman is recognized for expanding our understanding of problem neering research in natural language processing and in theories and applica- complexity and developing new algorithms for efficient inference.
    [Show full text]
  • Oral History Interview with Bernard A. Galler
    An Interview with BERNARD A. GALLER OH 236 Conducted by Enid H. Galler on 8, 10-11, and 16 August 1991 Sutton's Bay, MI Ann Arbor, MI Charles Babbage Institute Center for the History of Information Processing University of Minnesota, Minneapolis Copyright, Charles Babbage Institute 1 Bernard A. Galler Interview 8, 10-11, and 16 August 1991 Abstract In this wide-ranging interview, Galler describes the development of computer science at the University of Michigan from the 1950s through the 1980s and discusses his own work in computer science. Prominent subjects in Galler's description of his work at Michigan include: his arrival and classes with John Carr, research use of International Business Machines (IBM) and later Amdahl mainframe computers, the establishment of the Statistical Laboratory in the Mathematics Dept., the origin of the computer science curriculum and the Computer Science Dept. in the 1950s, interactions with Massachusetts Institute of Technology and IBM about timesharing in the 1960s, the development of the Michigan Algorithm Decoder, and the founding of the MERIT network. Galler also discusses Michigan's relationship with ARPANET, CSNET, and BITNET. He describes the atmosphere on campus in the 1960s and early 1970s and his various administrative roles at the university. Galler discusses his involvement with the Association for Computing Machinery, the American Federation of Information Processing Societies, the founding of the Charles Babbage Institute, and his work with the Annals of the History of Computing. He describes his consultative work with Israel and his consulting practice in general, his work as an expert witness, and his interaction with the Patent Office on issues surrounding the patenting of software and his role in the establishment of the Software Patent Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 10: File Systems File Systems, Databases, Cloud Storage
    Lecture 10: File systems File systems, databases, cloud storage • file: a sequence of bytes stored on a computer – content is arbitrary (just bytes); any structure is imposed by the creator of the file, not by the operating system • file system: software that provides hierarchical storage and organization of files, usually on a single computer (or nearby) – a significant part of the operating system • database: an integrated collection of logically related records – data is organized and structured for efficient systematic access – may be distributed across lots of machines & geographically dispersed • database system: software that provides efficient access to information in a database – not usually part of the operating system • cloud storage: the same thing, but on someone else's computer(s) File systems: managing stored information • logical structure: users and programs see a hierarchy of folders (or directories) and files – a folder contains references to folder and files – "root" folder ultimately leads to all others – a file is just a sequence of bytes contents determined and interpreted by programs, not the operating system – a folder is a special file that contains names of other folders & files plus other information like size, time of change, etc. contents are completely controlled by the operating system • physical structure: disk drives operate in tracks, sectors, etc. – other storage devices have other physical properties • the operating system converts between these two views – does whatever is necessary to maintain the file/folder
    [Show full text]