Failed.  Tried to fill in new conjectures involving the concept of 
SAME-SIZE.

 This Cand used 14.669 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Check all examples of Genl-obj-equal-1
    2: Check all things which just barely miss being examples of 
Same-size
    3: Fill in some specializations of Non-empty-struc

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (Some new ,  unchecked examples of 
GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 have recently been added)


      Beginning 105th cycle.

 Checked examples of GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1.
       25 entries were there initially.
       1 had to be completely discarded.
       20 entries are present now.
       4 had to be transferred elsewhere.


 Do-thresh raised from 420 to 421.

 This Cand used 4.711 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Fill in some conjectures involving the concept of 
Genl-obj-equal-1
    2: Check all things which just barely miss being examples of 
Same-size
    3: Fill in some specializations of Non-empty-struc

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (Examples of GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 remain after 
checking ,  to compare against other concepts)


      Beginning 106th cycle.


GC: 8
13355, 13355 FREE WORDS

Failed.  Tried to fill in new conjectures involving the concept of 
GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1.

 This Cand used 6.3 cpu seconds.


 No Cand on CANDS is good enuf.
 Do-thresh reduced from 420 to 280
 Must find new candidates and merge them into CANDS.



 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Fill in some examples of 
Coa-map-replace2-set-struc&set-of-lists-proj2
    2: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Genl-obj-equal-1 and Obj-equal
    3: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Same-size and Obj-equal

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The 3 reasons are:
      (Anyb-exs specifically asked for some examples of 
COA-MAP-REPLACE2-SET-STRUC&SET-OF-LISTS-PROJ2 ,  while trying to 
Fill in some Genl-obj-equal-1 conjectures involving the concept)
      (We have no examples for 
COA-MAP-REPLACE2-SET-STRUC&SET-OF-LISTS-PROJ2 yet)
      (The range of COA-MAP-REPLACE2-SET-STRUC&SET-OF-LISTS-PROJ2
might turn out to be the same as its domain ,  but there are no examples
around to test this hypothesis on)


      Beginning 107th cycle.


GC: 8
9056, 13144 FREE WORDS
 Won't try to create a restricted interesting version of 
COA-MAP-REPLACE2-SET-STRUC&SET-OF-LISTS-PROJ2.

Failed.  Tried to fill in new examples of 
COA-MAP-REPLACE2-SET-STRUC&SET-OF-LISTS-PROJ2.

 This Cand used 17.89 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Check all examples of 
Coa-map-replace2-set-struc&set-of-lists-proj2
    2: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Genl-obj-equal-1 and Obj-equal
    3: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Same-size and Obj-equal

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (Some new ,  unchecked examples of 
COA-MAP-REPLACE2-SET-STRUC&SET-OF-LISTS-PROJ2 have recently been added)


      Beginning 108th cycle.


 This Cand used .249 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Genl-obj-equal-1 and Obj-equal
    2: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Same-size and Obj-equal
    3: Coalesce Map-replace2-set-struc&set-struc-proj2

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (It would be nice to find a canonical  ( with
respect to Genl-obj-equal-1 and Obj-equal ) representation C for any
Object X ; that is ,  
  ( GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 x y ) iff 
  ( OBJ-EQUAL  ( C x )    ( C y ) ) .
)


      Beginning 109th cycle.

(CANONIZE-E-ALGS compiling)
(CANONIZE-E-ALGS (BA1 BA2 BA3 BA4 BA5) NIL)

 Experiments indicate that GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 is affected by the varying 
the type of structure of its arguments.

 GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 doesn't look at any elements of OBJECT except possibly
 the car of the structure which denotes its type,  so AM replaces the 
tail of OBJECT by a canonical distinguished tail,  say NIL.

Succeeded! 

 Some conjectures that AM considers believable:

 OBJ-EQUAL,  restricted to canonical OBJECT's,  is indistinguishable 
from GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1.

 There is a powerful analogy between

GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1.................OBJ-EQUAL
OBJECT...........................CANONICAL-OBJECT
operators on and into............those operators restricted to
      OBJECT.....................      CANONICAL-OBJECT
statements involving these.......statements involving these


 Do-thresh raised from 278 to 341.

 This Cand used 9.02 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Fill in some examples of Canonical-object
    2: Restrict the following:  Genl-obj-equal-1 Canonical-object Domain
 
    3: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Same-size and Obj-equal

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (Any example of CANONICAL-OBJECT is a canonical
example of OBJECT)


      Beginning 110th cycle.

(CANONICAL-OBJECT-E-DEFN compiling)
(CANONICAL-OBJECT-E-DEFN (BA1 BA2 BA3) (TK2))


 AM will now try to produce examples of CANONICAL-OBJECT by running the 
following operations:
       (CANONIZE-GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1&OBJ-EQUAL).

(CANONIZE-GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1&OBJ-EQUAL-E-ALGS compiling)
(CANONIZE-GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1&OBJ-EQUAL-E-ALGS (BA1 BA2 BA3 BA4 BA5)
NIL)
 Won't try to create a restricted interesting version of 
CANONICAL-OBJECT.

 Filled in examples of CANONICAL-OBJECT.
       0 examples existed originally on CANONICAL-OBJECT.
       165 potential new entries were just proposed.

 Eliminating duplicates,  the newly constructed examples are:
      (VECTOR)
      (BAG)
      (CLASS)
      (OSET)
      FALSE
      T
      TRUE
      (PAIR)
      (T)
      (NIL)
      (TRUE)
      (FALSE)
 After eliminating duplicate and already-known entries,  AM finds that.
 only 12 new,  distinct examples of CANONICAL-OBJECT had to be added.



 Do-thresh raised from 341 to 391.

 This Cand used 23.827 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Restrict the following:  Genl-obj-equal-1 Canonical-object Domain
 
    2: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Same-size and Obj-equal
    3: Coalesce Map-replace2-set-struc&set-struc-proj2

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 was one of the predicates
which defined the new concept CANONICAL-OBJECT ,  so it is worth 
considering the restriction of GENL-OBJ-EQUAL-1 to that subset of
OBJECT 's)


      Beginning 111st cycle.

(RESTRICT-E-ALGS compiling)
(RESTRICT-E-ALGS (BA1 BA2 BA3 BA4 BA5) NIL)

Succeeded! 

 Do-thresh raised from 391 to 431.

 This Cand used 3.562 cpu seconds.




 The top 3 Cands are:
    1: Canonize these 2 arguments:  Same-size and Obj-equal
    2: Coalesce Map-replace2-set-struc&set-struc-proj2
    3: Restrict the following:  Obj-equal Canonical-object Domain 

 I choose first Cand.       OK?   yes.

       The reason is: (It would be nice to find a canonical  ( with
respect to Same-size and Obj-equal ) representation C for any Object
X ; that is ,  
  ( SAME-SIZE x y ) iff 
  ( OBJ-EQUAL  ( C x )    ( C y ) ) .
)


      Beginning 112nd cycle.


 Experiments indicate that SAME-SIZE is not affected by varying the type
 of structure of its arguments.

GC: 8
 Running at 22251  Load av. =  1.75, used 0:53:35.2 in 2:08:51
15927, 15927 FREE WORDS