 |
Our Actual Route, 1,956 miles |
People are using AI for all sorts of things these days. One of the relatives has decided to use AI as
a tool for making his stock picks. After
decades of variable success trading stocks he is very excited by the possibilities.
I'm not going to promote any one tool or AI method here, but I have found AI to be useful.
I’ve been using various AI tools for other purposes, and I decided to run a
query to plan a trip. I wanted to see how an AI tool would compare to my route planning. I chose a trip I had taken many times in the past, so I had an ample amount of real-world information about the possible routes. I compared the AI suggestions to my various route plans.
Now, before
going further, it is important to understand how AI tools and more specifically how Large Language Models (LLMs) actually work.
These software tools "generate responses by analyzing input text,
predicting the next words based on learned patterns from vast datasets, and
utilizing complex algorithms to ensure coherence and relevance. "
What are those datasets, you may ask? LLMs glean data from the internet and other
sources. This gleaning, called “scraping”
means that they can and do repeat garbage.
They can make errors and can provide made-up answers, called "hallucinations". Some experts say that these hallucinations occur because AI will "guess" when it doesn't know the answer. AI, you see, is trained to provide an answer, so when it doesn't know or can't find an answer it will provide that guess. Sources for AI may include Google, Facebook, Google Maps, YouTube, other websites and online data. Obviously, the internet contains errors and falsehoods, and these may be selected and used by the AI when providing an answer to a query.
This short segment was part of a longer trek. The actual driving distance for this segment was 1,956 miles. I thought it would be a good trial for AI planning. At the completion of this trek the odometer read 74,875 miles. The total distance for the entire trek, spanning several months was 7,279 miles.
I am aware of the pitfalls of AI. I made a general query. The questioning can be very specific, but I decided
to be simple. Tightening up the query would have given different responses. For example, I did a second query with one additional requirement in which I stipulated my maximum driving speed would not exceed 70 MPH. The response to that second query required 8 days of travel.
I used the results of the first query for my trip, after reviewing it for accuracy and suitability. The results of the first query were similar to my usual trip planning, which requires at a minimum 4 days of travel time for this route. We usually make stops for a several of days along the way which will extend the trip.
Here is the first query and the AI response:
My Query: “Plan a driving route from Grand Rapids, MI to Tucson AZ. Travel via interstate
highways, no more than 6 hours daily driving time with RV stays overnight.”
Note that during this trip the posted speed limits on the highways
ranged from 45 MPH to 80 MPH. Frequently the highway posted speed limits were 60-70 MPH. Construction zones reduced this to 45
MPH. We drove in the center or right
lane, with prevailing traffic or below the posted speed limits. My maximum continuous speed was 70 MPH.
The LLM I used provided this Response: “Here is a
possible five-day driving route from Grand Rapids, Michigan, to Tucson,
Arizona, designed for an RV with driving days of six hours or less, focusing on
interstate highways.” It included highway details and route for each day of driving as well as a campground to stay each night.
Using other tools I checked the hours required by the route if I drove continuously each day at 65 MPH. The route in the response did exceed the stipulated daily driving times. Dividing the miles per day by 65 MPH gave daily driving times of 4.6, 7.0, 5.8 and 7.7 hours. As can be seen two days exceeded the requested 6-hours of travel. (I've determined after years of trekking that 60-65 MPH is a realistic average speed for a 7-8 hour day of highway travel if I include time spent on gasoline stops and bathroom breaks. A mid-day meal will add time.)
G and I discussed the trip alternatives and after reviewing with my usual planner we agreed to follow the AI suggestion with a few minor changes. She was excited to visit Santa Fe; it had been a few years since our previous visit. In this post I have included the AI suggestions and my actual experience driving this route.
The response included specific instructions as well as
suggested overnight stays. I checked
these for accuracy. Some of the suggestions were very good. There were some inaccuracies. We did stay at the four suggested campgrounds. We had
previously stayed at two, but two were new to us. All of the campgrounds were very good.
Our actual driving distances included stops for gas, usually
when the tank was about 2/3 empty. It
also included stops for a meal along the route coordinated with a gasoline fill-up,
unless noted otherwise.
We travelled using our usual routine. There were additional
stops for bathroom breaks and to stretch our legs.
There were three time zone changes on the route, and we gained an hour with each occurrence. This meant we arrived at the campgrounds earlier on the clock than had there been no time zone changes. We prefer to arrive at 3-4 pm, which is why I use a 6-hour driving day when planning. The time zone changes were beneficial. Had we been going east instead of west we would have lost an hour each day.
Day 1: Grand Rapids, MI to Springfield, IL
Day 2: Springfield, IL to Tulsa, OK
- Driving
Time: Approximately 6 hours was estimated by the AI.
- Proposed
Route: Continue on I-55 S to I-44 S, which will take you directly into
Tulsa.
- Actual
Distance: 504 miles. We deviated and took I-270 to bypass St. Louis,
MO. This added about 15 miles distance. At a constant 65 MPH this route would have required 7.0
hours point-to-point driving time.
Day 3: Tulsa, OK to Amarillo,
TX
Day 4: Amarillo, TX to Santa
Fe, NM
- Driving
Time: Approximately 4.5 hours was estimated by the AI.
- Proposed
Route: Continue on I-40 W from Amarillo. Near Clines Corners, NM, take
US-285 N directly into Santa Fe.
- Actual Distance: 301 miles. At a constant 65 MPH this would
require 4.6 hours driving time. However, actual distance from campground to
campground required 4.3 hours driving time. The
distance travelled included an excursion into town, which added 24
miles to this segment.
- We didn’t specify going to Santa Fe, and doing so added about 118 miles
of additional driving to this trip.
However, I didn’t specify “shortest route”. This slight addition was necessary to get us to the campground.
Day 5: Santa Fe, NM to Tucson, AZ
- Driving
Time: Approximately 6 hours was estimated by the AI.
- Proposed
Route: From Santa Fe, take I-25 S to Albuquerque. In Albuquerque, merge
onto I-40 W. In Holbrook, AZ, take AZ-77 S to US-70 W, then AZ-77 S again
to Tucson.
·
Actual route. Day 5:
We did not go to Holbrook AZ.
Doing so would result in a driving distance of 532 miles and require 8.2
hours driving time. In fact, the route
we took was I-25 to Hatch NM Hwy 26 to I-10 West.
This was a distance of 500 miles.
At a constant 65 MPH this would require 7.7 hours driving time.
On the 5th day we departed the campground at 7:55 AM
local time and arrived at our Tucson Destination at about 4:00 PM Tucson time. We “gained” an hour because of time zone changes. We did encounter an intense thunderstorm, which delayed us 20 minutes. Start to finish the day was 9 hours.
==
Note: No AI tools were used to produce this blog, although one was used for the route depicted. Most photos are unretouched.
(c) 2025 N. Retzke