ASSOCIATION FOR AUTOMATED REASONINGNEWSLETTERNo

In keeping with our objective of having the AAR Newsletter serve as a forum for discussion of innovative techniques as well as controversial issues related to automated reasoning, we feature here three articles. The rst, by D. Plaisted, proposes major changes to the current organization of CADE. Readers are strongly encouraged to respond by e-mail to Plaisted about this topic. The second, by Ranan Banerji, presents a new algorithm that eeciently tests theories for membership in certain decidable classes. We welcome such articles and hope that readers will nd the AAR Newsletter a useful mechanism for publishing such results. The third, by William McCune, ooers four challenge problems in equational logic. Faster proofs, and especially a solution to Problem D, should be sent to McCune. I would like to request the help of the readers of the AAR Newsletter in the matter of changing the way CADE, the conference on automated deduction, is organized. Currently, all power in CADE rests in the hands of the CADE trustees, who consist of the past four program committee chairs, future already-chosen program chairs, others whom the trustees may choose to add to this committee, and the secretary and treasurer, currently 9 persons in all. Also, the trustees choose CADE program committee chairs. Therefore, as you can see, there is no democratic element at all in the current system. The program committee, the CADE conference attendees, and the members of the Association for Automated Reasoning have no voice at all in the management of CADE (except as the trustees may choose to consider it). It is true that the current trustees have shown themselves receptive to the opinions of the program committee, but there is no guarantee that this will continue. There is also the possibility that the CADE system could be adopted by other organizations (such as RTA). I propose that a more democratic system be adopted, similar to that of the Association for Logic Programming, and that an election by the members of the Association for Automated Reasoning and recent CADE attendees be held to determine whether the current system should be continued or whether a democratic system should be adopted. 1 I am not sure that people understand the implications of the current system, which was only recently instituted (within the past year). The trustees have essentially become a separate organization within CADE, formally insulated from the opinions of the membership …