HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:0004972767@mcimail.com>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:27:00 GMT
From:         Hortideas Publishing <0004972767@MCIMAIL.COM>
Subject:      For Ed Ford

Rest of the net can hit the delete key -- this was the quickest way
to get this to Ed...

  A comprehensive checklist of articles and books on perceptual
control theory, updated annually, is available for $5.00 postpaid from
Greg Williams, 460 Black Lick Rd., Gravel Switch, KY 40328.

  CSGnet, the electronic mail network for individuals interested in
control theory as applied to living systems, is a lively forum for
sharing ideas, asking questions, and learning more about the theory.
There are no sign-up or connect-time charges for participation on
CSGnet. The Internet address is

CSG-L@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU

and

CSG-L@UIUCVMD

is the Bitnet address. Messages sent to CSGnet via these addresses are
automatically forwarded to over 120 participants on five continents,
as well as to hundreds of NetNews (Usenet) sites where CSGnet can be
found as the newsgroup bit.listserv.csg-l. CSGnet also can be accessed
via CompuServe, AT&T Mail, MCI Mail, or any other computer
communication service with a gateway to Internet or Bitnet. For more
information, contact Gary Cziko, the network manager, at

G-CZIKO@UIUC.EDU

or phone him at (217)333-8527.

Thanks for the net's indulgence,

Greg Williams
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:andaling@fac.anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 09:02:40 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: formulations & gain

[Avery Andrews 930126.0800]
 (Rick Marken 930125)

What you say about Schmidt & Bizzi is all true - I'm not sure what details
would be more useful.  What I think is most significant about the Bizzi
arm stuff is that deafferented monkeys could do the arm gestures correctly
within 2-4 days of the operation, much shorter than the normal period
of recovery of approximately normal function.  This suggests to me that
the arm gestures were *original acquired* as alpha-efferent programs
(presumably with gamma coactivation), since the behavior seemed to
survive the operation with minimal effect.

On the other hand, when the starting posture of the elbow was changed, or
constant loads were applied, the deafferents failed, while the normals
were able to get it right in a few movements, suggesting that they too
followed a program first time around, then fixed it.

The head-movement stuff turned out differently:  normal head movements took
about two weeks to emerge, and the pattern of innervations of the normals
& deafferents were quite different, with the deafferents having a much
higher level of opponent coactivation, & different shaped trajectories.
This suggests to me that the intact monkeys turn their heads to a
kinesthetically defined reference, to confer stability in the face of
the various postures they might be in, while the deafferents use the
muscular spring properties to achieve roughly the same effect.

But, for both groups, applying a constant load cause the head to fail to
attain its final position, (though it almost gets there), attaining
the final position when the load is removed.  Schmidt's interpretation
of this is that it shows that kinesthetic feedback is not involved in
specifying the endpoint of these gestures (Bizzi is more cagey in his
overt conclusions), whereas the facts are also consistent with the
kinesthetic loop being somewhat low gain.

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:andaling@durras.anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 11:56:06 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      kugler et al

[Avery.Andrews 930123.1130]

 Rick's reading of Kugler et. al. may well be right, but I think mine might
 be too.  I would have thought that those people would like PCT-ish
 theories because there isn't any `algorithm' being executed by an
 agent that is distinct from the representation of the algorithm, but
 evidently not.  I've tracked down a gettable copy of Stelmach 1978,
 so maybe we can pursue this issue when I'm better informed.

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
From: POWERS_W%FLC@VAXF.COLORADO.EDU (William T. Powers)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Subject: Preliminary conference announcement
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:00:31 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:POWERS_W%FLC@VAXF.Colorado.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: CSG-L@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu
X-VMS-To: @CSG
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT


                     Conference Announcement

This is a preliminary announcement of the ninth annual meeting of
The Control Systems Group, to be held on the campus of Fort Lewis
College, Durango, Colorado, from July 28-August 1.

Registration will begin in April, and forms will be available
then.

The approximate cost will be $225, for a single room, meals from
Wednesday dinner through Sunday breakfast, and membership in the
CSG. A shared room will be about $185, and the cost for students
sharing a room $145. We can waive fees for three students, and
will decide among applicants for the waiver on June 1. Guests are
welcome, and extra nights in the dorm are available for those who
want to ride the steam train, visit Mesa Verde, etc. For those
who want further information on the attractions of Southwestern
Colorado, or on off-campus accomodations, write DACRA, 111 S.
Camino del Rio, Durango CO 81301.

The CSG conference is small and informal. There are seven plenary
sessions, mornings and evenings, with afternoons and Sunday
morning free for further discussion or recreation. We welcome
formal papers for distribution, but presenters should be brief
and prepared for numerous interruptions and questions. This is
because most of your audience will be in fields remote from
yours, though all share a common understanding of PCT. It is this
simultaneous disparity and unity that make CSG conferences so
interesting and enjoyable.

                                        Mary Powers
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:ATEDF@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:19:58 -0700
From:         Ed Ford <ATEDF@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Rubber band demo

from Ed Ford (930127:1018)

Gary, Chuck, and all you PCT demonstrators -

I have a different way of demonstrating PCT with a rubber band.
Take two rubber bands (I prefer the big ones) and knot them
together.  Ask the participant to hold the ends of the rubber
bands, one in each hand, facing you.  With her hands outstretched,
the knot will be directly in front of both of you.  Then, point
your finger at the knot and ask her to keep the knot directly in
front of the tip of your finger.  Begin moving your finger and she
will automatically look at the relationship of the knot to the tip
of your finger.  Next, ask her to look at her left hand and watch
it's actions, and try to achieve the same goal of keeping the knot
at the tip of your finger.  Obviously she can't.  In fact, there is
a strong internal urge to take a look at the knot-tip of finger
relationship.  Thus she will perceive the need for feedback and the
inability to achieve goals by watching behaviors.   I've found this
is the best way to lay to rest the fact that we control our
actions.

An alternative is to get two people to participate.  Begin with the
two rubber bands knotted together.  She holds the end of one rubber
band, and he holds the end of the other rubber band, with the knot
between them.  Again, you point your finger with the tip being
right at the knot.  Then, move your finger around, and they have to
keep the knot right at the tip of your finer.  Now ask them to
achieve the same goal by watching their actions and to concentrate
on how they move their hands as they attempt to reach their goal.
Or, tell them to watch each other's actions.  Or, ask one of them
to close their eyes and the task for the other becomes more
difficult.  Now move your finger about.  Again, the internal desire
on their part to look at the knot shows the need for feedback to
achieve internal goals and the inability to control by
concentrating on the actions.  I find when you ask people to switch
from watching the knot and its relationship to the tip of your
finger to watching their hands move, it becomes so obvious how we
control for input, not output.  The nice thing about these
demonstrations is that you don't need a chalk board, you can
demonstrate this anywhere (with the exception of a phone booth),
and you still maintain control over the disturbance.

What do you think?

Ed Ford ATEDF@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
10209 N. 56th St., Scottsdale, Arizona 85253  Ph.602 991-4860
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:andaling@durras.anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:09:37 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      formulations

[Avery Andrews 930125.1610]

The bad guys say:

  Perception guides action

What Rick Marken says may (I hope) be paraphrased as:

  Perception of the net effects of disturbances on a controlled
    variable guides action

Which is clearly more specific, & therefore more useful.

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:Marken@courier4.aero.org>
Posted-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 11:52:06 -0800
X400-Trace: US**AEROSPACE; arrival Mon, 25 Jan 93 11:52:06 -0800 action Relayed
P1-Message-Id: US**AEROSPACE; 930125195206
Ua-Content-Id: CSI NC V2.1b
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:52:06 -0800
From:         Marken@COURIER4.AERO.ORG
Subject:      formulations & gain

[From Rick Marken (930125.1130)]

Avery.Andrews (930126.510)

>Indeed high-gain systems maintain the perceptions at the references
>pretty closely, but if the feedback systems involved in kinesthetic
>movement control are high gain, then Schmidt & Bizzi have some
>excellent arguments against this kind of control!

And they might be right. But just a quick look over their stuff suggests
some problems. The Schmidt "lever" control stuff seems to require
real quick behaviors -- probabaly pushing the frequency response of
the control systems involved. Bizzi found return to the goal head position
in deafferented, blind-folded monkeys (pleasant fellow) AFTER the
disturbance was removed (like finding that a pendulum returns to per-
pendicular with the ground after the pushes stop. My experience is that
under normal conditions I can control the position of lever and the position
of my head in the context of variable disturnbances. So I wonder how
excellent the Schmidt and Bizzi arguments (and reserach results) actually
are once you look at the details of what they REALLY did. But I would
not be surprised to find SOME systems that operate open - loop (like
the VOR?) -- but I have to believe that they are rare and part of closed
loop systems anyway.

But more detail on the Schmidt and Bizzi findings would be most
appreciated.

Best

Rick
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:andaling@durras.anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 12:26:57 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      myths article

[Avery Andrews 930123.1130]

Wobbly as my grasp & background may be, I do have some ideas about how
a feedback myths article might be organized, which go as follows:

  1.  Some examples of  egregious blunders (to get people to see quickly
        that there is a problem).

  2.  The major myths & how they started.

  3.  Some bad effects on current research.

  4.  Some puzzles & anomalies that might be cleared up by the BCP approach.

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 07:32:00 EST
From:         JCLUTCHE@PSUHMC.BITNET
Subject:      release 1.7f

When is this release schedule for distribution?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
John Clutcher, Project Leader/E-mail Postmaster  Information Systems
Internet: jclutche@psuhmc.hmc.psu.edu            Hershey Medical Center
Bitnet:   jclutche@psuhmc.bitnet                 500 University Drive
Voice:    (717) 531-8682                         Hershey, PA 17033  USA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:39:45 CST
From:         Brent Stilley <UCCXBRS@OSUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: SET RELPAGE OFF

On Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:29:32 +0100 Eric Thomas said:
>I have just noticed that many LISTSERV functions will perform much better
>if you add SET RELPAGE OFF to LISTSERV's profile. For instance, a refresh
>of the LISTS database takes 24.8 seconds of VCPU on SEARN with the normal
>RELPAGE ON setting and 19.8 (20% off) with RELPAGE OFF. The only drawback
>is that, if LISTSERV needs a lot of storage to perform a certain function
>and then  releases it,  it will not  notify CP that  the contents  of the
>pages are no longer important. This forces  CP to keep page slots on DASD
>for the  corresponding virtual memory  locations, and it may  take longer
>for the real memory frames to be reallocated to another user since CP has
>to assume  they are still needed  until they have been  unreferenced long
>enough. The paging DASD allocation issue is negligible on anything bigger
>than a  9370 with 5  users whereas the  recycling time problem  will only
>impact small to medium page-bound systems  (on a large system LISTSERV is
>just a  user among a thousand  and it doesn't make  any difference). This
>command will be included in the startup code in the next release.

This is a know problem, and has been fixed in VM/ESA R2 with the pending
page release enhancements.  So you'll probably want to make the command
conditional on the release of CP & CMS.

Brent Stilley,  Oklahoma State University, 113 Math Sciences, Stillwater, 74078
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@SEARN.SUNET.SE,@SEARN.SUNET.SE:HARVEY@WUVMD.WUSTL.EDU>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:45:40 CST
From:         Bill Harvey <HARVEY@WUVMD.WUSTL.EDU>
Subject:      IR=Ireland or Iran?
Comments: To: LSTSRV-L@SEARN.SUNET.SE

I just tried the following database command:
   SEL * IN BITEARN WHERE COUNTRY IS IR

LISTSERV told me "IR is assumed to be Ireland" and proceeded to list all
the IE entries.  I rephrased as:
   SEL * IN BITEARN WHERE COUNTRY IS IRAN
and was told that "Iran is not a valid country!"

IREARN is a node with :country=IR.  Can anybody explain what's going on?

Thanks
Bill
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@SEARN.SUNET.SE,@FERRIS.EDU:A000@MUSIC.FERRIS.EDU>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:59:05 EST
From:         Trevor C Poole <A000@MUSIC.FERRIS.EDU>
Subject:      Boo Boo with node name

Hello,

Two days ago I changed our system such that our outgoing mail
now says Id@FMUSIC.FERRIS.EDU instead of the previous Id@FERRIS.BITNET

It was one of those all night jobs and certain Listserv ramifications
didn't occur to me. Everything seemed hunky dory. Traffic flowed.
Stuff from mailing lists was coming in fine etc etc.

But I have failed to account for those folks enrolled in private lists.
That is they get the stuff in OK just as they ever did but if they
reply or send original mail to the list they no longer get a match.

Now I don't really want to change our Id thing again as I would rather
solve the problems as they arise and settle down.

Question:
1. If user sends an UNSUB request to a private list is it reasonable
   to expect that the person running it will see that they should
   delete the FERRIS.BITNET entry rather than the MUSIC.FERRIS.EDU
   entry that the request is coming from ? The way I figure it
   they can't know if we really want mail to two "different" addresses
   and will only remove an exact match.
   Am I forced to send private mail to the list owner explaining
   the situation. Its beginning to look messy.

Fortunately so far we don't seem to have many people on private
lists but I am not sure of all the ramifications.
Go on. Give me the bad news. I deserve it !

Trev
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:14:44 EST
From:         Trevor C Poole <A000@MUSIC.FERRIS.EDU>
Subject:      Boo Boo addendum

> Hello,
>
> Two days ago I changed our system such that our outgoing mail
> now says Id@FMUSIC.FERRIS.EDU instead of the previous Id@FERRIS.BITNET
>
Correction:
New name is Id@MUSIC.FERRIS.EDU I miss-typed the above.
Just not my day !
Trev
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Sender: kline@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:59:37 -0600
From:         Charley Kline <cvk@UIUC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Some problems with DIGEST
Comments: To: "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7" <LSTSRV-L@uga.bitnet>

At  3:40 PM 93/1/25 -0500, David Jelinek wrote:
>I've applied 17E-002D FIX on 1/18/93. listname DIGEST files were created
>by default for each list that was being logged as I expected. Each DIGEST
>is still being built but none are emptied out at the end of the day.
>I thought that the default was YES,SAME,DAILY. I even set up one list
>as explicity YES,SAME,DAILY and subscribed to the list and then set my
>options to DIGEST. I've yet to receive anything from the list even though
>it is receiving 10-30 postings a day. I imagine I've overlooked something
>very obvious, but I can't imagine what it could be. Any help would be
>appreciated. Thanks in advance.

You need to add the following line to your WAKEPARM FILE


ALL      &01:00   14:08:18 Call LSVXM1 'DIGESTSND'

--
Charley Kline, KF9FF                                cvk@uiuc.edu
UIUC Network Architect

"...and once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes
turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you long to return..."
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 14:19:18 PST
From:         Larry Crawford <LCRAWFOR@UCDCVDLS.BITNET>
Subject:      Front end for Local List

We use our local listserv to manage all of our internal distribution lists.

Has anyone develoded a front-end to list local list and make adds and
deletes to them? If you know of anything like this which is available
please let me know.

Thanks,

Larry Crawford, Systems Specialist  *    California Veterinary Diagnostic
lcrawfor%ucdcvdls.bitnet           / \   Laboratory System (916) 752-4407
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-pmrqc:      1
Priority: normal
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:59:38 CST
Reply-To:     JSimon@TUCCmail.Trinity.Edu
From:         Jonathon Simon <JSIMON@TUCCMAIL.TRINITY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Some problems with DIGEST
Comments: To: LSTSRV-L@UGA.bitnet

> Date:          Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:40:54 EST
> From:          David Jelinek
 <34AAQ77%CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU@VM1.TUCC.TRINITY.EDU>
> Subject:       Some problems with DIGEST

> I've applied 17E-002D FIX on 1/18/93. listname DIGEST files were created
> by default for each list that was being logged as I expected. Each DIGEST
> is still being built but none are emptied out at the end of the day.
> I thought that the default was YES,SAME,DAILY. I even set up one list
> as explicity YES,SAME,DAILY and subscribed to the list and then set my
> options to DIGEST. I've yet to receive anything from the list even though
> it is receiving 10-30 postings a day. I imagine I've overlooked something
> very obvious, but I can't imagine what it could be. Any help would be
> appreciated. Thanks in advance.

This is a follow-up to a message I just posted.

I just noticed something about my problem (which is similar to this
one above).  I have actually coded the keyword DIGEST=YES,SAME,DAILY
on a list that is "logged" monthly.  It appears that the Digest file
is also being accrued for a full month, and probably explains why I
haven't been receiving the DAILY digests I'm expecting.  Is this a
bug or am I missing something else?  I am at Rev. 7 of the 002D fix.
Thanks.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 13:11:45 EST
From:         "Duane D. Weaver" <WEAVER@OHSTVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: LISTSERV reject posting

The Send= should be set to PUBLIC.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: NY State Dept Health
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 21:34:54 EST
From:         Barry Krawchuk <BDK01@ALBNYDH2.BITNET>
Subject:      LPUNCH no longer used in Release 1.7e

We have a large number of uucp sites in our network who have been
requesting files for over a year from several fileserver lists. Some of
the files are over 80 bytes wide and were LPUNCH'd in preparation for
mailing. None of the sites are known to BITERAN NODES, or NJE capable.

Since installation of 1.7e, the files are mailed, but the contents are
wrapped at the 80th column.  This is definitely new.  Many of the files
are reports and it is not possible to reconstruct for proper printing.

How do we make sure that files are LPUNCH'd to these non-nje sites
again?

*
* Barry Krawchuk
* NYS Dept of Health
* Healthcom Network Systems
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 08:40:33 CST
From:         "John I. Quebedeaux, Jr" <JOHNQ@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Looking for LISTSERV client for PC and Mac

Thanks Paul, I am interested- will look into it as soon as I can.

-John

Louisiana State University * Information Technology Support
JOHNQ@LSUVM (bitnet) *  JOHNQ@LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU (internet)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Resent-Organization: Temple University Computer Services -- Listserv Postmaster
Return-Path: <@VM.TEMPLE.EDU:LISTSERV@TEMPLEVM.BITNET>
X-Acknowledge-To: <OASIS@TEMPLEVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:18:08 EST
Comments:     Resent-From: Stan Horwitz <OASIS@TEMPLEVM.BITNET>
Comments:     Originally-From: Revised List Processor (1.7e)
              <LISTSERV@TEMPLEVM.BITNET>
From:         Stan Horwitz <OASIS@TEMPLEVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Message

The listserv here hosts a peered list called INDIA-L. Its a moderated list.
All of a suddent, for no apparant reason, I am getting messages saying that
I, the Listserv Postmaster here, have had something submitted to the list's
editor. Why is this happening? I have not submitted anything to that list.

Stan Horwitz
Listserv Postmaster
Temple University
Acknowledge to: OASIS@TEMPLEVM (or VM.TEMPLE.EDU)

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Your mailing for INDIA-L has been submitted to the list editor:
INDIA-NEWS@ANDY.BGSU.EDU.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU