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 Think of
an
example

 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!
 Properties of greedy best-
first search
d

c
g
b

a goal state
start state

f(n) = straightline distance

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)
 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
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 or equal nr of 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
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’) (by def.)

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

 Theorem: keeps all checked nodes

in memory
If h(n) is consistent, A* using GRAPH-SEARCH to avoid repeated
is optimal
states
A* search example
A search example
*
A* search example
A* search example
A* search example
A* search example
 Properties of A*
 Complete? Yes (unless there are infinitely
many nodes with f ≤ f(G) , i.e. step-cost > ε)
 Time/Space? Exponential b d
except if: | h(n)  h * (n) |O (logh * (n))
 Optimal? Yes
 Optimally Efficient: Yes (no algorithm with the
same heuristic is guaranteed to expand fewer nodes)
 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
 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
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
 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

=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

n 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
if a single path from root to goal
 Time can still be exponential.does not fit into memory
 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
 Gradient Descent
•Assume we have some cost-function:C (x1,..., xn )
and we want minimize over continuous variables X1,X2,..,Xn


1. Compute the gradient : C (x1,..., xn ) i
xi
2. Take a small step downhill in the direction of the gradient:

xi  x 'i xi   C (x1,..., xn ) i
xi
3. Check if C (x1,.., x 'i ,.., xn )  C (x1,.., xi ,.., xn )

4. If true then accept move, if not reject.

5. Repeat.
 Exercise

• Describe the gradient descent algorithm for the cost function:

C (x , y )  (x  a )2  (y  b )2
 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

what can you do to get out of this local minima?)
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)
 P(child) = 24/(24+23+20+11) = 31%
 P(child) = 23/(24+23+20+11) = 29% etc
 Travelling Salesman
Problem
Given N cities and all their distances, find the shortest tour through all cities.

Try formulating this as a search problem.

Ie what are the states, step-cost, initial state,
goal state, successor function.

Can you think of ways to try to solve these problems?

 Exercise SEARCH TREE

R
9 1

1) Consider the search tree to the right. A B

There are 2 goal states, G1 and G2. 1 2
The numbers on the edges represent step-costs.
You also know the following heuristic estimates: C D
h(BG2) = 9, h(DG2)=10, h(AG1)=2, h(CG1)=1 1 10

a) In what order will A* search visit the G1 G2

nodes? Explain your answer by indicating the value of
the evaluation function for those nodes that the
algorithm considers.
 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
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 the following
search algorithms: a) Breadth-first search, Depth first search, uniform cost search,
and A* search. For A* 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.
3. For each algorithm indicate whether it is an informed or an uninformed search
strategy.
4. For each algorithm indicate separately whether its time complexity is polynomial
or exponential in the number of nodes visited. Same for space complexity.
5. For each algorithm indicate separately whether it is complete and/or optimal.
Answer these questions for generic search problems. Assume step-cost positive but not constant,
do not assume we can avoid repeated states, do not assume we have a very good heuristic
function h.
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.