0% found this document useful (0 votes)
48 views

Search Algorithms

The document discusses various informed search algorithms: - Best-first search uses an evaluation function f(n) to order nodes for expansion, with greedy best-first search and A* search as special cases. - Greedy best-first search expands the node closest to the goal based on a heuristic. A* search combines the cost to reach a node g(n) with an estimated cost to reach the goal h(n) as its evaluation function f(n)=g(n)+h(n). - Local search algorithms like hill-climbing search and simulated annealing search operate on complete configurations to find solutions satisfying constraints, evaluating a single current state and trying to

Uploaded by

Hassan Vilnius
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
48 views

Search Algorithms

The document discusses various informed search algorithms: - Best-first search uses an evaluation function f(n) to order nodes for expansion, with greedy best-first search and A* search as special cases. - Greedy best-first search expands the node closest to the goal based on a heuristic. A* search combines the cost to reach a node g(n) with an estimated cost to reach the goal h(n) as its evaluation function f(n)=g(n)+h(n). - Local search algorithms like hill-climbing search and simulated annealing search operate on complete configurations to find solutions satisfying constraints, evaluating a single current state and trying to

Uploaded by

Hassan Vilnius
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 44

Informed search algorithms

Outline
 Best-first search
 Greedy best-first search
 A* search
 Heuristics
 Local search algorithms
 Hill-climbing search
 Simulated annealing search
 Local beam search
 Genetic algorithms
Best-first search
 Idea: use an evaluation function f(n) for each node
 f(n) provides an estimate for the total cost.
 Expand the node n with smallest f(n).

 Implementation:
Order the nodes in fringe increasing order of cost.

 Special cases:
 greedy best-first search
 A* search
Romania with straight-line dist.
Greedy best-first search
 f(n) = estimate of cost from n to goal
 e.g., f(n) = straight-line distance from n
to Bucharest
 Greedy best-first search expands the
node that appears to be closest to goal.
Greedy best-first search
example
Greedy best-first search
example
Greedy best-first search
example
Greedy best-first search
example
Properties of greedy best-first
search
 Complete? No – can get stuck in loops.
 Time? O(bm), but a good heuristic can give
dramatic improvement
 Space? O(bm) - keeps all nodes in memory
 Optimal? No
e.g. AradSibiuRimnicu
VireaPitestiBucharest is shorter!
A* search
 Idea: avoid expanding paths that are already
expensive
 Evaluation function f(n) = g(n) + h(n)
 g(n) = cost so far to reach n
 h(n) = estimated cost from n to goal
 f(n) = estimated total cost of path through n to
goal
 Best First search has f(n)=h(n)
 Uniform Cost search has f(n)=g(n)
A* search example
A search example
*
A* search example
A* search example
A* search example
A* search example
Admissible heuristics
 A heuristic h(n) is admissible if for every node n,
h(n) ≤ h*(n), where h*(n) is the true cost to reach the
goal state from n.
 An admissible heuristic never overestimates the cost to
reach the goal, i.e., it is optimistic
 Example: hSLD(n) (never overestimates the actual road
distance)
 Theorem: If h(n) is admissible, A* using TREE-SEARCH
is optimal
Optimality of A* (proof)
 Suppose some suboptimal goal G2 has been generated and is in the
fringe. Let n be an unexpanded node in the fringe such that n is on a
shortest path to an optimal goal G.

We want to prove:
f(n) < f(G2)
(then A* will prefer n over G2)

 f(G2) = g(G2) since h(G2) = 0


 f(G) = g(G) since h(G) = 0
 g(G2) > g(G) since G2 is suboptimal
 f(G2) > f(G) from above
Optimality of A* (proof)
 Suppose some suboptimal goal G2 has been generated and is in the fringe.
Let n be an unexpanded node in the fringe such that n is on a shortest
path to an optimal goal G.

 f(G2) > f(G) copied from last slide


 h(n) ≤ h*(n) since h is admissible (under-estimate)
 g(n) + h(n) ≤ g(n) + h*(n) from above
 f(n) ≤ f(G) since g(n)+h(n)=f(n) & g(n)+h*(n)=f(G)
 f(n) < f(G2) from top line.

Hence: n is preferred over G2


Consistent heuristics
 A heuristic is consistent if for every node n, every successor n' of n
generated by any action a,

h(n) ≤ c(n,a,n') + h(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) It’s the triangle
 i.e., f(n) is non-decreasing along any path. inequality !

 Theorem: keeps all checked nodes


If h(n) is consistent, A* using GRAPH-SEARCH is optimal
in memory to avoid repeated
states
Optimality of A*
 A* expands nodes in order of increasing f value
 Gradually adds "f-contours" of nodes
 Contour i contains all nodes with f≤fi where fi < fi+1
Properties of A*
 Complete? Yes (unless there are infinitely many
nodes with f ≤ f(G) , i.e. path-cost > ε)
 Time/Space? Exponential b d
* *
except if: | h (n )  h (n ) | O (log h (n ))

 Optimal? Yes
 Optimally Efficient: Yes (no algorithm with the
same heuristic is guaranteed to expand fewer nodes)
straight-line distances
6 1
3 A D F 1 h(S-G)=10
h(A-G)=7
2 4 8
S B E G h(D-G)=1
h(F-G)=1
1 h(B-G)=10
20
C h(E-G)=8
h(C-G)=20

try yourself

The graph above shows the step-costs for different paths going from the start (S) to
the goal (G). On the right you find the straight-line distances.

1. Draw the search tree for this problem. Avoid repeated states.

2. Give the order in which the tree is searched (e.g. S-C-B...-G) for A* search.
Use the straight-line dist. as a heuristic function, i.e. h=SLD,
and indicate for each node visited what the value for the evaluation function, f, is.
Memory Bounded Heuristic
Search: Recursive BFS
 How can we solve the memory problem for
A* search?
 Idea: Try something like depth first search,
but let’s not forget everything about the
branches we have partially explored.
 We remember the best f-value we have
found so far in the branch we are deleting.
RBFS:
best alternative
over fringe nodes,
which are not children:
do I want to back up?

RBFS changes its mind


very often in practice.

This is because the


f=g+h become more
accurate (less optimistic)
as we approach the goal.
Hence, higher level nodes
have smaller f-values and
will be explored first.

Problem: We should keep


in memory whatever we can.
Simple Memory Bounded A*
 This is like A*, but when memory is full we delete the
worst node (largest f-value).
 Like RBFS, we remember the best descendent in the
branch we delete.
 If there is a tie (equal f-values) we delete the oldest
nodes first.
 simple-MBA* finds the optimal reachable solution
given the memory constraint. A Solution is not reachable
 Time can still be exponential. if a single path from root to goal
does not fit into memory
Admissible heuristics
E.g., for the 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) = ?
Admissible heuristics
E.g., for the 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) = ? 8
 h2(S) = ? 3+1+2+2+2+3+3+2 = 18
Dominance
 If h2(n) ≥ h1(n) for all n (both admissible)
 then h2 dominates h1
 h2 is better for search: it is guaranteed to expand
less nodes.

 Typical search costs (average number of nodes


expanded):

 d=12 IDS = 3,644,035 nodes


A*(h1) = 227 nodes
A*(h2) = 73 nodes
 d=24 IDS = too many nodes
A*(h1) = 39,135 nodes
A*(h2) = 1,641 nodes
Relaxed problems
 A problem with fewer restrictions on the actions
is called a relaxed problem
 The cost of an optimal solution to a relaxed
problem is an admissible heuristic for the
original problem
 If the rules of the 8-puzzle are relaxed so that a
tile can move anywhere, then h1(n) gives the
shortest solution
 If the rules are relaxed so that a tile can move
to any adjacent square, then h2(n) gives the
shortest solution
Local search algorithms
 In many optimization problems, the path to the goal
is irrelevant; the goal state itself is the solution

 State space = set of "complete" configurations


 Find configuration satisfying constraints, e.g., n-
queens
 In such cases, we can use local search algorithms
 keep a single "current" state, try to improve it.
 Very memory efficient (only remember current state)
Example: n-queens
 Put n queens on an n × n board with no
two queens on the same row, column,
or diagonal

Note that a state cannot be an incomplete configuration with m<n queens


Hill-climbing search
 Problem: depending on initial state, can get stuck in local
maxima
Hill-climbing search: 8-queens
problem

Each number indicates h if we move


a queen in its corresponding column

 h = number of pairs of queens that are attacking each other, either


directly or indirectly (h = 17 for the above state)
Hill-climbing search: 8-queens
problem

 A local minimum with h = 1


Simulated annealing search
 Idea: escape local maxima by allowing some
"bad" moves but gradually decrease their
frequency.

 This is like smoothing the cost landscape.


Properties of simulated
annealing search
 One can prove: If T decreases slowly enough,
then simulated annealing search will find a
global optimum with probability approaching
1 (however, this may take VERY long)

 Widely used in VLSI layout, airline scheduling,


etc.
Local beam search
 Keep track of k states rather than just one.

 Start with k randomly generated states.

 At each iteration, all the successors of all k


states are generated.

 If any one is a goal state, stop; else select the k


best successors from the complete list and
repeat.
Genetic algorithms
 A successor state is generated by combining two parent
states

 Start with k randomly generated states (population)

 A state is represented as a string over a finite alphabet


(often a string of 0s and 1s)

 Evaluation function (fitness function). Higher values for


better states.

 Produce the next generation of states by selection,


crossover, and mutation
fitness:
#non-attacking queens

probability of being
regenerated
in next generation
 Fitness function: number of non-attacking pairs of queens
(min = 0, max = 8 × 7/2 = 28)
 24/(24+23+20+11) = 31%
 23/(24+23+20+11) = 29% etc
Appendix
 Some details of the MBA* next.
SMA* pseudocode (not in 2nd edition 2 of
book)
function SMA*(problem) returns a solution sequence
inputs: problem, a problem
static: Queue, a queue of nodes ordered by f-cost

Queue  MAKE-QUEUE({MAKE-NODE(INITIAL-STATE[problem])})
loop do
if Queue is empty then return failure
n  deepest least-f-cost node in Queue
if GOAL-TEST(n) then return success
s  NEXT-SUCCESSOR(n)
if s 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, highest-f-cost node in Queue
remove it from its parent’s successor list
insert its parent on Queue if necessary
insert s in Queue
end
Simple Memory-bounded A* (SMA*)
(Example with 3-node memory) maximal depth is 3, since
memory limit is 3. This
Progress of SMA*. Each node is labeled with its current f-cost. branch is now useless.
Values in parentheses show the value of the best forgotten
descendant. best forgotten node
Search space best estimated solution
so far for that node
f = g+h  = goal A
13[15]
A
0+12=12 A A A
12 12
10 8 13
G
B G 13
10+5=15 8+5=13
B B G
10 10 8 16 15
18 H
15 13
20+5=25
C D
16+2=18
H I 
20+0=20 24+0=24
10 10 A A A
8 8 15[15] 15[24] 20[24]
E F J K
A 8
15
30+5=35 30+0=30 24+0=24 24+5=29 G B B
15 20[]
24[]

B G
I D
15 24 C 25
24 20

Algorithm can tell you when best solution found within memory constraint is optimal or not.

You might also like