Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown
by zarzavat on Monday September 11, 2023 @06:05PM
(#37474328)
Couldn’t you use the surrounding points? Each point is surrounded by a set of nearby points. You can prepare a map of pairs of points into unique ids beforehand, then have a step that takes (before, current, after) for each point in the flight plan and finds the ID of current.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown
by seabass-labrax on Monday September 11, 2023 @06:22PM
(#37474503)
That sort of thing happens already; for instance, the MCDU of an Airbus aircraft will present various options in the case of ambiguous input, with a distance in nautical miles for each option. Usually, the closest option is the most appropriate.
Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown
by avianlyric on Wednesday September 13, 2023 @05:22PM
(#37501906)
Yes you can, but that would be using
> additional data and heuristics
Directly mapping is impossible, so you cant just do a dumb ID-at-time pre-processing step (which is what your comment seems to suggest). You need a more complex pre-processing step that’s capable of understanding the surrounding context the identifier is being used in. A major issue with the flight planing system (as highlighted in the article) is that they attempted to do this heuristic mapping as part of their core processing step, and just assumed the ID wouldn’t be too ambiguous, and certainly wouldn’t repeat.