Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
oops. Sorry. This should not have gone to the Jess Users group. Sorry about that. Nothing proprietary or anything - I just cluttered up everyone's mail box and I know all of you are wondering, "What the heck!!???" Put it down to a wild, uncontrollable mouse that clicks in the wrong places. "James C. Owen" wrote: > Finally found the manners stuff for JRules. I'm sending the 128 guest data file > that they used as well. > > Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > > > I did made jeops work for a few semples. The way it works is that it > > generates a Java program from the rules you provide. Of course, it's not > > possible to add a rule on the fly, which is not cool as Jess, but it works > > fine. > > > > I'm pretty sure that I can found the sample I've compiled a year ago, and > > post it to you next week. > > > > Do you have a JRules sample of Manner 128 benchmark? It'll ease the test on > > jeops. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > > Behalf Of James C. Owen > > Sent: vendredi 1 fevrier 2002 23:23 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper > > > > Exactamundo! He (Dr. Forgy) is "very" protective about the Rete 2 > > algorithm. > > Seems that he *had* to make the Rete algorithm public since it was funded by > > the DOD when he was at CMU, but methinks that he wants to make some money > > with > > the Rete 2 algorithm. The Rete 2 works on optimizing memory space thereby > > increasing the speed. Actually, he's working on a Rete 3 but I have no idea > > what it is; only that it will make the process even faster than Rete 2. > > Cool > > > > However, I'll see if we can get his Rete Ph.D. thesis scanned and > > published - > > maybe this weekend. If so, I'll send it to Dr. Friedman-Hill to publish on > > the > > PST site if he likes. BTW, Dr. Forgy's email is [EMAIL PROTECTED], not > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) > > > > One other thing; I've been going over the various Java systems (Jess, OPSJ, > > JRules, Advisor and JEOPS) the past couple of weeks and trying to run the > > manners 128 benchmark on all of them using the same set of data and, > > basically, the same set of rules. That way only the engine is the > > difference > > factor. If anyone already has the JEOPS worked out, I would appreciate it > > if > > you would send it to me. I got CLIPS and converted it straight over to > > Jess - > > which wasn't terribly difficult since they both seem to be be LISP oriented. > > (Jim really hates LISP! All those parentheses and special markers for > > variables and just the jumbled way things are handled...) And I already had > > the code for OPSJ, Advisor and JRules. JEOPS seems to be a different animal > > since it is more Java-kinda oriented syntax. Whatever. Just a thought. > > > > SDG > > jco > > > > - > > James C. Owen > > Senior KE > > Knowledgebased Systems Corporation > > 6314 Kelly Circle > > Garland, TX 75044 > > 972.530.2895 > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > > > > James, > > > > > > > > if you could scan Dr. Forgy's thesis and convert it to pdf, that would > > be > > > > great :) > > > > > > > > is there also a publication on the Rete II algorithm? > > > > http://www.pst.com/ > > > > claims that it would be much faster... > > > > > > Nope, it's unpublished and proprietary. > > > > > > - > > > Ernest Friedman-Hill > > > Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 > > > Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 > > > Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov > > > Livermore, CA 94550 > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > > > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > >
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
Finally found the manners stuff for JRules. I'm sending the 128 guest data file that they used as well. Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > I did made jeops work for a few semples. The way it works is that it > generates a Java program from the rules you provide. Of course, it's not > possible to add a rule on the fly, which is not cool as Jess, but it works > fine. > > I'm pretty sure that I can found the sample I've compiled a year ago, and > post it to you next week. > > Do you have a JRules sample of Manner 128 benchmark? It'll ease the test on > jeops. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of James C. Owen > Sent: vendredi 1 fevrier 2002 23:23 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper > > Exactamundo! He (Dr. Forgy) is "very" protective about the Rete 2 > algorithm. > Seems that he *had* to make the Rete algorithm public since it was funded by > the DOD when he was at CMU, but methinks that he wants to make some money > with > the Rete 2 algorithm. The Rete 2 works on optimizing memory space thereby > increasing the speed. Actually, he's working on a Rete 3 but I have no idea > what it is; only that it will make the process even faster than Rete 2. > Cool > > However, I'll see if we can get his Rete Ph.D. thesis scanned and > published - > maybe this weekend. If so, I'll send it to Dr. Friedman-Hill to publish on > the > PST site if he likes. BTW, Dr. Forgy's email is [EMAIL PROTECTED], not > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) > > One other thing; I've been going over the various Java systems (Jess, OPSJ, > JRules, Advisor and JEOPS) the past couple of weeks and trying to run the > manners 128 benchmark on all of them using the same set of data and, > basically, the same set of rules. That way only the engine is the > difference > factor. If anyone already has the JEOPS worked out, I would appreciate it > if > you would send it to me. I got CLIPS and converted it straight over to > Jess - > which wasn't terribly difficult since they both seem to be be LISP oriented. > (Jim really hates LISP! All those parentheses and special markers for > variables and just the jumbled way things are handled...) And I already had > the code for OPSJ, Advisor and JRules. JEOPS seems to be a different animal > since it is more Java-kinda oriented syntax. Whatever. Just a thought. > > SDG > jco > > - > James C. Owen > Senior KE > Knowledgebased Systems Corporation > 6314 Kelly Circle > Garland, TX 75044 > 972.530.2895 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > > > James, > > > > > > if you could scan Dr. Forgy's thesis and convert it to pdf, that would > be > > > great :) > > > > > > is there also a publication on the Rete II algorithm? > > > http://www.pst.com/ > > > claims that it would be much faster... > > > > Nope, it's unpublished and proprietary. > > > > - > > Ernest Friedman-Hill > > Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 > > Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 > > Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov > > Livermore, CA 94550 > > > > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- SDG jco - James C. Owen Senior KE Knowledgebased Systems Corporation 6314 Kelly Circle Garland, TX 75044 972.530.2895 manners.zip Description: Zip compressed data
RE: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
I did made jeops work for a few semples. The way it works is that it generates a Java program from the rules you provide. Of course, it's not possible to add a rule on the fly, which is not cool as Jess, but it works fine. I'm pretty sure that I can found the sample I've compiled a year ago, and post it to you next week. Do you have a JRules sample of Manner 128 benchmark? It'll ease the test on jeops. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James C. Owen Sent: vendredi 1 fevrier 2002 23:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper Exactamundo! He (Dr. Forgy) is "very" protective about the Rete 2 algorithm. Seems that he *had* to make the Rete algorithm public since it was funded by the DOD when he was at CMU, but methinks that he wants to make some money with the Rete 2 algorithm. The Rete 2 works on optimizing memory space thereby increasing the speed. Actually, he's working on a Rete 3 but I have no idea what it is; only that it will make the process even faster than Rete 2. Cool However, I'll see if we can get his Rete Ph.D. thesis scanned and published - maybe this weekend. If so, I'll send it to Dr. Friedman-Hill to publish on the PST site if he likes. BTW, Dr. Forgy's email is [EMAIL PROTECTED], not [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) One other thing; I've been going over the various Java systems (Jess, OPSJ, JRules, Advisor and JEOPS) the past couple of weeks and trying to run the manners 128 benchmark on all of them using the same set of data and, basically, the same set of rules. That way only the engine is the difference factor. If anyone already has the JEOPS worked out, I would appreciate it if you would send it to me. I got CLIPS and converted it straight over to Jess - which wasn't terribly difficult since they both seem to be be LISP oriented. (Jim really hates LISP! All those parentheses and special markers for variables and just the jumbled way things are handled...) And I already had the code for OPSJ, Advisor and JRules. JEOPS seems to be a different animal since it is more Java-kinda oriented syntax. Whatever. Just a thought. SDG jco - James C. Owen Senior KE Knowledgebased Systems Corporation 6314 Kelly Circle Garland, TX 75044 972.530.2895 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > > James, > > > > if you could scan Dr. Forgy's thesis and convert it to pdf, that would be > > great :) > > > > is there also a publication on the Rete II algorithm? > > http://www.pst.com/ > > claims that it would be much faster... > > Nope, it's unpublished and proprietary. > > - > Ernest Friedman-Hill > Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 > Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 > Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov > Livermore, CA 94550 > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
Exactamundo! He (Dr. Forgy) is "very" protective about the Rete 2 algorithm. Seems that he *had* to make the Rete algorithm public since it was funded by the DOD when he was at CMU, but methinks that he wants to make some money with the Rete 2 algorithm. The Rete 2 works on optimizing memory space thereby increasing the speed. Actually, he's working on a Rete 3 but I have no idea what it is; only that it will make the process even faster than Rete 2. Cool However, I'll see if we can get his Rete Ph.D. thesis scanned and published - maybe this weekend. If so, I'll send it to Dr. Friedman-Hill to publish on the PST site if he likes. BTW, Dr. Forgy's email is [EMAIL PROTECTED], not [EMAIL PROTECTED] :-) One other thing; I've been going over the various Java systems (Jess, OPSJ, JRules, Advisor and JEOPS) the past couple of weeks and trying to run the manners 128 benchmark on all of them using the same set of data and, basically, the same set of rules. That way only the engine is the difference factor. If anyone already has the JEOPS worked out, I would appreciate it if you would send it to me. I got CLIPS and converted it straight over to Jess - which wasn't terribly difficult since they both seem to be be LISP oriented. (Jim really hates LISP! All those parentheses and special markers for variables and just the jumbled way things are handled...) And I already had the code for OPSJ, Advisor and JRules. JEOPS seems to be a different animal since it is more Java-kinda oriented syntax. Whatever. Just a thought. SDG jco - James C. Owen Senior KE Knowledgebased Systems Corporation 6314 Kelly Circle Garland, TX 75044 972.530.2895 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > > James, > > > > if you could scan Dr. Forgy's thesis and convert it to pdf, that would be > > great :) > > > > is there also a publication on the Rete II algorithm? > > http://www.pst.com/ > > claims that it would be much faster... > > Nope, it's unpublished and proprietary. > > - > Ernest Friedman-Hill > Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 > Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 > Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov > Livermore, CA 94550 > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list > (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > James, > > if you could scan Dr. Forgy's thesis and convert it to pdf, that would be > great :) > > is there also a publication on the Rete II algorithm? > http://www.pst.com/ > claims that it would be much faster... Nope, it's unpublished and proprietary. - Ernest Friedman-Hill Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov Livermore, CA 94550 To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
James, if you could scan Dr. Forgy's thesis and convert it to pdf, that would be great :) is there also a publication on the Rete II algorithm? http://www.pst.com/ claims that it would be much faster... his email is defunct, it seems (see error quoted below) :) Oliver At 03:24 PM 1/02/2002 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi. This is the qmail-send program at relay.pair.com. >I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. >This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >206.46.164.23 does not like recipient. >Remote host said: 550 Invalid recipient: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Giving up on 206.46.164.23. At 06:47 AM 1/02/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Another option, of course, is to write to the author of the paper and >see if you can get a freebie. Dr. Forgy can be reached at >[EMAIL PROTECTED] At 11:50 AM 1/02/2002 -0600, James C. Owen wrote: >Wow! I've haven't seen this much interest in the paper(s) for a long, long >time. It is, however, refreshing, to see that there is considerable interest >in the underlying Rete algorithm from so many people (er, >persons?). Anyway, I >contacted Dr. Forgy some time ago (like two weeks?) about both papers (his >dissertation and the AI publication) and he does not have either one in >electronic form. He does have a copy of his thesis in hard copy. His 1979 >thesis is 178 pages that we "could" scan in, but that is not the best way. >I've been toying with the idea of using some OCR software to scan in the whole >thing and then "re-do" the diagrams in a more modern format. I'm 99.4% sure >that he would have no objection since the entire thing was done under a DOD >grant. And, he's a really nice person. > >On the other hand, Ernest is 100% correct that the AI publication is >copyrighted and we cannot publish, display or show where to get that one. My >only suggestion would be to get the publisher to put it out on their web site >for down loads for a small fee, say $5 or something like that. Ernest's other >suggestion is also good; go to your local university library archives and make >your own copies. I've done that before and, although it takes some time, it's >worth the effort. > >For most of our group, the discussion that Ernest put together on his web site >should be sufficient. It does show the high-level view of the Rete algorithm >and is quite understandable. The code for implementing is freely available >from JEOPS, http://www.di.ufpe.br/~jeops/ so you can see how to do that >part as >well. One final note: I've noticed that most who get the thesis glance >at the >first chapter and then put it on the shelf to study when things are less >hectic >and they never get around to actually reading the good stuff. But, it looks >nice on your personal library shelf, right? Just my two cents. :-) > >SDG >jco > >-- >James C. Owen >Senior KE >Knowledgebased Systems Corporation >6314 Kelly Circle >Garland, TX 75044 >972.530.2895 > > >Agustin Gonzalez wrote: > > > Maybe it's time for one of us, especially those of us that have the paper > > and are trained, to create a formal paper describing the public domain RETE > > algorithm and make the paper publicly available? I can do that if there is > > enough interest and enough people agrees with me that I won;t have any > > legal problems (I don't think so because it is public domain). > > > > --- > > Agustin Gonzalez, Principal > > Town Lake Software > > www.townlakesoftware.com > > (512) 248-9839 > > > > On Friday, February 01, 2002 8:44 AM, James Patterson > > [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > > I can tell you that it is a waste of time trying to contact the > > > publisher... An Elsevier representative told me that the issue is out of > > > print and they do not have reprint service anymore. They offered to > > > individually reprint the entire journal issue for a couple of hundred > > > dollars (my boss said no). I'm not a student and therefore can't get > > > any cooperation from the local universities. I even emailed Dr Forgy > > > (and tried to find a coworker of his during a stint at Ericcson) about > > > the Elsevier problems (but they didn't respond - and I started feeling > > > like a stalker so I gave up). > > > > > > Good luck, > > > James > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > On Behalf Of Oliver Hoffmann > > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 6:54 AM > > > To: Jess Mailing List > > > Subject: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper > > > > > > > > > Hi :) > > > > > > I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are > > > generally > > > copyright protected. What might be copyright protected is the specific > > > paper version of a specific paper as distributed by a specific > > > publisher. > > > The point of publishing research results is to make them readily > > > available, > > >
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
Wow! I've haven't seen this much interest in the paper(s) for a long, long time. It is, however, refreshing, to see that there is considerable interest in the underlying Rete algorithm from so many people (er, persons?). Anyway, I contacted Dr. Forgy some time ago (like two weeks?) about both papers (his dissertation and the AI publication) and he does not have either one in electronic form. He does have a copy of his thesis in hard copy. His 1979 thesis is 178 pages that we "could" scan in, but that is not the best way. I've been toying with the idea of using some OCR software to scan in the whole thing and then "re-do" the diagrams in a more modern format. I'm 99.4% sure that he would have no objection since the entire thing was done under a DOD grant. And, he's a really nice person. On the other hand, Ernest is 100% correct that the AI publication is copyrighted and we cannot publish, display or show where to get that one. My only suggestion would be to get the publisher to put it out on their web site for down loads for a small fee, say $5 or something like that. Ernest's other suggestion is also good; go to your local university library archives and make your own copies. I've done that before and, although it takes some time, it's worth the effort. For most of our group, the discussion that Ernest put together on his web site should be sufficient. It does show the high-level view of the Rete algorithm and is quite understandable. The code for implementing is freely available from JEOPS, http://www.di.ufpe.br/~jeops/ so you can see how to do that part as well. One final note: I've noticed that most who get the thesis glance at the first chapter and then put it on the shelf to study when things are less hectic and they never get around to actually reading the good stuff. But, it looks nice on your personal library shelf, right? Just my two cents. :-) SDG jco -- James C. Owen Senior KE Knowledgebased Systems Corporation 6314 Kelly Circle Garland, TX 75044 972.530.2895 Agustin Gonzalez wrote: > Maybe it's time for one of us, especially those of us that have the paper > and are trained, to create a formal paper describing the public domain RETE > algorithm and make the paper publicly available? I can do that if there is > enough interest and enough people agrees with me that I won;t have any > legal problems (I don't think so because it is public domain). > > --- > Agustin Gonzalez, Principal > Town Lake Software > www.townlakesoftware.com > (512) 248-9839 > > On Friday, February 01, 2002 8:44 AM, James Patterson > [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > I can tell you that it is a waste of time trying to contact the > > publisher... An Elsevier representative told me that the issue is out of > > print and they do not have reprint service anymore. They offered to > > individually reprint the entire journal issue for a couple of hundred > > dollars (my boss said no). I'm not a student and therefore can't get > > any cooperation from the local universities. I even emailed Dr Forgy > > (and tried to find a coworker of his during a stint at Ericcson) about > > the Elsevier problems (but they didn't respond - and I started feeling > > like a stalker so I gave up). > > > > Good luck, > > James > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On Behalf Of Oliver Hoffmann > > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 6:54 AM > > To: Jess Mailing List > > Subject: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper > > > > > > Hi :) > > > > I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are > > generally > > copyright protected. What might be copyright protected is the specific > > paper version of a specific paper as distributed by a specific > > publisher. > > The point of publishing research results is to make them readily > > available, > > therefore "copyright" is simply the wrong approach here. More > > information on http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/resolution.htm > > I don't want to encourage anyone to re-distribute scanned journal pages > > without authorization etc., but there are better ways to deal with > > academic > > content than waiting for a library employee to get a photocopy > > within > > some weeks. I highly recommend self-archiving content and making these > > copies available over personal or university web sites and I also highly > > > > recommend getting original articles from the people or institutions that > > > > created them - everything else is pre-internet and a waste of time and > > effort. > > > > :) Oliver Hoffmann > > > > At 04:23 AM 1/02/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Hi Folks, > > > > > >This comes up periodically, so please forgive the intrusion while I > > >discuss it, once again. > > > > > >The Charles Forgy paper on the Rete algorithm was published in an > > >academic journal called "Artificial Intelligence." The contents are > > >protected by
RE: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
Maybe it's time for one of us, especially those of us that have the paper and are trained, to create a formal paper describing the public domain RETE algorithm and make the paper publicly available? I can do that if there is enough interest and enough people agrees with me that I won;t have any legal problems (I don't think so because it is public domain). --- Agustin Gonzalez, Principal Town Lake Software www.townlakesoftware.com (512) 248-9839 On Friday, February 01, 2002 8:44 AM, James Patterson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > I can tell you that it is a waste of time trying to contact the > publisher... An Elsevier representative told me that the issue is out of > print and they do not have reprint service anymore. They offered to > individually reprint the entire journal issue for a couple of hundred > dollars (my boss said no). I'm not a student and therefore can't get > any cooperation from the local universities. I even emailed Dr Forgy > (and tried to find a coworker of his during a stint at Ericcson) about > the Elsevier problems (but they didn't respond - and I started feeling > like a stalker so I gave up). > > Good luck, > James > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > On Behalf Of Oliver Hoffmann > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 6:54 AM > To: Jess Mailing List > Subject: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper > > > Hi :) > > I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are > generally > copyright protected. What might be copyright protected is the specific > paper version of a specific paper as distributed by a specific > publisher. > The point of publishing research results is to make them readily > available, > therefore "copyright" is simply the wrong approach here. More > information on http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/resolution.htm > I don't want to encourage anyone to re-distribute scanned journal pages > without authorization etc., but there are better ways to deal with > academic > content than waiting for a library employee to get a photocopy > within > some weeks. I highly recommend self-archiving content and making these > copies available over personal or university web sites and I also highly > > recommend getting original articles from the people or institutions that > > created them - everything else is pre-internet and a waste of time and > effort. > > :) Oliver Hoffmann > > At 04:23 AM 1/02/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Hi Folks, > > > >This comes up periodically, so please forgive the intrusion while I > >discuss it, once again. > > > >The Charles Forgy paper on the Rete algorithm was published in an > >academic journal called "Artificial Intelligence." The contents are > >protected by copyright law. Although you can make a photocopy for your > >own use, it's illegal to (for instance) scan it into your computer and > >post the result on the Internet. Whatever you do, do -not- post a copy > >to this mailing list, nor even post the URL where it might be > >downloaded. This goes for any other copyrighted material as well, of > >course. If you're interested in getting a copy of this paper (or any > >academic paper): > > > >1) Go to your local public library, or the library of your local > >college or University; or ask a student friend or a friend in another > >country to do so. > > > >2) Check their collection for the appropriate issue of the journal. > >It's 20 years old, so may be on microfilm or archived in some other > >way. Ask the librarian for help -- that's why they're there. > > > >3) If they have it, great, make yourself a copy. > > > >4) If they don't, go to the front desk and ask them to get a copy > >through the "Interlibrary Loan" program. They should be able to get it > >within a few weeks. > > > > > > > >- > >Ernest Friedman-Hill > >Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 > >Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 > >Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov > >Livermore, CA 94550 > > > > > >To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > >in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use > >your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' > in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use > your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-us
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
Ernest, At 06:47 AM 1/02/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi :) > > > > I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are > generally > > copyright protected. > >Oliver, > >I don't want to start a flame war, or a discussion about intellectual >freedom or any related topics. I'm not saying that I advocate or decry >any of the practices outlined here -- but I do want to set the record >straight. Therefore I should point out that this particular article, >has the following bit of text on the front page: > > 0004-3702/82/-/$02.75 (C) North-Holland > >meaning that the contents are copyrighted by the North-Holland meaning that the stack of paper is (copyright) North-Holland and not meaning that the intellectual content is (copyright) North-Holland the intellectual content was published, with the intent of public use >publishing concern, and they'll gladly sell you a reprint for >$2.75. and that is exactely the extend of their (copyright): paper reprints of this particular paper version >Do realize that we're talking about a paper from 1982, and it's >exceedingly likely that the original was prepared on a >typewriter. There was no Web on which to post the text so the question >is moot. Generally, when you submit academic papers to a journal or >conference nowadays (speaking as someone who has done so) they tell >you that you may post an electronic copy after publication (sometimes >after a specific time interval has elapsed) but they virtually always >require that their copyright notice be included on the paper. ... and this copyright notice refers to paper copies of the original paper version the only thing this (copyright) is good for is for stopping different publishers from making money with re-publishing papers >When you submit a paper you transfer the copyright of the material to >the journal, and they are therefore legally entitled to dictate what >can and what cannot be done with the content. One of the advantages of publishing content is that you don't have to repeat the same arguments over and over again. Therefore, I will just refer you to http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/resolution.htm#1.3 for the details of why a journal can not completely determine what you can or cannot do with a scientific publication. >Now, all that said and done, I did a bit of web searching (not clear >why the OP didn't simply do this first.) North-Holland is part of >Elsevier Science these days. Here's a web form for ordering reprints: > > http://www.elsevier.nl/homepage/guestbook/?form=reprints > >Another option, of course, is to write to the author of the paper and >see if you can get a freebie. Dr. Forgy can be reached at >[EMAIL PROTECTED] I have cc-d this email to Dr. Forgy, maybe he wants to tell us whether he thinks the content of his publication can be distributed. :) Oliver At 01:54 PM 1/02/2002 +0100, Oliver Hoffmann wrote: >Hi :) > >I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are >generally copyright protected. What might be copyright protected is the >specific paper version of a specific paper as distributed by a specific >publisher. The point of publishing research results is to make them >readily available, therefore "copyright" is simply the wrong approach >here. More information on >http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/resolution.htm >I don't want to encourage anyone to re-distribute scanned journal pages >without authorization etc., but there are better ways to deal with >academic content than waiting for a library employee to get a photocopy > within some weeks. I highly recommend self-archiving content and >making these copies available over personal or university web sites and I >also highly recommend getting original articles from the people or >institutions that created them - everything else is pre-internet and a >waste of time and effort. > >:) Oliver Hoffmann > >At 04:23 AM 1/02/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>Hi Folks, >> >>This comes up periodically, so please forgive the intrusion while I >>discuss it, once again. >> >>The Charles Forgy paper on the Rete algorithm was published in an >>academic journal called "Artificial Intelligence." The contents are >>protected by copyright law. Although you can make a photocopy for your >>own use, it's illegal to (for instance) scan it into your computer and >>post the result on the Internet. Whatever you do, do -not- post a copy >>to this mailing list, nor even post the URL where it might be >>downloaded. This goes for any other copyrighted material as well, of >>course. If you're interested in getting a copy of this paper (or any >>academic paper): >> >>1) Go to your local public library, or the library of your local >>college or University; or ask a student friend or a friend in another >>country to do so. >> >>2) Check their collection for the appropriate issue of the >>journal. It's 20 years old, so may be on micr
Re: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
I think Oliver Hoffmann wrote: > Hi :) > > I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are generally > copyright protected. Oliver, I don't want to start a flame war, or a discussion about intellectual freedom or any related topics. I'm not saying that I advocate or decry any of the practices outlined here -- but I do want to set the record straight. Therefore I should point out that this particular article, has the following bit of text on the front page: 0004-3702/82/-/$02.75 (C) North-Holland meaning that the contents are copyrighted by the North-Holland publishing concern, and they'll gladly sell you a reprint for $2.75. Do realize that we're talking about a paper from 1982, and it's exceedingly likely that the original was prepared on a typewriter. There was no Web on which to post the text so the question is moot. Generally, when you submit academic papers to a journal or conference nowadays (speaking as someone who has done so) they tell you that you may post an electronic copy after publication (sometimes after a specific time interval has elapsed) but they virtually always require that their copyright notice be included on the paper. When you submit a paper you transfer the copyright of the material to the journal, and they are therefore legally entitled to dictate what can and what cannot be done with the content. Now, all that said and done, I did a bit of web searching (not clear why the OP didn't simply do this first.) North-Holland is part of Elsevier Science these days. Here's a web form for ordering reprints: http://www.elsevier.nl/homepage/guestbook/?form=reprints Another option, of course, is to write to the author of the paper and see if you can get a freebie. Dr. Forgy can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Ernest Friedman-Hill Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov Livermore, CA 94550 To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper
I can tell you that it is a waste of time trying to contact the publisher... An Elsevier representative told me that the issue is out of print and they do not have reprint service anymore. They offered to individually reprint the entire journal issue for a couple of hundred dollars (my boss said no). I'm not a student and therefore can't get any cooperation from the local universities. I even emailed Dr Forgy (and tried to find a coworker of his during a stint at Ericcson) about the Elsevier problems (but they didn't respond - and I started feeling like a stalker so I gave up). Good luck, James -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Oliver Hoffmann Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 6:54 AM To: Jess Mailing List Subject: JESS: "publications" / Forgy paper Hi :) I highly doubt that the contents of published academic papers are generally copyright protected. What might be copyright protected is the specific paper version of a specific paper as distributed by a specific publisher. The point of publishing research results is to make them readily available, therefore "copyright" is simply the wrong approach here. More information on http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Tp/resolution.htm I don't want to encourage anyone to re-distribute scanned journal pages without authorization etc., but there are better ways to deal with academic content than waiting for a library employee to get a photocopy within some weeks. I highly recommend self-archiving content and making these copies available over personal or university web sites and I also highly recommend getting original articles from the people or institutions that created them - everything else is pre-internet and a waste of time and effort. :) Oliver Hoffmann At 04:23 AM 1/02/2002 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi Folks, > >This comes up periodically, so please forgive the intrusion while I >discuss it, once again. > >The Charles Forgy paper on the Rete algorithm was published in an >academic journal called "Artificial Intelligence." The contents are >protected by copyright law. Although you can make a photocopy for your >own use, it's illegal to (for instance) scan it into your computer and >post the result on the Internet. Whatever you do, do -not- post a copy >to this mailing list, nor even post the URL where it might be >downloaded. This goes for any other copyrighted material as well, of >course. If you're interested in getting a copy of this paper (or any >academic paper): > >1) Go to your local public library, or the library of your local >college or University; or ask a student friend or a friend in another >country to do so. > >2) Check their collection for the appropriate issue of the journal. >It's 20 years old, so may be on microfilm or archived in some other >way. Ask the librarian for help -- that's why they're there. > >3) If they have it, great, make yourself a copy. > >4) If they don't, go to the front desk and ask them to get a copy >through the "Interlibrary Loan" program. They should be able to get it >within a few weeks. > > > >- >Ernest Friedman-Hill >Distributed Systems ResearchPhone: (925) 294-2154 >Sandia National LabsFAX: (925) 294-2234 >Org. 8920, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >PO Box 969 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov >Livermore, CA 94550 > > >To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' >in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use >your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED]
