Computational Sustainability: Computing for a Better World and a Sustainable Future
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
IJCAI-05 Programme
PROGRAMME IJCAI – 0 5 NINETEENTH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE EDINBURGH, SCOTLAND 30 JULY – 5 AUGUST 2005 www.ijcai-05.org Sponsored by: INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCES ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (IJCAI) Hosted by: THE BRITISH COMPUTER SOCIETY SPECIALIST GROUP ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE In Collaboration with: THE SCHOOL OF INFORMATICS, UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH In Partnership with: SCOTTISH ENTERPRISE AND THE BRITISH COMPUTER SOCIETY IJCAI – 0 5 WELCOME TO IJCAI-05 Dear Attendees, We are very pleased to welcome you all to IJCAI-05 and Edinburgh. We have put together an excellent technical program and exciting social events. We hope you will find IJCAI-05 to be a pleasant experience through significant technical and social interactions with your fellow AI researchers and practitioners from around the world. Edinburgh, the capital city of Scotland, is a city filled with historical sights and stories and hosts the world-famous Edinburgh International Festival immediately after IJCAI-05. It will be a very busy but enjoyable week. IJCAI-05, the Nineteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, is sponsored by the International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) and hosted by The British Computer Society Specialist Group on Artificial Intelligence and the School of Informatics, The University of Edinburgh and in Partnership with the British Computer Society and Scottish Enterprise. IJCAI sponsors biennial conferences on Artificial Intelligence, which are the premier forums for -
Opportunities for Computing Research and Education in a Sustainability Context
Opportunities for Computing Research and Education in a Sustainability Context Panel on The Present and Future of Sustainability R&D at the First USENIX Workshop on Sustainable Information Technology Douglas H. Fisher Program Director National Science Foundation (NSF) Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Division of Information & Intelligent Systems (IIS) Robust Intelligence Program (RI) [email protected] Douglas H. Fisher (NSF) Questions to ask As educators What should be sustained? What are the “needs” of future generations referenced in the Brundtland report? Why? Are the reasons compelling? As computing professionals Is the low hanging fruit being implemented (e.g., distance meetings)? What are the factors influencing implementation decisions? What are the lifecycle costs? What are aspirations? Lifecycles→∞? As computer scientists What is the (likely) growth rate (of adoption, of resource depletion, of energy demand, of improvement)? (across all societal/technical areas) What is the complexity class (of growth rate, of change to growth rate)? What other communities are prospective partners? Douglas H. Fisher (NSF) Computing and the Environment ICT along for the ride ICT Possible Future Current Human footprint ICT reduces human footprint IT is a bigger (e.g., through percentage dematerialization) without Possible of a smaller matching rebound effects Future total Don’t (too) short shrift direct effects, because the 2% of “today” (2007) is the 30% of tomorrow (growth rates, growth rates, growth rates!) Douglas H. Fisher (NSF) * Context * * http://www.nsf.gov Douglas H. Fisher (NSF) Finding 1: … A comprehensive coordinated Federal strategy is required … Finding 2: … Private and Federal support … R&D is inadequate. Finding 3: … The U.S. -
A 20-Year Community Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence Research in the US
A 20-Year Community Roadmap for Begin forwarded message: From: AAAI Press <[email protected]> Subject: Recap Date: July 8, 2019 at 3:52:40 PM PDT To: Carol McKenna Hamilton <[email protected]>Artificial Intelligence Research in the US Could you check this for me? Hi Denise, While it is fresh in my mind, I wanted to provide you with a recap on the AAAI proceedings work done. Some sections of the proceedings were better than others, which is to be expected because authors in some subject areas are less likely to use gures, the use of which is a signicant factor in error rate. The vision section was an excellent example of this variability. The number of problems in this section was quite high. Although I only called out 13 papers for additional corrections, there were many problems that I simply let go. What continues to be an issue, is why the team didn’t catch many of these errors before compilation began. For example, some of the errors involved the use of the caption package, as well as the existence of setlength commands. These are errors that should have been discovered and corrected before compilation. As I’ve mentioned before, running search routines on the source of all the papers in a given section saves a great deal of time because, in part, it insures consistency. That is something that has been decidedly lacking with regard to how these papers have been (or haven’t been) corrected. It is a cause for concern because the error rate should have been improving, not getting worse. -
AAAI News AAAI News
AAAI News AAAI News Spring News from the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence AAAI Announces The Interactive Museum Tour-Guide Holte, Ariel Felner, Guni Sharon, Robot (Wolfram Burgard, Armin B. Nathan R. Sturtevant) New Senior Member! Cremers, Dieter Fox, Dirk Hähnel, Gerhard Lakemeyer, Dirk Schulz, Wal- AAAI-16 Outstanding AAAI congratulates Wheeler Ruml ter Steiner, and Sebastian Thrun) Student Paper Award (University of New Hampshire, USA) Toward a Taxonomy and Computa- Boosting Combinatorial Search on his election to AAAI Senior Member tional Models of Abnormalities in through Randomization (Carla P. status. This honor was announced at Images (Babak Saleh, Ahmed Elgam- Gomes, Bart Selman, and Henry the recent AAAI-16 Conference in mal, Jacob Feldman, Ali Farhadi) Phoenix. Senior Member status is Kautz) designed to recognize AAAI members Burgard and colleagues were honored IAAI-16 Innovative who have achieved significant accom- for significant contributions to proba- Application Awards plishments within the field of artificial bilistic robot navigation and the inte- Each year the AAAI Conference on intelligence. To be eligible for nomina- gration with high-level planning Innovative Applications selects the tion for Senior Member, candidates methods, while Gomes, Selman, and recipients of the IAAI Innovative must be consecutive members of AAAI Kautz were recognized for their signifi- Application Award. These deployed for at least five years and have been cant contributions to the area of auto- application case study papers must active in the professional arena for at mated reasoning and constraint solv- describe deployed applications with least ten years. ing through the introduction of measurable benefits that include some randomization and restarts into com- aspect of AI technology. -
A 20-Year Community Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence Research in the US
A 20-Year Community Roadmap for Begin forwarded message: From: AAAI Press <[email protected]> Subject: Recap Date: July 8, 2019 at 3:52:40 PM PDT To: Carol McKenna Hamilton <[email protected]>Artificial Intelligence Research in the US Could you check this for me? Hi Denise, While it is fresh in my mind, I wanted to provide you with a recap on the AAAI proceedings work done. Some sections of the proceedings were better than others, which is to be expected because authors in some subject areas are less likely to use gures, the use of which is a signicant factor in error rate. The vision section was an excellent example of this variability. The number of problems in this section was quite high. Although I only called out 13 papers for additional corrections, there were many problems that I simply let go. What continues to be an issue, is why the team didn’t catch many of these errors before compilation began. For example, some of the errors involved the use of the caption package, as well as the existence of setlength commands. These are errors that should have been discovered and corrected before compilation. As I’ve mentioned before, running search routines on the source of all the papers in a given section saves a great deal of time because, in part, it insures consistency. That is something that has been decidedly lacking with regard to how these papers have been (or haven’t been) corrected. It is a cause for concern because the error rate should have been improving, not getting worse. -
Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics the Library of Essays on the Ethics of Emerging Technologies
MACHINE ETHICS AND ROBOT ETHICS THE LIBRARY OF ESSAYS ON THE ETHICS OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES Series editor: Wendell Wallach Titles in the series The Ethical Challenges of Emerging Medical Technologies Edited by Arthur L. Caplan and Brendan Parent The Ethics of Biotechnology Edited by Gaymon Bennett The Ethics of Nanotechnology, Geoengineering, and Clean Energy Edited by Andrew Maynard and Jack Stilgoe The Ethics of Sports Technologies and Human Enhancement Edited by Thomas H. Murray and Voo Teck Chuan Emerging Technologies Edited by Gary E. Marchant and Wendell Wallach The Ethics of Information Technologies Edited by Keith W. Miller and Mariarosaria Taddeo Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics Edited by Wendell Wallach and Peter Asaro The Ethics of Military Technology Edited by Braden Allenby Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics Wendell Wallach, Yale University, USA, and Peter asaro, New School for Public Engagement, USA THE LIBRAY OF ESSAYS ON THE ETHICS OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES First published 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business Editorial material and selection © 2017 Wendell Wallach and Peter Asaro; individual owners retain copyright in their own material. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. -
Carla P. Gomes Computing and Information Science Dept
Carla P. Gomes Computing and Information Science Dept. of Computer Science Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management Cornell University 353 Gates Hall Ithaca, NY 14853 phone: (607) 255 9189 [email protected] www.cs.cornell.edu/gomes Current position Director, Institute for Computational Sustainability, Cornell University Ronald C. and Antonia V. Nielsen Professor of Computing and Information Science, Cornell University Professor, Dept. of Computer Science, Dept. of Information Science, and Dyson School of Ap- plied Economics and Management, Cornell University Cornell Research Field Membership: Computer Science, Information Science, Applied Mathe- matics, Applied Economics and Management, and City and Regional Planning. Education Ph.D. (Computer Science), University of Edinburgh (1993). Area: Artificial Intelligence and Operations Research Advisors: Professors Austin Tate (Artificial Intelligence) and Lyn Thomas (Oper. Re- search) M.Sc. (Applied Mathematics), Technical University of Lisbon (1987). Area: Operations Research Advisor: Professor Teresa Almeida Research Interests: Artificial Intelligence; Computational Sustainability; Scientific Discovery; Combinatorial Reasoning, Decision, and Optimization Problems; Connections with Operations Research, Machine and Statistical Learning, and Dynamical Systems; Multi-agent Systems; Approximations, randomization, and sam- pling techniques to identify structure; Science of Computation (synthesis of formal and experimental research). 1 Professional Recognition Fellow, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), 2017. Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2013. Fellow, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2007. Feigenbaum Prize, AAAI, 2021. Lead P.I., NSF Expeditions in Computing Award ($10M). CompSustNet: Expanding the Hori- zons of Computational Sustainability, 2015-2020. Lead P.I., NSF Expeditions in Computing Award ($10M). Computational Sustainability: Com- putational Methods for a Sustainable Environment, Economy, and Society, 2008-2013. -
Control and Responsible Innovation in the Development of AI and Robotics
Control and Responsible Innovation in the Development of AI and Robotics Draft Final Report Edited by Wendell Wallach With contributions from Carla Gomes, Gary Marchant, David Roscoe, Francesca Rossi, Stuart Russell, Bart Selman, and Shannon Vallor Gregory Kaebnick and Isabel Bolo provided editorial assistance with this report. A project of The Hastings Center, supported by funding from the Future of Life Institute DRAFT ii DRAFT Table of Contents I. Executive Summary/Recommendations………………………………………..….3 II. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………......5 Background and Project Origin AI Safety and Ethics III. Silo-busting, Collaboration, and Trust……………………………………….……11 AI: Whom Do You Trust? — David Roscoe The Need for Trustworthy AI — Carla Gomes and Bart Selman IV. Addressing Nearer-Term Ethical Challenges versus Longer-Term Approaches to AI Safety…………….………………………………………………24 Value Alignment and Machine Ethics — Shannon Vallor Towards Provably Beneficial AI — Stuart Russell V. Agile and Comprehensive Governance………………………………….................................................................43 An Agile Ethical/Legal Model for the International and National Governance of AI and Robotics — Wendell Wallach and Gary Marchant “Soft Law” Governance of Artificial Intelligence — Gary Marchant VI. Conclusion…………………….……………………………………………………….69 Appendix: Project Participants…………………….……………………………………….73 1 DRAFT 2 DRAFT Section I. Executive Summary/Recommendations Artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics promise tremendous benefit but are accompanied by an -
A 20-Year Community Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence Research In
CCC ~m putingComm unity Consortium C..talyst A 20-Year Community Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence Research in the US Executive Summary March 2019 Co-chairs: Yolanda Gil and Bart Selman Decades of a1tificial intelligence (AI) research have produced fo1midable technologies that are providing immense benefit to industiy, government, and society. AI systems can now ti·anslate across multiple languages, identify objects in images and video, converse about order placement, and conti·ol cars. The ubiquitous deployment of AI systems has not only created a ti·illion dollar AI industiy that is projected to quadiuple in three years, but has also exposed the need to make AI systems fair and t1ustwo1thy as well as more competent about the world in which they (and we) operate. Future AI systems will be rightfully expected to handle complex tasks and responsibilities, engage in meaningful communication, and improve their awareness through expedence. The next generation of AI systems have the potential for t1·ansfo1m ative impact on society. For example, lifelong personal assistants will enable an elderly population to live longer independently, AI health coaches will provide advice for lifestyle choices, customized AI tutors will broaden education oppo1tunities, and AI scientific assistants will dramatically accelerate the pace of discove1y. Recognizing that AI will be a major &·iver of the economy over the next several decades, Asia and Europe are making multi-billion dollar AI investments. With strategic investments, the US can remain the preeminent leader in AI and benefit from its broad societal and economic impacts. Achieving the fu ll potential of AI technologies po ses research challenges that will require significant sustained investment and a radical transformation of the AI research enterprise. -
The State of SAT
The State of SAT Henry Kautz a and Bart Selman b aDepartment of Computer Science, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA [email protected] bDepartment of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA, [email protected] Abstract The papers in this special issue originated at SAT 2001, the Fourth International Symposium on the Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing. This foreword reviews the current state of satisfiability testing and places the papers in this issue in context. Key words: Boolean satisfiability, complexity, challenge problems. 1 Introduction The past few years have seen enormous progress in the performance of Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solvers. Despite the worst-case exponential run time of all known algorithms, SAT solvers are now in routine use for applications such as hardware verification [1] that involve solving hard structured problems with up to a million variables [2,3]. Each year the International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing hosts a SAT competition that highlights a new group of “world’s fastest” SAT solvers, and presents detailed performance results on a wide range of solvers [4,5]. In the the 2003 competition, over 30 solvers competed on instances selected from thousands of benchmark problems. The papers in this special issue originated at the SAT 2001, the Fourth Inter- national Symposium on the Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing. ? A preliminary version of this paper appeared under the title “Ten Challenges Redux : Recent Progress in Propositional Reasoning and Search” in the Proc. of CP-2003, Cork, Ireland, 2003. Preprint submitted to Elsevier Science This foreword reviews the current state of satisfiability testing and places the papers in this issue in context. -
Control and Responsible Innovation in the Development of AI and Robotics
Control and Responsible Innovation in the Development of AI and Robotics Final Report Edited by Wendell Wallach With contributions from Carla Gomes, Gary Marchant, David Roscoe, Francesca Rossi, Stuart Russell, Bart Selman, and Shannon Vallor Gregory Kaebnick and Isabel Bolo provided editorial assistance with this report. Kenneth Miller provided additional editing assistance. A project of The Hastings Center, supported by funding from the Future of Life Institute ii Table of Contents I. Executive Summary/Recommendations………………………………………..….3 II. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………......5 Background and Project Origin AI Safety and Ethics III. Silo-busting, Collaboration, and Trust……………………………………….……11 AI: Whom Do You Trust? — David Roscoe The Need for Trustworthy AI — Carla Gomes and Bart Selman IV. Addressing Nearer-Term Ethical Challenges versus Longer-Term Approaches to AI Safety…………….………………………………………………24 Value Alignment and Machine Ethics — Shannon Vallor Towards Provably Beneficial AI — Stuart Russell V. Agile and Comprehensive Governance………………………………….................................................................43 An Agile Ethical/Legal Model for the International and National Governance of AI and Robotics — Wendell Wallach and Gary Marchant “Soft Law” Governance of Artificial Intelligence — Gary Marchant VI. Conclusion…………………….……………………………………………………….69 Appendix: Project Participants…………………….……………………………………….73 1 2 Section I. Executive Summary/Recommendations Artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics promise tremendous benefit -
AAAI-2000 Frontmatter
From: AAAI-00 Proceedings. Copyright © 2000, AAAI (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. Contents AAAI Organization / xix Conference Program Committees / xxi Outstanding Paper Award / xxiv Sponsoring Organizations / xxv Preface / xxvi Invited Talks / xxvii AAAI-2000 Technical Papers Agents Inter-Layer Learning Towards Emergent Cooperative Behavior / 3 Shawn Arseneau, Wei Sun, Changpeng Zhao, and Jeremy R. Cooperstock, McGill University Coordination Failure and Congestion in Information Networks / 9 A. M. Bell, NASA Ames Research Center; W. A. Sethares and J. A. Bucklew, University of Wisconsin-Madison Non-Deterministic Social Laws / 15 Michael H. Coen, MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Solving Combinatorial Auctions Using Stochastic Local Search / 22 Holger H. Hoos, University of British Columbia; Craig Boutilier, University of Toronto A Mechanism for Group Decision Making in Collaborative Activity / 30 Luke Hunsberger, Harvard University; Massimo Zancanaro, ITC-irst Cobot in LambdaMOO: A Social Statistics Agent / 36 Charles Lee Isbell, Jr., Michael Kearns, Dave Kormann, Satinder Singh, and Peter Stone, AT&T Shannon Labs Semantics of Agent Communication Languages for Group Interaction / 42 Sanjeev Kumar, Marcus J. Huber, David R. McGee, and Philip R. Cohen, Oregon Graduate Institute; Hector J. Levesque, University of Toronto Deliberation in Equilibrium: Bargaining in Computationally Complex Problems / 48 Kate Larson and Tuomas Sandholm, Washington University An Algorithm for Multi-Unit Combinatorial Auctions / 56 Kevin Leyton-Brown, Yoav Shoham, and Moshe Tennenholtz, Stanford University Maintainability: A Weaker Stabilizability Like Notion for High Level Control / 62 Mutsumi Nakamura, University of Texas at Arlington; Chitta Baral, Arizona State University; Marcus Bjäreland, Linköping University Agent Capabilities: Extending BDI Theory / 68 Lin Padgham, RMIT University; Patrick Lambrix, Linköpings Universitet v Iterative Combinatorial Auctions: Theory and Practice / 74 David C.