PlantUML is an open-source tool allowing users to create diagrams from a plain text language. Besides various UML diagrams, PlantUML has support for various other software development related formats (such as Archimate, Block diagram, BPMN, C4, Computer network diagram, ERD, Gantt chart, Mind map, and WBD), as well as visualisation of JSON and YAML files. The language of PlantUML is an example of a domain-specific language. Besides its own DSL, PlantUML also understands AsciiMath, Creole, DOT, and LaTeX. It uses Graphviz software to lay out its diagrams and Tikz for LaTeX support. Images can be output as PNG, SVG, LaTeX and even ASCII art. PlantUML has also been used to allow blind people to design and read UML diagrams. == Applications that use PlantUML == There are various extensions or add-ons that incorporate PlantUML. Atom has a community maintained PlantUML syntax highlighter and viewer. Confluence wiki has a PlantUML plug-in for Confluence Server, which renders diagrams on-the-fly during a page reload. There is an additional PlantUML plug-in for Confluence Cloud. Doxygen integrates diagrams for which sources are provided after the startuml command. Eclipse has a PlantUML plug-in. Google Docs has an add-on called PlantUML Gizmo that works with the PlantUML.com server. IntelliJ IDEA can create and display diagrams embedded into Markdown (built-in) or in standalone files (using a plugin). LaTeX using the Tikz package has limited support for PlantUML. LibreOffice has Libo_PlantUML extension to use PlantUML diagrams. MediaWiki has a PlantUML plug-in which renders diagrams in pages as SVG or PNG. Microsoft Word can use PlantUML diagrams via a Word Template Add-in. There is an additional Visual Studio Tools for Office add-in called PlantUML Gizmo that works in a similar fashion. NetBeans has a PlantUML plug-in. Notepad++ has a PlantUML plug-in. Obsidian has a PlantUML plug-in. Org-mode has a PlantUML org-babel support. Rider has a PlantUML plug-in. Sublime Text has a PlantUML package called PlantUmlDiagrams for Sublime Text 2 and 3. Visual Studio Code has various PlantUML extensions on its marketplace, most popular being PlantUML by jebbs. Vnote open source notetaking markdown application has built in PlantUML support. Xcode has a community maintained Source Editor Extension to generate and view PlantUML class diagrams from Swift source code. == Text format to communicate UML at source code level == PlantUML uses well-formed and human-readable code to render the diagrams. There are other text formats for UML modelling, but PlantUML supports many diagram types, and does not need an explicit layout, though it is possible to tweak the diagrams if necessary. +--------------------------------------+ | TEDx Talks Recommendation | | System | +--------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+ | | | Visitor | | | +----------------------------------+ | | | + View Recommended Talks | | | | + Search Talks | | | +----------------------------------+ | +--------------------------------------+ | | V +--------------------------------------+ | Authenticated User | +--------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+ | | | User | | | +----------------------------------+ | | | + View Recommended Talks | | | | + Search Talks | | | | + Save Favorite Talks | | | +----------------------------------+ | +--------------------------------------+ | | V +--------------------------------------+ | Admin | +--------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------+ | | | Admin | | | +----------------------------------+ | | | + CRUD Talks | | | | + Manage Users | | | +----------------------------------+ | +--------------------------------------+
Thermal attack
A thermal attack (aka thermal imaging attack) is an approach that exploits heat traces to uncover the entered credentials. These attacks rely on the phenomenon of heat transfer from one object to another. During authentication, heat transfers from the users' hands to the surface they are interacting with, leaving heat traces behind that can be analyzed using thermal cameras that operate in the far-infrared spectrum. These traces can be recovered and used to reconstruct the passwords. In some cases, the attack can be successful even 30 seconds after the user has authenticated. Thermal attacks can be performed after the victim had authenticated, alleviating the need for in-situ observation attacks (e.g., shoulder surfing attacks) that can be affected by hand occlusions. While smudge attacks can reveal the order of entries of graphical passwords, such as the Android Lock Patterns, thermal attacks can reveal the order of entries even in the case of PINs or alphanumeric passwords. The reason thermal attacks leak information about the order of entry is because keys and buttons that the user touches first lose heat over time, while recently touched ones maintain the heat signature for a longer time. This results in distinguishable heat patterns that can tell the attacker which entry was entered first. Thermal attacks were shown to be effective against plastic keypads, such as the ones used to enter credit card's PINs in supermarkets and restaurants, and on handheld mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. In their paper published at the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2017), Abdelrahman et al. showed that the attack is feasible on today's smartphones. They also proposed some ways to mitigate the attack, such as swiping randomly on the screen to distort the heat traces, or forcing maximum CPU usage for a few seconds. Thermal attacks can also infer passwords from heat traces on keyboards. Researchers at the University of Glasgow showed that attackers who use AI methods can be more effective in performing thermal attacks. Their study presents a new tool called ThermoSecure and evaluates it in two user studies. The results show that ThermoSecure can successfully attack passwords with an average accuracy of 92% to 55%, depending on the length of the password. The effectiveness of thermal attacks also depends on typing behavior and the material of the keycaps. ABS keycaps, which retain heat traces longer, are more vulnerable to thermal attacks. The study also discusses ways to protect against thermal attacks and presents seven potential mitigation approaches. Dr Khamis, who led the development of the technology with Norah Alotaibi and John Williamson, said with thermal imaging cameras more affordable than ever and machine learning becoming more accessible, it was "very likely that people around the world are developing systems along similar lines to ThermoSecure in order to steal passwords". == Thermal Attack Mitigation == === Simple and Practical Measures === One basic and effective way to mitigate thermal attacks is to deliberately create heat noise over the input interface, such as a keypad or keyboard, after entering a password. For instance, placing one's palm over the entire interface for a few seconds after use can obscure the thermal pattern left by the fingers, making it much more difficult for an unauthorized user to interpret the heat traces. === Range of Proposed Strategies === In addition to simple methods, researchers have developed a spectrum of mitigation strategies to counter thermal attacks. These strategies encompass 15 different approaches including: Use of Biometrics: Replacing traditional pin codes or passwords with biometric authentication, such as fingerprint recognition or facial recognition, eliminates the issue of residual heat on keypads. Heating the Interface: Implementing technology to slightly warm up the keypad can effectively neutralize the heat traces left by fingers, preventing thermal cameras from capturing the pattern. Randomizing Key Layouts: Employing dynamic key layouts that change positions every time the interface is used, making it impossible to correlate heat patterns with static input positions. === Technological Intervention on Thermal Cameras === Another avenue for mitigation is to address the issue at the source by modifying thermal cameras. Proposals have been made to develop thermal cameras that can automatically detect vulnerable interfaces such as keyboards or keypads. When these interfaces are detected within the camera's field of view, the camera would be programmed to prevent the user from recording images of them. This solution, however, would require widespread adoption by thermal camera manufacturers. Additionally, the approach is particularly viable for thermal cameras connected to a computing device, such as a smartphone, which can process the images in real time. Many affordable thermal cameras are standalone and do not have connectivity or processing capabilities. However, thermal cameras designed for connection to mobile devices can utilize the smartphone's processing power, making this mitigation approach feasible for such devices.
Lethal autonomous weapon
A lethal autonomous weapon (LAW), also known as a lethal autonomous weapon system (LAWS), autonomous weapon system (AWS), robotic weapon, or killer robot, is a type of military drone or military robot, which is autonomous in that it can independently search for and engage targets based on programmed constraints and descriptions. As of 2025, most military drones (including unmanned aerial vehicles and unmanned combat aerial vehicles) and military robots are not truly autonomous. LAWs may engage in drone warfare in the air, on land, on water, underwater, or in space. == Definitions == In weapons development, the term "autonomous" is somewhat ambiguous and can vary hugely between different scholars, nations and organizations. There is no definition of lethal autonomous weapon systems that is generally agreed upon among different countries. The official United States Department of Defense Policy on Autonomy in Weapon Systems (Department of Defense Directive 3000.09) defines an Autonomous Weapon System as one that "...once activated, can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator." Heather Roff, a writer for Case Western Reserve University School of Law, describes autonomous weapon systems as "... capable of learning and adapting their 'functioning in response to changing circumstances in the environment in which [they are] deployed,' as well as capable of making firing decisions on their own." The British Ministry of Defence states "Whilst definitions can vary, the key difference is that an automated system is capable of carrying out complicated tasks but is incapable of complex decision-making, whereas an autonomous system is capable of deciding a course of action without depending on human oversight and control." Scholars such as Peter Asaro and Mark Gubrud believe that any weapon system that is capable of releasing a lethal force without the operation, decision, or confirmation of a human supervisor can be deemed autonomous. == Automatic defensive systems == Some definitions of autonomous weapon systems are broad enough to include land mines and naval mines, simple automatically-triggered lethal weapons that have been in use for centuries. Some current examples of LAWs are automated "hardkill" active protection systems, such as a radar-guided close-in weapon systems (CIWS) used to defend ships that have been in use since the 1970s (e.g., the US Phalanx CIWS). Such systems can autonomously identify and attack oncoming missiles, rockets, artillery fire, aircraft, and surface vessels according to criteria set by the human operator. Similar systems exist for tanks, such as the Russian Arena, the Israeli Trophy, and the German AMAP-ADS. Several types of stationary sentry guns, which can fire at humans and vehicles, are used in South Korea and Israel. Many missile defence systems, such as Iron Dome, also have autonomous targeting capabilities. The main reason for not having a "human in the loop" in these systems is the need for rapid response. They have generally been used to protect personnel and installations against incoming projectiles. == Autonomous offensive systems == According to The Economist in 2018, as technology advances, applications of uncrewed undersea vehicles could include mine clearance, mine-laying, anti-submarine sensor networking in contested waters, patrolling with active sonar, resupplying manned submarines, and becoming low-cost missile platforms. In 2017 the Russian Federation was developing artificially intelligent missiles, drones, unmanned vehicles, military robots and medic robots. In 2018, the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review alleged that Russia was developing a "new intercontinental, nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered, undersea autonomous torpedo" named "Status 6". Israeli Minister Ayoob Kara stated in 2017 that Israel is developing military robots, including ones as small as flies. In October 2018, Zeng Yi, a senior executive at the Chinese defense firm Norinco, gave a speech in which he said that "In future battlegrounds, there will be no people fighting", and that the use of lethal autonomous weapons in warfare is "inevitable". In 2019, US Defense Secretary Mark Esper lashed out at China for selling drones capable of taking life with no human oversight. As of 2020, DARPA was working on making swarms of 250 autonomous lethal drones available to the American military. The US Navy is developing unmanned surface vehicles, also called sea drones, including Ghost Fleet Overlord, with plans to equip them with weapons and with the potential to use them semi-autonomously. In 2020 a Kargu 2 drone hunted down and attacked a human target in Libya, according to a report from the UN Security Council's Panel of Experts on Libya, published in March 2021. This may have been the first time an autonomous killer robot armed with lethal weaponry attacked human beings. In May 2021 Israel conducted an AI-guided combat drone swarm attack in Gaza. In the Russo-Ukrainian war, Ukraine has developed advanced drones with integrated artificial intelligence for a range of drone warfare purposes, including to attack infrastructure in Russia, although as of May 2026, Al Jazeera reported that humans remain in control of operation. == Ethical and legal issues == === Degree of human control === Three classifications of the degree of human control of autonomous weapon systems were laid out by Bonnie Docherty in a 2012 Human Rights Watch report. human-in-the-loop: a human must instigate the action of the weapon (in other words not fully autonomous). human-on-the-loop: a human may abort an action. human-out-of-the-loop: no human action is involved. === Standard used in US policy === Department of Defense Directive 3000.09 states that "Autonomous … weapons systems shall be designed to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force." However, as noted in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the policy requires that autonomous weapon systems that kill people or use kinetic force, selecting and engaging targets without further human intervention, be certified as compliant with "appropriate levels" and other standards, not that such weapon systems cannot meet these standards and are therefore forbidden. "Semi-autonomous" hunter-killers that autonomously identify and attack targets do not even require certification. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert O. Work said in 2016 that the Defense Department would "not delegate lethal authority to a machine to make a decision", but might need to reconsider this since "authoritarian regimes" may do so. In October 2016 President Barack Obama stated that early in his career he was wary of a future in which a US president making use of drone warfare could "carry on perpetual wars all over the world, and a lot of them covert, without any accountability or democratic debate". In the US, security-related AI has fallen under the purview of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence since 2018. On October 31, 2019, the United States Department of Defense's Defense Innovation Board published the draft of a report outlining five principles for weaponized AI and making 12 recommendations for the ethical use of artificial intelligence by the Department of Defense that would ensure a human operator would always be able to look into the 'black box' and understand the kill-chain process. A major concern is how the report will be implemented. === Possible violations of ethics and international acts === Stuart Russell, professor of computer science from University of California, Berkeley stated the concern he has with LAWs is that his view is that it is unethical and inhumane. The main issue with this system is it is hard to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. There is concern by some economists and legal scholars about whether LAWs would violate International Humanitarian Law, especially the principle of distinction, which requires the ability to discriminate combatants from non-combatants, and the principle of proportionality, which requires that damage to civilians be proportional to the military aim. This concern is often invoked as a reason to ban "killer robots" altogether - but it is doubtful that this concern can be an argument against LAWs that do not violate International Humanitarian Law. A 2021 report by the American Congressional Research Service states that "there are no domestic or international legal prohibitions on the development of use of LAWs," although it acknowledges ongoing talks at the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). LAWs are said by some to blur the boundaries of who is responsible for a particular killing. Philosopher Robert Sparrow argues that autonomous weapons are causally but not morally responsible, similar to child soldiers. In each case, he argues there is a risk of atrocities occurring without an appropriate subject to hold responsible, which violates jus in bell
Mathematical model
A mathematical model is an abstract description of a concrete system using mathematical concepts and language. The process of developing a mathematical model is termed mathematical modeling. Mathematical models are used in many fields, including applied mathematics, natural sciences, social sciences and engineering. In particular, the field of operations research studies the use of mathematical modelling and related tools to solve problems in business or military operations. A model may help to characterize a system by studying the effects of different components, which may be used to make predictions about behavior or solve specific problems. == Elements of a mathematical model == Mathematical models can take many forms, including dynamical systems, statistical models, differential equations, or game theoretic models. These and other types of models can overlap, with a given model involving a variety of abstract structures. In many cases, the quality of a scientific field depends on how well the mathematical models developed on the theoretical side agree with results of repeatable experiments. Lack of agreement between theoretical mathematical models and experimental measurements often leads to important advances as better theories are developed. In the physical sciences, a traditional mathematical model contains most of the following elements: Governing equations Supplementary sub-models Defining equations Constitutive equations Assumptions and constraints Initial and boundary conditions Classical constraints and kinematic equations == Classifications == Mathematical models are of different types: === Linear vs. nonlinear === If all the operators in a mathematical model exhibit linearity, the resulting mathematical model is defined as linear. All other models are considered nonlinear. The definition of linearity and nonlinearity is dependent on context, and linear models may have nonlinear expressions in them. For example, in a statistical linear model, it is assumed that a relationship is linear in the parameters, but it may be nonlinear in the predictor variables. Similarly, a differential equation is said to be linear if it can be written with linear differential operators, but it can still have nonlinear expressions in it. In a mathematical programming model, if the objective functions and constraints are represented entirely by linear equations, then the model is regarded as a linear model. If one or more of the objective functions or constraints are represented with a nonlinear equation, then the model is known as a nonlinear model. Linear structure implies that a problem can be decomposed into simpler parts that can be treated independently or analyzed at a different scale, and therefore that the results will remain valid if the initial is recomposed or rescaled. Nonlinearity, even in fairly simple systems, is often associated with phenomena such as chaos and irreversibility. Although there are exceptions, nonlinear systems and models tend to be more difficult to study than linear ones. A common approach to nonlinear problems is linearization, but this can be problematic if one is trying to study aspects such as irreversibility, which are strongly tied to nonlinearity. === Static vs. dynamic === A dynamic model accounts for time-dependent changes in the state of the system, while a static (or steady-state) model calculates the system in equilibrium, and thus is time-invariant. Dynamic models are typically represented by differential equations or difference equations. === Explicit vs. implicit === If all of the input parameters of the overall model are known, and the output parameters can be calculated by a finite series of computations, the model is said to be explicit. But sometimes it is the output parameters which are known, and the corresponding inputs must be solved for by an iterative procedure, such as Newton's method or Broyden's method. In such a case the model is said to be implicit. For example, a jet engine's physical properties such as turbine and nozzle throat areas can be explicitly calculated given a design thermodynamic cycle (air and fuel flow rates, pressures, and temperatures) at a specific flight condition and power setting, but the engine's operating cycles at other flight conditions and power settings cannot be explicitly calculated from the constant physical properties. === Discrete vs. continuous === A discrete model treats objects as discrete, such as the particles in a molecular model or the states in a statistical model; while a continuous model represents the objects in a continuous manner, such as the velocity field of fluid in pipe flows, temperatures and stresses in a solid, and electric field that applies continuously over the entire model due to a point charge. === Deterministic vs. probabilistic (stochastic) === A deterministic model is one in which every set of variable states is uniquely determined by parameters in the model and by sets of previous states of these variables; therefore, a deterministic model always performs the same way for a given set of initial conditions. Conversely, in a stochastic model—usually called a "statistical model"—randomness is present, and variable states are not described by unique values, but rather by probability distributions. === Deductive, inductive, or floating === A deductive model is a logical structure based on a theory. An inductive model arises from empirical findings and generalization from them. If a model rests on neither theory nor observation, it may be described as a 'floating' model. Application of mathematics in social sciences outside of economics has been criticized for unfounded models. Application of catastrophe theory in science has been characterized as a floating model. === Strategic vs. non-strategic === Models used in game theory are distinct in the sense that they model agents with incompatible incentives, such as competing species or bidders in an auction. Strategic models assume that players are autonomous decision makers who rationally choose actions that maximize their objective function. A key challenge of using strategic models is defining and computing solution concepts such as the Nash equilibrium. An interesting property of strategic models is that they separate reasoning about rules of the game from reasoning about behavior of the players. == Construction == In business and engineering, mathematical models may be used to maximize a certain output. The system under consideration will require certain inputs. The system relating inputs to outputs depends on other variables too: decision variables, state variables, exogenous variables, and random variables. Decision variables are sometimes known as independent variables. Exogenous variables are sometimes known as parameters or constants. The variables are not independent of each other as the state variables are dependent on the decision, input, random, and exogenous variables. Furthermore, the output variables are dependent on the state of the system (represented by the state variables). Objectives and constraints of the system and its users can be represented as functions of the output variables or state variables. The objective functions will depend on the perspective of the model's user. Depending on the context, an objective function is also known as an index of performance, as it is some measure of interest to the user. Although there is no limit to the number of objective functions and constraints a model can have, using or optimizing the model becomes more involved (computationally) as the number increases. For example, economists often apply linear algebra when using input–output models. Complicated mathematical models that have many variables may be consolidated by use of vectors where one symbol represents several variables. === A priori information === Mathematical modeling problems are often classified into black box or white box models, according to how much a priori information on the system is available. A black-box model is a system of which there is no a priori information available. A white-box model (also called glass box or clear box) is a system where all necessary information is available. Practically all systems are somewhere between the black-box and white-box models, so this concept is useful only as an intuitive guide for deciding which approach to take. Usually, it is preferable to use as much a priori information as possible to make the model more accurate. Therefore, the white-box models are usually considered easier, because if you have used the information correctly, then the model will behave correctly. Often the a priori information comes in forms of knowing the type of functions relating different variables. For example, if we make a model of how a medicine works in a human system, we know that usually the amount of medicine in the blood is an exponentially decaying function, but we are still left with several unknown parameters; how
Catholic Church and artificial intelligence
The Catholic Church views artificial intelligence as a significant technological development that must be governed by strict ethical principles rooted in human dignity and the common good. In January 2025, the Church issued the doctrinal note Antiqua et nova co-issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education. It addresses the "relationship between artificial intelligence and human intelligence" and offers reflections on the "anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI". In August 2025, Time magazine included Pope Leo XIV in its 2025 list of the World’s Most Influential People in Artificial Intelligence. In May 2026, Pope Leo XIV approved the creation of a new Vatican commission on artificial intelligence. He released his first papal encyclical, titled Magnifica humanitas, on the topic later in the month.
VK Video
VK Video is an internet video hosting service launched by VK (formerly known as Mail.ru Group) in 2021. It is positioned as a Russian alternative to the international platform YouTube. == History == The "VK Video" service began operations on October 15, 2021, following the merger of video platforms belonging to the social networks "VKontakte" and "Odnoklassniki". The launch of "VK Video" was managed by a team of executives led by VKontakte CEO Marina Krasnova, who worked at the company until 2023. Its launch was intended as an alternative to the international platform YouTube, which Russian authorities sought to replace with "domestic analogs. Key differences of the Russian service became the presence of pirated materials. Videos from the American video hosting site were uploaded en masse to "VK Video," which even caused the service to be temporarily blocked by YouTube. From 2022, to attract users, VKontakte's management bet on working with famous bloggers, specifically purchasing the shows "What Happened Next?" (ChBD) and "Vnutri Lapenko". Among the bloggers recruited to promote the service was the popular video blogger Vlad A4. An additional advantage for creators was the availability of monetization, which had been unavailable on YouTube for users from the Russian Federation since 2022. In September 2023, a separate "VK Video" mobile app appeared. In total, by the end of 2023, the monthly audience of "VK Video" reached 67.9 million users (which is almost 30 million less than YouTube). In the summer of 2024, following the blocking of YouTube in Russia, the service's traffic grew sharply: in August, its audience increased by more than two times compared to July. In the same month, "VK Video" took second place in downloads among free apps in the App Store and third in Google Play. In December 2024, the service received its own domain: vkvideo.ru. For the first time, "VK Video" managed to surpass YouTube in monthly audience in Russia in July 2025: the Russian service attracted 76.4 million viewers, whereas YouTube's reach amounted to 74.9 million people. == Platform features == On "VK Video," a view is recorded from the first second, whereas on YouTube it is only from the thirtieth. At the same time, a significant portion of comments are left by bots. For videos from the platform's most popular bloggers, the engagement level (likes to views) does not reach 4%. The "Trends" section most often features videos from large channels where the ratio of likes to views does not exceed 2%. == Management == In April 2025, the post of General Director of "VK Video" was taken by Marianna Maksimovskaya. From June 2022 to July 2024, the development of the platform was led by Fyodor Yezhov, who was primarily responsible for its technical direction. == Awards == In 2023, VK Video was awarded the Runet Prize in the "Science, Technology and Innovation" category.
Planner (programming language)
Planner (often seen in publications as "PLANNER" although it is not an acronym) is a programming language designed by Carl Hewitt at MIT, and first published in 1969. First, subsets such as Micro-Planner and Pico-Planner were implemented, and then essentially the whole language was implemented as Popler by Julian Davies at the University of Edinburgh in the POP-2 programming language. Derivations such as QA4, Conniver, QLISP and Ether (see scientific community metaphor) were important tools in artificial intelligence research in the 1970s, which influenced commercial developments such as Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) and Automated Reasoning Tool (ART). == Procedural approach versus logical approach == The two major paradigms for constructing semantic software systems were procedural and logical. The procedural paradigm was epitomized by Lisp which featured recursive procedures that operated on list structures. The logical paradigm was epitomized by uniform proof procedure resolution-based derivation (proof) finders. According to the logical paradigm it was “cheating” to incorporate procedural knowledge. == Procedural embedding of knowledge == Planner was invented for the purposes of the procedural embedding of knowledge and was a rejection of the resolution uniform proof procedure paradigm, which Converted everything to clausal form. Converting all information to clausal form is problematic because it hides the underlying structure of the information. Then used resolution to attempt to obtain a proof by contradiction by adding the clausal form of the negation of the theorem to be proved. Using only resolution as the rule of inference is problematical because it hides the underlying structure of proofs. Also, using proof by contradiction is problematical because the axiomatizations of all practical domains of knowledge are inconsistent in practice. Planner was a kind of hybrid between the procedural and logical paradigms because it combined programmability with logical reasoning. Planner featured a procedural interpretation of logical sentences where an implication of the form (P implies Q) can be procedurally interpreted in the following ways using pattern-directed invocation: Forward chaining (antecedently): If assert P, assert Q If assert not Q, assert not P Backward chaining (consequently) If goal Q, goal P If goal not P, goal not Q In this respect, the development of Planner was influenced by natural deductive logical systems (especially the one by Frederic Fitch [1952]). == Micro-planner implementation == A subset called Micro-Planner was implemented by Gerry Sussman, Eugene Charniak and Terry Winograd and was used in Winograd's natural-language understanding program SHRDLU, Eugene Charniak's story understanding work, Thorne McCarty's work on legal reasoning, and some other projects. This generated a great deal of excitement in the field of AI. It also generated controversy because it proposed an alternative to the logic approach that had been one of the mainstay paradigms for AI. At SRI International, Jeff Rulifson, Jan Derksen, and Richard Waldinger developed QA4 which built on the constructs in Planner and introduced a context mechanism to provide modularity for expressions in the database. Earl Sacerdoti and Rene Reboh developed QLISP, an extension of QA4 embedded in INTERLISP, providing Planner-like reasoning embedded in a procedural language and developed in its rich programming environment. QLISP was used by Richard Waldinger and Karl Levitt for program verification, by Earl Sacerdoti for planning and execution monitoring, by Jean-Claude Latombe for computer-aided design, by Nachum Dershowitz for program synthesis, by Richard Fikes for deductive retrieval, and by Steven Coles for an early expert system that guided use of an econometric model. Computers were expensive. They had only a single slow processor and their memories were very small by comparison with today. So Planner adopted some efficiency expedients including the following: Backtracking was adopted to economize on the use of time and storage by working on and storing only one possibility at a time in exploring alternatives. A unique name assumption was adopted to save space and time by assuming that different names referred to different objects. For example, names like Peking (previous PRC capital name) and Beijing (current PRC capital transliteration) were assumed to refer to different objects. A closed-world assumption could be implemented by conditionally testing whether an attempt to prove a goal exhaustively failed. Later this capability was given the misleading name "negation as failure" because for a goal G it was possible to say: "if attempting to achieve G exhaustively fails then assert (Not G)." == The genesis of Prolog == Gerry Sussman, Eugene Charniak, Seymour Papert and Terry Winograd visited the University of Edinburgh in 1971, spreading the news about Micro-Planner and SHRDLU and casting doubt on the resolution uniform proof procedure approach that had been the mainstay of the Edinburgh Logicists. At the University of Edinburgh, Bruce Anderson implemented a subset of Micro-Planner called PICO-PLANNER, and Julian Davies (1973) implemented essentially all of Planner. According to Donald MacKenzie, Pat Hayes recalled the impact of a visit from Papert to Edinburgh, which had become the "heart of artificial intelligence's Logicland," according to Papert's MIT colleague, Carl Hewitt. Papert eloquently voiced his critique of the resolution approach dominant at Edinburgh "…and at least one person upped sticks and left because of Papert." The above developments generated tension among the Logicists at Edinburgh. These tensions were exacerbated when the UK Science Research Council commissioned Sir James Lighthill to write a report on the AI research situation in the UK. The resulting report [Lighthill 1973; McCarthy 1973] was highly critical although SHRDLU was favorably mentioned. Pat Hayes visited Stanford where he learned about Planner. When he returned to Edinburgh, he tried to influence his friend Bob Kowalski to take Planner into account in their joint work on automated theorem proving. "Resolution theorem-proving was demoted from a hot topic to a relic of the misguided past. Bob Kowalski doggedly stuck to his faith in the potential of resolution theorem proving. He carefully studied Planner.”. Kowalski [1988] states "I can recall trying to convince Hewitt that Planner was similar to SL-resolution." But Planner was invented for the purposes of the procedural embedding of knowledge and was a rejection of the resolution uniform proof procedure paradigm. Colmerauer and Roussel recalled their reaction to learning about Planner in the following way: "While attending an IJCAI convention in September ‘71 with Jean Trudel, we met Robert Kowalski again and heard a lecture by Terry Winograd on natural language processing. The fact that he did not use a unified formalism left us puzzled. It was at this time that we learned of the existence of Carl Hewitt’s programming language, Planner. The lack of formalization of this language, our ignorance of Lisp and, above all, the fact that we were absolutely devoted to logic meant that this work had little influence on our later research." In the fall of 1972, Philippe Roussel implemented a language called Prolog (an abbreviation for PROgrammation en LOGique – French for "programming in logic"). Prolog programs are generically of the following form (which is a special case of the backward-chaining in Planner): When goal Q, goal P1 and ... and goal Pn Prolog duplicated the following aspects of Micro-Planner: Pattern directed invocation of procedures from goals (i.e. backward chaining) An indexed data base of pattern-directed procedures and ground sentences. Giving up on the completeness paradigm that had characterized previous work on theorem proving and replacing it with the programming language procedural embedding of knowledge paradigm. Prolog also duplicated the following capabilities of Micro-Planner which were pragmatically useful for the computers of the era because they saved space and time: Backtracking control structure Unique Name Assumption by which different names are assumed to refer to distinct entities, e.g., Peking and Beijing are assumed to be different. Reification of Failure. The way that Planner established that something was provable was to successfully attempt it as a goal and the way that it establish that something was unprovable was to attempt it as a goal and explicitly fail. Of course the other possibility is that the attempt to prove the goal runs forever and never returns any value. Planner also had a (not expression) construct which succeeded if expression failed, which gave rise to the “Negation as Failure” terminology in Planner. Use of the Unique Name Assumption and Negation as Failure became more questionable when attention turned to Open Systems. The following capabiliti