Tag Archives: mistake

Bees Are Smart, But Let’s Get Some Facts Straight

Today, a colleague of mine sent me a link to a news article entitled Tiny Brained Bees Solve a Complex Mathematical Problem, which appeared on the Queen Mary, University of London web site and on the Guardian web site. Here’s what it says:

Scientists at Queen Mary, University of London and Royal Holloway, University of London have discovered that bees learn to fly the shortest possible route between flowers even if they discover the flowers in a different order. Bees are effectively solving the Travelling Salesman Problem, and these are the first animals found to do this.

I think this is actually pretty cool, and I had no idea that bees were capable of this kind of “optimization”. However, the article contains a couple of incorrect statements that are really vexing:

Incorrect Statement 1: “The Travelling Salesman must find the shortest route that allows him to visit all locations on his route. Computers solve it by comparing the length of all possible routes and choosing the shortest.”

If that were true, we wouldn’t be able to solve the TSP’s with thousands of cities that we can solve today. OR is about being much smarter than simply enumerating all the possible solutions to a problem.

Incorrect Statement 2: “In nature, bees have to link hundreds of flowers in a way that minimises travel distance, and then reliably find their way home – not a trivial feat if you have a brain the size of a pinhead! Indeed such travelling salesmen problems keep supercomputers busy for days.”

Wrong again! According to published results (e.g. see here), many 1000-city TSP’s can now be solved in a matter of minutes on a standard desktop computer.



Filed under Mistakes, Promoting OR, Traveling Salesman Problem

Pronunciation Mistakes and Border Security

I love the English language. It’s compact, flexible, and easy to learn (at least easier than Latin languages like Spanish, French or Portuguese with all those verb conjugations). Although I’ve been learning English since I was twelve years old, I still make a significant number of pronunciation mistakes. Being married to an American makes my life much easier, and I really appreciate it when my wife corrects my pronunciation (after laughing out loud for 5 minutes, of course).

Yesterday, I started thinking that it may be possible to state that native speakers of language X typically make certain pronunciation mistakes when speaking English. More precisely, I started looking at my own mistakes and the mistakes of my fellow Brazilians. This led me to state the following conjecture:

Conjecture: When asked to say the following sentence out loud, 90% of all Brazilians who can speak English will make at least one pronunciation mistake:

“Sporting summer clothes, Jimmy Buffet was drinking his favorite lager as the road wound before driving over the Potomac river, where the scarce geese population has been massacred, when he saw his friends Graham and Craig from Akron, Ohio on his rear view mirror, wearing their hunting apparel.”

Try it out and let me know what happens! (I’m already counting myself as 1 out of 1.) UPDATE (4/17/10): 3 out of 3 Brazilians have made at least one mistake.

This little exercise made me think of using speech analysis for security purposes. Let’s say you’re screening people and you’re worried that they aren’t really from the country they claim to be from (e.g. fake passport). They could be asked to read a passage of text, which will then be analyzed by a computer program that will look for pronunciation mistakes (even tiny ones) or inconsistencies. Say, for example, that people from country X typically say word Y in a certain way and this person does not. That’s a first warning sign. If enough of these signs are caught, that may mean something (statistically speaking).

Has anyone heard of this kind of screening procedure? I’d love to read something about it. Perhaps OR can be used to help choose the main words that should go into the text passages, or to help with the speech analysis.


Filed under Applications, Security

Cited by Competing on Analytics, by mistake…

I just found out that one of my papers (Building Efficient Product Portfolios at John Deere and Company, co-authored with D. Napolitano, A. Scheller-Wolf and Sridhar Tayur), has been cited in chapter 2 of the book “Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning“, by Thomas Davenport and Jeanne Harris. The chapter is entitled “What Makes an Analytical Competitor?” (link to PDF). Another interesting coincidence was that today I listened to the Science of Better Podcast featuring Thomas Davenport! I was excited to see the context of the citation, but it all turned out to be a mistake :-( The authors refer to the work on “direct derivative estimation of non-stationary inventory” (which was also done by SmartOps, saving Deere 1.2 billion dollars over 5 years) and cite our paper as a reference for it. Could it have been because our paper has the words “John” and “Deere” in the title? On a positive note, however, this may drive some readers to our paper, which is, IMHO, a great read anyway.

Leave a comment

Filed under Analytics, Mistakes