Nilsson's 2009 history cites neither Dreyfus & Dreyfus (1988) nor Olazaran (1993); his own anti-refutation claim rests on personal memory plus a documentary Rosenblatt citation

nilssondreyfusolazaranperceptronssrihistoriographyai-winterhistory-of-ml

Nils Nilsson is close to the ideal test case for whether the history-of-AI literature has combined Dreyfus and Stuart Dreyfus's 1988 "vindicated, not refuted" account with Olazaran's 1993 SRI-funding account: he was himself one of the SRI researchers Olazaran interviewed, and he later wrote The Quest for Artificial Intelligence, a 707-page history of the field. He makes neither combination. The book's own index lists Hubert Dreyfus at pp. 163, 252, 389, 391, 392 — every citation concerns Dreyfus's critique of symbolic AI and embodiment, never the 1988 Daedalus essay's claim about Rosenblatt. "Olazaran" appears nowhere in the index or in the endnotes of the chapters covering this history.

Where Nilsson makes a structurally similar anti-refutation claim, he makes it without citing either scholar:

"In 1969 Marvin Minsky and Seymour Papert published an influential book in which they proved, among other things, that some versions of Rosenblatt's perceptrons had important limitations. Some have claimed that the Minsky–Papert book was the cause of a fading interest in neural-network research, but I doubt this. First, Rosenblatt himself began concentrating on other topics well before 1969, and the success of heuristic programming methods caused a shift of attention (including my own) away from neural networks during the mid-1960s."

The claim is not pure unaided recollection, though: the sentence carries footnote markers, and footnote 8 cites Rosenblatt, Farrow & Rhine's 1966 PNAS paper as documentary support for "Rosenblatt moved on before 1969" — so Nilsson's version rests on personal testimony plus one piece of contemporaneous documentary evidence, not citation to either Dreyfus or Olazaran. This is testimony adjacent to claim-sri-neural-group-retooled-for-arpa-funding (Nilsson is one of Olazaran's sources for that claim too) but independently derived, and it never reaches for Dreyfus's philosophical framing at all.