Department of Computer ScienceA/fel^ltf%^Is # fV£AAA<2

Stanford University * Stanford, California 94305

MARILYNNWALKER ■ ADMINISTRATIVEASSISTANT " MJH 210 " (415)497-2274

To: CSD FacultyFrom: Marilynn WalkerSubject:Date:

Faculty Meeting Minutes - January 5, 1982Tuesday, April 13, 1982

Attending:

Baskett, Binford, Buchanan, Cheriton, Feigenbaum, Floyd, Genesereth, Hennessey, Herriot, Lenat,McCarthy, Oliger, Reid, Schreiber, Shortliffe, Wiederhold, Wilkinson, Winograd, Ullman. Staff:' Gorin,Walker, Scott. Representatives: Tom Dietterich, Amy Lansky. On leave: Manna. Absent: Dantzig'Golub, Chairman, Knuth, Lantz, McCluskey,Pratt.

The meeting was called to order by Jeff Ullman at 2:30 p.m. Gene Golub was unable to chair the meetingdue to family obligations.

Degree candidates were presented and the following students were recommended:

Masters ofScience - Computer Engineering

Maureen EvansEdward FalisIngemar GardKaren Gathers

Doctor of Philosophy

Douglas AppeltWi 1 1 i am Gropp

Professor Hennessey moved that they be approved and Professor Herriot seconded the motion, and itpassed unanimously.

Committee Reports

A. Comprehensive - Terry Winograd, Chairman of the ComprehensiveCommittee, announced that the date of the examination would be movedforward from February 13 to February 6 due to the original date fallingon a holiday weekend.

He also reported that the committee would begin working on a revisedreading list that would be presented to the faculty at the next meeting.

Terry also expressed a need for the committee to reorganize its proceduresfor reading and grading students' programming projects.

/)

APR 2

Tuesday, April 13, 1982 Page 2

B. Admissions - Bruce Buchanan reported on the number of applicants whowere admitted to the department for the 1981-82 academic year. The totalnumber of applicants admitted were 25, total enrolled 21, and 6 declined.Bruce also commented that, in general, applicants were above the 90thpercentile in both GRE and verbal scores.There was also some discussion regarding the amount of support that thedepartment can guarantee to its students. Jeff Ullman suggested thepossibility of taking a departmental survey, particularly with thePrincipal Investigators, to see if estimates could be made as to howmuch support would be available to incoming students.C. Curriculum Committee - Rob Schreiber reported on the development of anew course to be offered during the autumn and winter quarters of1982-83. The new course, CSIOB A& B, Fundamentals of Computer Science,will.be available to those students who plan to continue their educationin computer science beyond programming. An instructor has not beenappointed at this time, but Brian Reid was mentioned as a strongpossibility due to his previous teaching experience with a similarcourse at Carnegie-Mellon.

D. Faculty Recruiting - Jeff Ullman made a brief statement, in behalfof Gene Golub, that the department was looking for faculty in the systemsarea, particularly in logical design.

E. Student Consulting - David Cheriton invited suggestions from thefaculty to form a department policy regarding students doing outsideconsulting. Further discussion was postponed until the committee hada meeting.

F. Teaching Obligations - a proposal was made regarding contributionsto the teaching and administrative program of the department. Thefollowing proposals were made:

a) A faculty member with strong research activity will teach fourcourses per year. If they offset 25% of their salary, they need to teachonly three courses, and if they offset 50%, two courses. No facultymember should displace their salary by more than 50%. New facultymembers may be forgiven their offset obligations under some circumstances.

b) Every senior faculty member is expected to chair a major committeeor be actively involved in a committee. Junior faculty members shouldalso participate in committees.

c) Every faculty member should lead at least a one quarter seminarper year in addition to teaching courses where the faculty member deliverslectures .General Discussion

A. Visiting Faculty - Jeff Ullman introduced Jim Wilkinson who teachesa course in numerical analysis one quarter every year.

B. Motion - A formal motion was made by Gio Weiderhold to extend

Tuesday, April 13,1982 Page 3

condolences to Gene Golub whose niece was recently killed in anautomobile accident.

There was no new business, and the meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.

Department of Computer ScienceStanford University * Stanford, California 94305

MARILYNN WALKER ■ ADMINISTRATIVEASSISTANT " MJH 210 - (415)497-2274

To: CSD FacultyFrom: Marilynn WalkerSubject:Date:

Faculty Meeting Minutes - March 30, 1982Wednesday, April 21, 1982

Attending:

Cheriton, Dahlquist, Feigenbaum, Floyd, Golub (Chairman), Hennessy, Herriot, Knuth, Lantz, Lenat,OligeF, Pratt, Reid, Schreibcr, Wicdcrhold, Winograd. Staff: Armer, Gorin, Scott, Tajnai, Walker.Student Bureaucrats: Trickcy, Weening. On leave: Baskett, Manna, McCluskey. Absent: ' Binford,Buchanan, Dantzig, Genesereth, McCarthy.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Gene Golub at 2:30 p.m.

Degree Candidates

Degree candidates were presentedby Marilynn Walker, and die following students were recommended:

Kathy ChingMaureen EvansKaren GathersJaime KelersteinGary OwDavid ParkerRatan RamchandaniGary RubinTakasumi Ueda

Masters ofScience - Artificial Intelligence

Yumi Iwasaki

Lawrence C. Paulson

Professor Floyd moved that they be approved; Professor Lenat seconded the motion, and it passedunanimously.

A£'£VN00%.li §? TOPft£\£ohi\a£A'A*JA<A-ft\A<f

Masters ofScience - Computer Fngineering

Doctor of Philosophy

Wednesday, April 21, 1982 Page 2

Visitor

Gene Golub introduced Germund Dahlquist, a visiting professor from Sweden, who will be here onequarter each year for the next five years.

Committee Reports

A. Comprehensive - Terry Winograd, Chairman of the ComprehensiveCommittee, reported that he did not receive any comments from the facultyregarding the updated version of the comprehensive reading list, andtherefore, the current list being circulated will be used.

He also reported that the passing ratio on the comprehensive examinationwas relatively low but not unusual. In general the PHD students didbetter than the masters students.

It was announced that Doug Lenat is the new chairman of the committeeDoug announced that the Spring Comprehensive Examination will be heldon May 8.

B. Admissions - Gene Golub spoke on behalf of Bruce Buchanan, Chairman ofthe Admissions Committee, and reported that we received 315 PHDapplications and accepted 27; 167 MS/CS applications were received andwe accepted 21. Gene also stated that we accepted 9 female studentsto the PHD program and 14 to the MS/CS program. The committee alsoaccepted 1 minority to the PHD program and 5 minority applicants wereaccepted to the MS/CS .prog ram. It was also noted that the PHD adrnitteeswere selected from a pool of outstanding candidates; at least 65 appli-cants of whom would be excellent students. (See attached for completereport. )

C. Curriculum Committee - Rob Schreiber, Chairman of the CurriculumCommittee announced that Brian Reid will teach the new course, CSIOB A,BFundamentals of Computer Science.

D. Computer Forum - Carolyn Tajnai reported that the Forum membershipnow totals 32 due to the newest member being added, CSELT, a company fromItaly. Carolyn quoted the following statistics to bring the faculty upto date on money which has been received by the Forum: 1.) Money receivedsince 9/1/81 is $397,000 for memberships; 2.) Visiting Scholar tuition$15,000; 3.) Hardcopy report option funds $6,500; 4.) Total of $420,500received by the Forum this fiscal year. She also stated that last yearthe Forum lost 10 members, but we have gained 10 new members for a totalof 32. Carolyn also commented that we need to do a better job ofmaintaining and retaining our members and pointed out that she is avail-able to assist and remind the faculty to do the maintaining. It is theresponsibility of the faculty liaison to maintain the companies andencourage them to continue in the Forum. (See attached for list ofmembership . )

E. Student Consulting - David Cheriton gave a report on the AD HOCCommittee on Student Consulting. David pointed out some very validreasons for students wanting to do outs i de" consul ting . The committeeobserves that these reasons are similar to the reasons most professors

Wednesday, April 21, 1982 Page 3

in the department do consulting. One obvious motive is the cost ofliving in the area. While stipends in the Computer Science Departmentare in the higher range of stipends in the University, they are neces-sarily set at the subsistence level. The committee recommended that theComputer Science Department endorse the following policy:

A student may perform up to 104 hours of consulting perregistered quarter with the approval of the students' advisorand the principal investigator of the project supportingthe student.

Don Knuth moved that this policy be endorsed, and Brian Reid secondedthe motion. It was agreed unanimously. (See attached for complete'committee report.)

F. Computer Facilities - Ralph Gorin gave a brief report regardingthe CF budget and stated that after seven months of operation underthe present rate structure, he was undertaking an adjustment to bringthe computer facilities cost center more nearly into financial balance.(See attached for present operating budget.)

Ralph also reported that the MEIS debugging may be moved back to SCOREif the present arrangement does not work out. He also mentioned that thedata disk is being replaced.

Ralph announced that he and Gene Golub would be doing some investigatinginto the possibilities of installing a new telephone system that wouldbe totally separate from the university.

G. Adjunct Professors - Gio Weiderhold proposed that the Computer ScienceDepartment endorse a statement that would maintain the Adjunct Profes-sorship. Gene Golub, Ed Feigenbaum, and Bruce Buchanan will work ondrafting a proposal.

H. Bell Lab Contribution - Gene Golub announced that Bell Labs maycontribute

$3500

per year towards the purchase of cookies for allcolloquiums and meetings. He also mentioned the possibility ofthe Computer Science Department receiving two fellowships from Bell Labs.It was suggested at this time that Paul Armer handle the fellowshipcommittee and ask for student input.

I. Resignation - Gene announced the resignation of Associate ProfessorForest Baskett. Forest is working for DEC. It was suggested that,perhaps, he could be appointed Consulting Professor with a one yearappoi ntment .J. New Faculty Recommendations - Gene Golub announced the names offive potential faculty members and recommended the following for facultyappoi ntments :

1. Charles Bigelow is supported highly by Don Knuth andBrian Reid. His field is graphic design-typography. David Cheritonmoved that this appointment be approved, and Gio Weiderhold secondedthe motion. His appointment would be joint with the Art Department.It was unanimously approved.

Wednesday, April 21, 1982 Page 4

2. Michael Genesereth is highly recommended by Ed Feigenbauim.Ed commented that he would hate to lose such a valuable person.. Don Knuthmoved his appointment be approved, and John Hennessy seconded tihe motion.It was unanimously approved with Bob Floyd abstaining.

3. Paul Hilfinger comes highly recommended by Brian Reid wfirxoknew him from Carnegie-Melon and by John Hennessy. Terry Wino-gjrradmoved that his appointment be approved, and David Cheriton secondedthe motion, and it was unanimously approved. (Subsequently, PaulHelfinger declined our offer.)

4. Ernst Mayr is highly recommended by Don Knuth. The fasojltyare generally impressed with Ernst's teaching career. Ed Feigenbaummoved that his appointment be approved and Terry Winograd seco-nmdedthe motion. It was a unanimous approval.

5. It was mentioned that Andy Yao would probably be given, anappointment. Further communication from the department will fallow.Othe r Business

Gene Golub announced that on Friday, April 9 at 4:30 p.m. there will bea reception in remembrance of George Forsythe and the 10th anniversaryof his death. There will also take place the dedication of the mosaicwhich was designed and assembled by Harold Cohen in December o.ff 1981.

The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

To

From

Subject

V " OFFICE MEMORAND

6 W2

Date: March 26, 1982Gene Golub

£*» 2

Admissions Committee Report

SUMMARY:

PhD Applications:

315 applications considered27 accepted, including 9 women & one minority student

MS/CS Applications:

167 applications considered21 regular MS/CS accepted

22 Honors co-op accepted

8 co-terminal students acceptedOf these, 14 are female and 5 are minority applicants

The committee members this year were:

Danny BerlinBruce BuchananMike GeneserethJock MacKinlayJoe OligerVaughan PrattBrian Reid

Every applicant's folder was read by at least two members of thecommittee. The best 65 PhD applicants' folders were read by nearlyevery committee member.

Special thanks to Sue Seabrook. Because Sue kept track of all theitems in all the folders, and because she kept much of the infor-mation online, the committee's work was greatly simplified.

Bruce G. Buchanan, Chairmanr^miaeions Committee

Stanford Computer ForumERL Building, Room 448 AStanford UniversityStanford, California 94305Tuesday, March 30, 1982

MEMBERS

1982

Bell LaboratoriesBNRINC.

CSELTData General

Digital Equipment CorporationEastman Kodak Company

L. M. EricssonFairchild Corporation

Fujitsu Laboratories, LimitedGeneral Electric Company

Harris CorporationHewlett-Packard Company

Hitachi, LimitedHughes Aircraft Company

International Computers LimitedInternational Business Machines Corporation

Intel CorporationMartin Marietta Aerospace

Mitsubishi Electric CorporationNippon Electric

Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyPhilips Laboratories

SchlumbergerShell Development Company

Siemens AGSohio Petroleum CompanySTC Computer ResearchTektronix, Incorporated

Texas InstrumentsToshibaTRW

Welex/Halliburton

Report of the Ad Hoc Committee onStudent Consulting

Edward Feigenbaum David Cheriton Arthur Keller

4 March 1982

The committee recognizes that the Computer Science Department is a focal pointof research in Computer Science. However, we are fortunate to be surrounded by manycompanies doing research and other work in Computer Science. Often, ">rk done at theseother institutions provides insights into problems that are not available in an academicinstitution These insights can be beneficial to the degree-related research being performedby the student. One of the purposes of an academic institution is to disseminate knowled*e-consultmg performed by research personnel including students furthers this purpose '

The committee further recognizes that the cost of living in the area is high and increas-ing rapidly. While stipends in the Computer Science Department are in the higher rangeof stipends in the University, they axe necessarily set at the subsistence level. Students axetempted by lucrative salaries offered by nearby companies to drop out of degree programsAllowing students to supplement their income would facilitate completing their decreeprograms. &

The committee observes that these reasons are similar to the reasons that mostprotessors m the department do consulting.The committee reports that University policy permits consulting:

It is the Graduate Division policy that a student on a fellowshop or assis-tantship may only work 8 hours a week outside of this appointment.— "Student Assistantships", Lieberman and Dickey, July 1981

The committee opines that the departmental policy should be similar to the Universitypolicy. However, it is important that consulting not be permitted to interfere with theacademic progress of the student. Therefore, the student should be required to obtainthe concurrence of the faculty advisor. Similarly, the principal investigator of a projectsupporting the student should have to approve such outside activities because of the PImust certify on budget statements that the percentage of time stated accurately representsactual effort expended.Consequently, the committee recommends that the Computer Science Departmentendorse the following policy:

A student may perform up to 18 dayo of consulting per^Si^igiete^dwith the approval of the student's advisor and the principal investigator ofthe project supporting the student.

The committee appreciates the opportunity to advise the department on this matterof importance.

Computer Science Computer FacilitiesStanford University * Stanford, California 94305

RALPH GORIN " DIRECTOR. COMPUTER FACILITIES " MJH 422 ' (415) 497-3236

Computer Facilities ParticipantsRalph Gorin

To:From:

CF Rate Adjustments, andFuturesWednesday, March 31, 1982

Subject:Date:

After seven months of operation under the present rate structure, we are undertaking an adjustment to

bring the computer facilities cost centermore nearly into financial balance. The" rates set forth below will

be effective April 1, 1982through August 31, 1982.

First, many users have expressed an interest in where their money goes, I am willing to supply this

information to the extent that private information, such as salary data, is maintained m confidence. The

presentconsolidated operating budget for computer facilities is set forth below.

Computer Facilities Consolidated Budget 1981/82

YTD income 132,174 279,660 84.778 estimated, September through March

income^ 247~443 251~057 ~62,888 during the five months. April through August

Based on these figures, the revised aliquot rates, for April through August arc these:

SAIL, 1200 aliquots,

Score,

3200 aliquots,Alto. 300 aliquots,

New Rate$ 41.24 /month

$

15.69 /monthS 41.92 /month

Old Rate29.02 * Note new chargeout below13.1844.54

Specific explanations regarding each system follow.

IV££ 446.994 131,966 10J.074 53,797 1.111,797

Alloc Net. 104.663 83,723 15,698 <204,074> -—-Charqable ~

"""

c-s 707 1 111 797Total 379.617 530,717 147.666 53 . 797 l."*.'»'

al ariesenef its

SAIL112,169

21 ,649

Score87,75016,936

Xerox5,000

965

Devel op41,8608,079

Admin43,1778.333

Network25,985

5.015

SWS20.805

4,015

Total336,746

64,992

TotalSal & Ben

TravelMaintenanceExpendables

133,818

57,600

104,686

57,50039.600

5.965

32.000

49.939 51,51010.828

31.000

20.00033,600

24,820

20,000

401.73810,828

109,500150,800

TotalDirect 191.418

Alloc A & D 38,338Depreciation 45,208

201,78640,415

204,793

37,9657.603

86,400

49,939<49,939>

62,338<62,338>

84,60016,944

102,530

44,8208,977

672,8660

438,931

Wednesday, March 31, 1982 A^'££££/The original budget for SAIL was $417,000. Although this has been reduced in the current budget, thefact that SAIL continues to not be fully paid for requires this upwards adjustment in rates Work on thereplacement for the data disc has been in progress since September; we hope that it will be ready in April.

Effective April 1, 1982, the chargeout process for SAIL will be modified to take into account theconsumption ofcpu time andconsole time as well as disk space. The new rates will beDisk Space $0.0013 /track-day ($19.50/month/50 tracks)Day CPU $1.20 /cpu-minute ;Night CPU $0.60 /cpu-mlnuteDay Console $0.80 /console-hourNight Console $0.40 /console-hour

The Computer Science Department provided an $80,000 subsidy towards the operation of SAIL in fiscal81 CSD cannot continue to use gift funds to subsidize research facilities. If the combined users of SAILfail to deliver adequaterevenues, the Computer Science Department will cease to operateSAIL

Score

The original budget for Score was $506,000. Due to new university accountingpolicy adopted due to GSAvZZn^f A'2i thv

derdation total f°r Sc°re Chan§ed from a P lanned $165,000 to nearly$205,000. This change, which m.ght have resulted in a $40,000 increase, has been mitigated by savings inother operating costs. *The large increase m the size'of the Score budget this year is due to two factors: first, the engineeringcharges for the Score-specific development of the Massbus Ethernet Interface (MEIS) which will providea high-throughput path for network connections; second, for charges due to network operations (see thediscussion ofnetwork operations charges, below).

We expect that by means of the MEIS, and by appropriate placement of Ethertip terminal multiplexorswe will be able to provide more and better terminal service to our users who are not at Margaret JacksHall The engineering development effort will be completed this year; the personnelcharged to Score willbe charged to a different community in subsequent years. Further, we expect to build several copies ofthis interface; when we sell these copies, we will recover some ofour engineering costs. Such cost recovery

SnnmT/ T^0* 'V" f°r °eXt yean The cnSine^ng effort represents perhaps$40,000 of direct charges to Score, which will notrecur.

Network Operations >/

The network operationscharges represent an asscment to each system for the expenses of operating andmonitoring the ctiicrnet, supplying and repairing the Dover, and the depreciation of the capital equipmentinvolved in the network (the Dover, the wire itself, and four of the Altos which are used in networkmanagementactivities.)

lam aware that shanng this burden over only the users of the CSDCF mainframes is inappropriate Ishall be working to develop an appropriate cost-sharing mechanism to spread these costs over all whobenefit. I expect that community of network users is growing far more rapidly than the costs for operatingthe network. Therefore, the network operations.costs will be appear as a shrinking component of futurecosts.