[computer-go] The dominance of search (Suzie v. GnuGo)

[Chrilly]

>
> Thanks Chrilly. For anyone else interested, it is here:
> http://www.xilinx.com/publications/xcellonline/xcell_53/xc_pdf/xc_hydra53.pdf
>
> But, as you say, the "the search tree as an adaptable error filter"idea
> is only mentioned in passing. I guess I'll just have to wait for Ulf
> Lorenz to translate his Dissertation into English :-).
>
Or you learn German. As I side effect you can than also read Goethe and my 
chess columns. The chess columns are interesting, but then you have to learn 
also the Austrian version of German).

>> Ulf has used this model for a project to improve the robustness of
>> airplane-schedules. ...
>
> Interesting. It is always motivating to hear about game theory getting
> applied to the real world. (And having been stuck in Amsterdam airport
> for 5 hours because KLM "forgot to schedule a pilot" for my flight, I
> think the airline industry needs all the help it can get!)
>
The problem is, that there is no economic incentive. A robust solution is 
usually somewhat worse than the non-robust one. I assume that you did not 
get any compensation for the 5 hours in Schiphol. Such methods will only 
become important, if KLM has to pay you. 50 Euro/h. The scheduling was done 
before by humans. These schedules have been robust. Simply for the fact that 
it is too complicated for a human to make an optimal schedule. But also 
because humans have some feeling what can go wrong and they anticipate the 
most likely delays. To a certain degree computer-optimization was introduced 
to make the schedules less robust.

But you have also choosen a very poor airline. KLM was fine a few years 
agos, but then they started to "save money" and now its notorious for being 
late, loosing baggage. But as the other lines have gone the same way, it 
makes no big difference. There a few good lines left. I my experience the 
best one is Emirates from Dubai. You should give it a try the next time.

Chrilly