Skip to main content

Once upon and Algorithm - Martin Erwig ***

I've been itching to start reading this book for some time, as the premise was so intriguing - to inform the reader about computer science and algorithms using stories as analogies to understand the process.

 This is exactly what Martin Erwig does, starting (as the cover suggests) with Hansel and Gretel, and then bringing in Sherlock Holmes (and particularly The Hound of the Baskervilles), Indiana Jones, the song 'Over the Rainbow' (more on that in a moment), Groundhog Day, Back to the Future and Harry Potter.

 The idea is to show how some aspect of the story - in the case of Hansel and Gretel, laying a trail of stones/breadcrumbs, then attempting to follow them home - can be seen as a kind of algorithm or computation and gradually adding in computing standards, such as searching, queues and lists, loops, recursion and more.

 This really would have been a brilliant book if Erwig had got himself a co-author who knew how to write for the public, but sadly the style is mostly heavy academic, so the cleverness is rather wasted. Sometimes this comes across in labouring points and at others in spending a lot of effort on what is little more than defining labels for things, rather than providing useful information and context for the reader. It's not that there's not a lot of good material in there, just that it's hard work to dig it out, where I'm sure the whole idea of using the stories was to make it more approachable.

 Part of the problem is that the stories themselves don't always work very well as an analogy for what's happening in the computation. So, for example, in the section dealing with sorting he comes up with the task of sorting the tasks and places that Indiana Jones needs to deal with to find the Lost Ark. The unsorted list includes the likes of: disc, sunbeam, Marion and Nepal. The algorithm used involves finding the 'smallest' element... which somehow we are supposed to instantly see is Nepal. Using numbers would not have been so well-linked to the story, but at least it would have made some sense to the reader.

 Perhaps the low point is the section that uses a part of the song 'Over the Rainbow' (giving us a tenuous story connection to The Wizard of Oz) to examine language and meaning. If you aren't familiar with musical notation, I'm not sure it's a very helpful analogy... and if you are, some of the ways it's used (particular the assertion of what bars are for) doesn't entirely make sense.

 I was a professional programmer for a number of years, but without a computer science background. So I was very familiar with how to do this stuff, but knew nothing of the theory behind it. As such, I found the content of the book really interesting - and the story idea should have made it doubly brilliant - but the execution meant that it didn't deliver anywhere near as well as it could have. Even so, there's a lot to savour, and it's definitely worth persevering to get a feel for why computer programs involve far more than just 'cutting code.'
Hardback:  

Kindle:  

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book
Post a Comment
Read more

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T
Post a Comment
Read more

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on
Post a Comment
Read more