The task for the semantic analysis of sentences with SR's is to make clear what is being positioned. This has been difficult to do. Previous proposals have left unanalyzed many phenomena including important motional references. This paper's main conclusion is that a much.improved analysis can be obtained by representing the SR's as positioning ab~tract events and states of affairs.

The analysis in semantic nets has the location of an event or state ~f affairs represented as a node which is linked to the node showing the event or state by arcs indicating its status as the spatial attribute. A few SR's are shown as naming these locational entities, which we call pLaee object. These SR's involve examples with "where", "here", and "therei'. However, most SR' s are represented as relating place objects to the position of objects in the manner of prepositional phrases. This primacy of prepositions is argued for in the paper. Motional references are allowed for by functions represented in the nets which produce parts of place objects which are then positioned by prepositional forms. The necessary ordering that comes with motional references is allowed for by associating temporal elements with the functions.

While the positioned elements are simple, the overall semantic structure of the sentences containing SR's is often complicated by the involvement of more than one event or state of affairs. The paper includes a survey of the sentential semantic structures necesaaBy to deal ~ith SR's. A similar complexity is necessary to deal with the information on the location of objects which is gained from sentences with SR's. The paper suggests the use of inference rules to allow for this. The most surprising of the paper's conclusions is that a strong tie exists between references to space and temporal information. In fact, the locations of all events and s tetes of af fairs placed by SR' s are argued to be locations in both space and time. The effect of this conclusion is most clearly seen in a formaIized definition of the primitives of the semantic structures, which is also presented in semantic nets. There, as one possible interpretation of the place object, it is shown as a set of pairs of volumes in space and pointe in time.

The paper has nine sections following this one. In the first, the limitations of previous analyses of the semantic function of SR's is considered. Thea in one section, the semantic net formalism and, in the next, the syntactic distinctions used in the study are introduced. The next four sections present epcr more complex situations. The first section shows simple direct analyses involving one event or state. The next section presents complex sentehtial structures with non-movement SR's. Motional references are analyzed in the next. The connection between time and SR's is diswed in the fourth section. Following these analyses of sentential semantic structures, a section hs given over to the formalization of the definition of the st tuctures used. The paper ends with a discussion of the limitations of the proposal and possible extensions to it.

There is available a discussion in greater detail of a preliminary analysis to the one given here (~ondheimer, 1975). There is also available for comparison an analy is by this authbr of the same meaning phenomena, in the competing paradigm of model-theoretic semantics (Sondheimer , 1978) The current. paper is distinguishable by its better developed semantic net formalism nnd itn emphasis 3n producing computationally justified structures. XI. Prev ous Efforts Ihe pazt has seen many studies of SR phenomena. There ha8 been interest in connecting. language and scenes, e. g. , Coles ( 19681, Kochen ( 19691, Winograd (1972), Badlcr (1975), and Tsotsos (1976). The use of langdage to capture the bpatial 8;ru:ture of the physical world has been studied, e.g., Hobbs (1975) and Kuiper 1 9 7 The conceptual structure of the terms used in SR and the pragmatics of, evaluating them has been studied, e. g., Cooper (1968). Bennett (19751, and Denofsky (1976). Finally a number of studies have considered our topic: the position of a SR within the semantic structure of a sentence.

Studies of our soet tend to be distinguishable by the type of entities SR'S are claimed to locate. In some cases, the SR'B apply to only physical objects.. In athers, they apply to only abstract forme identifying events and states o affairs. A broad third type of analysis shows different sorts of entities being modified. Each has.its limitations. that claim physical objects as

The proposals of Norman and b, anc c) and Schubert (19761, the SR to "the iuan-" directly. the style of Schubert (1976). at a time, indicated by the - T FIGURE 2 .I "The man in the car left" in the

st-yle of Schubert (1936). since all that is required is to associate SR's with the sentential elements which are modified which reference physical objects. Unfortunately, there are problems.

It can be difficult to find all or any objects with which to associate an SR. Often there is more to an event than. just its partiripahts' locations:

2.2 John is playing solitaire in the basement. If we hear example 2.2 then more than John is known to be in the basement. His cards are, for. example. Further, the location of the action is more than the instantaneous position of John and his cards. For example, space where the cards may, potentially be plaoed must be included. Similarly, the following does not indicate that John is next to the school:

2.3 John is playing baseball next to the school. Hemi.ght be playing outfield 300 feet from it. It can be difficult to find any objects to associate with an SR: 2,'4 * In France, literary criticism is a high art form. 2*.5 The explosion was in the garage. tn both the above examples, only complex analyses showing many understood ad potential participants can allow £01 object-reference. Allowing fox motional sentences is a very serious problem for objectreferenee analyses. The typical proposal is to show motion as change from one static location to another: 2.6 The man walked from New York to Chicago. Example 2.6 would be shown as a man's walking causing a change of location from New York to Chicago. Some sentences show intermediate points:

2.7 The man walked from New York to Chicago via Pittsburgh. Here, successive changes seem to be appropriate. However, one references to motion seems to defeat this entire approach:

2.8 The man walked across the puddle.

2.9 The man walked around the puddle.

2.10 The man walked through the puddle. Examples like the above involve duration in a key way and can not be shown with class of reference to one position. For example, at no time was the man "across" the puddle like ~aleigh's cloak was across it. Similarly, two points showing the man's change of position are inadequate since the same initial and final positions are a'cceptable in all three cases. Finally, adding an intermediate point will not be adequate, since the man might reach that point while on a path that otherwise holds a different relation to the puddle. As shall be seen, the lesson to be learned from these examples is that in allowing for motion, it is the entire path that must be considered and not selected positions of objects. 11.2 Analyses Using Events and States of Affairs

A second uniform type of analysis postulates events and states of aftairs as the subject of SR's (see for example, Davidson, 1967, Lakoff, 1970, and Harman, 1972). Events and states of affairs are said to be the two types of situations that utterances describe. Taking them 88 the subjects of SR' e claims that it is not the participants but the overall situation that is being referenced. This can be seen in Figure 2.2, which shows one of Davidson's analyses in a eemantfc net notation. The diagram shows that there is a strolling by John which has a particular time and space coordinate. The benefits of this analysis include the independence of event and state existence from discussion of spatial location, the ability to handle location of vaguely bounded events and states, and the simplicim of application. However, again the simple direct methods that have been proposed are unsatisfactory.

It is often difficult to simply associate SR'S with a central event or state since SR's in some utterances must modify different entities:

2.11 John held the ice bag to his head in the car. In 2.11, only the ice bag is to John's head but John and the ice bag are in the car. Motion is still a proslerb:

2.12 John walked from his car across the yard to the ilouse. How the event of 2.12 can be "from", "across", and "to" simultaneously and also have these aspects temporally ordered is nowhere explained in these analyses. Finally, even if SR's are associated with events and states of affairs, the fact that something is often learned about participants' location must be explained. For example, from the sentence of Figure 2.2, the fact that John was in the streets of Bologna is clear, but from the semantic structure only the location of the strolling is clear. No coherent way has been presented to allow for this kind of relationship. Strol ling,

FIGURE 2.2 "John strolled through the streets of Bologna at 2 a.m." in the style of Davidson (1967). W.3 Nonuniform Analyses

The third style of SR analysis is nonuniform in nature. These either mix the two uniform analyses or elaborate on the simple event or state analysis. Mixed analyses claim that some SR's locate concrete objects while some locate events or states of affairs (see for example, Winograd, 1972, and Schank, 1973) By sacrificing the simplicity that comes from uniformity , these analyses avoid the uniform analyses' complementary problems. However, the mutual problems, especially motion, are left unsolved.

The nonuniform analyses that elaborate on the nature of events and states of affairs are best represented by Case analyses, see Bruce (1975). They claim that either the overall location or specific aspects of events and states are located. Takin~ Fillmore (19711, as opposed to the betterknown but earlier Fillmore

(1968), as the model, four spatial cases can be seen. An SR can either reference a static locatioh (the Location case), place of origin (the Source case), place of termination (the Goal case), or location of intermediate motion (the Path case). In terms of events and states of affairs, the first case can either be used for overall event or state location or it may be used to locate an aspect of the event. The final three cases all relate to different aspects of a motional event. This allows for examples like 2.12, with inherent temporal ordering among the cases allowing for the ordering of the SR's.

The Case analyses still has problems. The two uses of the static case conflict in sentences with two static locations such as the one where the ice bag is held to the man's head while the man and ice bag are said to be in the car. Two instances of the Location case seem to be required, but if both appear, there is no way to identify their differing function. Also, motion is still troublesome. As Fillmore (1971) point^ out, instances such as the underlined phrases in the following seem tc indicate a need for an unbounded number of instances of the Path case.:

2.13 He walked down the hill across thebridge

through the pasture to the chapel. The underlined phrases refer to motion ordered in time, e.g., he walked the hill before the bridge. However, Case analysis gives no way to order instances of the same case. Gruber (1965) points out the same problem with the Goal case:

2.14 I walked to New York to my mother's. Finally, the Case proposal rnuat be given some physical interpretation. Any representation of meaning must at some point be related to a m~del of the world. In this instance the idea of a source, goal, and path must be somehow related to models of motion.

This paper presents a proposal for an analysis that is nonuniform in the same way the Case analysis is. A uniform source for locations modified by SR's is given, but the predication of these spaces by SR's is shown to be much more complex than previously thought. Futther, sentences are not seen as being as simple with respect to SR's as previously supposed. Before presenting the analysis, two sections will be devoted to preliminary topics: our semantic net formalism and the eyntactic status of the phenomena considered. 111. Semantic Nets The resblts of this analysis of SR phenamenaare formalized in semantic nets or networks. This %ormalism is currently a popular choice for semantic analyses. It allows clear, expressive graphic presentations and possesses many positive computational properties. Because of its popularity, it also allows wide dissemination of ideas. Working against this last claim is the $roliferation of versiods of the representation, for example, Hendrix (1976), Norman and Rumelhart (19751, Shapiro (,1971), Simmons (19731, and Woods (1975). This section clarifies what is meant here by the formalism, which can be seen to most closely resemble that af Brachman (19773.

Semantic nets have been used for representing many aspects of htelligence. Of ten they are used to represent factual information concerning ob jerts, actions, and states. They have separately been used to show the semantic structure of utterances It is this use that mainly interests us. However, there is a connection between the two uses. All semantic structures must he related to structures that represent facutal inbrmation and each use of a type of object, event, or state of affair must be related to a concept that explains it. This can be thought of as paralleling the relationship between a semantic structure shown iq the predrcate calculus and a model in which that structure has a truth value.

In a complete net, the above translates into the necessity of nodes for concepts representing types of events, states of affairs, and objects and nodes for instances of tokens of these concepts. The "token" nodes must link to "type" nodes that define them. These definitions must include specification of abtributes of an instance in terms of restrictions on values, fuwtional role of thd attribute, and other things. The instance nodes must be connected to instantiations of the attributes. Concept nodes must also be related to dther concepts., have overall structural conditions, locate inference rules that map apply, etc. All this information is essential to any artificially intelligent entity, just as the model is essential'to any analysis in the predicate calculur. However, for showing the semntic relations in which we are mainly interested, an abbreviation is sufficient just as only the formulas are sufficient in most studies using symbolic logic. Hence a special abbreviation will be used in all sections except fX where the definitional level wili be discwsed. Central to our abbreviation will be nodes that collapse types and tokens. These will identigy the verbal concepts that characterize the events and states of affairs. We will call them "event/state" nodes. They will be circled and capital letters will be used for abstract types, such as CAUSING. Nonabstract forms will be shown with names that suggest the interpretation, e.g., Sleeping will suggest the sleeping state. When a node represent8 a physical object, identifying information will be included in quotes, e.g., "the bus". Names placed on ascs - will abbreviate and suggest - the functional roles of attributes. For example, ANTE for antecedent and CONS for consequence will be used with CAUSING. Case names will be used with many event and state of affairs types. These will include:

- T

- A - 0 Restrictions oval shapes and time intervals in square brackets. Finally, because it is not essential for our purposes, specification of time will often be left out of most semantic structures. Similarly, ire will consider only declarative statements. Figure 3.1 shows a typical struoture.

Some concepts that act as functions will also be used. Each of these will look like a relation - associating parameters with a value. The value will be identifiied by a VALUE arc. Inference rules will be presented in the form of

for "Time" showing the time an event occurred or state held.

for "Agent" showing the instigator of an event or state.

for "Object", the neutral case (as Fillmore (1971) explains

it "the wastebasket") .

on types of entities which will be necessary will be shown by nonfor nodes. For example, time instances will be shown in parentheses Loving \ (IIMOryll) \ [ 1.11 ] FIGURE 3.1 "John loved Mary all last year." "subnetll' 2 "subnet2", where on seeing slibnet 1' subnet* is to 'be added to the semantic net. These rules will include variables within nodes, where the variables are to be bound on matching and referenced on inferencing. These variables will be in the form of capital letters, e.g., X.

To summarize, our semantic net formalism uses concept names, descriptions of objects, mnemonic arc names, and mnemonic shapes for nodes to abbreviate the two levels in a semantic net. Also used are functions and inference ruLes. This will be enough to represent the semantic relations involving reference to space that are being considered. Unfortunately, it is one more unique formalism. However, it sdds no new structures, only abbreviating others. We leave as an unproven claim that it will fit in with any formalism which shows identifiable event and state of affairs nodes such as Norman add Rumelhart (1975) and Schank (1973). IV. The Syntactic Structure of Spathl References and the Primacy of Prepositions Semant'ic structure ia the topic of our paper, but the syntactic structure of sentences with SR s is also important. Us consideration clarifies the range of phenomena king etudied. With SR, the basic syntactic structures involve prepositional phrases. All other SR are analyzable in terms of these structures. In this sectian, the syntax function of prepositional phraees will be considered and arguments for their primacy will be presented. Our main interest in syntax is in structuring our didcussion of semantics. However, the problems of parsing and generation make the syntax of' SR's independently imprtant. These are not our topics here. However, in an earlier issue of this journal we presented a parsing scheme that produces semantic from syntactic structure and applied the scheme to current clags of phenomena (Sondheimer and Perry, 1975). IV.l Locative Prepositions

Prepositional phrases that express SR's can be called locatiye. They appear conti~~ously, as in example 4.1, or diacontiguously, as in example 4.2:

4.1 I put it on table.

4.2 The table I put it on is broken. The discontiguous example can be taken as derivable from (reducible to) the cont iguous f oms in generation ( interpretation). Hence only contiguous examples will be considered. These are primarily employed in four syntactic roles: complement, quhlifier, adjunct, and locative object. There is also one special dependent usage that will be described at the end of this section.

The complement usage of locative prepositions arises only when they are the "complement" of the verb "be":

4.3 He is in the kitchen. Quirk et al., (1972)'distinguishes them from predicate adjective and nominal usages. Locative objects and adjuncts with copulative eentences can be distinguished f rw compl ements by the presence of these ad jec tivee and noun phrases : 4.4 There are lions in Africa. 4.5 He wes important in Chicago. The qualifier usage of locative prepositions is part of noun phrases and shows the location of the reference of the noun phrase: 4.6 The man in ths car left. The strings in some sentences may make it appear that locative prepositions are part of noun phrases when they are not:

4.7 I put the knife on the table.

4.8 She took care of John in Chicano. In these cases, the passive test and cleft-sentence test (~acobs and Rosenbaum, 1968, p. 38) can be applied:

4.9 *The knife on the table was put by me.

4.10 *What I put was he knife on the table.

4.11 *John in Chicago was taken care of by her.

4.12 *What she took care of was John in Chicago. The asterisk "*" here and throughout marks ungrammatical sentences. The ungrammaticality of the above examples indicate that the strings in question are not noun phrases. Hence the prepositional phrases cannot be qualifiers.

Adjunct usages are prepositional phrases that are external to the clause of a scntence:

4.13 I met John on the train. Locative object usages are objects of verbs and internal to clauses:

4.14 I put the lamp in the corner.

4.15 He yelled at John.

4.16 He saw her in the park. There is some controversy on the distinction between these two types. We can present two syntactic and one semantic classification procedures. First, adjuncts are never required for granrmaticality, while locative objects can be: 4.17 I met John, 4.18 *I put the lamp. Second, adjuncts always allow shifting to presubject position without loor of gramatical&ty or shift in meaning: 4.19 On the train I met John. 4.20 *At John, he yelled. 4.21 In the park, he saw her. Note that in 4.21, the man is definitely placed while in one interpretation of 4.16, the locative object one, he is not. Semantically, we claim that adjuncts locate the entirety of events and states discussed, while locative objects can locate only part of what ir described. For example, in 4.16, the locative object reading shows only the woman's position in the park, not the location of the "seeing" as a whole. The following is also informative:

4.22 He dropped it behind the door.

4.23 Behind the door, he dropped it. Both examples are similarly ambiguous with respect to the SR. One sense, the most likely to be identified in 4.22, is that the end result of the dropping wan that the object came to be behind the door. The second sense, the most likely for 4.23, is that the dropping took place behind the door. The firet sense ehows partial predication and a locative object usage. The second ehows overall predication and an adjunct usage.

Some forme that seem to be adjuncts do not at first glance appear to make overall predication:

4.24 On the train, he commented on the Empire State Building.

4.25 In Chicago, John wrote to his mother. The Empire State Building's and John's mother's position are independent of the train and Chicago. However, we can claim there is still overall predication since the commenting and the writing were done on the train and in Chicago, respectively. Durational adjuncts also complicate the semantic test: 4.26 He cried through the tunnel. 4.27 He sat still from New York to Chicago. l'hese prepositional forms show duration of the crying and sitting and should be taken as adjuncts. The first gives overall predication. The second example shows two phrases that individually give ~artial predication. However, together they give overall predication. Further, they cannot be used individually: 4.28 *He sat still from New Y~rk. 4.29 *He sat still to Chicago.

These are the four primary uses of locative prepositions. We claim that the semantic structure of other SK'B can be represented through these forms. We will now show this. In general, this will be done by observing the SR's structure or by paraphrase arguments. IV.2 Other Spatial References as Locative Prepositions

Some spatial terms can have syntactic and semantic functions similar to prepositions in that they directly serve to relate two forms:

4.30 San Francisco is north of Los Angeles.

4.31 The car is to the left of the building. These examples can immediately be given prepositional-like semantic structures. In other sentences, these terms appear as nouns and adjectives:

4.32 The North is desolate.

4.33 He hit my left leg. Here, t h ~ forms can be paraphrased in the prepositional-like form which can be taken as their underlying semantic form:

4.34 The part of the country to the north of the rest is desolate.

4.35 He hit one of my legs that is to the left of the other. Another category, the locative prepositional adverbs, although lacking syntactic objects have assumed semantic objects. This is shown by our ability to question the missing object, which is a means for distinguishing this category from verb particles (~uirk et al., 1972, p. 103) : 4.36 4.37 4538 4.39 He went up. Up what did he go? He picked it up. Up what did he pick it? A diverse variety of non-prepositional locative adverbs can be handled with prepositional forms. Assumed objects can also be seen in cases of paired prep-ositianal-adverbs and prepositions. These are suggested in parentheses below:

4.40 He walked across (a walkable space) to the blackboard.

4.41 He jumped from (a jumpable place which was on) the table. Some adverbs can be straightforwardly treated as the equivalent of prepoaitiod phrases. These appear as the concatenation of a preposition and a noun and refer to the spatial relation referenced by the preposition with respect to the type of object referenced by the noun:

4.42 He ran uphill.

4.43 He is overseas. The suffix "-ward1' following a preposition or preposition-like term produces an adverb that can be treated as having a destinationel- or orientationel-like meaning as shown by the following,paraphrases:

4.44 He moved leftward.

4.45 He moved to the left.

4.46 It pointed upuard.

4.47 It pointed up the space. Other adverbs can be treated as having a neutral prepositional sense like "at" or 11 to" in their semantic representation:

4.48 He is home.

4.49 He is at home. Finally, many noun phrases that indicate position can be seen as havipg prepoeitione subsumed by the verbs they appear with and hence can be represented as containing prepositional phrases, see Gruber (1965) for elaboration: 4.50 He gave Susan the ball. 4.51 He gave the ball to Susan. 4.52 He jumped the fence. 4.53 He jumped over the fence.

There are a few forms in SR's that I can not always claim to be represented by preposi tidnal f om& Theq e are I1 where", "here", "there", and measures of distance. These w i l l be dealt with separately. In general, we w i l l deal wit% prepositio~lal phrases with the aseumption that all SR phenomena are covered.

Beyond the examples already g-n, it is hard to say what should be considered an SR. Adjectivw such as "10ng"~ and "fat" inwolve the abstract properties of ~bjects more than their properties as objects momentarily situated at a point in space. Many examples apsear to be metaphors of SR or make oblique reference to space:

4.54 I stood trial.

4.55 I go to Ohio State. A l l of these w i l l be ignored. Doubtlessly, there are unarguable cases of SR that are being overlooked. For this, I can only apologize. IV.3 Semantic Structure of Pre~ositional Phrases

Since prepositional forms are the basic method of making SR, their representation is central to this analysis. They w i l l be given a semantic representation as concepts relating what is referenced by the SR to their own complements, see Figure 4.1. The referenced entity w i l l be identified by the - F link for "figure" and the complement by the - G link for "ground" (Talmy , 1975)*. Each prepositional concept w i l l be defined as comparing the figure's space to the location of the ground's object at the time associated with the figure (Section *There would have to be a second ground link for "between": I left it between the window and the dbor. FIGURE 4.1 A prepositional semantic structure. VIfI contains more discussion on this point). Prepositional concepts will all be considered abstract and written in capital letters. The reason abstract forms are used will become clear in the following sections.

One particular dependent use of the preposition "from" f all8 outside the simple pattern shown in Figure 4.1 as well as outside of the four claeeerr of prepositional usages:

4.56 John .is far from home.

4.57 John is acr-oss the street from home. In both of the above, John ip distant from home. But in 4.57, John is not across the street in the usual aenee of "across" stretching the width of the street. As Bennett (1975) points out, the "across1' and "from" phrases combine in euch a way that we understand that it is the way that must be travelled in starting from home and going to John that is "across the streetB'.* This can be allowed for in semantic nets with a function, - WAY, producing a path through space joining two points identified For example 4.57, -e rame meaning

is an understood

He died by - INIT for Initial and - FIN for Final links, see Figure 4.2. G would identify the cltreet, INIT the home, and FIN where John also ariaer in sentences such as the following where there "from point" that muat be represented: acroae the river. is. How John's location is to be shown is explained in the next section, where the baaic and simpler SR's are analyzed. FIGURE 4.2 A prepositional semantic structure

for the special "from" usage. V. Static Adjunct, Complement and Qualifier usages Section I describes our basic claim: the source of the locations being referenced by SB's can be represented as being the locations of events and states of affairs. In this section, this claim is associated with the amantic net model and applied to those types of SR's for which it works immediately. These are the static adjunct, complement and qualifier usages. V. 1 Basic Structures In our semantic net model, the locations of events and states of affairs will be shown as attributes of eventhate nodes through arcs leading from the nodes to locational entities. For each event/state node involved with an SR there will be only one such arc and locational entity. Theee atcs will be labelled - Pto suggest a spatial attribute or "Place" case. The locational entities will be referred to as place objects. They are the basis of our analysis. These place objects can be taken for the time being as volumes in space. The sort of ~olume they are will be ela6orated upon. Place objects will be identified by boxes. Figure 5.1 gives a typical diagram.

It must be askedwhether place objects are required in semantic represen-

tations or simply ad hoc creations. The answer is that they are required since speakers treat t b as existing byreferring directly to them with some user of

"where" :

5.1 Where is John living?

5.2 I found it where John was sleeping.

Place objects can not be outlined strictly in space like a solid can. This is not important, because there is no way in language to directly and completely locate any object. In the last section, it was argued that except -for "where", "here", and "there", every SR is like a preposition. Hence they all give relative position. With those that do not, "where" can be show leeping T V FIGURE 5.1 "John is sleeping here. II as referencing place objects not definite locations. "Here" and "there" both predicate spatial qualities of place objects not specific locations:

5.3 John was born here. In 5.3, the location of the doing is simply associated with "here". Hence a semantic analysis that associates SR with abstract locations can work if the means of predicating these locations and of fitting them into semantic structures can be found. V.2 Applying the Analysis

With the place object, there is a Large class of phenomena that can be represented directly. These include static adjuncts (5.4) as opposed to durational ones (5.5):

5.4 At the table, John sat without moving.

5.5 From Dallas to Houston, John sat without moving. Similarly, the static complement senses (5.6) as opposed to resultive complement senses (5.7) can be directly represented:

5.6 Chicago is far away from New York.

5.7 We are finally far away from New York. Finally, direct analysis can be given to qualifier usages which either apply with a static sense to nouns describing physical objects (5.8) or act like static adjuncts with respect to verbal noun8 (5.9) : 5.8 Tkb man in the car left . 5.9 swimming in the lake is fun. These qualifier usages can be contrasted with those that ahow motian (5.10), act like locative objects to verbal nouns (5.11) or @how extent (5.12): 5.10 The bus to Chicago left. 5.11 ~wiming in to a cave is fun. 5.12 The bridge from Ohio to Weet Virginia ie old. Applying the place object analysis to static adjuncts is easily defendable. One test for adjuncts in the last section was to see if it located the entirety of the event or state discussed. The static adjuncts are identifiable in this way. Since the place object shows the location of that entirety, static adjuncts can therefore be directly applied to them. Figure 5.2 gives a typical analpsir. FIGURE 5.2 "~ohn is sleeping in the kitchen. II This basic treatment ex-tends to static complement usages. These relate an object to some location in space and time. To show this an abstract predicate, BEING-AT, can be postulated whose object case shows an entity whose spstiotemporal location ia specified by Plaee and Time cases, see Figure 4.3. Proposing a state of affairs to show an object's existence in space and time slay at first seem artificial. But in fact, it provides representations ismorphic to the usual "direct" repreeentatioa of object .I location. For example, Schubert (1976) uses a concept - LOC which by a link A identifies an object, a link - B the object s location, and a link v T its time frame (see Figure 2.1). These match our BEING-AT, 0, P, and T cases, respectively. Schubert sometimes abbreviates SR's when the preposition "at" is used. However, this is simply an abbreviation and his underlying form remains equivalent to ours. BEING -AT FIGURE 5.3 "John is behind the house. II Static qualifiers parallel either the adjunct or complement analysis. As m adjunct to verbal noun, we can claim that an event/state correspondiag to the event or state described by the nouns can be located by the SR in the same way as an actual adjunct. With qualifiers applying to concrete nouns there can be a BEING-AT eventheate showing that the existence in space and time of the object is being discussed. The qudifier can then modify its place object. This would then show thefollowing equivalently: 5.13 The man in the car yesterday left. 5.14 The man d o was in the car yesterday left. The possibility of time modification as in 5.13 is good evidence for the treatment of qualifiers as having underlying complement structure (Winograd, 1972). V.3 Allowing for Object position

Now that both adjunct and complement usages have been considered, our method of allowing for the positioning of objects while representing SR's as positioning eventlstates can be explained. As was discussed in Section 11, an event/state analysis must explain how ati artificially intelligent entity can discover that John vae somewhere from the representation of an event or state involving John being located there. This can be taken as being something like discovering the appropriateness of the complement form (5.16) from the truth of the ad jmct form (5.15):

5.15 John slept in the kitchen.

5.16 John was in the kitchen.

Within the computational paradigm, the discovery of 5.16 from 5.15 is made easy by inference rules. Whenever the semantic analyses of a sentence like 5.15 is presented to a system, rules associated with the type of eventistate node involved can produce inferable information. This process allows for the human process of the deduction of specific information about participants in an event or state of affairs from kn~wledge~of the type of event or state of affairs. This is actually what is happening with SR's. From our knowledge of sleeping, we know that someone is where he is sleeping. From our knowledge of "working for", we know that B i l l but not necessarily John is at the store in the followirg: 5.17 B iU is working for John at the store. From our knowledge of contact cases such as in 5.18, we know that the location of the intersections of the objects is learnable:

5.18 The ball hit Mary on the ear. In semantic nets, these facts can be shown by inference rules associated with the appropriate concepts. In Figure 5.4, the "subnetll' 9 "subnet2" form described in Section 111 is used to allow for the sleeping case. Other rules w i l l , of course, be needed for other concepts.* The predication of pLace objects, hich are the locations of events and states of affairs, therefore stands as the core of our analysis. How it directly applies to represent certain SR's has been shown in this section. In the next, more indirect analyses are conaidered. Sleep1 ng BEING - AT

FIGURE 5.4 The encoding of the rule "If you know where something is sleeping, then you know where it is". *A potential critic may argue that the extra processing involved with inference

rules should be avoided if at all possible. However, no other analysis of

SR successfully avoids its use (~ondheimer , 1975). VI. Non~ovement Locative Object Usages The analysis of locative object usages is not a8 simple as that of other forms. Looking back to Section T', most of the problems with earlier studies arise from this class. The solution to tthese problems is found in an elaboration on the basic form of our event/state analysis. This elaboration proceeds in two directions. First, the semantic structure of the sentences containing the troublesome SR's is seen to be more complex than otherwise thought. Second, the nature of the SK is seen as more complex. The first case is best seen with nonmovement and the second with movement sR's. This section covers the non-movement type of locative object. Section VII covers the movement type.

We can review the problems with the use of event and skate location in the non-movement cases, briefly. There is a need to differentiate referents which can be seen in the following:

6.1 John held the ice bag to his head in the car. The ice bag is to John's head, but both the ice bag and John are in the car. The first SR involves a locative object, the second an adjunct. With a simple approach to eventhate location, they would not be differentiated. There is a

similar problem in some adjunct references to the location of only part of an event or state of affairs. For instance, in 6.2, only the boy isplaced which the hawk is definitely physically present:

6.2 In an open field, a boy watched a hawk. In the latter case, although not the former, the use of inference rules might be suggested. However, a better answer can be found. VI.l Continuous Position and Perception Verbs

The semantic structure of simple sentences have often been analyzed as involving multiple events and states of affairs, see far example, Schank (1973) and Norman and Rumelhart (1975). If we can see problematic sentences in this light, then perhaps we could assign the various SR1s to different event/states. Indeed, we can do both. Instances of calmative relations betweell events and states of affairs are found in many problem sentences. Change-of-state events applying to separate states of affairs are seen in others. Simple instances of embedded events and states of affairs are seen in yet others. "Hold" belongs to a clam of verbs that involve continuou~ position. Others in the class include "adhere", "cling", and "keep". With Locative objects, these can all be seen ar causations. Each ha8 an action which causes some entity to remain somewhere. holding-type action causes the ice bag to remain allows us to analyze the SR's as locating events and the car1', can be seen, as adjuncts were explained the laet as locating the highest event/etate within the causation. The "to his head1' can be seen as locating the resuftant state. This is shown in Figure 6.1. The TO in the diagram represents a static eense of "to". CAUSING, L 1 - BGNG0 John "the ice bag" FIGURE 6.1 "John held the ice bag to his head in the car. 1 '

In our example 6.1, John's somewhere. ~ealizkg thir states. The overall SR, "in

in section, an open FIGURE 6.2 "In an open field, the boy watched a hawk."

"Watch" belongs to a class of verbs that includes "hear", "see", and "taste". These can all be seen as involving the perception of another event or state of affairs.* In our example 6.2, it is the being somewhere, the existing, of a hawk that is watched. How this allows for the SR to be associated with the correct event/state is evident from Figure 6.2. This analysis may seem somewhat forced here, 6.3 6.4 6.5 mese verbs I heard through the door. On these occasiow, an assumed entity can be added to the semantic structure: I heard ( sane thing) through the door. but other exmaples show more overt event or state forms: I watched the mating of the doves I saw the delivery of the baby. I heard the cooing of the doves. occasionally appear without an object: Inference rules play an important part in these analyses. For example, the positioning of John and the ice bag must be derivable from the structure of Figure 6.1. An inference rule must associate the position of the HOLDING-ACTION with their positions. Another rule must relate a place object for the HOLDINGACTION as inside that of the CAUSING. Conversely, there should be no inference rule applying to the structure of Figure 6.2 to show the place object of the BEING-AT as being contained in that of the Watching. VI.2 Other Verb Classes

There are a number of other classes of verbs that take static locative objects, see Table 1. We will survey their analysis in the remainder of the section and close with a comment on several related forms. TABLE 1,- A CATEGORIZATION OF SOME VERBS THAT ACCEPT

NON-MOVEMENT LOCATIVE OBJECTS 4. 5. 6. Continuous Position: adhere, cling, hide, hold, keep. Perception: hear, see, taste. Attachment, Containment, Posture, and Creation: build, close, crouch, draw, erect, glue, hang, lay, lean, lock, nail, paint, sew, shut, sit, stand, write. Contact: grab, hit, kick, kiss, kneel, punch, slap, slug, touch. Change of State: break, chop, cook, cut, fry, shatter, spill, split. Discovery and Thought: dream, find, imagine, lose, recognize, remember, spot, think. Copula-like: happen, gave, occur, remain, stay, take place. Portability: bring, carry, send, take, wear.

The next class of verbs adds anokher abstract predicate to the set of forms we have considered: c( him" FIGURE 6.3 "H& nailed it to the wall."

6.6 He nailed it t~ the wall.

6.7 He shut'it in the rgom.

6.8 He sat it on the trible.

6.9 He drew it on a napkin. The above sentences involve attachment, has an element of coming-into-being that for these sentences shows the action of state of affairs. The locative object see Figure 6.3. The coming-into-being COMING-ABOUT. The segment of the structure the dotted there to show the analysis these verbs take in the second type of usage they allow:

6.10 It is nailed to the wall.

6.11 It is shut in the room.

6.12 It sits on the table.

6.13 It is drawn on a napkin. These; examples lack agents and any sort of causation. The farma within the

dotted line in Figure 6.3 show exactly this structure.

The prepositional form, TO, in Figure 6.3, is to be understood in the static

sense just as with Figure 6.1. In fact, this is the case with all prepositional forms used here. It is an important advantage of this analysis that it uses only static senses in semantic structures. On the surface, it is often said that the locative objects of the current set of verbs have dynamic senses. However, with containment, posture, and creation. Each

must be represented. The standard form

an agent causing the bringing about of a is shown locating this state of affairs,

concept in this structure is labelled

inside line is a separate inchoative eventletate, this is unnecessary. This allows. tb+ representation of presuppositions like "to" or "on to" either through "at" or "on" as Cruber (1965) does, or through their own static bense as in example 6.10. e his is one in a series of reductions. It was shown in Section IV that some double prepositional phrase structures involved "from" can be reduced to a simpler form. It will be seen elsewhere that other simplications can be made. That underlying senses of the prepositions are being used explains why our prepositional concepts have been capitalized.

Another class of verbs-shows contact. They take the two types of analyses just discussed. They also show a coming-into-being sense vhen no agent i~ present but a state is achieved. All three cases are shown in the following:

6.14 I touched her on her face with my hand.

6.15 The tree touches the window near the top.

6.16 The ball touched my leg near the knee. The semantic structures for each of these can contain an event/state showing contact between the two objects to which the SR's can be applied.

Another class of verbs which show change of state have all three types of structures with locative object usages:

6.17 I broke it on the rim.

6.18 The cup broke on the rim.

6.19 The cup is broken on the rim. 6.17 is causative/coming-into-being, 6.19 is coming-into-being, and 6.19 is static only. The static form in each can again take the SR. In noncausative examples with thelse change of state verbs, SR's generally appear to act as locative objects, as a test from Section IV shows:

6.20 The cup broke on my knee.

6.21 *On my knee, the cup broke. The noncausative examples includes SR' s which reference ob jeats not inherently possessed by the changed object, such as 6.20, but which place the entire event. In these cases, the SR'r should be treated similarly to adjuncts and &own applying to the COMING-ABOUT event/state. Some verbe which take locative objects are like perception verbs in not requiring causative analyses to explain locative object usages. These lnclude discovery and thought verbs, such asl'spot" and "thought". They can be ahown with embedded event/states. With locative object readings, 6.22 and 6.23 involve only locating of the direct objects: 6.22 I spotted her behind the dresser. 6.23 I thought of Mary at the seashore. These entities can be shown in an event/state claiming they existed in a certain time and space with the SR predicating that event/state. This treatment would parallel the structure of overt examples of embedded events as in the following:

6.24 I spotted you stealing some bananas.

6.25 I thought of you dancing.

Finally, as Lyons (1968) notes, some verbs, which we treat here as having locative objects, seem to relate to SR'S in the same way as the complement usages :

6.26 It occurred in Chicago.

6.27 It remained in New Orleans. These can be analyzed with one eventistate showing both adjunct and locative objects identifying the same entity.

So we have seen that the complexity associated with many SR's comes from their semantic environment, not themselves. With the exception of a class of verbs covered in the next section this covers the range of verbs that take nonmovement locative objects. Also covered but only indirectly are a few senses left from the last chapter. We can now see how qualifiers of verbal nouns that are acting as non-movement locative objects can be analyzed. We can also see that resultive senses of the copula can be shown with a COMING-ABOUT, see Figure 6.4. COMING-ABOUT FIGGRE 6.4 He is just now in the house. VII. Motion Problems with motion arise in every analysis of SR considered in Section 11. In this section, what is, as far as we know, an entirely unique approach to the semantics of motion is presented. Our analysisa centers on movement locative objects. As has been mentioned, this involves cmplex modification of the location of motional events. The section first presents a brief discussion of the structure of movement sentences, then motivates our view of motion predication, and finally presents the details of the representation. VII .1

Thc ( 1972) . 11 puntf', objects resembles that of sentences with non-movdment locative objects being complex. Nearly all examples show causative structure with an actioin in one event/state causing motion in another illmo more, 1971). The appropriate analyses approximately pairs the following:

7.1 John threw the ball through the door.

7.2 John's throwing caused* the ball to go through the doox.

7.3 Mary walked out of the house.

7.4 Mary's walking caused her to go out of the house. The only sentences which take simple, causative-like analyses are those with "go" and "come".

An important aspect of the analysis of movement SRfs is the concept to be used in the motional event/state. The semantic equivalents of "got1 or 1 I comef' will not do. 7-.5 7.6 7.7 7.8

The Structure of Movemement Sentences verbs that take movement locative objects are numerous, see Miller

They include If come", "go", "bringff, "take", "climb", "drivef', "bit" 9 I I set1', etc. The structure of the sentences with movement locative

in These verbs have special deictic conditions on them (Fillmore

Go there. *Go here. *Come there.

Come here. FIGURE 7.1 The basic structure for movement locative object sentences. Only "take" and "bring" show the - same pattern. For this reason, an abstract concept of pure motion, called GOING, will be used in our analysis. Figure 7.1 shows the sentential structure into which most movement SR's will t . The structures for "take" and "bring" will have Going and Coming, respectively, in place of the abstract form. For "go" and "come" themselves, the semantic structures will match the motional event/state shown wj th the other verbs with the exception of the type of eventhtate. The place objects of all the motional events can be considered the same, as can the way SR's apply to the different types of motion. We can also think of motional qualifiers as analyzable with the same structure. Because of this, the structure of movement predication will be considered in general and isolated from other forms. VZI .2 Thinking About Motion r As was pointed out in Section 11, one reason that motional SR1s are difficult is the multiple predications of different types which must be orderable in time. These problems can be overcome with appropriate consideration of the motion and the place objects of motional events.

The ineight for a better analysis comes from considering answers to questions of where motion occurs. Consider the answer to where the first Marathon was run. It is probably some thing like "in Greece" or "from Marathon to ~thens". These tend to place the entirety of motion. It is unlikely to be just "from ~arathon" or "to Athens". These just place, part of the motioa. People tend to locate motion as if it a single thing, It were a motion" so to speak. This is how we propose to think of the place object of motibnal events.

Place objects of motional events can be thought of as showing that motion, essentially showing a trace of the path of motion. This trace yould be similar to the trace a piece of chalk leaves as it crosses a blackboard. But it should be the marks that would be made by the entire chalk if space was a three-dimeneional blackboard and the entire chalk could write. This idea is displayed pictorially in Figure 7.2 with another example where something approaching an overexposed photograph of a rolling ball shows a solid cylinder tracing a ball's movement.

It is this type of cylinder that motional place objects represent.

This trace idea has one great merit. It allows direct analysis of the most

troublesome class of movements SR1s:

7.9 He walked through the puddle.

7.10 He walked across the puddle.

7.11 He walked around the puddle.

7.12 He walked over the.puddle. As was pointed out in Section 11, the aboue require a representation that

considers every instance of movement. The trace idea does this in such a sidewal k FIGURE 7.2 A ball rolling across a sidewalk to a porch. way that the SR's can be shown applying to the trace directly. Further, it does it in a way that allows the basic static use of the preposition to be used in the representation:

7.13 The bridges across the Mississippi are closed. This was pointed out in Section IV to be the same sense that applied in the I1 across-from" form:

7.14 The man stopped across the street from here. Hence three usages collapse into one with this representation.

This concept can be extended to allow for differentiating "up" and "down" by considering the solid traces to have an inherent ordering basedoon the direction of motion:

sensitivity shows up with other uses of the prepositions and other prepositions: 7.18 The carotid arteries extend up the neck to the head. 7.19 A woman stood at the front of the line while a man

stood at the rear. bnce its use is not arbitrary. The trace or path idea does not provide an immediate explanation for other movement 5#'s, those that reference instantaneous change: 7.20 He hit the ball into the cotner. 7.21 He walked out of the house. W i th the above we can not say that the overall path of motion wao either "into" the house or "out of" the house in the static sense of these prepositions Hoerever, there is a way we could use the static sense. If we could refer to podtione achieved by the moving object as it followed the path, we could say that there were positions where the object first got to be "into the corner" and "out of the house". This would be like allowing reference to the position of the individual balls displayed in Figure 7.2. W e can conclude that we ought to be able to reference parts of place objects.

Being able to reference parts of motion actually leads to a solution of the problem of temporal ordering inherent in multiple SR, such a8 I8 .. . across the yard up the stairs . . .". If these durational forms ere also thought of as modifying discrete, bounded parts of the kind of place objects that are being discussed, then they too can be compared. For the phrase just mentioned, a part of the motional object that~wae across the yard could be compared to a part that vas up the stairs as being lees further along it. The same could be done to capate the parte involved with instantaneous reference.

To sunuuarize3 the idea is to think of movement as a trace of the event over tb, vbich has an inherent orientation and which cah be predicated in part. We can now almost present our representation. W e w i l l first present a slightly incapleke proposal and then rwlse it. VII. 3 Semantic Structures for Motion Tentatively, we propose two different functions - to produce parts from complete place objects. These are called SEGMENT and UNIT. They will be used with durational and instantaneous references, respectively. The durational function can be taken as picking off bounded parts of a place object. The instantaneous function can be assumed to pick off part of the trace beginning at the earliest point, and going up to the point of change. Both functions will have the place object they accept identified by an S link and the produced space identified by a VALUE link. To distinguish the two outputs, the SEGMENTized place object will have a colon inserted, and the UNITized one a period. The segments will be shown ordered through I I as numeric" comparisdns. Pigcre 7.3 therefore gives a tentative analysis for the sentence "The cat came across the yard up the stairs into the house". One SEGMJ3NT function picks out the motion across the yard while another picks out motion up the stairs. A UNIT function picks out motion into the house. The segments are all ordered by less-than-orequal links.

The temporal ordering of the partial traces is the one tentative part of the analysis. To have it be sensible, some scale of comparison - must exist. The appropriate choice appears to be the temporal scale. When the locations were achieved is, of course, what is being ordered. There must also be conventions on application of the comparison. This is because there must be a way to force the comparison on only the appropriate end points of segments. We might develop a way of making these conventions inherent, but I propose to make them explicit.

/ C omlng the ' cat 2 SEGMENT

VALUE

SEGMENT VALUE VALUE FIGURE 7.3 A tentative analysis of "The cat came I across the yard the stairs into the house. 1 up

Our final proposal for the structure of motional SR's is to include time parameters with the functions. In this way, both the end points of the segments and the temporal scale can be identified. For the SEGMENT function, two linkr, - T1 and - T2, will identify the times that initial and final points were occupied. For the UNIT function, one link, T, will identify the time the final position war achieved. These structures are shown in Figure 7.4 and 7.5. FIGURE 7.4 The motional elements in "John walked acreas the yard." FIGURE 7.5 The motional elements in "I hit the ball into the khair." FIGURE 7.6 The motion component of "John walked from his house to the cat.". I

Now, in order to allow for multiple motional locative objects, two time instances can be related with a temporal relation, - LE, for less than or equal. This is done in Figure 7.6.

An interesting aspect of the semantic structure of Figure 7.6 is the static representation of "from". It is to be understood as showing that up to some point in the journey the moving object was not away from the house, but that it eventually got to be away from it. "Out of" and "off of" are analyzed similarly. VII.4 Static Spatial References Applying to Motional Events Besides the ,durational and instantaneoue predications of motion, there can be overall predications of moving objects. These come in two forms. Adjuncts in movement sentences place the entirety of motion:

7.22 In Chicago, he walked around the downtown.

7.23 John came to Chicago in a plane. One class of verbs, which allows both movement and non-movement locative objects, allows the moving object to be statically placed during movement:

7.24 He carried the dog onto the bus in a box.

7.25 He. brought John to Chicago in a plane. This class is the portability verbs left over from the last section. These verbs take causative analyses with a motional event/state as the caused event. In both of these kind of examples, the motional event must have its motional properties represented at the same time as its static properties. Instantaneous and dutational SR'S must be shown predicating special place objects which are parts of whole place objects. Therefore, we must show the over411 predication applying to different forms. these must be the complete place objects representing the entirety of motion. This is consistant with our other anlayees, as will shortly be seen in more detail. It .will also simplify the inference rules that bring down overall spatial predications from higher levels to the motional place objects. This analysis is seen in Figure 7.7 which essentially summarizes this section.

We have introduced twd new functions and types of place objects. These have allowed for movement locative objects. We must, however, realize that there are other uses-for this analysis. We will see why in the next section. INSIDE the cat S T2 VALUE V&LUE ACROSS UP l NTO FIGURE 7.7 The motional component of the "The cat was yard stairs into the house. 8 I brought across the up the . VIXI . Extending the Motional Analysis to Other Spatial References The last section may have given the reader the impression that the analyses for motiopal SR's are really different from those given other SR1s. Motional place objects have been set out as a history of movement in space and time. Nomotional place objects are left as "just" the location of certain events and states of affairs. In this section, we argue that this should definitely not be assumed. The place object of nonmotional SR's must be seen to have the same space-time structure as motional place objects. These are several arguments for this point.

Relative motion has been considered only for sentences with movement verbs, but relative motion and references to motion are common as adjuncts of "nonmotional" sentences:

8.1 John held the ice bag to his head in the moving car.

8.2 Jane sat on her purse from New York to Los Angeles. In each of tlie above examples two objects are statically related, i.e., John and the ice bag, and Jane and her purse, respectively. However, all are moving. One pair moves but remains static with respect to a car. The other pair is moving and changing with respect to -two cities. Hence, motion must somehow be allowed for in these "nonmotional" analyses. Further , change of relative position must be allowed for in at least one. No hint was given of how this last problem is to be solved in any of our diacussions of nonmotional SR's.

Even when motion is not overt, time may have to be considered with SR1s:

8.3 He died in his car. As we have seen in the analyses of sentences like 8.3, the car is to be related to the event of the dying. Consider the fact that the car is moveable. If we were to check to see if this were true, we must have either a history of the car's location or have the ability to find its location at the time of death. In oher words, time must be available for even instantaneous events. Jane FROM TO -A<-")

FIGURE 8.1 "She sat on her purge from New York to Los Angeles. fi I .

The way to extend our analysis to cover these facts is to recognize the connection between moti'onal and nonmotional place objects. Motional events involve the location over time of moving objects. Ndnmotional events and states of affairs do not necessarily involve moving objects, but they can involve location over time. This location is the space of spaces occupied by an event or state of affairs during its holding. To analyze the case8 of relative motion and motion with nonmotional events and states of affairs, these locations-over-time must be taken as the locations bf the events and states of affairs. Note that this does not change of the analyses presented earlier, only the way they are understood. With the same tyw of place object in all SR's the problematic examples that began this section can be elegantiy alloved for with the use of the motional functions. This is shown for example 8.2 in Figure 8.. So in conclusion we propose an analysis that treats all SR's the same. IX. Interpreting the Representation The last several sections presented the "syntax" of our semantic analysis. The term syntax is appropriate since the form of the analysis was presented. The semantics or interpretation to be given the proposed structures was only informally discussed, as when the trace or path analogy for motion was introducld. We noted in Section I11 that semantic nets do not just allow for the syntactic aspect of meaning structures, but also for the representation of the interpretation or definition of the concepts used in these structures. In this section, this property will be used to help formalize an interpretation of our analyses. This is only one of many possible interpretations, but showing it will help clarify the semantic structures. The formaloism for the conceptual definitions is based on Brachman (1977). Again, many abbreviations of a complete formalism are used.

The center of our previous discussions was the place objecc. This must also be true in discussing conceptual definitions. The nature of the place objects must first be defined, followed by the definition of everything that relates to place objects. ~ventlatates will be discussed first, then the SEGMENT and UNIT functions, and then the prepositional concepts. The definition of the WAY function wiil not be attempted. IX. 1 The Place Object

Our interpretation of the place object wiil be based on a discrete representation of time. Time can be considered as composed of arbitrarily densely packed time instances. A place object can show the location of an event/atate at one time for instantaneous events/states, a set of consecutive instances for durations1 event/states, and any set of instances for intermittent event/states. Structurally, we can take a place object to be a set of what we can call 0 Place Object DATTR FIGURE 9.1 a) The definition of Place Object.

b) The definition of Placelet. platelets, each of which is an ordered pair whose first element is a volume in space and whose second is an instant in time. This is formalized in Figures 9 .la and b.

In Figure 9.la, the node labelled Place Object stands for the concept of a place object. An arc with the special label DATTR points to its one defining attribute. This attribute and a11 others in this section are shown by a special node shaped as a square. The fact that placelets are members of the set that compose place objects is the defining - attribute of place objects, This node captures this by using an arc labelled ROLE to point to the special name Membe'r and one labelled V-R for value-restriction to point to the restriction on any member, namely that it must be a Pldcelet. In Figure 9.lb, the concept Placel* is defined. In this case, the concept has two defining attributes since a placelet must have a space and a time. The two attributes are shown accordingly with the - one in the role restricted to be a SPACE and one in the role called - t being a TIME. The concepts of SPACE and TIME will be treated as primitive, here. IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects The structure we defined for place objects will be referenced whenevel place objects are used. One reference will be in eventlstatea where place objects are involved with the case P. Hence, with the conceptual definition of every type of event/state that has a location, there will be a definingattribute with role P and value-restriction Place Object.

It is also the case that with each event/state, there will be a way to ehaw how the place object fits in with the .definition of the event/state. Thig will include the way in which the place object will be related to the participants in the eventlstate and structural restrictions on the place object Consider theabstract eventlstate GOING. GOING requires of its place object that the placelets showlwhe.re the moving object was at each instance during the movement., The placelets must refer to the time of the GOING. Since a discrete representation -of time is used, placelets for successive instances of time during the movement must show an overlap in positions occupied. Further, since movement is FIGURE 9.2 Partial Definition of GOING. necessary at least two positions among the placelets must be different. All these facts will have to be shown in the definition of GOING.

In order to show the flavor of eyent/state definition, we show in Figure 9.2 the relation between moving object and place object for GOING. The definition shows that the event/state has three attributes corresponding to the cases, P, T, and 0. Names have been added to the attribute nodes to make this easier to see. The everitlstate also has a structure identified by a special - 5-C link, tor structural conditions, which is used to identify how the event/stete is structured. The conditions for GOING are a set of conjuncts identified by the label in the diamond shaped node. This shape is an ald to the reader and indicates a logical operator. The structure necessary for the spatial relation is the leftmost of the conjuncta. It essentially takes the form of an implication statement eaying that for every placelet in the place object, the moving object, which is identified by the 0 role, will have a BEING-AT holding for the place and time in the placelet. The statement begins with a logic node, labelled EVERY, identifying a universal quantification. The domain of the quantified variable is shown by the link labelled - x. By po3nting to the appropriate attribute node, the restriction is to the set of placelets in the place object. The link labelled - P identif ies the proposition within the scope of the quantifiet which shows that for Cach placelet BEING-AT is the case for the entity in the 0 role at the place and time of that placelet. The representation of this last depends on the ability to focus in on attributes of entities being quantified over, for which see the FOCUS-SUBFOCUS mechanism in Brachman (1977). This ability is indicated here by the special representation of the P attribute. IX.3 - The SEGMENT and UNIT Functions

Formalizing the definitions of the SEGMENT and UNIT functions is fairly straightforward. Both can merely identify subsets of sets of placelets. The structural conditions for both can be shown with the same function which can be called GENERATE-RANGE. It can be asstuned to apply to any set and to produce the subset that fits a range defined by two limits and a measure. Since the definitions are similar, only the UNIT function will be shown, see Figure 9.3.

The GENERATE-RANGE function for the UNIT definition can take as its input,

identified by the SOURCE link, the place object marked by the S link of the UNIT function. The scale for measurement can be established by reference to a special Temporal scale. and apply to the time values in the set of placelets being operated on. The boundaries of the subset to be generated can be shown by - FROM and - TO linke. The FROM value would be produced from the set of placelets by a special LOWEST function to produce the lowest time value from among the placelets. The TO value can be a placelet with time specified by the T role in the UNIT function and unspecified space. The RESULT link can show that the generated value should be connected to the VALUE role of the UNIT function. SPACE Figure 9.3 Definition of the UNIT Function. IX,4 Pre~osi tions

Prepositions are the final concepts whose xelation to place objects w i l l be considered. It is always the case that prepositional concepts relate place objects which aFe locations over time to simple objects. The suggestion in the last section was that the locations of the place objects are related to the position of the referenced object at the times of the place object. The nature of this relationship depends on the source of the place object being predicated. Consider first predication of place objects which directly show the location

9.1 In his new shoes, John walked through the barnyard. The above eqample asserts that at each instance during the walking, the walker was "in" with r@spect to the position of his shoes. Such examples require that the object's position at each instant during the eventlstate be compared to the location of the event at that instant. Ulowing for the preporititma]. concepts applying to place objects produced by the UNIT function must be done differently: 9.2 John went into the car. Exaq4-e-9-2 ite of thia class with the eemantic structure showing concept Im relating a part of the going to the location of the car. Here the position of the aiqle object must again be compared at each instant of the place object to the location of the place object at that instant. Rowever, only at the last instant wt the relation be ehown as holding.*

Repositions predicating place objecte produced by the SEGMENT function are are caplex:

9.2 An ant is crawling up your arm. A s*le interpretation of the prepositional concept in the above may be problematic. Since your arm could be in motion, a stationary observer would include sare wtion attributable to your arm in the ant's path. Further, even if r wanted to take the position of the arm at erne one instant it is unclear wbich to take. These problems, however, dieappear with. the realization that the motion refereaced is not with respect to an arbitrary observer but to one on the am. For him, the SR can be treated as involving not a moving arm but one essentially static in space. This can be allowed for by requiring the conceptual definition of the prepositions to project the referenced objects' positions shown in the place object in. the P case onto the base object shown in the G case. This will be like taking the base as a static ground and the referenced object as a figure seen against it. *Since the change into the final state my be gradual and not dramatic, fuzzy

relatioucl (~adeh, 1973) might be used. For instance, the degree of "into"'

ednees could be quantified with the analysis showing that a certain degree was reached. V-R FIGURE 9.4a The definition of ACROSS: higheat level.

The conceptual level definition of the prepositional cmaept ACROSS is sketched in Figures 9.4a, b, and c. Here again, it should be remembered that we are not trying t~ show the entire meaning of the prepositional form, only its relation to the place object. Accordingly, a number of unanalyzed forme will be used. Perhaps the most curious one of the forms will be one labelled acroes , this can be seen as the physical part of the concept ACROSS. It would have to be the next form developed if we are analyzing the meaning of the preposition.

The definition of ACROSS begins in Figure 9.4a with an indication of the F and G nodes. The structural condition again shows the required connection between these two elements. It has three a1 ternative opportunities for eatisfaction, one for direct predication, one for UNIT functions, and one for SEGMENT funf tions. The three choices are reflected by the three arcs projecting from the - OR node. Which case applies should be shown by one of the two arcs projecting from the corresponding AND node. The test for direct predication is identified by the object in the F role being pointed to by an Event/Statc.* This is shown by *It could just a8 well be pointed to by a WAY node. Thicl could be teetcd

for with the addition of a disjunct. FIGURE 9.4b The definition of ACROSS: direct predication. across SPACE project m 2 FIGURE.9.4c The definition of ACROSS: SEGMENT predication. a test labelled with these names. The condition that muat hold if we do have direct predication is shorn in Figure 9.4b. It states that for every placelet the physical across must hold between the space of the placelet and the space of the place object of a BEING-AT which locates the object identified by the object in the role at the ti* shown in the placelet. The superscripts on nodes in the figure establish co-reference between the different parts of Figure 9.4. The structure for the UNIT case is fairly similar and not shown. For the SEGMENT case, the condition is based on one space being phy~ical across from another. This is shown in Figure 9.4~. Both spices are shown being produced by a s~ecial proieqtion function which takes the place object in the F role and the object in the G role and produces the projection, shown by an arc of that name, and an abstract space to compare it to, shown by the Abstraction arc. To summarize, the section has shown how conceptual level interpretation can be given the semantic structures proposed earlier in the paper. Any system that uses the semantic structures can also use the interpretations. Of course, the interpretations are baaed on one way of structuring plade objects. Since there are other ways, other interpretations are possible. X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions There are definite limits to the claims we wish to make. In this concluding section, we point out several half-solved and unsolved problems, one area where we could conceivably expand our claims, and then end with a summary and final defense. Metaphorical usages are i~lportant but difficult subjects for semantic representation. Things like "climbing the ladder of success" are far enough away from spatial reference to be ignorable. However, some SR phenomena appear to be metaphors: 3 -

20.1 John yelled his greetings to John. In the above, an imaginary object, "his greetings", seems to be sent through space. In the.following, a hypothetical journey is referenced:

10.2 The bridge goes from New York to New Jersey. Any direct representation of these phenomena using the definitions from the lasf section is unlikely since a non-instantaneous time interval must be present, while these sentences are basically instantaneous. My best suggestion is to represent these using the motional structures but to indicate by a function or operation applied to every appropriate foa that the actual sense is metaphorical. Unfortunately, this leads to odious complexity. It is probably better to say our claims stop at this point.

Many adverbial8 qan apply to modify SR'S or show spatial-like properties of events and states. We have no definite analyses for these, either. An incomplete study indicates that these may be analyzable within our model. For example, some forms can be shown as modifiers of a prepositional concept, such as in the following:

I put the ball completely under the car. Some seem to predicate place objects directly:

10.4 I walked two miles. Others seem to coordinate with SR's: 10.5 Go straight into the house. Here "straight" can be shown aa predicating the part of the journey up to the t ime the house was entered. However, I do not know how many other terms remain to be considered. Two problems remain completely unsolved. The first involves relative motion. 10.6 The ant walked over the rising pile of dough. Now, it is actually during the walking. problematic the use projected. Secondly, appears that inferences vary in habitual sentences:

10.7 He bought a present for her in New York.

10.8 He always buys a present for her in New York. The last examples differ because the former says - an event occurred in New York but the latter says that a certain type of event must occur when the person is in New York. I have solutions for neither problem. We can only appeal to the fact that these phenomena do present problems in many other areas of semantics.

Switching from difficult to promising areas, one strong possibility exists for expanding the analyeis and corroborating it. As the analysis was developing, t ime could be seen t-9 become more closely associated with place. In the end, time was claimed to f i t i t every place object. Perhaps with our place object, no separate t ime attribute needs to be associated with events or states of affairs. We may be able to claim that, to quote E. J. Lemon (19671, we can associate events with I I space-time zones" instead of times and spaces. How this would be done remains to be seen. However, if we have not already met our gdal of putting space on a par with tie, that would certainly do it. possible that-10.6 can be true but that the dough changed Since there is no one static pile of dough, this would make which of the dough as the object into,,the motion of the ant is

it In suampry, this paper has ahown how the .emantic rtructure of 8pati.l reference8 can be shown as locating events and states of affairs. within a semantic net, this has the form of showing a location ae an attribute of event/state nodes. In line with this, the concept of a place object, showing where events and states of affairs held at instances of time, was developed. Several functions were developed for use in predicating locations. Inferencing of spatial facts, the use of prepositional-like concepts for showing spatial relatibnships, and the overall semantic structure of utterances was also discussed.

Throughout the paper, the main jus tif ication has been that the analysis handles phenomena that other analyses do not. However, there are other jurtifications. Only one source for space simplifies the modeling of spatial phenomena. Using only static forms simplifies the interpretation of spatial terms. Also, the use of static forms fits in with proposals for state-based semantic representations (~ercone and Schubert, 1975). Finally, we can see that the analysis of semantic structures, in general, fits in with )I deeper" analyses of semantic structure such as Schank (1973) and Norman and Rumelhart (1975). In sum, there appears to be a strong case for the analysis. Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge the help of David Brown on an earlier draft of thia paper and the even earlier advice of Richard L. Venezky and Peter S. Schreiber who launched me into time and epace. Bibliography Abrahamron, Adele A. , "Experimental Analyeia of the Semantic8 of Movement ," in Explorations in Cognition, eds., Donald A. Norman and David E. Rumelhart, and the LNR Reeearch coup, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1975, 247-276.

- Norman, "The Conceptual Description of Physical Activi tier ," American of Computational Linguistics, Microfiche 35, (19751, 70-83, Badler, Journal Bennett, David C., Spatial and Temporal -- Uses of English Prepositions: - An Essay - in Stratificational Semantics, London, England: Langman Group, 1975. Brachman, Ronald J., A Structural paradigm - for Representinq Knowledge, Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard hiversity, 1977. Bruce, Bertram, "Case Systems for Natural Language," Artificial Intelligence, 6, 4, (1975). 327-360. Cercone, Nick and L. K. Schubert, ---- "Toward a State-Baeed Conceptual Represents- tion," in Advance Papers of the 4th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. - ~a-mbridne: - Artificial ~ntellinence Laboratory. Kesachuaetta Institute of Technology, 1975, 83-90. Colea, L. Stephen, "An On-Line Question-Answering System with Natural Language and Pictorial Input," in Proceedings -- WM National Conference, 1968, 157-167. Cooper, Gloria S., A Semantic Analysis of Engish Locative Prepositions, Report No. 1587, APCRL-68-0356, Bedfard, ~assachyaetts: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, IHC., January 1968. ~avidaon, - Donald, "The Logical - Form of Action Sentences" and "Reply to Comments, 11 in The Logic of Decision and Action, ed., Nicholas Rescher, Pittsburgh: University of pittsGrgh Press, 1967, 81-95, 11 5-120. Denofsky, Murray E., --- How Near is Near?: a "nearf' specialist, AX Memo No. 344, Cambridge: Artificial Intelligence ~aborator~, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, February 1976. Fillmore, - Charles J., "~eictic Categories in the Semantics of 'Come' ,I' Founda- tions of Languages, 2, (19661, 219-227. Fillmore, Charles J., "The Case for Case ," in Universals in Linguistic Theory, eds., Emmon Bach and Robert T. Harms, New York: Holt , cnehart and Winston, 1968, 1-88. Fillmore, Charles J., "Some Problems - for Case Grammar, f I in Georgetown - University Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics 24, ed., R. J. OtBrien, Washington D. C.: ~eor~eto~~niversit~ Press, 1971, 35-56. Geie, Michael L., "English Time and Place Adverbials," in Working Papers in

linguistic^, No. 18, Columbus: Department df Linguistics, The Ohio ~ t a c University, 1975a, 1-11. Geis, Michael L., "Two Theories of Action Sentences, I1 in Working Papers in Linguistics, No. 18, Columbus: Department of Linguistics, The Ohio st& University, 1975b, 12-24. Geis, Michael L., "What do Place Adverbials Modify?," in Working Papers & Linguistic$, No. 18, Columbus: Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University, 1975c, 25-29. Gruber, Jeffery S., Studies in Lexical Relations, Ph.D. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of ~echnolG, - - 1965 d e t - by the Zndiaua University Linguistic Club,, 1970). Harmon, Gilbert, "Logical Form," Foundations - of Language, Hendrjx, Gary G., partitioned Networks -- for the Mathematical Modeling of Natural Language Semantics, Technical Rep~rt NL-28, Austin: The University oF~exas at Austin, Department of Computer Scienkes, December 1975. Hobbs, Jerry R., "A General System for Semantic Analysis - of English and its Use in Drawing Maps from ~irections," Aberican Journal of Computational Linguistics, Microfiche 32, (19751, 21-41. Jacobs, R0derick.A. and Peter S. Rosenbaum, English Transformational Grammar, London: inn and Company Ltd., 1968. Kochen, Manfred, "Automatic --- Question-Answering of English-Like Questions About Simple Diagrams," Journal of the ACM, 16, 1, (19691, 26-48. Kuipers, Benjam-in, Representing Knowledge of Large-Scale Space, AI-TR-418, Cambridge: Art if icial Intelligence ~aboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, July 1977. takof f , George, 1 I Pronominalization, Negation, and the Analysis of Adverbs ," in Readings in English Transformational Grammar, eds., Roderick A. Jacobs and Peter S. ~osenbGm, Waltham, Massachusetts: inn and Company, 1970, 145-165. Lemon, ," E. J:, - "Comments on D. Davidson's - 'The Logical Form of Action Sen- tences' in The Logic of Decision and Action, ed., Nicholas Rescher, Pittsburgh: University of ~ittsburg?; Presa, 1967, 96-103. Lyons, John, Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1968. Miller, George A., "~nglish Verbs of Motion: Lexical Memory, I1 in Coding Processes in Human Edwin Martin, Washington, D. C. : V. twins st on - Norman, Donald A., David E. Rumelhart, and the in Cognition, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech and Jan Svartvik, A Grammar-of Contemporary English, New York: Seminar Press, 1972.

A Case Study in Semantics and Memory, eds., A. W. Melton and and Sons, 1972, 335-372. LNR,Research Group, Explorations

comp$ny, 1975. Schank, Roger C . , "Identif icatign of Concep - tualizations Underlying Natural Lang- uage," in -computer Models of Thought and Language, eds . , Roger C. Schank and Kenneth M. Colbp, . San ~ranczco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1973, 187-247. 1 Schubert, L. K., "Extendink the Expressive Power of Semantic Net~orks," Artifi- cial Intelligence, 7, (1976), 163-198. ~hapiro, Stuart C., "ANet - Structure for Semantic Information Storage, Deduction, and Retrieval," in 2nd International gence Papers Papers -- joint Conference on Artificial Intelli- : Advance bf the Conference, ~ondrn: British Computer Society, 1971, 512-523. Simmons, Robert F., "Semantic ," Networks: Their Computation - and Use for Under- s banding English Sentences in Computer Models of Thought and Language, eds . , Roger C. Schank and Kenneth M. Colby, San ~riincisz: W H. Freeman and Company, 1973, 63-113. Sondheimer, Norman K., - The Computational Semantics of Locative Prepositions, Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of isc cons in-~adisz, 1975. Sondheimer, Linguistics - Norman, "A Semantic Analysis of Reference to Spatial Properties, II and Philosophy, 2, (1978). Sondheimer , Norman and Doy t Perry, "SPS: A Formalism for Semantic and Use that Reference Space ," Interpretation its in ~rocessin~~~re~o$itions American Journal - of Computational Linguistics Microfiche 34, (1975), 49-63. Talmy, Leonard, "Semantics and Syntax of Motion," in Syntax - and Semantics, 4, ed., John P. Kimball, New York: Academic Press, 1975, 181-238. Tsotsos, John K., A Prototype Motion Understanding S~~stern, Technical Report No. 93 ,. Toronto: ~e~artrnent of Computer Science, University of Toronto, June 1976. Winograd, Ter'ry , Unders tandinq Natural Langua~, New York: Academic Press, 1972. Woods, William - A., "What's in a Link: Foundations for Semantic ~etworks," in Representation and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science, eds., Daniel G. Bobrow end AJlan Collins, New York: ~cadexc Press, 1975, 35-82. d* Washington Report 71 **+****+****+************************ rnemm Wwm 04 lnfarmd~an Processr@ Soc~ew, Inc Sum 420,2100 L Street, N W Washnglon, D C 20037 202-296-0590 , , Vol. 111, No. 9 September, 1977 WASHINGTON DEVELOPMENTS m, SENATE HOLD HEARINGS ON 'REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 10P 1977' AFFECTING OTP, OSTP, ISETAP, PCST, FCCST % Home of Representatives and the Senate last month held hearings on Resident Carter's Reorganization PZan Jo. 1 of 1077, dealing with the reorganiaat ion of the Executive Office of the President (EOP) , including bodies dealing with telecommunications, computers and information policies. Reoqanizutia P h No. I , submitted July 15th, is the first of a series of plans to be presented by the ?resident reorganizing the Executive Branch of Governutent. The proposals directly affect the organization of groups (UP) ; within EOP including the Office of Telecommmicatians the of Science and Policy ; Policy 0fiice Technology (OSTP) the Intergovernmental Science, Engineering, and Technology Advisory Panel (ISETAP) ; the President s Cmittee on Science and Technology (PCST) ; and the Federal Coordihating Cameil for Science, ~ngineeking and Technology (FCCST) . The plan becomes law unless vetoed by Congress in 60 days. Details of lReorganization Plan No. 1. In hearings hst month before both the Subconittee on Legislation and National Security of the House b i t tee oh Government Operations and the Senate Conunittee on Governmental Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Bert Lance contended that the Reorganization would strengthen the Cabinet form of Government. Mr. Lance added that it would also insure that "interested individ~als~~ in the departments would be consulted early in the decisionmaking pmcess . In short the plan creates (in lieu of the present White Home Domestic Council) a "Domestic Policy Staff1' composed of ad hoc working groups of Cabinet and agency officials who, under the Vice President, are charged with setting priorities among the issues. Specifics of the plan as it affects telecomunications, computers and infmtion pol icies groups within the EOP are: It abolishes OTP. It transfers varkous functions of OTP to the President. It grants the Domestic Policy Staff authority, once associated with OTP, to review policy options requiring presidential decisions. It delegates to OMB responsibility for establishing policy for Government procurement of telec~nicatias facilities and services, formerly a function of UI'P. It transfers all other functions of OTP, including policy development and the allocation and regulation of frequency assignments, to the Department of Commerce. It creates a new position of Assistant Secretary of Cbnmerce for Communicatfons and Information "to serve as spokesman for the Administration on telec~unicat ions issues , and [to] assume responsibility for the functions transferred from OTP and those of the Office of Telecomunications in Commerce,ff according to OMB Director Lance. It retains OSTP but transfers all functions vested in the director of OSTP to the President, who may than redelegate various functions. It abolishes ISETAP, PCST and FCCST [established. with OSTP through enactment of the NationuZ Science and TeehZogy IbZicy, UrganCsation, and Prioritis8 Ad of lg76), and transfers these organizations' functions to the President, who may then redelegate some or all of them. Criticism of 'Reorganization Plan No. 1.' Congressional criticism of heorganization PZun No. I, as it pertains to teletommunications, computers and infomation policies groups, centered on the creation of the new Assistanit Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information. Sen. Abraham A. Ribicoff (D-Conn.), chairman of thd Senate Committee on Government Affairs, suggested there wi 11 be "a lack of coordinationv of telecommunications policies with the new Assistant Secretary of Commerce outside the White House. Sen. Ribicoff also expressed concern that the Assistant Secretary would "get lost in the shuffle." In addition, Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Tex.) , chairman of the House Committee on Government Operations, questioned how the Assistant Secretary-designate, 'hot the juiciest job in the United States," could coordinate Govermnent;wide policy. BILL REGULATING EFTS ImRODUCED IN HOUSE A bill that would extend Federal regulation to include control over electronic funds transfer systems (EFTS) was introduced in the House of ~e~resentatives in July by Rep. Wary Rose maker (D-Ohio) . The bill, B.R. 8387 (#I , would expower the Comptroller of the Currency to oversee EFTS for national banks; the Federal Home Loan Bank Board to oversee EFTS for savings and loan associations; and the Federal Ekposit Insvrance Corporation, the Federal Reserve, and the Nadonal Credit Union Administration to oversee EFTS for their member institutions. The bill incorporates some of the legislative recommendations of the National Comission on Electronic Fund Transfers (NCEFT) conkained in the NCEFTWs Fehuary, 1977, interim report. (The final NGEFT report is due to be released next month.) H.R. 8387 was referred to the House Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs in July. SEPTEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT The Department of Justice, the Ad Hoc Tblecormnunications Users Committee, ATGT, IBM Corp., the Computer and Business Equipment Manufacturers Association (CBEMA) , the Computer Communications Industry Association (CCIAJ, and the Association of Data Processi'ng Service Organizations (ADAPSO) have ' all filed recent comments in the Federal Comrmmications Comiss i on s (FCC] Second Canputer Inquiry. The InquZq is considering the role of a regulated monopoly, ATBT, and otherregulated CQmon carriers in providing unregulated data processing services, generally torbidden by the FCC. In filings last May, the Justice Department opposed broad regulation by the Commission of unregulated firms which, though they may compete in certain areas with AT6T, are not now regulated by the FCC. Justice also said it "strongly supports the Commission' s intentions to base its rules on marketplace standards, rathet. than simply technolbgical standards." lle Ad Huc Telecommunications Users Committee (composed of 15 users companies such as the Ford Motor Co. and Sears, Roebuck & Co.) oppased "a prohibition against the usc of new technology for communications purposes." The Users Committee suggested that prohibitions against regulated carriers' entry into unregulated data processing activities should be confined to the lJpurpose and effect of the services provided," rather than be based an the processes or equipment used. ATET argued against anbwoverly restrictive viewff of "communications common carriage." IBM, CBESlA, CCIA and ADAPSO, however, supported a broad definition of data processing, leaving it unregulated, and opening the field to more competition, they said. FEDERAL MINICOMPUTER. TERMINAL STANDARDS TO BE ADOPTED BY NBS A new Federal interface standard, called '%S-XYZ;" is planned by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) to replace the current RS-232C interface between terminals and computers (especially minicomputers) and data communications equipment. According to a June 27, 1977, article in ComputemorZd, the RS-XYZ standard should be implemented this month. In addition, an eight-bit ASCII code (in lieu of the usual seven-bit code), and protocols standardizing the user-terminal interface, are under consideration by NBS. The eight-bit ACII code could be implemented as a Federal standard early iq 1978. A Federal Basic standard is also expected for 1978. FIRST NATIONAL FACILITY FOR ELECTRONIC DEVICES RESEARCH ESTABLISHED AT CORNELL BY NSF The first national facility'for research on electronic devlces with dimensions of less than one micron is being established at Cornell University in, Ithaca, New York, with a five-year, five million dollar a grant from the National Science Foundat ion (NSF) . The faci li ty , known as the National Research and Resource Facility for sub-Micron structures, SEPTEMBER, 1977 3 AFIPS WASHIKGTON REPORT 74 is designed to find better ways to produce tiny patterns that can be incorporated into various electronic devices. The technology, planned for development in the new facility, could allow researchers to increase the density of componengs in an integrated circuit by as much as 10 times. SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT RELEASED ON 'FEDERAL PERSONAL DATA SYSTEMS SUBJECT TO THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974' As required by the Privacy Act of 1074, President Carter in June submitted his Seaond Annuat Report of Fedem2 Personut Data Systsm Subject to tho Morn& Act of 1974. The teport covers personal data systems maintained by the Executive Branch in 97 agencies during calendar year 1976. The study concludes that there was no "significant change1' in the "scope and naturetf of Federal persoqal data systems, nor was there any "significant changew in the use of computers to process personal data. Specific findings include: (1) Ninety-seven agencies maintained 6,753 personal data systems containing 3.85 billion individual records at the end of 1976, a net increase of 11 agencies and 30 systems, but a net decrease of 34 million individual records from 1975; and (2) at the end of 1976, 29 per cent of the personal data systems and 74 per cent of tho individual records were fully or partial.1~ computerized, as compared to 27 per cent and 79 per cent, respectively, at the end of 1975. AFIPS IN WASHINGTON AFIPS ESTABLISHES PANEL TO COMMENT ON REORGANIZATION OF FEDERAL CNPUTERRELATED GROUPS. SUBMITS RECOhDlENDATIONS TO OMB AFIPS has established a panel to comment on the reorganization of computerrelated groups in the Federal government. Chaired by Dr. Stephen S. Yau, Northwestern University, the panel consists of 13 members who prepared a consensus document for submission to the Office of Management and Budget At the direction of the President to begin a "comprehensive review of the management of administrative services within the Federal government," OMB has solicited comments on a ucomprehensive-reexamination of Federal data proce~sing." Specifically, the OMB project is focusing on: (1) Improving productivity in the delivery of Government services through the application of computer technology; (2) improving the acquisition, management and use of these resources; and (3) eliminating duplication and overlap in agency jurisdictions dealing with computer issues. Dr. Yau and Washington Office Director Philip S. Nyborg .et August 11th with Mr. Walter W. Haase, OFlB deputy associate director and project leader for this area of the Reorganization, to present the AFIPS consensus document, As a result of AFIPS President Theodore J. Williams' letter to President Carter (Washington Report, 8/77, p. 3), in which Dr. Williams expressed concern about the Reorganization, Hr. Wayne T. Granquist, OMB associate director for Administrative Management, suggested the meeting SEPTEMBER, 1977 4 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT with Mr. Haase. The AFIPS panel recommendations are summarized verbatim from the consensus document : An independent agency should be established to have cognizance over all Federal procurement and management functions related to data processing and comunications; this, as explained below, should be the sole mission of the agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OW) should continue to provide Government-wide enforcement in this area, by exercising fiscal control. 3. Responsibilities of the independent agency should include authority over -all other Government agencies concerning the following functions related to data processing and communications (except as noted): a. Management policy, procurement, technical support and standards development and implementation (Exceptions would be weapons systems computers and procurements below certain minimum cost?.) b. Inng range planning of data proccss~ ng and communicat i.ons operations as part of the reg111 ~r budget cycle c. Mandatory periodical total system performance evaluation and analysis of data proccssing and communications operations in all agencies d Providing technical consultants to other agencies e. Maintainancc of an inventory of well-documented software packages with the information on their performance f. Recommendat ions to the Civi 1 Service Commi ssion regarding:

Provision for adequate coat inuing cd~lcot ion to enable personnel to remain abreast of rapid technological change

study : a. Whether it is aesirablc to consolidate national policy

functions, relating to computer and cornmunicatinns

technologies, within 3 single group (i.c.. , in clther the proposed independent agency or within an exist~ng department 1 SEPTEMBER, 1977 b. [As indicated, we recommend that an independent

agency is esteblished, with the responsibilitirr

outlined in item 3, above; however, if this

rscomondation is not adopted): Wether this agency should be placed within th-rce Department

ether there should be established, a Federal Data =* BiXT n strator responsible for analyzing and frcilltatinp

the overall flow of Federal data Members of the AFIPS pans1 (and society affiliations) include: Mr. Isaac L. Auerbach, Auerbach Associates, Inc. (first IFIP president); Mr. Joseph Cunningham (past ACM executive director) ; Dr. N. P. Dwivedi (IEEE) ; John Eastman M. George Epgert ; M. Egsr, Esq. ,B Lamb, 8 Keats (AFIPS) ; R. (DPMA) Dr. Bruce Gilchrist, Columbia University ; (past AFIPS executive director); Dr. Herbert Grosch (ACM president) Mr. Wil limn 0. Groth, IBM Corp. [IEEE) ; Dr. Carl Hemmer, 'Univac Federal Systems (ACM); Mr. Thomas McConnell, Atlanta Public Schools (past AEDS prssldent) ; Dr. Wil liam Miller, Stanfotd Univeristy (SIAM); Philip S. Nyborg, Esq. (AFIPS Washington Office Director); Mr. H. Lewis Parker, Comsat LabratoriQs f~lh);'Dr, Anthony Ralston, State University of New York (past AFIPS pres idsnt 1, Dr. ~dgar Sibley , University of Maryland (ACM) ; Mr. Keith Uncapher, ~nf&nntion Sciences Inst ituts (past AFIPS president); Dr. Willis Ware, Rand Corp. (past AFIPS president); and Mr. Sidney Weinstein (ACM executive director). FIRST COPY OF AFIPS STUDY ON 'T!VORhLATION PROCESSING IN THE U.S.' PRESENTED PO WHITE HOUSE OFF ICE OF SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The first copy of a now AFIPS study, entitled Informtion P?wosecling in thr fisted Stutoe A QuantCtative Sm r y (see Wuehtngton Report, 4/77 p. 11, was presented in July to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). The 8s-page report updates a previous AFIPS study, ha Sate of thu Computer Indue try in the United Statee, published in 1973. Accepting the report on behalf of Dr. Frank Press, OSTP director and Presidential science adviser, wcrc: Mr. Philip Smith. OSTP assistant director, and Mr. William Montgomery, OSTP executive officer. Incorporating some 34 figures and tables, the study includes previously unpublished and unosscmbled data on U.S. computer suppl~ars and users, personnel and educot ion in the information processing field, and significant trends for the computer area. Presenting the report. AFIPS Washington Officc Director Philip S. Nyborg noted that it is intended to provide summary data on the information processing field, establishing computer technology as 8 vnon-scarcc" national resource relevant to a broad range of policy questions. OSTP Assistant Director Smith described the study as "timely" and "very helpful .I t In a letter accompanying the report, AFIPS President Theodore J. Williams wrote to Dr. Press: ''We can envision that you may have need of furthcr specific reports (or less formal input) on applications of computer science and technology to achieve national program goals and to solve national problems. As these needs arise, f urge you to regard the 110,000 men and wanen who constitute the 15 scientific and educational socicties within AFIPS, as a continuing source of experts and expertise from thc information SEPTEMBER, 1977 6 AFIPS WMMI NCTON REPORT processing field. We would welcome the opportunity to usefully contribute to the important work of your office." Mr. Nyborg, who co-edited the study, was accompanied by Research Associate Pendsr M. McCarter, co-editor and principal ingestigntor working on the report. Mr. William Erickson, co-editor, was also employed by AFIPS to participate in the project as a part-time, temporary research assistant. According to the study, world computer manufacturing and services revenues of U.S. firms are projected to double from $31.9 billion in 1976 t-o $64.0 billion in 1981, and world computer equipment shipments for U.S. firms arc also forecast to double from $15.9 billion in 1976 to $30.5 billion in 1981. In addition, the report notes that, while the insurance and banking industries have the highest degrec of computer usage in tcrms of the proport ion of firms ;sing cornputor equipment or scrvices, the nanufiicturing sector is the biggest user in the U.S. in terms of total expenditures on computcr equipment and services. According to the study, the total computer labor force (i.e. , individuals having fullt ime employment in traJit ional computer-related occupatio~~s such as programmer or analyst) is placed at 853,000. Finally, the report stated that whi lc thc pcxcentagc of gross national product spent on computer usiigo in the U.S. is increasing driunsticnlly, the amount spent per capita is incrc;ising at an even faster ratc. I'ublic distribution of the study is scheduled this month by AFIPS at $6.00 per copy. Initial inquiries should bc directed to the Headquarters Of ficc in Montvul c, New Jcrsey, telephone (201) 391 -9810. -- NEWS BRIEFS Implementation of u computcrized + switching system to transmit administrative messages between the National Crime Information Centor -- and the nnt ion1 s local ond s tze law - enforcement units is being reexmined by the IlcpartmanY of .Justice, in view of Congrcssionnl opposition to the project. *he House ohn nit tee on Science and Tachnolo last month convened hearings on the functions and operations o the Congressional Off ice of 'Pechnology

Asscssmcnt reportedly omendmcnt --.. ((n'A) , considering 5 to the TeehnoZop~

Aoscusnent A d , which established OTA in 1972; among othcr recent

activities, M'A is examining the hosis for cstal~lishing a serics of

01'A technology nssessrncrlts in the area of tclccommrlrlicotions,

computers and iwfomat ion policies . A b i l l to make n cri~nc "thc frnudulclit or illegal usc of any cornput er

owned or opcrntcd by thc I1 .S., ccrtitin f'iniincrul inst i tut ions, iind

e11t itics affecting interstate comnrerce" was int roiluccd i 11 tho llousc

in .July by Rep. Charles Rose 111 (1)-N.C.) and Rep. Rolwrt F . nrinon

(D-Mas~.); hill follows lcgislotion introduced ------- the similir in the K t e in .June (Wushi*rgto~z R~por*t. 8/77, p. 2 ) . ~ornp~Fer specialists are being sought by the Qrganizat ion of American States

(OAS) for short and long-ten - technical assistance missions to merriments inLat i n Amcri c . ,~ end t hc (:sribbc:ln; furthcr i nforrnrlt ion

fs nvail;lhlc from tl~c Unit of Coopcrnl ion w i th Nonjiovcrnmcntiil Institutions, Offirr of 1ntcm.lt lonal Coopcrnt ion, OAS, W:~.;hington, 11. (0. 20006, SEPTEMBER, 1977 Al- 1 I'S WAS1 1 I NG'I'ON UIIIIOH'I' d% Washington Report 78 Vol, 111. No. 10 October, 1977 WASHINGTON DEVELOPMENTS PRESIDENT FILES AMENDMENTS TO 'REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 1 ' CLARI FY ING TRANSFER OF OSTP FUNCTIONS TO NSF ; BROOKS ' COMITTEE REJECTS RESOLUTION DISAPPROVING 'PLAN NO, 1' The President last month filed amendments to his Reorganhation Pta NO. I of 1977 (W~shington Report, 9/77, p. 1) clarifying the transfer of certain functjons of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to the National Science Fowdation (NSF). The original Reorganiaatia PZan No. I transferred these functions to the President for later redelcgation to NSF; under the amendments, various OSTP functions are transferred directly to the director of NSF. These functions include production of a national research and dev~lopment assessment as well as a five-year outlook for science and technology, both alluded to in PZan No. 1. Brooks1 Committec ~esolution. On the day after the transmittal of the President Is amendments September 14th, the Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security of the House Committee on Government operat ions, chaired by Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Tex.) , rejected House ResoZutim 688 expressing disapproval of Plan No. I . The President1 s amendments appear to be responsive to earlier comments by Rep. Olin E. Teague (D-Tex.), chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology, who (in a letter to Rep. Brooks1 Committee last August) criticized the ambiguity of the President's transfer of powers procedure. Rep. Teague called such redesignation of functions "unfortunate" because "it gives Congress no idea of their final disposition." Coordination with OM0 Study. The amendments also state that the Reorganization "shall become effective at such time or times on or before April, 1, 1978, as the president' shall specify, but not sooner than the earliest time allbwable," in this case 60 working days from July 15th (when the Pkn was presented to Congress), or October 15th (when the PZan becomes law, unless vetoed by Congress). The April I, 1978, date would coincide with the conclusion of an CMB reexamination of Federal data processing by six task teams under the supervision of Wayne T. Cranquist , CMB associate director for Administrative Management (see Wa8hington Report, 9/77, p. 4). CBEMA, CCIA Comments to OMB on OriginaI Plan. Last month, the Computer and Business Equipfient Manuf actureres Association (CBEMA) and the Computei. and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) filed differing recommendations with the OMB on Federal automatic data processing (ADP) procurement. CBEW criticized the General Services Administration (GSA) for overly strict enforcement of policy concerning agency ADP procurements, whereas CCIA favors further centralization of ADP procurement policy within GSA. PRIVACY, OTHER DATA PROCESSING LEGISLATION GIVEN LIMITED CHANCES FOR PASSAGE IN FIRST SESSION OF 95TH CONGRESS Following presentation of the Privacy Protection Study Commissionts final report in July (Washington Report, 8/77, p. I), chances for passage of privacy md DP legislation introduced in the first session of the 95th Congress appear to be limited, according to a survey of higher-level Congressional staff members conducted by AFrPS Wtzahington Report last month. Reasons for delay in consideration of legislation on DP and privacy include: uncertainty over adjournment (with estimates ranging from as early as this month to as late as Thanksgiving); receipt of Executive Branch comments on the Privacy Conunission's recommendations; and consideration of other business, ranging from the Lance investigation to energy, lobbying and anti child pornography legislation. In addition to the privacy legislation already introduced, new House legislation is expected concerning rccordkeeping among educational institutions. The Omnibue Privacy Act is also anticipated, incorporating previous legislation introduced -by Rep. Barry M. Goldwater (R-Calif.) and Rep. Edward I. Koch (D-N.Y.), as well as providing for a new Eederal entity overseeing implementation of privacy legislation. In the Senate, additional legislation covering all areas addressed in the Privacy Conunissionfs final report is expected from Senators Bayh, Heinz, Muskie, Percy, Proxmire, Ribicoff and Weicker. NBS PROPOSES REVISION TO 'COMPUTER X/O CHANNEL JNTERFACE' The National Bureau of Standards (NBS) last month published a proposed revision (t) to the NBS' Computer input/Output fI/O) Chunnez Interfaoe (Wuehington Report, 2/77, p. 4) to be adopted as a Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) . According to the announcement of the revision, Vol. 42, Federal Regiekr 42242 (August 22, 1977), l~acquisition alternatives that comply with this standard shall be considered competitively with other alternatives so as to meet the Government's data processing requirements at least cost.1t Comments should be directed by October 2lst to the associate director for ADP Standards, Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, NBS, Washington, D .C. 20234. CWISSION ON FEDERAL PAPERWORK EXPECTED TO RECOHEND NEW CABINET,-LEVEL ~EPARWENT INCORPORATING FUNCTIONS OF GSAIS AUTOMATED DATA 0 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE; COMMISSION URGES COORDINATION OF INFORMATION POLICY OVERSIGHT-FUNCTIONS The Commission on Federal Paperwork, established two years ago by Congre3s, ir expected this month to announce some 750 recommendations for reducing paperwork which could rrlrult in annual ravings of $10 billion, AFIPS WarhCngton Report learned last month. At its final meeting in September, the Conuniss ion conditionally approved a recommendat ion er tablishing a Department of Administration that would combine the functions of the OCTOBER, 1977 APIPS WASHINGTON REPORT Automated Data and 'l'elecommunications Service (ADTS) as well as the National Archives and Record Service, within the General Services Administration (GSA); and the Bureau of the Census, within tho Deparment of Commerce. Recommendations pertaining to data processing are incorporated in an ItInformation Managementt1 section of the final report. The Commission is expected to recommend consolidation of Itthe major paperwork, information and communications-related it policy oversight functions pnd authoritiestt which holds are "now dispersed and fragmentedI1 among: the Information Systems Division in the office of Management and Budget; ADTS within CSA; and the Office of 'I'elecommunications I'olicy, in the Executive Office of tho President. The Comn~ission on Pedcral Paperwork is also expected to favor improved ttcoord i riot ion of records and paperwork management programs and pol icies with related information policies such as statistics, ADP telecommunications, public-use reporting, and other similar activities." The complete report is scheduled for release corly this month. - FIHS'L' MEETING - OF OS'I'P AL)V ISORY GROUI' ON W111'E t1OUSE INFORMA'I'ION SYSTEMS IDEWTFIES EOP INFORMATION NEEDS 'The first meeting of the Office of Scicncc and Technology Policy (OSTP] Advisory Croup on White House Information Systems was held August 24-25 in Wash i ngton . 'I'he Advisory Croup has been formed to identify informat ion systrrns neck which can be accommodated to support the "decision processesr' of the Write llouse and the Executive Office of the President (EOP) . Itigher-lcvcl EOP staff members appeared before the Group to identify their informat ion requirements. A t the first meeting, opened by OSTP Director Dr. Frank Press, Stuart E. Eizenstat, assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs and Policy, told the Advisory Group that the Office of Domestic Affairs and Policy requires more sophisticated document tracking techniques. For example, Mr. Eizenstat noted that there are ttseveral hundredt1 legislative bills of interest to his off ice. In addit ion, ' council of Economic Advisers (CEO) Chairman Charles L. Schultze cited the need for "large scale data bases," also fcr document tracking. Advisory Group Chairman John Cosden of the Equitable Life Assurance Society solicits written- statements from all interested parties to assist the Group with its work. The next meeting of the Group is scheduled for October 4-5 in Washington to continue briefings by EOP staff on their information needs. Other Georgia State University; Vincent McRae, IBM Corp.; Russell Shank, UCLA. NASA, ILLINOIS INSI'IlUTE OF 'TECHNOLOGY FOR The Ames Research Center of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA] and the Illinois Institute of Technology last month began conducting OCTOBER, 1977 AF I PS' WASI-1INGTON REPORT Group members include : Dr . William cottenan, Dr. Gerald Dinneen, Department of Defense; Dr. Mr. Jon Turner, Columbia University; and Dr. SURVEY USER NEEDS - VLSCS 831 a survey to detehaine projected user needs for very large scientific computer systems (VLSCS) which might become available in the 1985-1990 time period. Rewlts of the survey, which may assist in developing design requirements for future VLSCSs, are expected to be published at a future date. AFIPS IN WASHINGTON APIPS PANEL SUBMITS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FIRST YEAR OTA PROGRAM IN TELE~WNICATIONS, COFlPUTERS AND INFOMlATJON POLICIES As a member of an Office of Technology.Assessmertt (OTA) iiorking Group (WushCngton Report, 6/77, p. 41, AFIPS last month provided comments on a first year OTA program in telecommunications, computers and information policy. The Working Group was first established to describe the issues, identify policy options, and define research strategy to be considered in such a program. In submitting the Federation's comments,-prepared by n panel representing the AFIPS societies (also including individwls who have served on previous MIPS panels), Washington Off ice Director Phi lip S. Nyborg wrote OTA Consultant br. Leland L. Johnson: "As is evident in our proj cct recommendations, there are numerous issues in tho telecommunications, computers and information policies area in which OTA could well serve its intended function of apprising the Congress of major technological change. For exaqple, in its next session Congress will likely consider legislation related to national telecommunications policy, electronic banking, electronic mail, privacy, computer and teleconununications security, computer crime, standards, and copyright protcction for computer Clearly, these policy issues have major technological components, the Congress will have substantial need for a credible, accurate independent source of technical inf~rmation.~~ The AFIPS panel listed projects which it recommended for primary given anticipated budgetary constraints, and projects which should be considered, if additional funding becomes available. The pro j ect s recommended for primary considerat ion, given ant icipafed budgetary constraints were: (1) Assessment of the Impact and Operation of Federal Standards Activities; (2) Assessment of Technological and Economic Impact of Federal Legal Protection for Software and Data Bases; (3) Assessment of the Existence of Technological Problems Regarding Privacy and Security; (43 Assessment of Electronic Mail : Regulatory Aspects and Private Sector Rale; (5) Assessment of Electlronic Fund Transfer Systems (EFTS) : Privacy, Security and Regulatory Aspects ; (6) Alternative Approach to Projects 3, 4 and 5 ($. e. , a tise study approach considering privacy and security, the relationship of regulat~ry jurisdictit-ns, and private sector involvement as these subjects concern electronic mail a d EFTS);and (7) Assessment of Opportunities and Problems Resulting from New Applications and Techniques Arising Out of the Convergence of Computer and Communications Technologies. Projects recommended for OCTOBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT programs.

and and consideration, 82 consideration if additional funding becomes available include: (1) Assessment of the Adequacy of Existing Computer Systems Audit and Control Techniques; (2) Assessment of Educational Technology: and (3) Assessment of Alternative Regulatory Approaches Regarding Offerings of Mixed Communications and Data Processing Services. Participants on the AFIPS panel were: for AIAA, Mr). H. Lewis Parker, COMSAT Laboratories; for ACM, Prof. Peter Lykos, Illinois Institute of Technology; for AEDS, Dr. Judy Edwards, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratories; for DPMA, Mr. Bruce Spiro, Defense Communications Agency; for ZEEE-Computer Society, Mr . Lynn Hopewell, Computer Sciences Corp.; for IIA, Mr. William E. Perry; for SIAM, Dr. Hans Oser, National Bureau of Standards; and from previous AFIPS panels, Prof. Vinton Cerf, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; Mr. Alex Curran, Bell-Northern Research, Inc.; and Mr. Frederic G. Withington, Arthur D. Little, Inc. Alternates included: for AIAA, Mr. Kenneth Hales, Boeing Aerospace Co.; and for AEDS, Mr . David R. Kniefel, New Jersey Educational Computer Network. AFIPS REVIEWERS COMMENT ON APPENDIX TO PRIVACY COMMISSION'S FINAL REPORT The Privacy Protection Study Commission last month released five appendices to its final report, Personal Privacy in an Information Society, sent to the President and Congress in July (Washington Report, 8/77, p. 1). A t the request of the Privacy Conmission, AFIPS volunteers reviewed and filed comments to the Commission's appendix entitled Technology and Mvacy (#). AFIPS reviewers included: Mr. Paul Baran, Cabledata Associates, Inc.; Mr. Richard L. Bisbey and Mr . Dennis Hollingworth, Information Sciences Institute, University of Sourthern California; and Mr . Richard G. Mills, Citibank, N.A. NEWS BRIEFS Security procedures and controls for the Social Security Administration's

(SSA) Data Acquisition and Response System, said to access personal

information on millions of Americans, are deemed inadequate to

prevent fraud and abuse, according to a recent report prepared by

the audit agency of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. The National Science Foundat ion' s (NSF) Research Applied to National

Needs (RANN) program has been discontinued; according to an article in the September 5, 1977, issue of Chemical & mgineering News, - NSF

Director Richard C. Atkinson abolished the program because he is

said to favor distribution of RANN projects throughout the NSF. Total research and development spending in the United States is estimated

to reach $40.8 billion in 1977, nine per cent above the 1976 level

of $37.3.billion, according to a new study entitled NationuZ Patterns

of R&D Resources: 1953-77, published - by the National Science

~oundat ion. President Carter last month nominated Charles D. .) Ferris, general counsel to House Speaker Thomas P. O 'Ne i l l [D-Mass , to succeed Richard E.

Wiley as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC);

Mr. Wiley resigned early last month. OCTOBER, 1977 AF IPS WASHINGTON REPORT Philip S. Nyborg, Director Washington Office Pender M. McCarter, Editor d% Washington Report 83 *t******** '************************* i* nencan Federatron of Informatron Process~n'g Socrsties, lnc Su~te 420,2100 L Street, N W, Washington, D C* 20037 202-296-0590 , Vol. 111, No. 11 November, 1977 [~ote: Due to a printing error, the name of Pender M. McCarter, Editor, AFIPS Washington Report, was inadvertently omitted from the masthead of the October, 1977, Waehingtm ~ep~rt] WASH1 NGTON DEVELOPMENTS NCEFT RECOMMENDS LIMITED EFT REGULATION, ENCOURAGES EFT COMPETITION; FINAL REPORT DELIVERED TO PRESIDENT, CONGRESS AFTER TWO YEAR STUDY The National Commission on Electronic Fund Transfers (NCEFT) late last month released its final report to the President and Congress on electronic funds transfer systems (EFTS) . The NCEFT endorsed recommendations contained in last February's interim report (see Washington Repmt, 3/77, p. 4) favoring limited EFTS regulation and encouraging wide EFTS competition. The final report s findings and recommendations, obtained last month by AFIPS Washington Report prior to their formal release, are divided into five "general areasv: (1) Consumer Interests; (2) Developmental Issues in EFT; (3) Technology; (4) Role of the Federal government; and (5) International Developments in EFT. NCEFT Recommendations r Governmental Issues. In regard to the role of government with Em, the Commission recommended that Federal and state ~omnunications regulation should be limited to "the underlying communications transmission and distribution facilities used with EFT systems . . . , 1t and that regulated carriers should be permitted to provide EFT services on an untariffed (i. e. , unregulated) basis. Thus, under the Federal Connnunicat ion Commission1 s (FCC) First Computer Inquiry, distinguishing between data communications (a tariffed, regulated service) and data processing (an untariffed, unregulated service), regulated carriers could provide EFT as an untariffed, unregulated data processing service, through separate subsidiaries, However, WIT is forbidden in its 1956 Casent Decree with the Department of Justice from offering any data processing service (which could now include EFT) even through a separate subsidiary. The NCEFT does not comment on the advisability of this restriction, but notes that ATGT Itmay possess dominant market power which could be exercised in the unregulated EFT markets in a manner which would force other firms from . , . and preclude the entry of new firms into those markets." Apparently disregarding an earlier statement contained in its interim report that it may become appropriate to have a Governmental operational role in point-of-sale (POS) switching and clearing facilities to insure an effective national payments system, the Commission (in its final report) concluded that the Federal government should "not be involved 84 operationally, at present or in the forseeable futurev in POS switches. However, the NCEFT did recpmend that the Federal Reserve continue to provide "ACH-like services1! (i.e. , automated check clearing house services), also encouraging private sector development in the same area. Developmental Issues. In regard to developmental issues affecting EFT, the panel support nationwide deployment of EFT terminals with debit services (0-8. B POS devices) . However, it also encourages "gradual expansinnu of deposit -taking through terminals, an important economic issue with many financial institutions. POS/EFT systems can make money, the panel added. Technological Issues. In reference to techno logical issues concerning EFT, the Commission~is recommending that the FCC's registration program for interconnection of terminal devices to the public it telephone network be extended to include EFT terminals. In addition, suggests that communications protocols which are inconsistent with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards should be published as soon as they are adopted for use by EFT equipment manufacturers. According to the NCEFT, ANSI should' "expedite the development of Standards for numbering systems, message formats . . , [as well as] standardize invoice and billing systems.11 In the area of security, the Commission recommends joint state and Federal action to develop uniform security regulation and security supervision. The NCEFT, perhaps surprisingly, noted that "few breaches" were found in EFI' security. It added that "a balance w i l l have to be achieved between the cost of security measures and the value of the losses they are designed to protect against. Consumer Issues. In the general area of consumer interests, the Commission recornended that the Government should have the right to access EFT financial information when "legitimate needs of law enforcement" are served. However, the NCEFT also said that a consumer's permission should be obtained before information concerning his EFT records- is released to a third party. Consumers should also have the right to correct inaccuracies in EFT records, the Commission held. In general, the panel found present legal safeguards ." for privacy of financial information as applied to EFT "inadequate In a finding that may disappoint some consumer groups, the NCEFT said it could uncover no evidence at present that would suggest a need to provide the equivalent of a paper-based stop order in EFT transactions. According to the Commission, such a stop order inhibits the guaranteed acceptance of payment achieved through EFTS at the point-of-sale. The NCEFT would require a monthly written it statement for consumers whenever an EFT transaction occumed. However, would place the burden of proof on consumers to report unauthorized uses of EFT services. In addition, the Commission does not recommend the $50.00 limit on a consumerts liability now provided with bank credit cards. Instead, under the panel's recommendations, a consumer could be liable for any loss when negligenqe is proven on his part, sag., carrying his personal identification number [PIN) with a debit card. NCEFT Background. The Commission was established three years ago by Congress to recommend action and legislation in connection with the development of public or private EFT systems. In 1975, President Ford appointed- 14 members. NOVEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT NSF TASK LIT^^ FORCE RECOEMENDS NEW RESEARCH PROGRAM 1N INFORMATION SCIENCE, OR WF QIVISIcH OF SCIENCE INFORMATION In Sapta'kr, the National Science Foundation (NSF) Task Force on Science Information Activities recomnended to NSF Director Richard C. Atkinson : d (1) that a new research pro- in information science should be created; t2) the NSF's division of science infornetiun should be dissolved. Infomation science is defined as the theoretical study of infarmation as a -on; science information is said to include a11 elemmts in the pmeratim, storage, retrieval and dissemination ~f science material. The Tulr Force .ad also recamended doubling of the current budget for information science science information frm $5 million to approximately $11 million. SEE= STANDARD MEA,!UMMENT OF DATA CQMMUNICATICNS Thc Fedem1 Ctmunmications Commission (FCC) should develop standard measurerat of the quality and reliability of data colmrmnications service provided by specialized cmon carriers, the Department of Commerce's Office of Telscaunicaticms 6, (OT) said in an August filing to the FCC. According to custmrs presently experience difficulty in determining which data services are nost useful because tariffs do not always provide coaplete descriptions of service quality. OT endorses standard measurement of data carrmications services in lieu of the implementation of mandatory performance and design specifications which it feels inhibit innovation and competition. AEXANDER NAMED HRIS DIRECTOR, REEDER BECOMES DEPUTY DIRECTOR Boyd L. Alexander, acting director of the House of Representatives Information Systems (HRIS), has now been appointed HRIS director. Mr. Alexander is former director of Computer Services, Information System Division, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). He replaced Dr. Frank B. Ryan, who left' HRIS to become director of Athletics and lecturer in mathematics (MI at Yale University Franklin S Reeder, also a member of the Information Systems Division staff, has been named HRIS deputy director. FCC CHAIRMAN-DESIGNATE PROFILE: CHARLES D. FERRIS Charles D. Ferris, nominated in September by President Carter to WGGPM Richard E. Wiley as chairman of the Federal Communications Commissidn (FCC), is general counsel to House Speaker Thomas P. O'Neill (D. Mass .) . Prior to working with the speaker, Mr. Ferris was chief counselor to the Senate Majority Leader, general counsel to the $enate Policy Committee, and chief counsel for the Senate Majority. A physics graduate with a law degree from Boston College, the FCC chairman-designate also served as a trial attorney in the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. In addition, he holds a degree in Advancedknagement from the Graduate School of Business, Harvard University. Mr. Ferris has not worked in data processing, an aide told MIPS Waehington Report. [~d . . At press time, the nomination has been FCC in for ending June 30, 1984. ] approved; and the new chairman sworn a term NOVEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT AFIPS IN WASHINGTON AFIPS RELEASES PRINTED VERS,ION OF ' INFORMATION PROCESSING IN THE U. S . ' , FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ST1 LL LARGEST SINGLE USER OF COMPUTERS IN U. S . : INSURANCE. AFIPS last month released to the public the printed version of In fm th Procescling in the United States A Quat3tattve Smary , an update of a similar 1973 report. A presentation copy of the study was delivered in July to the White House Office' of Science and Technology Policy (Waehingtmf' Report, 9/77, p. 6). Incorporating some 34 figures and tables, the SS-page report includes previously unpublished and unassembled data on U.S. suppliers of computer equipment and services, computer users (by government and industry sectors), personnel and education in tbe'information processing field, as well as significant trends. The study notes that the Federal governpent is still the largest single user of computers in the United States, accounting for approximately s ix per centof the total usage in the U.S. According to the report, the Department of Defense accounts, for almost half of all Federal computer usage. However, it added that Government usage is not increasing a$ fast as in the U.S. at large. As of last year, the Government was said to employ some 9,600 computers. In 1976, the study noted, U.S. computer users (mainly institutions in business, all government and education) spent $38.4 billion including expendi tures on computer goods and services, related salaries and overhead. While the insurance and banking industries have the highest degree of computer usage in terms of the proportion of firms using computer equipment or services, the manufacturing sector is clearly the largest user in the U.S. in terms uf total expenditures on computer equipment and services, the report said. In 1974, according to the study, the total U.S. computer labor force (including traditional computer-related otcupations such as programer, systems analyst, maintenance technician and keypunch operator) numbered 853,000. The manufacturing sector is iisted as the largest employer of the computer labor force in a given field, the Federal govement is the largest single employer of the computer labor force. The report said world revenues of U.S. computer manufacturing and services firms are projected to double from $31.9 billion in 1976 to $64 billion in 1981, and world shipments of U.S. computer equipment are also forecast to double from $15.9 billion in 1976 to $30.5 billion in 1981. Last year, qccording to the study, U.S. computer equipment manufacturers accounted for 87 per cent of the installed base of the world's computers, by value. However, the U.S. share of the world market is reported to be decreasing due to foreign competition (especially from Japan). By 1981, U.S. computer equipment manufacturers are expected to account for 81 per cent of the installed base of the world's computers by value, down six per

from 1976. cent NOVEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT U.S. exports of computer equipment are said to exceed imports by a factor of 15 to one and will result in a trade surplus of $2.8 billion in 1977. At the present time, the study said, U.S. firms derive approximately 50 per cent of their revenues from overseas sales. The AFIPS report is based largely on data provided by three major market research firms (;.e., Arthur D, Little, Inc.; Auerbach Associates, Inc.; and International Data COT.) as well as the Federal government. The study was edited by Philip S. Nyborg, Pender M. McCarter and William Erickson. Research for Chapters I, II,, and I11 was performed by Mr. McCarter with the assistance of Mr. Erickson. A '!Note on Future Trendsl'was drafted by T. B. Steel; Jr., member of the SILT Committee. SHARE, I~ic. The report was fom8lly briefed and presented at last month's meeting of the Interagency Committee for Automatic Data Processing, composed of some 50 representatives from Federal departments and agencies having significant computer usage. HOUSE LEGISLATION WOULD LIMIT POST-SERVICE ACTIVITIES OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES INTERACTING WITH GOVERNMENT ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNOLOGICAL MATTERS The Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations of the House Judiciary Committee last month held hearings on, favorably reported, and marked up H.R. I , legislation that would restrict the post-service activities of Federal employees, with exceptions in some areas for Itthe making of communications solely for the purpose of furnishing scientific or technological information under procedures acceptable to the [~ederal] agency concerned ." At press time, H.R. I is being marked up by the full Judiciary Committee. However, as the legislation is now written, it would (1) impose a lifetime ban on the post-service activities of Federal employees prohibiting them from acting- in matters in which they participated llpersonally and substantially" while with the Government; (2) impose a two-year banonthe post-sefvice activities of Federal employees prohibiting them from acting in the realm of their "official responsibility" while with the Government; and (3) impose a one-year ban on the post-service activities of higher-level Federal employees prohibiting them from acting in matters affecting the agency with which they were employed while with the Government. H.R. 1 would not prohibit former Federal employees "with outstanding scientific or technological qualifications" from acting in scientific or technological matters'with a Government agency, provided that "the national interest would be served1' by such actionsand it has approval of the agency head. In addition, the legislation would exempt Federal employees who are classified in higher Federal pay grades from the ~ne-year ban on post-service activities (involving the department or agency with which they were formerly employed) provided that the agency determines no "undue infludencet? will be exerted by the former employee on "substantive agency action by yirtue of his or her former association with the agency." The AFIPS Washington Office has been consulting with both the Subcommittee on Adiminstrative Law and Governmental Relations and affected individuals in an attempt to formulate what are deemed approprinte cxccptions to the limits on post-service activities of Federal employees. The AFIPS proposals NOVEMBER, 1977 5 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT would broaden the exemptions far pos t-service activities of farmer Federal employe& adding, in addition to the exemption for the one-year ban on higher-level employees, an exemption for the two-year and lifetime bans on former Federal employees in circumstances where no Itundue influence1' will be exerted on "substantive agency action by virtue of the former employee's association with the agency ,I1 NEWS BRIEFS A limited number of complimenary copies of Canputer Software kmgment

A Primer for Project Nanagment and Quality Control is available from

the National Bureau of Startaards (NBS): Computer Science Section,

Technology A367, NBS, washington, D.C. 20234; also known as Special

Publication 500-11, the document describes preferred methods of software

development and includes recommendations for specification and testing

of software. Computer Science and TechnoZogy Pub Zicatione , containing nirmerous National

Bureauof Standards (NBS) listings as of June, 1977, is available from

the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, NBS, Washington, D.C. 20034. The 1977 Winter Simuktion Conference is scheduled at the National Bureau

of Standards (NBS) in Gaithersburg, Mary land, December 5-7; the program

will consider applications of computer simulation in such areas as -

energy, criminal- just ice, behavioral science, agriculture, environment and health care. A call for papers has been issued for Trends and Applikatwns 1078, a

symposium on distributed processing to be held at the National Bureau

of Standards in Gaithersburg, Maryland, May 18, 1978; spohsored by

the IEEE Computer Society, papers are sought describing practical

experiences with distributed processing; further information is

available through the Computer Society office in Silver Spring, Maryland, telephone (301) 439-7007, Vico E. ~enri~ues has been named president of the Computer and Business

Equipment Clanufacturers Association (CBEMA) , re-placing Peter F. McClaskey,

who has been appointed president of the Electronic Industry Association;

. Henriques previously served as a CBEMA vice president. Product ion assistance for the Washington Report is provided by Linda Martin. AFIPS societies have permission to use material in the newsletter for their own pub1 ications ; however, when an article appears with an aste-risk, clearance must be obtained from the AFIPS Washington Office. NOVEMBER, 1977 AFI PS WASHINGTON REPORT . SPECIAL REPORT SURVEY 01: COMPVIER TRADE ASSOCIATIbNS : PART I (ADAPSO) .. The AFIPS Washington Office has conducted a survey of computer trade associations to smmakize their positions on data processing issues the Federal government. The survey, prepared by Research Associate M. McCarter, is an attempt to review the issues which are perceived important by indus try-orient ed groups in the infonnat ion processing during the last two years. In this first of four installerments, the Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. (ADAPSO) is considered with respect to its membership, charter, organization and positions vis-a vis the Federal government. before Pender as field Membership. Established in 1961, ADAPSO is a trade association representing the computer services industry, i. e. , companies engaged in providing timesharing, facilities management, software systems and products, and data center services. Its 967 member units include large national computer service companies as well as smaller local, regional and sometimes specialty finns, located in the the U.S., with affiliates in Europe, Latin America and the Far East. Charter. ADAPSO was original ly chartered to provide information on management for its member companies. Thus, it sponsors national and regional conferences and workshops on accounting, sales management, advertising, law, data communications, privacy and security and other related topics. As a registered lobbyist, ADAPSO has become involved directly in influencing legislation that concerns its member companies (discussed more fully below) . Organization. With national headquarters in Montvale, New Jersey, the association consists of a professional staff directed by Mr. Jerome L. Dreyer, executive vice president, who is responsible for overall operat ions. In addition to an elected board of directors and elected officers, ADAPSO is supported by special counsel in the areas of law, taxation and public relations. It consists of three "operating sections" including: Software Industry Assn.; Data Center Section; and the Rpmote Processing Services Section (concerned with the technical , legislative, legal and operating factors of companies engaged in data communications and interactive computing). Positions. ADAPSOts p~s~tions on data processing issues before the Federal government during the last two years are summarized in various posit ion ~ papers provided- to AFIPS by ~r- Dreyer . : Resolving Antitwet Disputes," ADAPSO Poeition &per #lo, October 24, 1974. Congress would consider 'la responsible and logical approach to the resolution of antitrust claims against IBM incorporating mediation, arbitration and litigation, and avoiding unnecessary burdens, inconsistent results, duplication and waste to the maximum reasonable extent. tf NOVEMBER, 1977 7 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT 'Tho Right to Rh~~cy, P I ARAPSQ Position Paper #ll, Febnccny 12, -

- nC3uenaentuZ Cicem ing af Prof 8seimZ mP Peremel, tt Position Paper #12, Aprit 18, 1975. 'IComputer profes~ionals~~ should not be licensed through Federal, state or local certification. Licensing is not in "the public interest" because it ffinhibitsu free enterprise. "State and Local Privacy Legislation, tt PoeitCim kp8r #Is, ApdZ 16, . "lsgiduti~e and Administmtivs EFTS Action, " Poettion Paper #l4, ApAZ 15, 1875. Federal, state and local officials, administrative agencies, legislatures, councils, "other government bodies ,I1 and the private sector should withhold action implementing major proposals for EFTS until the National Commission on Electronic Fund transfers (NCEFT) has completed its studies. - tWmbe~shipof NCEFT,rrPositionPape~ #13, November22, 1875. Congress should predicate extension of repotting times for the NCEFT on appointment by the President of a commissioner from "private ." life with special experience and qualifications in the computer industry - Tostat Repkztias," Position Paper #la, April 6, 1976. Congress should amend the United States Code to exclude data processing materials from consideration as letters which i subject^'^ them to U.S. Postal Service rates [bhether transmitted by independent carrier or ." th'e U.S. maill) and to the lfwell-known irregularities of the U.S. mail - 'IConsume~ Commmicatiom Reform Act of 10 76, Sltly 21, 1976. Congress should oppose the Commer ~omwtunbatione Refon Act because it will eliminate competition; bring computers, station and terminal equipment under regulatory control by the* states; and grant antitrust immunity for future acquisitions by the telephone companies. Lth bh forcement Aeeietance Ach$n&t tmtion (LEAA) rnocurement Pzucticee, July 27, 1976. Computer service companies should be allowed to act as both a designer of a computer system as well as an "implement~r.~ - Fhcia: Accounting Stun&& Board Statement #2, October 15, 1978. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) should reevaluate FASB Statement #2 defining the " development/manufacture of software sys tents as a 'Icurrent period expense. I Doto Privacy and Sed ty , ApAZ 17, 1977. citizen should be ffadequatelyIf protected from viewing, disclosure, or uses which ore Itnot socially desirable .I1 Data on a private [Ed.: Future reports in this series will deal with CBEMA, CCIA and IIA.] NOVEMBER, 1977 AF IPS WASHINmON REPORT d% Washington Report Philip 6. Nyborg, Dlrector Washington Off ice Pender M. McCarter, Editor 91 m merlca~Federat~on of Informallon Process~ng Socletles lnc Sulte 420, 2100 L Street, N W Wash~ngton, D C 20037 202-296-0590 , . Vol, 111, No. 12 im~ DEVELOPMENTS December, 1977

REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 1 OF 1977' APPROVED BY CONGRESS; HENRY GELLER RECOMMENDED FOR NEW ASSISTANT SECRETARY BOSITION Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 777, reorganizing the Executive Office of the President (EOP) , including bodies dealing with te~lecommunicat ions, computers and information policies, became effective October loth, with neither the Senate nor the Hor17e of Representatives adopting a resolution. of disapproval. ~eorganization Plan No. 1, submitted to Congress by President Carter July 15th, is the first of a series of plans proposed by the President to reorganize the Executive Branch of the Government. The House and Senate held hearings on Plan No. 1 in August (~ashington Report, 9/77, p. 11, and Mr. Carter filed amendments to his original plan in September (Washington Report, 10/77, p. 1) . As approved by the Congress, the amended proposals, with reference to computer-oriented groups, specify: (1) abolition of the Office of Telecommunications Policy (OTP) ; (2) transfer of various OTP functions to the President and the Office of Maqagement and Budget (CMB) , including preparation of Presidential telecommunications palicy options, and transfer of other OTP functions, not specifically designated, to the Department of Commerce; (3) continuation of the role of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), assisting the President and his advisers in making decisions about policy and budget issues in the area of science, engineering and technology; (4) transfer of responsibility' for preparing certain reports, including a five-year out look report on science and technology, to the National Science Foundat ion, the Intergovernmental Sci cnce , Engineering and Advi sory Panel, and the Federal Coordinating Counci 1 for Sci ence , Engineering and Technology; and (5) transfer of the functions of the latter two panels to the President. The Plan is expected to be fully implemented by April 1, 1978. There is some doubt regarding the functions and title of wl1a.t the Plan originally referred to as tho new Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Information and Communications. At press t ime , @IPS Washington Report has learned that an Executive Order is being circulated for comment. by OMB concerning the responsibilities of the new Assistant Secretary. 1h October, the Commerce Department said that Secretary Juanita M. Kreps rerommended to President Carter appointment of Henry Gellet, a fellow at the Aspen Institute, to become what Commerce called the new "Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Te~ecomuni~ations.~~ Pending an announcement from the President and confirmation by the Senate, Mr. Geller occupies an office at OTP. CONGRESS, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCI L STUDY FOREIGN RESTRICT1 WS ON TRANSBORDER DATA FLOW Both the Congress and tbe National Security Council are studying restrictions placed by foreign nation's on the exchange of information among countries, fa . , transborder data flow. In conjunction with its hearings on revision of the Comnunications ~ c of t 1934, the House Subcommittee on Communications considered U.S. policy on transborder data flow in early October. On October ZQth, a committee of the National Security Council, Executive Office of the President, met for the firpt time to consider policy implications of the same subject. Summarizing the implications of transborder data flow, Mr. G.R. Pipe wrote recently in the IFIPS Washington Report (3/77, p. 7). 'The emergence of international data transmission networks, coupled with the realization that national legislation is effective only for domestic processing, has resulted in demands for the creation of international standards for the treatment of personal information. While the objectives of these xi:::, laws have been widely applauded, the consequences of imposing restrictions on the movement of data may run counter to traditional free flow of information1 principles. Additionally, some U.S. computer manufacturers, services, and multinational users are troubled abdut possible or shrinkage of markets, resulting from the rules adopted by various c~untries.~ Thirteen European countries are reportedly considering adopting laws which would restrict information flow to the country of origin. Two countries, Sweden and Germany, have already adopted privacy legislati611 affecting the exchange of information. Eight other countries, including Austria, Belgium, France, Canada, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, Finland, and possibly the Netherlands, are expected to support similar legislation in the next year. At a recent meeting of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, U.S. representatives opposed a precipitous international agreement restricting data flow. Representatives from Sweden, France, Austria and Germany supported an international accord standardizing conflicting national privacy laws. A French participant in the meeting expressed an inteiest in European development of its own data bases, independent of the U.S. COMPUTER AUDITING IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS 'INADEQUATE1: GAO Internal auditing of automatic data processing and controls has been I1inadequate" in some Federal agencies, according to a recent report of the General Accounting Office (GAO) . Entit led Computer Auditing in the Sxecutive Departments: Not Engough is Being Lbne, the study suggests DECEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT that audits be instigated in four areas : (1) systems design and development; (2) equipment acquisition; (3) specific applications; and (4) installation management. The GAO said, More work is needed by both Federal managers and internal auditors to make sure that audits adequately cover the four areas, and that computer-based information systems are better control led. " The complete report, Wer FGMSD-77-82 (dated September 28th), is available free-of-charge to non-profit organizations through the CAO directly at (202) 275-6241, or through the AFIPS Washington Office . The GAO has also recently released: (1) Millions in Savings Possible in Converting Programs, from One Computer to Another (FCMSD-77-34, September 15th) ; (2) Planning for Source Data Automation in Government Industrial Activities-Coordination Needed (LCD-77-441, September 23rd); and [3) Responsibilities, Actions and Cmrdination of Federal Agencies in International Tcl ecommunica tions Services (CED-77-132, September 29th). NATIONAL SC I ENCE FOUNDAT1 ON RE LEASES ' GUIDE TO PROGRAMS ' The National Science Foundation (NSF) last month released its Guide to Program (#--enclose $2.20) reflecting NSF research projects for FY 1978. Within the Computer Science Section, programs in theoretical computer scienee, software, systems science, software engineering, intelligent systems, computer systems design, and special projects are described. The theoretcal computer science program encompasses the theory of computation, numerical analysis and computational mathematics , theory of formal languages, and analysis of algorithms. The software systems science program covers vYundamentalw quest ions of communicating with and control ling computer systems. The software engineering program includes the methods, tools and techniques for specifying, designing and implementing l'qualityfl software. intelligent systems program covers computer-based systems which such characteristics as pattern recognition, pattern generation knowledge representation. The computer systems design program includes the principles of systems design such as : computer system architecture, performance, graphics, man-machine interaction and logic design. The special proj ects program encompasses research pioj ects, studies, workshops, and other activities which "might encourage the development of new fields of computer science research." Proposals will be assigned to the appropriate program within the Computer Science Section. DECEMBER, 1977 AFT PS WASHINGTON REPORT The have and computer APIPS BRIEFS I ACI ADP : ' INFORMATION PROCESSING IN THE JNITED STATES' AFIPS made its public presentation of Information Processing in the United States: A Quantitative Summary at a briefing given to the Interagency Committee on Automatic Data Processing (IAC/ADP) during the Committee Is regular monthly meeting in Washington, D. C., October 11th. IAC/ADP is composed of some 50 representatives from Federal departments and agencies having signfficant computer usage, and is chaired by Ms. Roxanne Williams, director, Plans and Policy Division, Office of Automated Systems, Department of Agriculture. Rep. Charles G. Rose (D-N.C.) , chairman of the House Policy Group on Information and Computers, served as keynoter for the briefing. The major contributors of data for the ; report [including representatives from Arthur D. Little, Inc. (ADL) ] Auerbach Associates, Inc. (AM) ; and the International Data Corp. (IDC) acted as panelists. Introducing Rep. Rose to the Interagency Committee, AFIPS President Dr. Theodore J. Williams said, 'We are very proud of, this new study, and hope very much that you will find it useful and valuable in your work." Mr. Rose, who previous ly addressed the AFIPS National Computer Conference in New York City in 1975, stated in his keynote speech to the IAC/ADP that the "establishment of new information systems and computer technology [has enchanced the] relative power [of Congress in relation to the Executive and Judicial ~ranches] . l1 The North Carolina congressman was accompanied by Mr. Neal Gregory, staff director, Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Computers; and Mr. Boyd L. Alexander, recently appointed director of the House of Representatives Information Systems (HRIS) (Washington Report, 11/77, p. 3). In the panel presentation that followed (chaired by AFIPS Washington Office Director Philip S. Nyborg), Mr. Robert E. Wallace, vice president, Commercial Industrial Division, AAI, considered the report's chapter on United States suppliers of computer equipment and services. As coe'ditor of the study, Mr. Nyborg summarized the section on government and industrial users of computers for James Peacock, director/Publications, IDC, who was unable to attend the briefing. Mr. Neal H. Rosenthal, assistant chief, Division of Occupational Outlook, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, considered the chapter Qn personnel. Mr. Frederic C. Withington, senior staff member, ADL; joined T.B. Steel, Jr., marketing supervisor, ATIT; in discussing future trends and implications. In his talk on suppliers, Mr. Wallace noted that, "while the measures that the report uses are reasonable ones on which to judge the economic aggregates in the industry, they do not in any way reflect total computer power being delivered or available to the economies of the wor1d.l' DECEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT , According to the AAI executive, "A computer delivered today, for the same price as one delivered five years ago, obviously has many times the c~mputing power of the 1971 counterpart. l' Mr. Nyborg, in his pre~e~ntation on governmental and industrial users of computer equ'ipment and services, emphasized the trend toward mini and micrccomputers as we1 1 as the emergence of computers. Discussing the personnel section, Mr. Rosenthal stated that, with the exception of keypunch operators, computer-related occupations are Hgrowing very rapidly, maybe three or four times as fast as the economy as a whole." The Labor Department official also announced that the Bureau of Labor Statistics is initiating the llOccupational Employment Statistical Surveyu for more precise gathering of industry stwistics. Mr. Steel, who wrote the "Note on Future Trends" incorporated in the study, stated that, "The key problem [in the information processing fiell] is the development it." ~f software and the improvement of the productivity of the people who develop Finally, Mr. Withington, commenting on implications of the report for the Government, said if the study's forecasts arB all correct, "there w i l l be a continuing and even an accelerating spread of small computer systems, intelligent terminals, word processing systems and the like throughout agencies of the Federal government, and evidently in the Legislative Branch as well as throughout the whole "structure." According to the ADL executive, it "this proliferation of the resource w i l l truly bring with new management problems : in the attempt to control the budget as a whole; in the attempt to maintain standards; and [in] the attempt to maintain . . . communicative ability, even within an agency, much less across agencies." A short question and answer session followed the panel presentation. Others attending the meeting, and introduced by the AFIPS President, were Mr. Pender M. McCarter, co-editor of the study and research associate, AFIPS Washington Office; as well as Mr. W i l l iam Erickson, co-editor, a formcr,temporary AFIPS employee. Also in attendance were other AFIPS officials, including Executive Direcbor Dr. Robert W. Rector. The 55-page report is available 5or $6.00 from AFIPS Press, 219 Summit Avenue, Montvale, New Jersey 07645, (208 391-9810. There is a $2.00 postage and handling charge for the first copy, and a $1.00 charge for each additional copy, if the oraer is not accompanied by payment. A limited number of studies are available in the AFIPS Washington Office for sale in the Washington, D.C. area only. OTA PLANNING STUDY IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS, COMPUTERS AND INFORMATION POLICIES NEARING A PROJECT PROPOSAL TO OTTA BOARD As the Urns,,. C6ngress Office of Techdblogy Assessment (OTA) planning sttidy on telecomunications, computers and information policies approaches the submission. of a program proposal to the OTA Board, AFIPS has continued DECEMBER, 1977 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT to work closely with the Congressional group in an effort to assist in the formulation of a technical agenda for the prospective program. AFIPS has worked with the planning study since its inception, earlier contributing a statement of critical issues in this policy area (Washington Report, 6/77, p. 4) and a formal set of program recommendations (Washington Report, 10/77, p. 4). A final decision on the telecommunicationss computers,and information policies program has been somewhat delayed by the appointment of a new director for OTA. There have been, for the past several months, careful and extensive procedures to identify the appropriate individual for this position. Dr. Russell W. Peterson, former governor of Delaware and former chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality [CEQ), has been offered the directorship by the Congressional Board which governs OTA. [EI.. At press time, Dr. Peterson has accepted the offer, and will take office January 16th.l The importance of the prospective (TrA program can be well appreciated by considering the volume of data processing-related legislation before the Congress at any given time. Equally important is the significance of computer and communications technologies as viewed by the Congress, itself. In this regard, the views of Senators Magnuson and Hollings are articulated in the following letter which argues the need for the 'prospective UI'A program. This letter merits a careful and thoughtful reading, particularly in its discussion of "new technologiesw (i.e., digital technology has been the driving force .in generating many if not most of the critical policy issues), "needs and interests of consumer^,^ "industry

structure^,^' and "the quest ion of competition. These matters can and will, to a significant extent, shape the future of the information processing field. -- Philip S. Nyborg January 25, 1977 The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy Uni ted S ta t es Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Oear Ted: We would like to raise with you an area of inquiry for OTA which we have been developing for some time and which we plan to propose at our February Board meeting . :The technological rev01 ution in telecommunications is here. It began a little over two decades ago. Now we find ourselves on the verge of major socia2 and economic changes as the introduction of 'these new. telecormnunica tions techno1 ogies become econ'omicall y feasible . 1-n the view of many experts, these technologies change the very assumptions on DECEMBER, 1977 6 NIPS WASHINGTON REPORT which telecolnmunicatf ons policy should be based. Those responsible for policy formafion must understand the alternative social consequences compel led by competing technol ogi cal choices f n telecommunf cations. Further , they must identify iinpediments to the introduction of desirable technologies. Without this prior thought and planning, the technology w i l l be in control rather than the people, The Cpmnunications Act, passed first in 1934, remains the prevailing governmental policy responsible for the shape, structure and function of the regulated communications industries. We are beginning to hear criticisms because technol ogi cal events have steamed by, leaving the govermnt policy to operate in the wake. The House ~onununications Subconunittee has announced plans to begin a total review of the 193 Act. Further, the Senate Subcod ttee on Canmunications, which has oversight responsibiltiy for federal teleconununications policy, expects to begin a review of each major policy area, and the underlying economic and social relationships. Our desire is to reevaluate the assumptions made in 1934 in light of the new technologies. This reevaluation will help us to identify the benefits and problem these new technologies may present our society, and to recommend the appropriate federal role. The subcd ttees extensive agendas are fraught with technology assessment questions. We believe that a properly conceived OTA telecomunications project is essential to the success of these endeavors. For example, in the common carrier area, the technologies for erpanded services such as data processing, funds transfer, two-way visual communication, alarm systems and the like, are basically known and feasible. The feal question is which conbination of technglogies w i li l l best benefit societg. An assessment of the technologies, such as sate1 te, microwave, coaxial cable, and dqta processing, the services they can provide, the needs and interests of consumers and the possible trade-offs in cost, industry structures and services to users, w i l l assist the subcommittees as they look into the question of competition and how to encourage the maximum use of best available technol ogy . New wire transmission technologies, such as optical fiber, are upon us and the introduction into telephone, cable, computer and broadcast activities, w i l l have significant consequences. An assessment of these technologies, the roles they can play as well as the social and economic implications, would be of great assistance. In the area of over-the-air transmission, technologies now offer substantial increases in the information capaci ty of the el ectromagnetic spectrum. These technologies may potentially change the whole premise of spectrum management and revolutionize mobile as well gs fixed-point radio services. An OTA study of their economic and technical feasibility, impediments to their widespread use, and the consumer consequences of alternative system designs would be very helpful. To cite examples, teleconferencing and interactive video systems have direct applications to government service delivery as well as to private sector specialized groups, such as the handicapped. Second, coding data into signals may offer economicially viable over-the-air services to specialized audiences currently without DECEMBER, 1977 qFrPS WASHINGTON REPORT broadcast service, such as deaf people rural areas, dispersed c lassr~ and special categordes of consumer groups. SlmiZarly, the overall quality of general audience entertainment signals or specialized mile comnuni cations, such as citizens band and mobf 1 e telephone, can be greatly augmented by the introduction of cbmputar technology to recei wrs and transmi t t ers , The examples that we have cited are illustrative of the activities Mat a teleconaunfcatl ons project could and should undertake. Our staff is preparing a more precise proposal for Me February meeting and we would appreciate any input you would lfke to make. Technolog9 In the telecmmnicationa area is changing faster than in any other segment of our society. It has substantial implications on everyone's qudli ty of life. It has rendwed obsolete many of the previous distinctions betmen ccxmunicatfona and data processing, between postal and teleccmnunlcations servfce?s, and between broad-band and narrow-band electronic cconmunicrations. We can think of no other new undertaking by dA that can be as exciting or as imhtant to the Congress. Sincerely yours, Warren G . Magnuson/s/ Ernest .F. Hollings/s/ Warren G, Magrruson Ernest Fa HolSlng8 NEWS BRIEFS The Supreme Court recently refused to consider the U.S. Patent Office's

claim that the "Regulator" - program (Washington Report, 1/77, p. 3)

is not patentable; lv~egulatbr* adjusts priorities on computer

programs, President Carter has signed into law legislation to extend the tern of

the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted

Works (CONTU) through July 31, 1978. The Federal Commpnicati,onS Commission's (FCC) telephone equipment

re~istration'program,allowing consumers to connect FCC-registered

teiephone equipment to the national telephone network without

carrier-supplied protective couplers, was implemelnted in October,

following the Supreme Court's refusal to review the FCC program. In a recent report of the Department of Commerce, entitled Voluntary Standards and Testing Laboratory Accreditation, Corrmerce supported Senate bi 1 1, S. 82sr, creating an independent Government-f inanced standards board and an Institute of Standards and Accreditation within the National Bureau of Standards. Production assistance for the Washington Report is provided by Linda hartin. AFIPS societies have permission to use material in the newsletter for their own publications; however, when an article appears with an asterisk, clearance must first be obtained from the AFIPS Washington Office. Documents indicated by the symbol "(#)" are available on request to the Washington Office. Washington Report in which noted, make checks payable , DECEMBER, 1977 Requests should specify the date(s) of the the docment(s) appeared. Where price is to "AFIPS.'1 AFIPS WASHINGTON REPORT