Sure; automated configuration of one system with an easy model was, y'know, paper #1. XCON and R1 are old hat. They could never generalize them, though. There's a reason that they say if it works, it isn't AI.

There's a lather/rinse/repeat model with AI publication. I encountered it in configuration (systems designed to build systems), and it goes like this: 1. We've built a system that can make widgets out of a small set of parts, now we will build a system that can generally build artifacts! 2. (2-3 years later). We're building an ontology of parts! It turns out to be a bit more challenging! 3. (5-7 years later). Ontologies of parts turn out to be really hard! We've built a system that builds other widgets out of a small set of -different- parts! The models of thought in AI (and to a lesser extent cog psych) are still caught up in this very algorithmic rule-based world that can be traced almost lineally from Aristotle and without really much examination of how our thinking process actually works. The problem is that whenever we try to take these simple models and expand them out of a tiny field, they explode in complexity.

I wanted a gel multipen, since all the multipens I've found are ballpoint and I find ballpoint ink annoying. I'm currently using a Zebra Sharbo X from jetpens, which is basically a build-your-own-pen kit. You can get ink refills which use either ballpoint or gel ink, with a size from 0.4 mm up. The form factor is also the same as a standard pen. The basic set can be a bit pricey, but I've found it very good.