0% found this document useful (0 votes)
34 views128 pagesBest First Search
Uploaded by
anshul.saini0803Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
34 views128 pagesBest First Search
Uploaded by
anshul.saini0803Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 128
Chapter 3
Best First Search
i Best First Search
« So far, we have assumed that all the edges have the
same cost, and that an optimal solution is a shortest path
from the initial state to a goal state.
» Let’s generalize the model to allow individual edges with
arbitrary costs associated with them.
» We'll use the following denotations:
Jength - number of edges in the path
cost - sum of the edge costs on the path Best First Search
Best First Search is an entire class of search
algorithms, each of which employ a cost function.
The cost function : froma NOdE to its COSt.
Example: a sum of the edge costs from the root to
the node.
We assume that a lower cost node is a better node.
The different best-first search algorithms differ
primarily in their cost function. Best First Search
Best-first search employs two lists of nodes:
= Open list
¢ contains those nodes that have been generated but
not yet expanded.
» Closed list
contains those nodes that have already been
completely expanded Best First Search
Initially, just the root node is included on the Open list, and
the Closed list is empty.
At each cycle of the algorithm, an Open node of lowest cost
is expanded, moved to Closed, and its children are inserted
back to Open.
The Open list is maintained as a priority queue.
The algorithm terminates when a goal node is
chosen for expansion, or there are no more
nodes remaining in Open list. Example of Best First Search
» One example of Best First Search is breadth
first search.
= The cost here is a depth of the node below the
root.
» depth first search is not considered to be best-
first-search, because it does not maintain Open
and Closed lists, in order to run in linear space. Uniform Cost Search
= Let g(n) be the sum of the edges costs from root to
node n. If g(n) is our overall cost function, then the best
first search becomes Uniform Cost Search, also
known as_ Dijkstra’s_ single-source-shortest-path
algorithm .
«= Initially the root node is placed in Open with a cost of
zero. At each step, the next node n to be expanded is
an Open node whose cost g(n) is lowest among all
Open nodes. Example of Uniform Cost Search
» Assume an example tree with different edge costs,
represented by numbers next to the edges.
a
@®
Notations for this example:
— generated node
— expanded node Example of Uniform Cost Search
2 Os Example of Uniform Cost Search
te)
re rn Example of Uniform Cost Search
“|
oo Example of Uniform Cost Search
(c)
a ,
) @ @
Closed list: (Sfelp
& Ls
e)
Open list:
Q
alo
wl
| = |ta
= Example of Uniform Cost Search
2
Closed list: (Sfelbla
& Ls
e)
Oo
ea
[o}
Open list: Example of Uniform Cost Search
wed”
2 -
@ @ ©
Closed list: (Sfelblalet
Open list: g
EES)
[es]=n Example of Uniform Cost Search
2
ce)
o :
@ Ce)
Closed list: falelbla
Open list: aq
a Example of Uniform Cost Search
2 @ 7m
reat
Closed list: (4 dleltiaf
Open list: Uniform Cost Search
» We consider Uniform Cost Search to be brute force
search, because it doesn’t use a heuristic function.
= Questions to ask:
¢ Whether Uniform cost always terminates?
¢ Whether it is guaranteed to find a goal state? Uniform Cost Search -
Termination
« The algorithm will find a goal node or report that there is no
goal node under following conditions:
@ the problem space is finite
¢ there must exist a path to a goal with finite length and finite
cost
there must not be any infinitely long paths of finite cost
» Wewill assume that all the edges have a minimum non-zero
edge cost e to a solve a problem of infinite chains of nodes
with zero-cost edges.
Then, UCS will eventually reach a goal of finite cost If one exists
In the graph. Uniform Cost Search -
Solution Quality
= Theorem 3.1 : Jn a graph where all edges have a minimum
positive cost, and in which a finite path exists to a goal
node, uniform-cost search will return a lowest-cost path to
a goal node.
« Steps of proof
¢ show that if Open contains a node on an optimal path to a
goal before a node expansion, then it must contain one after
the node expansion
¢ show that if there is a path to a goal node, the algorithm will
eventually find it
¢ show that the first time a goal node is chosen for expansion,
the algorithm terminates and returns the path to that node as
the solution Uniform Cost Search -
Time Complexity
» Inthe worst case
every edge has the minimum edge e.
¢ cis the cost of optimal solution, so once all nodes of cost %TSP Gis the optimal solution. Admissible, Consistent and
Monotonic Heuristics
= Admissible:
if we define h*(n) as the exact lowest cost from node nto a goal, a
heuristic function h(n) is admissible if and only if Vn
h(n) < h(n)
= Consistent:
this quality is similar to the triangle inequality of all metrics. If c(n,m) is
the cost of a shortest path from node n to node m, then a heuristic
function h(x) is consistent if ¥n,m
h(n) < c(n,m) + h(m) Consistent heuristic
h(n) < c(n,m) + h(m)
{h(n)-h(m)| c will be
expanded. Some nodes n whose cost f(n) = c will be
expanded.
Thus, f(n) < c is a sufficient condition for A* to expand node n, and
f(n) scis a necessary condition. 2 . . *
Time optimality of A
= Theorem 3.3 : For a given consistent (admissible) heuristic
function, every admissible algorithm must expand all
nodes surely expanded by A*.
» Intuition: If anode m with f(m) bis also a constant )
Thus, the asymptotic time complexity of A* using a
heuristic that has constant absolute error is linear in the
solution depth. Constant Relative Error
» A much more realistic assumption for measurements of heuristic
functions, is constant relative error. We assume that the absolute
error is a bounded percentage of the quantity being estimated.
h(n) =a. h*(n)
Let's repeat the above analysis with the new heuristic model
g(n)=x+y
h*(n)=y+d-x
h(n) =o (y +d- x)
f(n) = g(n) + h(n) =x+y +a (y+d-x) max (h(n)) , D(x) =1
A way to view D(x) is that it is the probability that a state is
chosen randomly and uniformly from all states in the problem
space has h(n) h(parent) -1.
@ the solid boxes represent “fertile” nodes which will be expanded.
@ the dotted boxes represent “sterile” nodes that will not be
expanded, because their total cost exceeds the optimal solution cost.
@ the thick diagonal! line separates the fertile nodes from the sterile
nodes.
In this particular example, the maximum value of the heuristic is 4, and
the depth of solution d is 8 moves. We chose 3 for the heuristic value of
the initial state. Nodes Expanded as a Function of
Depth
» We will count the number of node expansions, which is the number of
fertile nodes in the graph. The number of nodes generated is simply 6
times the number expanded.
» There is a single state at depth 0. This root node generates b children,
whose heuristic value range from 2 to 4, inclusive. Each of these
nodes generate b nodes, whose heuristic value will range from 1 to 4,
giving a total of b* nodes at depth 2. Since the goal is assumed to be at
depth 8, in the worst case, all nodes n whose total cost f(n) = g(n) +
h(n) < 8 will be expanded.Since 4 is a maximum heuristic value, all
nodes down to depth 8 - 4 = 4 will be expanded, as in brute force
search. Down to this depth, the number of nodes at depth d will be b%.
Note that P(4) = 1, and hence b*P(4) = b*.
» In general, down to depth d - m, where m is max heuristic value, all
nodes are expanded. Nodes Expanded as a Function of
Depth
« The nodes expanded at depth 5 are fertile nodes, which are those
with f(n) = g(n) + h(n) =5+h(n)<8 = h(n) <3. In equilibrium
distribution, the fraction of nodes at depth 5 with h(n) < 3 is P(3).
Since all nodes at depth 4 are expanded, the total number of
nodes at depth 5 is b®°, and the number of fertile nodes at depth 5
is bSP(3).
» While there are nodes at depth 6 with all possible heuristic
values, their distribution in no longer equal to the equilibrium
distribution. The number of nodes at depth 6 with h(n) < 2 is
completely unaffected by this pruning and is the same as it would
be in a brute force search at depth 6, or b®P(2). Nodes Expanded as a Function of
Depth
- Due to consistency of the heuristic function, all the possible
parents of fertile nodes are themselves fertile. Thus, the
number of nodes with each heuristic value to the left of the
diagonal line is the same as it would be in a brute force
search to the same depth.
» If the heuristic were inconsistent, then the distribution of fertile
nodes would change at every level where pruning occurred,
making analysis much more complex.
« Ingeneral, the number of fertile nodes at depth jis b’P(d - I)
Q
d
>" b'P(d—i) The Heuristic Branching Factor
» Heuristic branching factor =
number of nodes generated in a search to depth d
number of nodes generated in a search to depth d - 1
« The heuristic branching factor is the same as the brute-force
branching factor b.
» This analysis contradicts the abstract model:
¢ abstract model: the effect of the heuristic function is to reduce
the heuristic branching factor and the overall complexity from
O(b2) to O(a), a