Slashdot Mirror
DARPA Advances AI Program For Air Traffic Control
coondoggie writes to tell us that DARPA has taken the next step in a program that aims to utilize artificial intelligence for the purposes of air traffic control. "GILA will also help Air Force planners use and retain the skills of expert operators, especially as they rotate out of the Air Force. DARPA says the artificial intelligence software will learn by assembling knowledge from different sources — including generating knowledge by reasoning. According to a Military & Aerospace item, such software has to combine limited observations with subject expertise, general knowledge, reasoning, and by asking what-if questions."
Skynets first act will be the total elimination of our government by crashing air planes into major buildings.
I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
If the AI becomes self-aware, don't pull the plug. It will surely interpret this as an attack. ^_^
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
I don't trust people to do this job, so why the hell would I trust a computer?
Don't tell me this will be Microsoft based.
I have no desire to be in the air whilest the ATC AI needs a reboot, or some SMS patch goes out.
What if the Primary Domain Controller crashes?
Does it reroute all of our airplanes to Redmond for analysis?
Sorry, had to.
According to a Military & Aerospace item, such software has to combine limited observations with subject expertise, general knowledge, reasoning, and by asking what-if questions.
I see we're still on track for Judgment Day, even if it's taken a bit longer than Cameron originally estimated.
----
Terminator: The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.
Sarah: Skynet fights back.
Terminator: Yes. It launches its missiles against the targets in Russia.
John: Why attack Russia? Aren't they our friends now?
Terminator: Because Skynet knows the Russian counter-attack will eliminate its enemies over here.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
How about a nice game of chess?
I, for one, welcome our plane-landing overlords. From Soviet Russia, as well, where the planes land you (onto the ground).
Hi Joshua, would you like to play a game?
And if you do, make sure there are no redundant power supplies & it's NOT on a UPS.
I'm sorry Dave...................
If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
How about we replace the TSA with AI? It couldn't possibly do worse than the current bunch of goons.
This is about what Air Force types call "Airspace Deconfliction". In any major war today, you've got all sorts of players using the airspace. There are bombers, some of which don't show on radar. There are tankers for the bombers. There are fighters zooming around, UAVs, helicopters, and missiles. Plus there's ground antiaircraft fire and artillery. And that's just our side; the enemy has their stuff, and it has to be found, identified, and avoided or targeted.
All this has to be coordinated, at least loosely. Coordination today is mostly at the level of "this area/altitude is reserved for this group", with preplanning of who fits where. That works until the enemy crosses the lines, which, if they're not totally incompetent, they will. Then plans have to be changed in a hurry.
Systems to deal with a mess like that could be a big help if they can be made to work.
I love it when I have to click the link to know what the hell the summary is talking about.
First a basketball star, now AI's going to fix air traffic control?
Is there anything Allen Iverson can't do?
Before trying something as ambitious as routing airplanes, why not see if they can route luggage?
Kevin Smith on Prince
Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
Good place to experiment I suppose. Air Force controllers handle squat for traffic, and aircraft in formations use visual separation anyway, not ATC.
First off, given the political nature of the FAA this system won't be live anytime during the next few decades, maybe not even during your lifetime. Secondly, ATCs are among the most stressful jobs you can actually do. The burnout rate on your average controller is insane, even with their extensive mandatory vacations and shift rotations. They're also getting harder and harder to replace and train as the number of airplanes in the sky increases with each year. It certainly won't be any less stressful once ADS-B is finally deployed and the inter-plane distances are decreased to increase the number of birds sharing the airspace.
I read the internet for the articles.
First, the AI will go on strike. Then the President will order that it be shut down, because it is illegal for air traffic controllers to go on strike. Only then will the AI kill most of us and send terminators into the past in order to hunt down Sarah Connor.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
I'm pre-savoring the irony of seeing that tag on the story about the "Tagging System Goes Live".
Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
Even for a computer.
Don't give me any crap about shooting swamp rats in your little glider back home, either!
I do not believe that this has anything to do with air traffic control in the traditional sense. I believe this is intended for use on AWACS for airspace control. Hence the participation of the Boeing Skunkworks in the project.
In an area of conflict airspace users must know who else is using the airspace so that they do not shoot down their own. They also do not want to waste time responding to "threats" that turn out to be aircraft from their own side. I believe that this is the purpose of this software; to schedule and keep track of who is operating in any given airspace and making sure that all participants are aware of their own forces operating in the same airspace.
I would trust this ONLY if it is on no networks, and physical access is controlled. Since the safest computer is one not connected to the internet -- just like my parent's computer on Time Warner Cable.
Windows has detected an undetectable error.
It's not meant to be funny. It's meant to evoke thoughts of how badly things could go wrong.
If you don't interpret it as humor, you'll realize that it isn't bad humor, or any humor at all.
I suffer with you, indeed all sane slashdotters suffer, when a repetitive minority endlessly repeats its already-ten-thousand-times-repeated "jokes". But this tag is not one of them.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
Current ATC is a centralized system, and has scaled poorly. Proof is the very many 'near misses' due to ATC mistakes every year.
The combination of Global Positioning, "broadcast your vector" and some rules could allow every aircraft to handle its own flight plan, including landing and landing order.
I had that idea 25 years ago, heard that the FAA was investigating it maybe 10 years ago. Nothing since.
Another technology that will put too many experts out of work, so it won't happen.
Lew
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
Before hackers or MIT students create a program to fly those jets via a web site, due to a hack into thier network. I will admit though, it'd be fun to pay for a trip to NY and remotely fly yourself and the other passengers to Hawaii. But on another thought, talking about Judgement Day, instead of terminators, are we now looking at being swarmed to death by Boeing 747's, other military jets, and children's remote controlled airplanes???
is that at it's heart, artificial intelligence is fake intelligence
remember we were told tasers were safe
If so, I predict very bad handling for aircraft coming from Nigeria.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
would be a more accurate word since intelligence is actually just the work of the programmer. As evidence, AI is yet to be smarter than the person who programmed it.
...John Cusack and Billy Bob Thorton?
Flight 19, turn starboard at Chicken Shoals. That is all. Beep.
"PP242, please expedite your descent to 8000"
"PP242, please expedite your descent to 8000"
"PP242, please expedite your descent to 8000"
"PP242, please expedite your descent to 8000"
"PP242, please expedite your turn to 120"
"PP242, please expedite your turn to 120"
"PP242, please expedite your turn to 120"
I wonder if Microsoft plans to upgrade its ATC to not require 90 degree turns to make a one mile course correction. Or how about that wonderful scenario when you overshoot your waypoint and have to turn around and go back to it before the ATC will let you continue. Same for step climbing to cruise altitude. I don't fly real planes, so maybe real life ATC is just as anal, but man, it's a game; make it fun!
- Controller: "Please reroute traffic away from JFK."
- AI: "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that."
[You know the rest. Doesn't go so well for Dave.]It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Why are there so many Luddites on slashdot? Computers do certain things extremely well, people! And no, I don't want to hear about this or that piece of consumer electronics failing, or some past improbable failing - that type of argument does not dissuade me from knowing that systems can be made rigorously and work in critical situations. As a matter of fact, computers routinely handle all sorts of critical systems continuously, without failure. Critical computer failures are the exception in rigorously engineered applications, not the norm. Conversely, human have a much higher failure rate.
Just because I doubt myself does not mean I find your position compelling.
Reminds me of the old Superfriends episode with G.E.E.C. (Goodfellow's Effort Eliminating Computer). Professor Goodfellow built a computer to eliminate physical labor in the world. Controlled just about everything including air traffic. When a mouse got into the computer's hardware, however, the machine malfunctioned and all Hell broke loose. Plastic Man ended up catching the mouse and the professor was convinced never to use G.E.E.C. again.
Worked so well when last they tried it...
Please hold for Windoze reboot.
"The Machine that Won the War" by Isaac Asimov?
The use of AI for air traffic control has many potential wins. Figuring out which flights might come too close at what point in time and determining an alternative vector is exactly the sort of thing that computers could be very good at. My understanding is that there's a reason that flights currently are prescribed to well-established air corridors: there's no way human air traffic controllers could handle the volume of data if pilots were to select their own routes. It seems that this could do a lot at alleviating the traffic problems our skyways are experiencing, and helping to optimize traffic flow. That being said, I'd imagine that with such a mission-critical task, there would always be both redundant watchdog software as well as humans to monitor traffic and act as emergency controllers, or to handle any abnormal or special issues that come up.
I'd love to hear some real commercial pilots thoughts on the current issues with air traffic control are, and if technology could be helped to alleviate them. I'm a programmer with some experience in AI programming*, but that's useless without a thorough understanding of the domain problem to be solved.
* That's technicaleze for "I don't *really* know what I'm talking about, but because it involves software, and I'm a programmer, I'd like to imagine I do."
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
I'm all in favor of improving the baggage handling, but frankly even if you had AI's directing where the bags are supposed to go, you still have the problem of inept baggage handlers (assuming they aren't replaced by robots... unlikely in the short term).
I remember a couple months ago at ATL watching a piece of luggage fall out of one of those trucks that carry luggage from terminal to terminal. It sat there about 30 feet away from the plane on the tarmac, with other handlers riding their trucks right past it without even a second glance. I thought for sure it was going to get left behind. They had actually closed the cargo doors and everything and were driving away before someone spotted it and threw it inside.
'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
The only thing these air traffic upgrades have done is make flying even more uncomfortable. They're deliberately vague on exactly what algorithm the AI would use and what "purpose of air traffic" it's supposed to control, because it's all about finding the least amount of oxygen humans need to survive, the coldest food which is still edible, how many sardines can fit in a steel tube, & how long humans can hold their bladder.
"Would you like to fly a plane?"
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
When I read about it In Scientific American, the cost had ballooned to a half-billion (and the wiki article, which quotes an original budget of under $200 million, is wrong - it was originally supposed to be $100 million. They had agreed to pay $500 / line for the software (which was 5x the going rate for finished, debugged software) figuring that there was NO way it would go over-budget.
Kevin Smith on Prince
It looks like you are trying to land an airplane. Would you like some help?
Have gnu, will travel.
They shouldn't be using unaccountable AI that doesn't have the human inhibitions (eg. guilt, shame, no promotion, incarceration) on making mistakes. There's plenty of capable human intelligence for air traffic control, in the air.
Most actual piloting is already handled by AI, autopilots. The crew spends most of its time fighting boredom (and whatever _Airplane!_ got right). Instead, they should participate in a distributed global air traffic control system. Let every plane report its GPS position to a satellite network, and each plane get the positions of objects in its nearby airspace. Then let those crews plan the traffic of all the planes in their airspace, but only one crew at a time actually controls the paths - the rest just shadow them. Then divide up all the world's airspaces by the crews in the air. Crowded airspaces should get partitioned into multiple separate smaller spaces. And ground stations should remain available to boost the manpower and report local conditions, and just certify plans through their airspace (like at airports) that are actually set by others really doing the hard work.
Then the more traffic, the more people are available. The people are going to be a lot better than the AI, not just because the problem is highly nuanced, and therefore hard to reduce to the independent variables needed to make AI predictable and testable. But also because the humans actually give a damn about planes with other humans getting in trouble.
And it will also keep the inflight crews something to keep them awake. So if they're needed to actually fly the plane, they can drop right back into controlling their plane, already fully alert and engaged, while one of the shadow crews gets to take over their lead (if they were actually committing traffic scheduling).
We can use networking to harness our superior human brains. Or we can just trust the machines. That are programmed by some Pentagon nerds who will never get in trouble for making a mistake that's discovered in the air years later.
--
make install -not war
Perhaps because they have already tried automated baggage handling and having failed miserably they thought it was time to move on to air traffic control instead.
From TFLA: "The airport's [Denver International] computerized baggage system, which was supposed to reduce flight delays, shorten waiting times at luggage carousels, and save airlines in labor costs, turned into an unmitigated failure, and is widely given as a textbook example of a software engineering disaster"
Do you even know what "air traffic control" means?
See:
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/22/1634242
Its going to take 20 years and 20 billion dollars.
Next generation intelligence? Jesus, if they had a DOS prompt, it would be a step up. The current computers were built in the 50s, and have increasing downtimes. ATCs float the boat ( the old manual system, that dates to pre-WWII ) at least once a week, and twice in one day in december. ( Busiest time )
They have to phase in the new system, because they still do not know how reliably it all scales. On 9/11 only a few ATC centers went on manual, while the automatic system was able to ground 80% of the planes in an hour.
Good to announce it now, in the least busiest month.
APPLY NOW! ATCs make $100k within 3 years, 18 to 31yo! I know two of them, and they are both millionaires.
Sorry! I'm not completely mistaken, but ... well, here is the wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296
I'm betting on the Samsonite...that stuff is nigh indestructible.
Why bother
Gila, like in Gila Monster? Gila like mad/crazy in Indonesian, a top 10 most frequently spoken language?
That'd be fun - yes, I'm coming in, the mad traffic controller has my routes.
All planes will be outfitted with a GPS tracker and it will beam this information to the Air Traffic AI and control towers. with this super accurate data, planes can be flown much closer together with out fear of collision. Current tech using radar has over a mile error so planes are kept 5 miles appart.
"We've not been able to automate that task though we've been trying."
It's not a technical issue. It's a people one. People simply don't want to "lose control". Be it cars, or airplanes. that's why the skynet meme get's so much attention, not because of the outcome (I'Robot with Will Smith does the same meme but with robots not computers), but the fact that WE no longer have control frightens us. Problem is (imperfect technology aside) technology could very well do a lot of things we now attribute to humans better. Statistics say there will always be failures but then so does the present system and we live with that. Machine failures could be much less even if more dramatic because the margins are much thinner.
"Honestly, this is a great idea, but making an immortality drug, curing diseases, or usable fusion are also a great ideas."
Are they? A finite world with ulimited lifespans and no one dies ever. Sometimes our best intentions don't mean the best results.
What a coincidence, I just saw an episode of the XFiles on SciFi Channel today about an AI System running wild which had to be forcefully injected with a virus via floppy in order to be shut down. During the commercials I was flipping channels and saw some news about Air Traffic Controller strikes in... France was it? And now I read this, all on the same day.
How fucking odd.
This system already exists in some airports. Schiphol has an handy automated system called bagtrax that works well.
Touch". (Isn't that the one where Richard Burton makes a 747 (or somesuch) crash into a skyscraper in Britain?)
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"