| Revision as of 03:17, 23 June 2005 view sourceCarlHewitt (talk | contribs)5,700 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:17, 23 June 2005 view source CarlHewitt (talk | contribs)5,700 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| He is known for his design of ] that was the first ] ] based on procedural plans that were invoked using pattern-directed invocation from assertions and goals. Carl (then a student of ], ] and Mike Paterson) championed the "procedural embedding of knowledge" in the form of high level procedural plans in contrast to the logical approach pioneered by ] who advocated expressing knowledge declaratively in ] for ]. A subset of Planner called Micro Planner was implemented by ], Eugene Charniak and ]. It was used in Terry's famous ] program, Eugene Charniak's natural language story understanding work and a couple of other projects. | He is known for his design of ] that was the first ] ] based on procedural plans that were invoked using pattern-directed invocation from assertions and goals. Carl (then a student of ], ] and Mike Paterson) championed the "procedural embedding of knowledge" in the form of high level procedural plans in contrast to the logical approach pioneered by ] who advocated expressing knowledge declaratively in ] for ]. A subset of Planner called Micro Planner was implemented by ], Eugene Charniak and ]. It was used in Terry's famous ] program, Eugene Charniak's natural language story understanding work and a couple of other projects. | ||
| Using program schemmas in collaboration with Mike Paterson, Carl proved that recursion is more powerful than iteration and that parallelism is more powerful than recursion. In collaboration with his student Henry Baker, he published physical laws for computation which they then used to derive the continuity criterion for computable functions of ]. Using participatory semantics, he recently proved that corroutines are more powerful than recursion and that concurrency is more |
Using program schemmas in collaboration with Mike Paterson, Carl proved that recursion is more powerful than iteration and that parallelism is more powerful than recursion. In collaboration with his student Henry Baker, he published physical laws for computation which they then used to derive the continuity criterion for computable functions of ]. Using participatory semantics, he recently proved that corroutines are more powerful than recursion and that concurrency is more powerful than parallel coroutines. | ||
| Carl and his students and colleagues are also known for their work on the ]. Actors are the universal primitives of concurrent computation. The Actor work built on ], ], capability-based systems, ] and Smalltalk-71. | Carl and his students and colleagues are also known for their work on the ]. Actors are the universal primitives of concurrent computation. The Actor work built on ], ], capability-based systems, ] and Smalltalk-71. | ||
Revision as of 03:17, 23 June 2005
Carl Hewitt is an emeritus professor from MIT.
He is known for his design of Planner that was the first Artificial Intelligence programming language based on procedural plans that were invoked using pattern-directed invocation from assertions and goals. Carl (then a student of Marvin Minsky, Seymour Papert and Mike Paterson) championed the "procedural embedding of knowledge" in the form of high level procedural plans in contrast to the logical approach pioneered by John McCarthy (computer scientist) who advocated expressing knowledge declaratively in mathematical logic for Artificial Intelligence. A subset of Planner called Micro Planner was implemented by Gerry Sussman, Eugene Charniak and Terry Winograd. It was used in Terry's famous SHRDLU program, Eugene Charniak's natural language story understanding work and a couple of other projects.
Using program schemmas in collaboration with Mike Paterson, Carl proved that recursion is more powerful than iteration and that parallelism is more powerful than recursion. In collaboration with his student Henry Baker, he published physical laws for computation which they then used to derive the continuity criterion for computable functions of Dana Scott. Using participatory semantics, he recently proved that corroutines are more powerful than recursion and that concurrency is more powerful than parallel coroutines.
Carl and his students and colleagues are also known for their work on the Actor model. Actors are the universal primitives of concurrent computation. The Actor work built on Lisp, Simula, capability-based systems, packet switching and Smalltalk-71.
Together with his student Bill Kornfeld, he developed the Scientific Community Metaphor. He has also made contributions in the areas of garbage collection (computer science), programming language design and implementation, open systems, negotiation forums, and multi-agency systems with his students and colleagues.
More recently Carl has worked to integrate sociology, anthropology, organization science, the philosophy of science, and services science into information science.
Reference
- Carl Hewitt. PLANNER: A Language for Proving Theorems in Robots IJCAI 1969
- Mike Paterson and Carl Hewitt. Comparative Schematology MIT AI Memo 201. August 1970.
- Carl Hewitt. Procedural Embedding of Knowledge In Planner IJCAI 1971.
- Carl Hewitt. Description and Theoretical Analysis (Using Schemata) of Planner, A Language for Proving Theorems and Manipulating Models in a Robot AI Memo No. 251, MIT Project MAC, April 1972.
- Carl Hewitt, Peter Bishop and Richard Steiger. A Universal Modular Actor Formalism for Artificial Intelligence IJCAI 1973.
- Carl Hewitt and Henry Baker Actors and Continuous Functionals Proceeding of IFIP Working Conference on Formal Description of Programming Concepts. August 1-5, 1977
- William Kornfeld and Carl Hewitt. The Scientific Community Metaphor MIT AI Memo 641. January 1981.
- Carl Hewitt. The Challenge of Open Systems Byte Magazine. April 1985
- Carl Hewitt and Gul Agha. Guarded Horn clause languages: are they deductive and logical? in Artificial Intelligence at MIT, Vol. 2. MIT Press 1991.