html5-img
1 / 49

C hapter 4

C hapter 4. Informed Search and Exploration. O utline. Best-First Search Greedy Best-First Search A * Search Heuristics Variances of A* Search. T ree Search (Reviewed, Fig. 3.9). A search strategy is defined by picking the order of node expansion.

davina
Download Presentation

C hapter 4

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Chapter 4 Informed Search and Exploration

  2. Outline • Best-First Search • Greedy Best-First Search • A* Search • Heuristics • Variances of A* Search

  3. Tree Search (Reviewed, Fig. 3.9) • A search strategy is defined by picking the order of node expansion function TREE-SEARCH(problem, strategy) returns a solution, or failure initialize the search tree using the initial state of problem loop doif there are no candidates for expansion thenreturn failure choose a leaf node for expansion according to strategy if the node contains a goal state then return the corresponding solution else expand the node and add the resulting nodes to the search tree

  4. Search Strategies • Uninformed Search Strategies • by systematically generating new states and testing against the goal • Informed Search Strategies • by using problem-specific knowledge beyond the definition of the problem to find solutions more efficiently

  5. Best-First Search • An instance of general Tree-Search or Graph-Search • A node is selected for expansion based on an evaluation function, f(n), with the lowest evaluation • an estimate of desirability expand most desirable unexpanded node • Implementation • a priority queue that maintains the fringe in ascending order of f-values • Best-first search is venerable but inaccurate

  6. Best-First Search (cont.-1) • Heuristic search uses problem-specific knowledge: evaluation function • Choose the seemingly-best node based on the cost of the corresponding solution • Need estimate of the cost to a goal • e.g., depth of the current node sum of distances so far Euclidean distance to goal, etc. • Heuristics: rules of thumb • Goal: to find solutions more efficiently

  7. Best-First Search (cont.-2) • Heuristic Function • h(n) = estimated cost of the cheapest path from node n to a goal (h(n) = 0, for a goal node) • Special cases • Greedy Best-First Search (or Greedy Search) • minimizing estimated cost from the node to reach a goal • A* Search • minimizing the total estimated solution cost

  8. Heuristic • Heuristic is derived from heuriskein in Greek, meaning “to find” or “to discover” • The term heuristic is often used to describe rules of thumb or advices that are generally effective, but not guaranteed to work in every case • In the context of search, a heuristic is a function that takes a state as an argument and returns a number that is an estimate of the merit of the state with respect to the goal

  9. Heuristic (cont.) • A heuristic algorithm improves the average-case performance, but does not necessarily improve the worst-case performance • Not all heuristic functions are beneficial • The time spent evaluating the heuristic function in order to select a node for expansion must be recovered by a corresponding reduction in the size of search space explored • Useful heuristics should be computationally inexpensive!

  10. Straight-line distances to Bucharest Arad 366 Bucharest 0 Craiova 160 Drobeta 242 Eforie 161 Fagaras 176 Giurgiu 77 Hirsova 151 Iasi 226 Lugoj 244 Mehadia 241 Neamt 234 Oradea 380 Pitesti 100 Rimnicu Vilcea 193 Sibiu 253 Timisoara 329 Urziceni 80 Vaslui 199 Zerind 374 Romania with Step Costs in km

  11. Greedy Best-First Search • Greedy best-first search expands the nodes that appears to be closest to the goal • Evaluation function = Heuristic function • f(n) = h(n) = estimated best cost to goal from n • h(n) = 0 if n is a goal • e.g., hSLD(n) = straight-line distance for route-finding function GREEDY-SEARCH( problem ) returns a solution, or failure return BEST-FIRST-SEARCH( problem, h )

  12. Greedy Best-First Search Example

  13. Analysis of Greedy Search • Complete? • Yes (in finite space with repeated-state checking) • No (start down an infinite path and never return to try other possibilities) • (e.g., from Iasi to Fagaras) • Susceptible to false startsIsaiNeamt (dead end) • No repeated states checkingIsaiNeamtIsaiNeamt  (oscillation)

  14. Analysis of Greedy Search (cont.) • Optimal? No • (e.g., from Arad to Bucharest) • Arad → Sibiu → Fagaras → Bucharest • (450 = 140+99+211, is not shortest) • Arad → Sibiu → Rim → Pitesti → Bucharest • (418 = 140+80+97+101) • Time? best: O(d), worst: O(bm) • m: the maximum depth • like depth-first search • a good heuristic can give dramatic improvement • Space? O(bm): keep all nodes in memory

  15. A* Search • Avoid expanding paths that are already expansive • To minimizing the total estimated solution cost • Evaluation function f(n) = g(n) + h(n) • f(n) = estimated cost of the cheapest solution through n • g(n) = path cost so far to reach n • h(n) = estimated cost of the cheapest path from n to goal function A*-SEARCH( problem) returns a solution, or failure return BEST-FIRST-SEARCH( problem, g+h)

  16. Straight-line distances to Bucharest Arad 366 Bucharest 0 Craiova 160 Drobeta 242 Eforie 161 Fagaras 176 Giurgiu 77 Hirsova 151 Iasi 226 Lugoj 244 Mehadia 241 Neamt 234 Oradea 380 Pitesti 100 Rimnicu Vilcea 193 Sibiu 253 Timisoara 329 Urziceni 80 Vaslui 199 Zerind 374 Romania with Step Costs in km (remind)

  17. A* Search Example

  18. Straight-line distances to Bucharest Arad 366 Bucharest 0 Craiova 160 Drobeta 242 Eforie 161 Fagaras 176 Giurgiu 77 Hirsova 151 Iasi 226 Lugoj 244 Mehadia 241 Neamt 234 Oradea 380 Pitesti 100 Rimnicu Vilcea 193 Sibiu 253 Timisoara 329 Urziceni 80 Vaslui 199 Zerind 374 Romania with Step Costs in km (remind) 150

  19. Admissible Heuristic • A* search uses an admissible heuristic h(n) • h(n) neveroverestimates the cost to the goal from n • n, h(n) h*(n), where h*(n) is the true cost to reach the goal from n (also, h(n)  0, so h(G) = 0 for any goal G) • e.g., h(n) is not admissible • g(X) + h(X) = 102 • g(Y) + h(Y) = 74 • Optimal path is not found! • e.g., straight-line distance hSLD(n) never overestimates the actual road distance

  20. Admissible Heuristic (cont.) • e.g., 8-puzzle • h1(n) = number of misplaced tiles • h2(n) = total Manhattan distance • i.e., no. of squares from desired location of each tile • h1(S) = • h2(S) = • A* is complete and optimal if h(n) is admissible 8 3+1+2+2+2+3+3+2 = 18

  21. Optimality of A*(proof) • Suppose some suboptimal goal G2 has been generated and is in the queue • Let n be an unexpanded node on a shortest path to an optimal goal G

  22. Optimality of A*(cont.-1) • C*: cost of the optimal solution path • A* may expand some nodes before selecting a goal node • Assume: G is an optimal and G2 is a suboptimal goal f(G2) = g(G2) + h(G2) = g(G2) > C* ----- (1) For some n on an optimal path to G, if h is admissible, then f(n) = g(n) + h(n)  C* ----- (2) From (1) and (2), we have f(n)  C* < f(G2) So, A* will never select G2 for expansion

  23. n c(n,a,n’) h(n) n’ h(n’) G Monotonicity (Consistency) of Heuristic • A heuristic is consistent if h(n)  c(n, a, n’) + h(n’) the estimated cost of reaching the goal from n is no greater than the step cost of getting to successor n plus the estimated cost of reaching the goal from n’ • If h is consistent, we have f(n’) = g(n’) + h(n’) = g(n) + c(n, a, n’) + h(n’)g(n) + h(n) = f(n) f(n’) f(n) i.e., f(n) is non-decreasing along any path • Theorem: If h(n) is consistent, A* is optimal

  24. Optimality of A*(cont.-2) • A* expands nodes in order of increasing f value • Gradually adds f-contours of nodes • Contour i has all nodes with f=fi, where fi < fi+1

  25. A B goal start Why Use Estimate of Goal Distance? Order in which uniform-costlooks at nodes. A and B aresame distance from start, sowill be looked at before anylonger paths. No”bias”toward goal. Order of examination usingdist. From start + estimates ofdist. to goal. Notes “bias”toward the goal; points awayfrom goal look worse. Assume states are pointsthe Euclidean plane

  26. Analysis of A* Search • Complete? Yes • unless there are infinitely many nodes with f  f(G) • Optimal? Yes, if the heuristic is admissible • Time? Exponential in [relative error in h* length of solution] • Space? O(bd), keep all nodes in memory • Optimally Efficient? Yes • i.e., no other optimal algorithms is guaranteed to expand fewer nodes than A* • A* is not practical for many large-scale problems • since A* usually runs out of space long before it runs out of time

  27. Start State Goal State Heuristic Functions • Example • for 8-puzzle • branching factor  3 • depth = 22 • # of states = 322 3.1  1010 9! / 2 = 181,400 (reachable distinct states) • for 15-puzzle • # of states  1013 • Two commonly used candidates • h1(n) = number of misplaced tiles = 8 • h2(n) = total Manhattan distance (i.e., no. of squares from desired location to each tile) = 3+1+2+2+2+3+3+2 = 18

  28. Effect of Heuristic Accuracy on Performance • h2 dominates (is more informed than) h1

  29. Effect of Heuristic Accuracy on Performance (cont.) • Effective Branching Factor b* is defined by N + 1 = 1 + b* + (b*)2 +‧‧‧+(b*)d • N : total number of nodes generated by A* • d : solution depth • b* : branching factor that a uniform tree of depth d would have to have in order to contain N+1 nodes • e.g., A* finds a solutions at depth 5 using 52 nodes, then b* = 1.92 • A well designed heuristic would have a value of b* close to 1, allowing fairly large problems to be solved • A heuristic function h2 is said to be more informed than h1(or h2dominates h1) if both are admissible and n, h2(n)  h1(n) • A* using h2 will never expand more nodes than A* using h1

  30. Inventing Admissible Heuristic Functions • Relaxed problems • problems with fewer restrictions on the actions • The cost of an optimal solution to a relaxed problem is an admissible heuristic for the original problem • e.g., 8-puzzle • A tile can move from square A to square B if A is horizontally or vertically adjacent to B and B is blank. (P if R and S) • 3 relaxed problems • A tile can move from square A to square B if A is horizontally or vertically adjacent to B. (P if R) --- derive h2 • A tile can move from square A to square B if B is blank. (P if S) • A tile can move from square A to square B. (P) --- derive h1

  31. ‧ ‧ ‧ ‧ ‧ ‧ ‧ ‧ Start State Goal State Inventing Admissible Heuristic Functions(cont.-1) • Composite heuristics • Given h1, h2, … , hm; none dominates any others h(n) = max { h1(n), h2(n), … , hm(n) } • Subproblem • The cost of the optimal solution of the subproblem is a lower bound on the cost of the complete problem • To get tiles 1, 2, 3 and 4 into their correct positions, without worrying about what happens to other tiles.

  32. Inventing Admissible Heuristic Functions(cont.-2) • Weighted evaluation functions fw(n) = (1-w)g(n) + wh(n) • Learn the coefficients for features of a state h(n) = w1 f1(n), , wk fk(n) • Search cost • Good heuristics should be efficiently computable

  33. Memory-Bounded Heuristic Search • Overcome the space problem of A*, without sacrificing optimality or completeness • IDA* (iterative deepening A*) • a logic extension of iterative deepening search to use heuristic information • the cutoff used is the f-cost (g+h) rather than depth • RBFS (recursive best-first search) • MA* (memory-bounded A*) • SMA* (simplified MA*) • is similar to A*, but restricts the queue size to fit into the available memory

  34. Iterative Deepening A* • Iterative deepening is useful for reducing memory requirement • At each iteration, perform DFS with an f-cost limit • IDA* is complete and optimal (with the same caveats as A* search) • Space complexity: O (bf*/)  O(bd) • f* : the optimal solution cost •  : the smallest operator cost • Time complexity: O(bd) •  : the number of different f values • In the worst case, if A* expands N nodes, IDA* will expand 1+2+…+N = O(N2) nodes • IDA* uses too little memory

  35. Iterative Deepening A*(cont.-1) • first, each iteration expands all nodes inside the contour for the current f-cost • peeping over to find out the next contour lines • once the search inside a given contour has been complete • a new iteration is started using a new f-cost for the next contour

  36. Iterative Deepening A*(cont.-2) function IDA*( problem) returns a solution sequence inputs: problem, a problem local variables: f-limit, the current f-COST limit root, a node root MAKE-NODE(INITIAL-STATE[ problem]) f-limitf-COST(root) loop do solution, f-limit DFS-CONTOUR(root , f-limit) ifsolution is non-null then returnsolution iff-limit = then return failure end

  37. Iterative Deepening A*(cont.-3) function DFS-CONTOUR(node, f-limit) returns a solution sequence and a new f-COST limit inputs: node, a node f-limit, the current f-COST limit local variables: next-f, the f-COST limit for the next contour, initially  iff-COST[node] > f-limitthen return null, f-COST[node] if GOAL-TEST[ problem](STATE[node]) then returnnode, f-limit for each node sin SUCCESSORS(node) do solution, new-f DFS-CONTOUR(s, f-limit) ifsolution is non-null then returnsolution, f-limit next-f MIN(next-f, new-f ) end return null, next-f

  38. Recursive Best-First Search (RBFS) • Keeps track of the f-value of the best-alternative path available • if current f-values exceeds this alternative f-value, then backtrack to alternative path • upon backtracking change f-value to the best f-value of its children • re-expansion of this result is thus still possible

  39. Recursive Best-First Search (cont.-1) ∞ ∞ ∞ Arad Arad Arad 366 366 366 447 447 447 Sibiu Sibiu Sibiu Timisoara Timisoara Timisoara Zerind Zerind Zerind 393 393 393 447 447 447 449 449 449 417 447 415 Fagaras Fagaras Fagaras Fagaras Arad Arad Arad Oradea Oradea Oradea Rim Vil Rim Vil Rim Vil 415 415 415 417 646 646 646 671 671 671 413 413 413 417 450 447 Pitesti Sibiu Craiova Craiova Bucharest Pitesti Sibiu Sibiu 591 526 526 450 417 417 553 553 Bucharest Craiova Rim Vil 418 615 607

  40. Recursive Best-First Search (cont.-2) function RECURSIVE-BEST-FIRST-SEARCH( problem) returns a solution, or failure RBFS( problem, MAKE-NODE(INITIAL-STATE[ problem] ), ) function RBFS( problem, node, f_limit) returns a solution, or failure and a new f-COST limit if GOAL-TEST[ problem](STATE[node]) then returnnode successors EXPAND(node, problem) ifsuccessors is empty then return failure,  for each node sinsuccessorsdo f [s]  max( g(s) + h(s), f [node]) repeat best the lowest f-value node in successors iff [best] f_limitthen return failure, f [best] alternative the second lowest f-value among successors result, f [best]  RBFS( problem, best, MIN( f_limit, alternative)) ifresult failurethenreturnresult

  41. Analysis of RBFS • RBFS is a bit more efficient than IDA* • still excessive node generation (mind changes) • Complete? Yes • Optimal? Yes, if the heuristic is admissible • Time? Exponential • difficult to characterize, depend on accuracy of h(n) and how often best path changes • Space? O(bd) • IDA* and RBFS suffer from too little memory

  42. Simplified Memory Bounded A* (SMA*) • SMA* expands the (newest) best leaf and deletes the (oldest) worst leaf Aim: find the lowest-cost goalnode with enough memory Max Nodes = 3 A – root node D,F,I,J – goal nodes Label: current f-Cost

  43. Simplified Memory Bounded A* (cont.-1) 3. memory is full update (A) f-Cost for the min chlid expand G, drop the higher f-Cost leaf (B) 5. drop H and add I G memorize H update (G) f-Cost for the min child update (A) f-Cost 6. I is goal node, but may not be the best solution the path through G is not so great, so B is generated for the second time 7. drop G and add C A memorize G C is non-goal node C mark to infinite 8. drop C and add D B memorize C D is a goal node, and it is lowest f-Cost node then terminate ‧How about J has a cost of 19 instead of 24 ?

  44. Simplified Memory Bounded A* (cont.-2) Aim: find the lowest-cost goalnode with enough memory Max Nodes = 3 A – root node D,F,I,J – goal nodes Label: current f-Cost 0+12=12 A 10 8 10+5=15 8+5=13 B G 10 10 8 16 20+5=25 20+0=20 16+2=18 24+0=24 C D H I 8 8 10 10 30+5=35 30+0=30 24+0=24 24+5=29 E F J K

  45. drop C and add D • B memorize C • D is a goal node and it is lowest f-cost node then terminate • How about J has a cost of 19 instead of 24 ?? • memory is full • I is goal node, but may not be the best solution • the path through G is not so great so B is generate for the second time • drop G and add C • A memorize G • C is non-goal node • C mark to infinite • memory is full • update (A) f-cost for the min child • expand G, drop the higher f-cost leaf (B) • drop H and add I • G memorize H • update (G) f-cost for the min child • update (A) f-cost 20 (24) 15 (24) 13 (15) 13 12 15 (15) 15 12 A A A A A A A A 20 (infinite) 15 15 15 15 24 24 (infinite) 13 13 B B B B B G G G G 25 infinite 20 18 infinite 24 C D H I Simplified Memory Bounded A* (cont.-3)

  46. Simplified Memory Bounded A* (cont.-4) function SMA* ( problem) returns a solution sequence inputs: problem, a problem local variables: Queue, a queue of nodes ordered by f-COST Queue MAKE-QUEUE({MAKE-NODE(INITIAL-STATE[ problem])}) loop do ifQueue is empty then return failure ndeepest leastf-COST node in Queue if GOAL-TEST(n) then return success s NEXT-SUCCESSOR(n) ifs is not a goal and is at maximum depth then f(s)  else f(s)  MAX(f(n), g(s) + h(s)) if all of n‘s successors have been generated then update n‘s f-COST and those of its ancestors if necessary if SUCCESSORS(n) all in memory then remove n from Queue if memory is full then delete shallowest, highestf-COST node in Queue remove it from its parent’s successor list insert its parent on Queue if necessary insert s on Queue end

  47. SMA* Algorithm • SMA* makes use of all available memory M to carry out the search • It avoids repeated states as far as memory allows • Forgotten nodes: shallow nodes with high f-cost will be dropped from the fringe • A forgotten node will only be regenerated if all other child nodes from its ancestor node have been shown to look worse • Memory limitations can make a problem intractable

  48. Analysis of SMA* • Complete? Yes, if M  d • i.e., if there is any reachable solution • i.e., the depth of the shallowest goal node is less than the memory size • Optimal? Yes, if M  d * • i.e., if any optimal solution is reachable; otherwise, it returns the best reachable solution • Optimally efficiently? Yes, if M  bm • Time? • It is often that SMA* is forced to switch back and forth continually between a set of candidate solution paths • Thus, the extra time required for repeated generation of the same node • Memory limitations can make a problem intractable from the point of view of computation time • Space? Limited

  49. HW2, 4/11 deadline • Write an A* programs to solve the path finding problem.

More Related