Intelligent Systems

Search Methods

Copyright 2010 Dieter Fensel and Federico Facca

Where are we?

# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Title Introduction Propositional Logic Predicate Logic Reasoning Search Methods CommonKADS Problem-Solving Methods Planning Software Agents Rule Learning Inductive Logic Programming Formal Concept Analysis Neural Networks Semantic Web and Services

Outline

Motivation Technical Solution

Uninformed Search
Depth-First Search Breadth-First Search Best-First Search Hill Climbing A*

Informed Search

Illustration by a Larger Example Extensions Summary

Problem Solving as Search

MOTIVATION

Motivation

One of the major goals of AI is to help humans in solving complex tasks

How can I fill my container with pallets? Which is the shortest way from Milan to Innsbruck? Which is the fastest way from Milan to Innsbruck? How can I optimize the load of my freight to maximize my revenue? How can I solve my Sudoku game? What is the sequence of actions I should apply to win a game?

Sometimes finding a solution is not enough, you want the optimal solution according to some cost criteria All the example presented above involve looking for a plan A plan that can be defined as the set of operations to be performed of an initial state, to reach a final state that is considered the goal state Thus we need efficient techniques to search for paths, or sequences of actions, that can enable us to reach the goal state, i.e. to find a plan Such techniques are commonly called Search Methods
5

Examples of Problems: Towers of Hanoi

3 pegs A, B, C 3 discs represented as natural numbers (1, 2, 3) which correspond to the size of the discs The three discs can be arbitrarily distributed over the three pegs, such that the following constraint holds: di is on top of dj di < dj Initial status: ((123)()()) Goal status: (()()(123))

1 2 3 A B C

Operators: Move disk to peg Applying: Move 1 to C (1 C)

to the initial state ((123)()()) a new state is reached ((23)()(1))

Cycles may appear in the solution!
6

Examples of Problems: Blocksworld

D C

E C A

B D

Initial State

Goal State

Objects: blocks Attributes (1-ary relations): cleartop(x), ontable(x) Relations: on(x,y) Operators: puttable(x) where x must be cleartop; put(x,y), where x and y must be cleartop

Initial state:
ontable(E), cleartop(E) ontable(A), cleartop(A) ontable(B), cleartop(B) ontable(C) on(D,C), cleartop (D) on(E,A), cleartop(E) ontable(A) ontable(B), cleartop(B) ontable(C) on(D,C), cleartop (D)

Applying the move put(E,A):

Search Methods

TECHNICAL SOLUTION

Search Space Representation

Representing the search space is the first step to enable the problem resolution Search space is mostly represented through graphs A graph is a finite set of nodes that are connected by arcs A loop may exist in a graph, where an arc lead back to the original node In general, such a graph is not explicitly given Search space is constructed during search

Node

Loop

Arc

Search Space Representation

undirect

direct

A graph is undirected if arcs do not imply a direction, direct otherwise A graph is connected if every pair of nodes is connected by a path A connected graph with no loop is called tree A weighted graph, is a graph for which a value is associated to each arc
2

connected

disconnected

tree

weighted
1 4 2 1 1 1 5 6

10

Example: Towers of Hanoi*

These nodes are equals 1 2 3 A 2 3 A 1 B

C 2 3 A

1 B

1 B 1 C C 2 3 A

2 C 3 A 2 B

3 A

1 B

1 3 A B 2 C 3 A B 1 2 C 3 A 1 2 B 1 2 B C 1 3 A 2 B C

A 3 C

* A partial tree search space representation

11

Example: Towers of Hanoi*

* A complete direct graph representation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Hanoi]

12

Search Methods

A search method is defined by picking the order of node expansion Strategies are evaluated along the following dimensions:
completeness: does it always find a solution if one exists? time complexity: number of nodes generated space complexity: maximum number of nodes in memory optimality: does it always find the shortest path solution?

Time and space complexity are measured in terms of

b: maximum branching factor of the search tree d: depth of the shortest path solution m: maximum depth of the state space (may be )

13

Search Methods

Uninformed techniques
Systematically search complete graph, unguided Also known as brute force, nave, or blind

Informed methods
Use problem specific information to guide search in promising directions

14

Brute force approach to explore search space

UNINFORMED SEARCH

15

Uninformed Search

A class of general purpose algorithms that operates in a brute force way

The search space is explored without leveraging on any information on the problem

Also called blind search, or nave search Since the methods are generic they are intrinsically inefficient E.g. Random Search
This method selects randomly a new state from the current one If the goal state is reached, the search terminates Otherwise the methods randomly select an other operator to move to the next state

Prominent methods:
Depth-First Search Breadth-First Search Uniform-Cost Search

16

Depth-First Search

Depth-First Search (DFS) begins at the root node and exhaustively search each branch to it maximum depth till a solution is found
The successor node is selected going in depth using from right to left (w.r.t. graph representing the search space)

If greatest depth is reach with not solution, we backtrack till we find an unexplored branch to follow

DFS is not complete

If cycles are presented in the graph, DFS will follow these cycles indefinitively If there are no cycles, the algorithm is complete Cycles effects can be limited by imposing a maximal depth of search (still the algorithm is incomplete) The first solution is found and not the shortest path to a solution

DFS is not optimal

The algorithm can be implemented with a Last In First Out (LIFO) stack or recursion

17

Depth-First Search: Algorithm

List open, closed, successors={}; Node root_node, current_node; insert-first(root_node,open) while not-empty(open); current_node= remove-first(open); insert-first (current_node,closed); if (goal(current_node)) return current_node; else successors=successorsOf(current_node); for(x in successors) if(not-in(x,closed)) insert-first(x,open); endIf endWhile
N.B.= this version is not saving the path for simplicity
18

Depth-First Search: Example

S

A
2 3

S
4 5

B
6

open={S} closed ={} F D

0. Visit S: open={A,B}, closed={S} 1.Visit A: open={S,B,F,B}, closed={A,S}

2.Visit S: open={B,F,B}, closed={S,A,S} 3.Visit B: open={S,A,F,D,F,B}, closed={B,S,A,S} 4.Visit S: open={A,F,D,F,B}, closed={S,B,S,A,S}

5.Visit A: open={F,D,F,B}, closed={A,S,B,S,A,S}

6.Visit F: GOAL Reached!
19

Depth-First Search: Example

Result is: S->A->B->F

20

Depth-First Search: Complexity

Time Complexity
assume (worst case) that there is 1 goal leaf at the RHS so DFS will expand all nodes =1 + b + b2+ ......... + bm = O (bm) where m is the max depth of the tree

d=0

d=1
m=d=2 G

Space Complexity
how many nodes can be in the queue (worst-case)? at each depth l < d we have b-1 nodes at depth m we have b nodes total = (d-1)*(b-1) + b = O(bm)

d=0
d=1 d=2 d=3 m=d=4
21

Breadth-First Search

Breadth-First Search (BFS) begins at the root node and explore levelwise al the branches BFS is complete
If there is a solution, BFS will found it

BFS is optimal
The solution found is guaranteed to be the shortest path possible

The algorithm can be implemented with a First In First Out (FIFO) stack

22

Breadth-First Search: Algorithm

List open, closed, successors={}; Node root_node, current_node; insert-last(root_node,open) while not-empty(open); current_node=remove-first(open); insert-last(current_node,closed); if (goal(current_node)) return current_node; else successors=successorsOf(current_node); for(x in successors) if(not-in(x,closed)) insert-last(x,open); endIf endWhile N.B.= this version is not saving the path for simplicity
23

Breadth-First Search: Example

S
2

A
3

open = {S}, closed={} 0. Visit S: open = {A,B}, closed={S} 1. Visit A: open={B,S,B,F}, closed={S,A} 2. Visit B: open={S,B,F,F,A,C,D}, closed={S,A,B} 3. Visit S: open={B,F,F,A,C,D}, closed={S,A,B,S} 4. Visit B: open={F,F,A,C,D,S,A,C,D}, closed={S,A,B,S,B} 5. Visit F: Goal Found!
24

Breadth-First Search: Example

Result is: S->A->F

25

Breadth-First Search: Complexity

Time complexity is the same magnitude as DFS

O (bm) where m is the depth of the solution

Space Complexity
how many nodes can be in the queue (worst-case)? assume (worst case) that there is 1 goal leaf at the RHS so BFS will store all nodes =1 + b + b2+ = O (bm) ......... + bm
1

d=0 d=1

d=2
4 5 6 7

d=3
8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15

d=4
26

Further Uninformed Search Strategies

Depth-limited search (DLS): Impose a cut-off (e.g. n for searching a path of length n-1), expand nodes with max. depth first until cut-off depth is reached (LIFO strategy, since it is a variation of depth-first search). Bidirectional search (BIDI): forward search from initial state & backward search from goal state, stop when the two searches meet. Average effort O(bd/2) if testing whether the search fronts intersect has constant effort In AI, the problem graph is typically not known. If the graph is known, to find all optimal paths in a graph with labelled arcs, standard graph algorithms can be used

27

Using knowledge on the search space to reduce search costs

INFORMED SEARCH

28

Informed Search

Blind search methods take O(bm) in the worst case

May make blind search algorithms prohibitively slow where d is large How can we reduce the running time?
Use problem-specific knowledge to pick which states are better candidates

29

Informed Search

Also called heuristic search

In a heuristic search each state is assigned a heuristic value (h-value) that the search uses in selecting the best next step A heuristic is an operationally-effective nugget of information on how to direct search in a problem space Heuristics are only approximately correct

30

Informed Search: Prominent methods

Best-First Search
A*

Hill Climbing

31

Cost and Cost Estimation

f(n)=g(n)+h(n)
g(n) the cost (so far) to reach the node n h(n) estimated cost to get from the node to the goal f(n) estimated total cost of path through n to goal

32

Informed Search: Best-First Search

Special case of breadth-first search Uses h(n) = heuristic function as its evaluation function Ignores cost so far to get to that node (g(n)) Expand the node that appears closest to goal Best First Search is complete Best First Search is not optimal
A solution can be found in a longer path (higher h(n) with a lower g(n) value)

Special cases:
uniform cost search: f(n) = g(n) = path to n A* search

33

33

Best-First Search: Algorithm

List open, closed, successors={}; Node root_node, current_node; insert-last(root_node,open)

returns the list of direct while not-empty(open); descendants of the current current_node=remove-first (open); node in shortest cost order insert-last(current_node,closed); if (goal(current_node)) return current_node; else successors=estimationOrderedSuccessorsOf(current_node); for(x in successors) if(not-in(x,closed)) insert-last(x,open); endIf endWhile N.B.= this version is not saving the path for simplicity
34

34

Best-First Search: Example

S
h=1 h=1
2

A
h=2 h=2 h=2

B
3

h=2
h=2

h=2

h=2

0. 1. 2. 3.

open = {S}, closed={} Visit S: open = {A,B}, closed={S} Visit A: open={B,F,B,S}, closed={S,A} Visit B: open={F,B,S,F,A,C,D}, closed={S,A,B} Visit F: Goal Found!

In this case we estimate the cost as the distance from the root node (in term of nodes)
35

35

Best-First Search: Example

S
h=1, w=2 h=1, w=1

A
h=2, w=7 h=2 h=2 h=2, w=4

B
h=2 h=2 h=2

Result is: S->A->F! If we consider real costs, optimal solution is: S->B->F
36

36

A*

Derived from Best-First Search Uses both g(n) and h(n) A* is optimal A* is complete

37

A* : Algorithm

List open, closed, successors={}; Node root_node, current_node, goal; insert-back(root_node,open)

while not-empty(open); current_node=remove-front(open); insert-back(current_node,closed); if (current_node==goal) return current_node; else successors=totalEstOrderedSuccessorsOf(current_node); for(x in successors) if(not-in(x,closed)) insert-back(x,open); endIf endWhile N.B.= this version is not saving the path for simplicity

returns the list of direct descendants of the current node in shortest total estimation order

38

38

A* : Example

S
h=1, w=2, g=2
2

h=1, w=1, g=1

A
h=2, w=2, g=4 h=2, w=7, g=9 h=2, w=1 g=3

B
h=2, w=4, g=5
3

h=2 w=3 g=4

4

h=2, w=4, g=5

h=2, w=1 g=2

0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

open = {S}, closed={} Visit S: open = {B,A}, closed={S} Visit B: open={A,C,A,F,D}, closed={S,B} Visit A: open={C,A,F,D,B,S,F}, closed={S,B,A} Visit C: open={A,F,D,B,S,F}, closed={S,B,A,C} Visit A: open={F,D,B,S,F}, closed={S,B,A,C,A} Visit F: Goal Found!

In this case we estimate the cost as the distance from the root node (in term of nodes)
39

39

A* : Example

S
h=1, w=2, g=2 h=1, w=1, g=1

A
h=2, w=2, g=4 h=2, w=7, g=9 h=2, w=1 g=3 h=2, w=4, g=5

B
h=2 w=3 g=4 h=2, w=4, g=5

h=2, w=1 g=2

Result is: S->B->F!

40

40

Hill Climbing

Special case of depth-first search Uses h(n) = heuristic function as its evaluation function Ignores cost so far to get to that node (g(n)) Expand the node that appears closest to goal Hill Climbing is not complete
Unless we introduce backtracking

Hill Climbing is not optimal

Solution found is a local optimum

41

Hill Climbing: Algorithm

List successors={}; Node root_node, current_node, nextNode; current_node=root_node while (current_node!=null) if (goal(current_node)) return current_node; else successors=successorsOf(current_node); nextEval = -; nextNode=null; for(x in successors) if(eval(x)> nextEval) nexEval=eval(x); nextNode=x; current_node=nextNode, endIf endWhile N.B.= this version is not using backtracking
42

42

Hill Climbing: Example

S
h=1 h=1

A
h=2 h=3
2

B
h=2
h=2 h=2 h=2 h=2

B
3

F
h=1

F 0. 1. 2. 3.

current_node=S, successors (A=1,B=1) current_node=A, successors (B=2,F=2,S=2) current_node=B, successors (F=1,.) current_node=F: Goal Found!

In this case we estimate the cost as the distance from the root node (in term of nodes)
43

43

Hill Climbing: Example

S
h=1 h=1

A
h=2 h=3 h=2

B
h=2
h=2 h=2 h=2

B
h=1

Result is: S->A->B->F! Not optimal, more if at step 1 h(S)=2 we would have completed without funding a solution
44

44

Informed Search Algorithm Comparison

Algorithm Best First Search Hill Climbing A*

Time O(bm) O() O(2N)

Space O(bm) O(b) O(bd)

Optimal No No Yes

Complete Yes No Yes

Derivative BFS

Best First Search

b, branching factor d, tree depth of the solution m, maximum tree depth

45

45

ILLUSTRATION BY A LARGER EXAMPLE

46

Route Search

Start point: Milan End point: Innsbruck Search space: Cities

Nodes: Cities Arcs: Roads

Lets find a possible route!

47

Graph Representation

Feldkirck Landeck

Innsbruck (Goal)

We start from the root node, and pick the leaves The same apply to each leaves
But we do not reconsider already used arcs

Merano
Bolzano Chiavenna Sondrio Lugano
20

Trento

Como

Lecco Bergamo

Verona

Milan (Root)

Brescia

The first node picked is the first node on the right

Piacenza

48

Depth-First Search

Milan
1

Piacenza
2

Bergamo Brescia Verona Trento Bolzano Trento Bolzano Merano Innsbruck Landeck

Lecco

Como

Brescia Verona
3

Trento Bolzano
4

Trento Bolzano

Merano Innsbruck Landeck

Merano Innsbruck Landeck

Merano Innsbruck Landeck

According to Google Maps: 464 km 4 hours 37 mins

Innsbruck Innsbruck Innsbruck

Innsbruck

N.B.: by building the tree, we are exploring the search space!

49

Breadth-First search

Milan
1 4 3

Piacenza
5

Bergamo
6

Lecco
7 8 9 Lugano 17 18

Como
10

Brescia
11
12

Brescia
13 14

Chiavenna
15

Sondrio Merano

Lecco
19 20 21

Verona
22

Trento
23

Verona
24

Trento
25

Landeck

16 Lugano

Chi.

Feld.

Chi.

Sondrio

Trento Bolzano

Bolzano

Trento Bolzano

Bolzano

26
Innsbruck

Innsbruck Merano Innsbruck Landeck

Innsbruck Merano

Innsbruck
Landeck

According to Google Maps: 358 km 5 hours 18 mins

Innsbruck

Innsbruck

N.B.: by building the tree, we are exploring the search space!

50

Depth-First Search vs Breadth-First search

Distance
DFS: 464 km BFS: 358 km Q1: Can we use an algorithm to optimize according to distance? DFS: 4 hours 37 mins BFS: 5 hours 18 mins Q2: Can we use an algorithm to optimize according to time? DFS: 5 expansions BFS: 26 expansions Not very relevant depends a lot on how you pick the order of node expansion, never the less BFS is usually more expensive

Time

Search space:

To solve Q1 and Q2 we can apply for example and Best-First Search

Q1: the heuristic maybe the air distance between cities Q2: the heuristic maybe the air distance between cities x average speed (e.g. 90km/h)

51

Graph Representation with approximate distance

Feldkirck
70

Landeck

63

Innsbruck (Goal)

100 90 180 140

Merano
25 135 55

Bolzano

Chiavenna
40

Sondrio
60 42

Lugano
20

Trento
90

Como
45

25 50 55

Lecco Bergamo
45

80

Milan (Root)
60 70

60

Brescia

Verona

Piacenza

52

Best-First search

Milan

Piacenza 4 H=60 Brescia 11 H=130

Bergamo 3 H=55 Brescia 8

Lecco

H=50

Como 1

H=45

H=100

H=92 H=110 Lugano 5 H=65 Lecco 6 H=70 Chiavenna 10 Sondrio 7

H=190 Verona 16 H=270 Trento

Bolzano

H=220
Trento 18 Bolzano

H=160 Verona 15
Trento 20

H=227 H=105 H=245 H=130 H=142 H=190 H=150 H=250 Trento 17 Landeck 22 Lugano 14 Merano 19 Chi. 9 Feld. 21 Chi. 12 Sondrio 13

H=275

H=245 H=240 Bolzano 21 H=313

29
According to Google Maps: 358 km 5 hours 18 mins And this is really the shortest way!

Bolzano Innsbruck Innsbruck Merano

Innsbruck

Merano Innsbruck Landeck

Innsbruck
Landeck

Innsbruck

Innsbruck

N.B.: by building the tree, we are exploring the search space!

53

EXTENSIONS

54

Variants to presented algorithms

Combine Depth First Search and Breadth First Search, by performing Depth Limited Search with increased depths until a goal is found Enrich Hill Climbing with random restart to hinder the local maximum and foothill problems Stochastic Beam Search: select w nodes randomly; nodes with higher values have a higher probability of selection Genetic Algorithms: generate nodes like in stochastic beam search, but from two parents rather than from one

55

SUMMARY

56

Summary

Uninformed Search
If the branching factor is small, BFS is the best solution If the tree is depth IDS is a good choice

Informed Search
Heuristic function selection determines the efficiency of the algorithm If actual cost is very expensive to be computed, then Best First Search is a good solution Hill climbing tends to stack in local optimal solutions

57

REFERENCES

58

58

References

Mandatory reading:
Chap. 4: Grz et. al. (eds.): Handbuch der Knstlichen Intelligenz, 2000

Further reading and references:

Chap. 3: Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (2nd ed.), 2003 Chap.2-3: M. Tim Jones: Artificial Intelligence: A Systems Approach

Wikipedia links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth-first_search http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breadth-first_search http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best-first_search http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A*_search_algorithm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_climbing

59

Next Lecture
# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Title Introduction Propositional Logic Predicate Logic Reasoning Search Methods CommonKADS Problem-Solving Methods Planning Software Agents Rule Learning Inductive Logic Programming

12
13 14

Formal Concept Analysis

Neural Networks Semantic Web and Services

60

Questions?

61