Slashdot Mirror


IBM Using Complex Math To Manage Natural Disasters

coondoggie brings us a NetworkWorld story about IBM's efforts to use complex algorithms to manage responses to natural disasters. Researchers are making use of recent increases in processor speed and algorithm efficiency to develop a scalable, flexible model capable of handling the complicated planning involved in reacting to a crisis. Quoting: "'We are creating a set of intellectual properties and software assets that can be employed to gauge and improve levels of preparedness to tackle unforeseen natural disasters,' says Dr. Gyana Parija. 'Most real-world problems involve uncertainty, and this has been the inspiration for us to tackle challenges in natural disaster management.' In the case of flooding, for example, the stochastic programming model would use various flood scenarios, resource supply capabilities at different dispatch locations, and fixed and variable costs associated with deployment of various flood-management resources to manage various risk measures. By assigning probabilities to the factors driving outcomes, the model outlines how limited resources can meet tomorrow's unknown demands or liabilities. In this way, the risks and rewards of various tradeoffs can be explored, IBM said."

18 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. complex math... by Runagate+Rampant · · Score: 5, Funny

    sqrt(-1) = natural disaster!

    1. Re:complex math... by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Funny

      sqrt(-1) = natural disaster!

      That's an imaginary natural disaster
      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    2. Re:complex math... by isomeme · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hear the river is expected to crest at 5 + 3i feet over flood stage.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
    3. Re:complex math... by The_reformant · · Score: 2, Funny

      sqrt(-2) = Irrational Imaginary Natural Disaster

      --
      I have discovered a truly remarkable sig which this post is too small to contain.
  2. Re:I'm skeptical by andy666 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah! Who do they think they are ? If their so smart, why aren't they rich ?

  3. Complex math? by Carnildo · · Score: 1, Funny

    Complex math? Aren't real numbers good enough for the job?

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    1. Re:Complex math? by sapphire+wyvern · · Score: 5, Funny

      Complex math? Aren't real numbers good enough for the job? You need the imaginary axis to quantify FEMA's competency. :)
  4. Easy by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Funny


    if(contribution_of_lobbiests_impacted > 100000000)
    do_something(); /* better respond to them */
    else
    ignore_poor_people(); /* who cares */

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      PeopleWhoUseUnderscoresInTheirVariableAndFunctionNames = null; /* Okay, I'll get off your lawn. Sheesh. */

  5. That's what an iMac is for by Charles+Dodgeson · · Score: 1, Funny

    Clearly complex math needs to be computed on an iMac.

    --
    Prime numbers are exactly what Alan Greenspan says they are -S. Minsky
  6. Re:It won't save us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    i'd parse your post but i'm still stuck on your sig.

    to almost alliterate a little.

  7. Obligatory by fixer007 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was told there would be no math...

  8. Intellectual Properties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    In the case of a natural disaster please check with your lawyer before responding.

    You may be infringing on a patent...

  9. Short Term FEMA Math... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Natural Disaster + Presidential Photo-Ops = Great PR!

  10. "unforseen"? by AJWM · · Score: 3, Funny

    From TFA: "to tackle unforeseen natural disasters"

    But then it goes on to talk about mostly foreseeable natural disasters. If you live on a flood plain or a low-lying coastal area subject to hurricanes, you're going to get flooded. In an earthquake zone you're going to get earthquakes. Lot of vegetation in an area that has dry spells, fires. And so on.

    Legitimately unforeseen natural disasters would be things like a comet impact, volcanoes erupting in downtown LA, or perhaps alien invasion. Oh wait, that last would be an unnatural disaster, wouldn't it? But come to think of it, the ones I just mentioned have all been foreseen too.

    I guess I just don't foresee a need for this software. Maybe they should work on software for foreseeable disasters.

    --
    -- Alastair
  11. Re:It won't save us by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Funny

    Heckuva job, Brownie! More optimistically, I hope that their algorithms could predict the 4 or 5 "wild"- fires in Southern California which are all started mysteriously(on the same day) "in season."
    What's your guess? Blackwater, with black helicopters, in the forest? I'm going with Col. Mustard, with the candle-stick, in the grasslands.
  12. Re:It won't save us by gnick · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope that their algorithms could predict the 4 or 5 "wild"- fires in Southern California which are all started mysteriously If there's enough money in it, I can predict a mysterious fire just about anywhere at any time.
    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  13. Re:It won't save us by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Funny

    it all fits into the statistical patterns. In the case of fires, it doesn't matter if it's lightning, arson, or volcanic eruption, the pattens still hold.
    It leads one to wonder whether being statistically significant, is itself statistically significant?
    --
    May the Maths Be with you!