Intelligence Artificial Intelligence Ian Gent [email protected] Practical 2: Forward Checking.
-
Upload
efrain-dingley -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
2
Transcript of Intelligence Artificial Intelligence Ian Gent [email protected] Practical 2: Forward Checking.
Artificial IntelligenceIntelligence
Practical 2: Forward Checking
Artificial IntelligenceIntelligence
Part I : OverviewPart II: Three ways to implement FCPart III: Other parts of the practicalPart IV: What I’m looking for
Practical 2: Forward Checking
3
Practical 2: Forward Checking
Write a program to implement the two algorithms BT (Backtracking) and FC (Forward Checking.) Perform an empirical comparison of the two algorithms.
Some practical stuff: This is practical 2 of 2. Each will carry equal weight, I.e. 10% of total credit You may use any implementation language you wish Deadline(s) are negotiable (can be decided after vacation)
4
Aims and Objectives
Aims: to give experience in implementing important AI search
algorithms to give experience in comparing AI techniques empirically
Objectives: after completing the practical, you should have:
implemented the algorithms BT and FCgained an appreciation of some of the basic techniques necessaryperformed and reported on an empirical comparison of different
algorithms
5
What you need to do
Implement BT and FC for binary CSP’s if you can do FC you can do BT FC is the hard bit implement at least two (static) heuristics for each
Implement a reader to read in benchmark CSP’s format of problems will be provided use benchmarks for testing
Perform empirical comparison of algorithms run on benchmark problems report on comparative success of algorithm/heuristic
combinations
6
What you can get away with
Implement BT binary CSP’s implement at least one heuristics
Implement a reader to read in benchmark CSP’s format of problems will be provided use benchmarks for testing
Perform empirical comparison of algorithms run on benchmark problems report on success or otherwise
Don’t expect too many marks for doing the above but don’t expect zero either
7
Three Ways to Implement FC
You only need one implementation! Choose the style that suits you and the language
you like usingThree ways are:
using the general search algorithm recursive from pseudocode using specific data structures
8
Implementing FC (1)
You can implement FC using the generic search algorithm presented earlier
Search states = some representation of current assignment of values to variables, and current domains for each variable
Forward checking done when new states createdDo search by depth-firstMain problem is memory management
not letting space expand endlessly/overwriting existing states easier if you’ve got GC built in
Appropriate for languages with non destructive data structures (e.g. Lisp, Haskell)
9
FC via general search algorithm
1. Form a one element list with null state• null state = state with no decisions = original CSP
2. Loop Until (either list empty or we have a solution) Remove the first state S from the list Choose the next decision to make
• which variable x to assign next
Create a new state for each possible choice of decision• decisions are all remaining values v in Dx
• to create each new state, assign x=v and forward check
MERGE the set of new states into the list
3. If (solution in list) succeed and report solution else list must be empty, so fail
10
Implementing FC (2)
Functional languages are good for search e.g. Lisp, Haskell
Write propagator for forward checking which makes non destructive changes. I.e. original state still exists, but we get a new one for free GC done for you
Write search function recursively handles the manipulation of the list for you via the function
calling stack
11
Implementing FC (2)
Search (CSP): choose var while (value remains in CDvar)
Call Search( fc-propagate(CSP[var = value]))If call succeeds with solution, return solution
If all calls failed, return failure
12
Implementing FC(3)
Follow implementation outlined by ProsserAvoids most memory management problemsExplicit data structures initially set up
when we remove values from vi to vj we modify them
reductions[j] contains sequence of sequenceeach one a sequence of values disallowed by past var
past-fc[j] is a set of variablesset of variables i which caused value removals from vj
future-fc[i] is another setset of variables in which the current value of vi causes value
removals
13
General pseudocode for bcssp
Procedure bccsp (n, status) consistent := true, status := unknown, ii := 1 while (status = unknown)
if (consistent) • ii := label(ii,consistent)
– need special purpose function fc-label here
• else ii := unlabel(ii,consistent)– and fc-unlabel here
if (ii > n)• status := solution• else if (ii = 0)
– status := impossible
14
Implementing FC(3.2)
Use data structure suggested by Bacchus/van RunHave a 2D array Domain[ii,k]
first dimension is variables, second dimension values Domain[ii,k] = 0 if value k still possible for variable ii
I.e. if k still belongs to CD[ii] If value k impossible, removed from CD[ii]
Domain[ii,k] = j, where j is variable that caused removal
On backtracking, to undo effect of assigning j if Domain[ii,k] = j, reset it so that Domain[ii,k] = 0 either store all changes made by j, or just iterate over 2D array looking for those equal to j
when we remove values from vi to vj we modify them
reductions[j] contains sequence of sequenceeach one a sequence of values disallowed by past var
past-fc[j] is a set of variablesset of variables i which caused value removals from vj
future-fc[i] is another setset of variables in which the current value of vi causes value removals
15
Other parts of the practical
Input format: the APES group has a standard format for sharing binary
CSP’s. Allows sharing of benchmarks Valuable for testing (all programs should give same results)
Write a reader for this format translate input to your internal format for CSP
your representation of variables, domains, constraints create small test problems for yourself
and if you want, share them for others
16
Heuristics
I am only looking for static variable ordering heuristics implement dynamic ones if you wish heuristics are harder in Prosser’s version
see paper by Bacchus & van Run for pointers
Heuristics you might consider lexicographic, v1, v2, v3… random, v17, v16, v2, v19 … min degree: var involved in least constraints first max degree: var involved in most constraints first other heuristics you find/can think of
17
Empirical Report
Run your program(s) against benchmark instances I will provide, and others you might want to try
From empirical evidence, how do the techniques perform? Is FC better than BT? Worse? varies across problems? Are there some problems that you can’t solve in
reasonable cpu time? Is min degree better than max degree? Are some problems harder than others?
18
Empirical Report
Write a report on your experimentsDescribe the purpose of each experiment, the
results, and conclusions you drawTry to make it a good piece of empirical AI! Include results as e.g. tables or graphs
as appendix if too many results
Probably a few pages
19
What I am looking for
A correct functioning program speed is not important (within reason) should implement at least 4 combinations of
algorithm/heuristic
A report summarising program and empirical work no set word limit, probably needs a few pages to present
good empirical work well evidence that your code is correct
e.g. sample output, correct result on benchmarks conclusions on your empirical result code (electronically if it’s HUGE)
20
Additional Issues
Some ways to get more credit … create/find problems for which usually worse
algorithm/heuristic does better think of different heuristics think of interesting hypotheses and test them implement FC so that propagation causes a chain reaction.
I.e. if you get domain size = 1, redo FC from thereSince I’ve asked for static heuristics, we may search on
variable x, domain size 4, when variable y has d.s. = 1 implement dynamic variable ordering heuristics
21
Some pointers
A tutorial on constraint programming Barbara Smith Leeds University, 1995
Hybrid Algorithms for the Constraint Satisfaction Problem Patrick Prosser Computational Intelligence, 1993
Dynamic Variable Ordering in CSPs Bacchus & van Run CP95, 1995