## At least 81:

The problem space group (5):

• One to define the goal state.
• One to define the operators.
• One to describe the universal problem solver.
• One to hack the production system.
• One to indicate about how it is a model of human lightbulb-changing behavior.

The logical formalism group (16):

• One to figure out how to describe lightbulb changing in first order logic.
• One to figure out how to describe lightbulb changing in second order logic.
• One to show the adequacy of FOL.
• One to show the inadequacy of FOL.
• One to show that lightbulb logic is non-monotonic.
• One to show that it isn’t non-monotonic.
• One to show how non-monotonic logic is incorporated in FOL.
• One to determine the bindings for the variables.
• One to show the completeness of the solution.
• One to show the consistency of the solution.
• One to show that the two just above are incoherent.
• One to hack a theorem prover for lightbulb resolution.
• One to suggest a parallel theory of lightbulb logic theorem proving.
• One to show that the parallel theory isn’t complete.
• One to indicate how it is a description of human lightbulb changing behaviour.
• One to call the electrician.

The statistical group (1):

• One to point out that, in the real world, a lightbulb is never “on” or “off”, but usually something in between.

The planning group (4):

• One to define STRIPS-style operators for lightbulb changing.
• One to show that linear planning is not adequate.
• One to show that nonlinear planning is adequate.
• One to show that people don’t plan; they simply react to lightbulbs.

The robotics group (10):

• One to build a vision system to recognize the dead bulb.
• One to build a vision system to locate a new bulb.
• One to figure out how to grasp the lightbulb without breaking it.
• One to figure out how to make a universal joint that will permit the hand to rotate 360+ degrees.
• One to figure out how to make the universal joint go the other way.
• One to figure out the arm solutions that will get the arm to the socket.
• One to organize the construction teams.
• One to hack the planning system.
• One to get Westinghouse to sponsor the research.
• One to indicate about how the robot mimics human motor behavior in lightbulb changing.

The knowledge engineering group (6):

• One to study electricians’ changing lightbulbs.
• One to arrange for the purchase of the lisp machines.
• One to assure the customer that this is a hard problem and that great accomplishments in theory will come from his support of this effort.
• The same can negotiate the project budget.
• One to study related research.
• One to indicate about how it is a description of human lightbulb changing behavior.
• One to call the lisp hackers.

The Lisp hackers (14):

• One to bring up the chaos net.
• One to order the Chinese food
• One to adjust the microcode to properly reflect the group’s political beliefs.
• One to fix the compiler.
• One to make incompatible changes to the primitives.
• One to provide the Coke.
• One to rehack the Lisp editor/debugger.
• One to rehack the window package.
• Another to fix the compiler.
• One to convert code to the non-upward compatible Lisp dialect.
• Another to rehack the window package properly.
• One to flame on BUG-LISPM.
• Another to fix the microcode.
• One to write the fifteen lines of code required to change the lightbulb.

The Connectionist Group (6):

• One to claim that lightbulb changing can only be achieved through massive parallelism.
• One to build a backpropagation network to direct the robot arm.
• One to assign initial random weights to the connections in the network.
• One to train the network by showing it how to change a lightbulb (training shall consist of 500,000 repeated epochs).
• One to tell the media that the network learns “just like a human does”.
• One to compare the performance of the resulting system with that of traditional symbolic approaches (optional).

The Natural Language Group (5):

• One to collect sample utterances from the lightbulb domain.
• One to build an English understanding program for the lightbulb-changing robot.
• One to build a speech recognition system.
• One to tell lightbulb jokes to the robot in between bulb-changing tasks.
• One to build a language generation component so that the robot can make up its own lightbulb jokes.

The Learning Group (4):

• One to collect twenty lightbulbs
• One to collect twenty “near misses”
• One to write a concept learning program that learns to identify lightbulbs
• One to show that the program found a local maximum in the space of lightbulb descriptions

The Game-Playing Group (5):

• One to design a two-player game tree with the robot as one player and the lightbulb as the other
• One to write a minimax search algorithm that assumes optimal play on the part of the lightbulb
• One to build special-purpose hardware to enable 24-ply search
• One to enter the robot in a human lightbulb-changing tournament
• One to state categorically that lightbulb changing is “no longer considered AI”

The Psychological group (5):

• One to build an apparatus which will time lightbulb changing performance.
• One to gather and run subjects.
• One to mathematically model the behavior.
• One to call the expert systems group.
• One to adjust the resulting system, so that it drops the right number of bulbs.