Abstract
I analyze the frame problem and its relation to other epistemological problems for artificial intelligence, such as the problem of induction, the qualification problem and the "general" AI problem. I dispute the claim that extensions to logic (default logic and circumscriptive logic) will ever offer a viable way out of the problem. In the discussion it will become clear that the original frame problem is really a fairy tale: as originally presented, and as tools for its solution are circumscribed by Pat Hayes, the problem is entertaining, but incapable of resolution. The solution to the frame problem becomes available, and even apparent, when we remove artificial restrictions on its treatment and understand the interrelation between the frame problem and the many other problems for artificial epistemology. I present the solution to the frame problem: an adequate theory and method for the machine induction of causal structure. Whereas this solution is clearly satisfactory in principle, and in practice real progress has been made in recent years in its application, its ultimate implementation is in prospect only for future generations of AI researchers.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brooks, R. (1991), ‘Intelligence without Representation’, Artificial Intelligence, 47, pp 139–159.
Brown, F.M. (ed.) (1987), The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann.
Buck, R.C. (1963), ‘Do Reflexive Predictions Pose Special Problems for the Social Scientist?’, Philosophy of Science, 30, pp 359–374.
Carnap, R. (1962), Logical Foundations of Probability, second edition, University of Chicago.
Cherniak, C. (1986), Minimal Rationality, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Dennett, D. (1984), ‘Cognitive Wheels: The Frame Problem of Artificial Intelligence’, in C. Hookaway (ed.) Minds, Machines and Evolution, Cambridge University. Reprinted in Pylyshyn (1987).
Dietrich, E. and Fields, C. (1996), ‘The Role of the Frame Problem in Fodor's Modularity Thesis: A Case Study of Rationalist Cognitive Science’, in K. M. Ford and Z. W Pylyshyn, (eds.) The Robot's Dilemma Revisited: Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, pp 9–24.
Dreyfus, H. and Dreyfus, S. (1987), ‘How to Stop Worrying about the Frame Problem even though it's Computationally Insoluble’, in Z. W. Pylyshyn (ed), The Robot's Dilemma Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, pp. 95–111.
Fetzer, J. (1991b), ‘The Frame Problem: Artificial Intelligence Meets David Hume’, In K. M. Ford and P. J Hayes (eds.) Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World Greenwich, CT: JAI Press pp. 55–69.
Fetzer, J. (1991b), ‘Artificial Intelligence Meets David Hume: A Response to Patrick Hayes’, in K. M Ford and P. J. Hayes (eds.) Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World Greenwich, CT: JAI Press pp. 77–85.
Fetzer, J. (1993), ‘Philosophy Unframed’, Psycoloquy 4,(33).
Ford, K.M. and Hayes, P.J. (eds.) (1991a), Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World: The Frame Problem. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Ford, K.M. and Hayes, P.J. (1991b), ‘Framing the Problem’, in K. M Ford and P. J Hayes (eds.) Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World Greenwich, CT: JAI Press pp. ix-xiv.
Ford, K.M. and Pylyshyn, Z.W. (1996), The Robot's Dilemma Revisited, Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
Freeman, W. (1992), ‘Framing Is a Dynamic Process’, Psycoloquy, 3(62).
Georgeff, M.P. and Wallace, C.S. (1984) ‘A General Selection Criterion for Inductive Inference’, European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 6, pp. 473–482.
Gillies, D. (1990), ‘The Turing-Good Weight of Evidence Function and Popper's Measure of the Severity of a Test’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 41, pp 143–146.
Gillies, D. (1996), Artificial Intelligence and Scientific Method, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, D.E. (1989), Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning), Addison-Wesley.
Grice, H.P. (1975), ‘Logic and Conversation’, in P. Cole and J.P. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41–58) New York: Seminar Press.
Hanks, S. and D. McDermott (1986), ‘Default Reasoning, Nonmonotonic Logic, and the Frame Problem’, in T. Kehler, S. Rosenschein, R. Filman and P. Patel-Schneider (eds.) Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 328–333, Morgan Kaufmann.
Harnad, S. (1993), ‘Problems, Problems: The Frame Problem as a Symptom of the Symbol Grounding Problem’, Psycoloquy 4(34). http://cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnard/psyc.html
Haugeland, J. (1987), ‘An Overview of the Frame Problem’, in Z.W. Pylyshyn The Robot's Dilemma Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, pp. 77–93.
Hayes, P. (1987), ‘What the Frame Problem Is and Isn't’, in Z. W. Pylyshyn (ed), The Robot's Dilemma Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, pp. 123–137.
Hayes, P. (1991), ‘Commentary on’ The Frame Problem: Artificial Intelligence Meets David Hume', in in K. M Ford and P. J Hayes (eds.) Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 71–76.
Hayes, P. and Ford, K. M. (1993), ‘Modeling our Adaptive Intelligence, Not God's’, Psycoloquy, 4(42). http://cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnard/psyc.html
Heckerman, D. and Geiger, D. (1995), ‘Likelihoods and Priors for Learning Bayesian Networks’, Neural Information Processing Systems 1995 Workshop on Learning in Bayesian Networks and Other Graphical Models, December 1995, Veil, Colorado.
Heckerman, D., Mamdani, A. and Wellman, M. P. (1995), ‘Real-world Applications of Bayesian Networks’, Communications of the ACM 38 (March), p 24–26.
Howson, C. and Urbach, P. (1993), Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach, second edition, Chicago: Open Court.
Hume, D. (1748/1975) An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, ed. L. A. Selby-Bigge, revised by P. H. Nidditch, Oxford University.
Israel, D. (1985), ‘A Short Companion to the Naive Physics Manifesto’, in J.R. Hobbs and R.C. Moore (eds.) Formal Theories of the Commonsense World, Norwood, N. J.: Ablex. pp. 427–447.
Korb, K.B. (1995), ‘Inductive Learning and Defeasible Inference’, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 7, pp. 291–324.
Korb, K.B. (1998), ‘Probabilistic Causal Structure’, forthcoming in H. Sankey (ed.), Causation and Natural Laws: Australasian Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, Kluwer.
Korb, K.B. and Wallace, C. S. (1997) ‘In Search of the Philosopher's Stone: Remarks on Humphreys and Freedman's Critique of Causal Discovery’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48, pp. 543–553.
Langley, P. Simon, H. A. and Bradshaw, G. L. (1990), ‘Heuristics for Empirical Discovery,’ in Shavlik and Diettrich (eds.), Readings in Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann.
Langley, P. Simon, H. A. Bradshaw, G. L. and Zytow, J. M. (1987), Scientific Discovery, MIT.
McCarthy, J. and Hayes, P. J. (1969), ‘Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence’, in B. Meltzer and D. Michie (eds.), Machine Intelligence 4, pp. 463–502, Edinburgh University Press. Reprinted in M.L. Ginsberg (ed.) Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, pp. 26–45, Morgan Kaufmann.
McDermott, D. (1987a), ‘We've Been Framed: Or, Why AI Is Innocent of the Frame Problem’, in Z. W. Pylyshyn (ed), The Robot's Dilemma Norwood, N. J.: Ablex, pp. 113–122.
McDermott, D. (1987b), ‘AI, Logic and the Frame Problem’, in F. M. Brown The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 105–118.
McDermott, D. (1987c), ‘A Critique of Pure Reason’, Computational Intelligence 3, pp. 151–160.
Mitchell, T.M. (1977), ‘Version Spaces: An Approach to Rule Revision during Rule Induction’, 5th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 305–310.
Mitchell, T.M. (1978), Version Spaces: An Approach to Concept Learning. Technical Report STAN-CS-78–711, Computer Science Dept., Stanford University (Ph.D. dissertation).
Muggleton, 5. (1990), Inductive Acquisition of Expert Knowledge Workingham, England: Addison-Wesley (Turing Institute Press).
Muggleton, S. (ed.) (1992), Inductive Logic Programming, Academic Press.
Muggleton, S. and Feng, C. (1992), ‘Efficient Induction of Logic Programs’, in S Muggleton (ed.), Inductive Logic Programming,) Academic Press. pp. 281–298.
Nutter, J.T. (1991), ‘Focus of Attention, Context, and the Frame Problem’, in in K. M. Ford and P. J. Hayes (eds.) Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. pp. 171–188.
Oliver, J. Dowe, D. and Wallace, C. S. (1992), ‘Inferring Decision Graphs using the Minimum Message Length Principle’, Proceedings of the 1992 Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hobart, Tasmania, pp. 361–367, World Scientific.
Oliver, J. and Hand, D. (1995) Introduction to Minimum Encoding Inference. Technical Report 95/205, Dept. of Computer Science, Monash University.
Pylyshyn, Z.W. (ed.) (1987), The Robot's Dilemma: The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
Quinlan, J.R. (1990), ‘Learning Logical Definitions from Relations’, Machine Learning 5, pp 239–266.
Quinlan, J. R. (1993), C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann.
Reichenbach, H. (1949), The Theory of Probability, second edition, translated by E. H. Hutton and M. Reichenbach, Berkeley: University of California.
Reiter, R. (1978), ‘On Reasoning by Default’, Proceedings of Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, Urbana, Illinois, pp. 210–218.
Reiter, R. (1980), ‘A Logic for Default Reasoning’, Artificial Intelligence 13, pp. 81–132.
Reiter, R., (1987), ‘Nonmonotonic Reasoning’, Annual Review of Computer Science 2, pp. 147–186.
Robinson, J.A. (1965), ‘A Machine-oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle’, Journal of the ACM 12, pp. 23–41.
Rumelhart, D. E. and McClelland, J. (1986), Parallel Distributed Processing, volume 1, MIT.
Salmon, W.C. (1967), The Foundations of Scientific Inference, University of Pittsburgh.
Salmon, W. C. (1971), Statistical Explanation and Statistical Relevance, University of Pittsburgh.
Schaffer, C. (1994), ‘A Conservation Law for Generalization Performance’, Proceedings of the 1994 International Conference on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann.
Shannon, C. E. and Weaver, W. (1949) The Mathematical Theory of Communication, University of Illinois.
Simon, H. (1994), ‘Literary Criticism: A Cognitive Approach’, in G. Guzeldere and S. Franchi (eds.), Stanford Humanities Review Special Supplement: Bridging the Gap, pp. 1–26.
Solomonoff, R. (1964) ‘A Formal Theory of Inductive Inference, I and II,’ Information and Control 7, 1–22 and 224–254.
Sperber, D. Premack, D. and Premack, A. J. (eds.), (1995), Causal Cognition: A Multidisciplinary Debate, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Spirtes, P., Glymour, C. and Schemes, R. (1993), Causation, Prediction, and Search, New York: Springer Verlag.
Thorndike, E. L. (1911), Animal Intelligence, New York: Macmillan.
Wallace, C. S. (1995) Multiple Factor Analysis by MML Estimation. Technical Report 95/218, Dept. Computer Science, Monash University.
Wallace C. S. and Boulton D. M. (1968) ‘An Information Measure for Classification’, Computer Journal 11, 185–194.
Wallace, C. S. and Freeman, P. R. (1987), ‘Estimation and Inference by Compact Coding’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 49, pp 240–252.
Wallace, C. S. and Freeman, P. R. (1992), ‘Single-factor analysis by minimum message length estimation’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 54, pp. 195–209.
Wallace, C. S. and Korb, K. B. (forthcoming), ‘A Study of Causal Discovery by MML Sampling,’ forthcoming in M. Slater (ed.), Causal Models and Intelligent Data Analysis, Springer Verlag.
Wallace, C. S. Korb, K. B. and Dai, H. (1996), ‘Causal Discovery via MML’, in L. Saitta (ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 516–524.
Wolpert, D. H. and McReady, W. G. (1995), No Free Lunch Theorems for Search. TR 95–02–010 Santa Fe Institute. http://www.santafe.edu/sfi/publications/95wplist.html
Wright, S. (1934) ‘The Method of Path Coefficients’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 5, pp. 161–215.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Korb, K.B. The Frame Problem: An AI Fairy Tale. Minds and Machines 8, 317–351 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008286921835
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008286921835