Agent-Centered Search

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

Review: Search problem formulation
Artificial Intelligence CS482, CS682, MW 1 – 2:15, SEM 201, MS 227 Prerequisites: 302, 365 Instructor: Sushil Louis,
HEURISTIC SEARCH Ivan Bratko Faculty of Computer and Information Sc. University of Ljubljana.
1 CS 385 Fall 2006 Chapter 4 Heuristic Search. 2 Heuristics eurisko ("I discover" in Greek) "the study of the methods and rules of discovery and invention."
Greedy best-first search Use the heuristic function to rank the nodes Search strategy –Expand node with lowest h-value Greedily trying to find the least-cost.
Traveling Salesperson Problem
Informed Search Methods Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Chapter 4 Spring 2004.
Informed Search Methods How can we improve searching strategy by using intelligence? Map example: Heuristic: Expand those nodes closest in “as the crow.
Solving Problem by Searching
Artificial Intelligence Adversarial search Fall 2008 professor: Luigi Ceccaroni.
Artificial Intelligence
Mahgul Gulzai Moomal Umer Rabail Hafeez
1 search CS 331/531 Dr M M Awais A* Examples:. 2 search CS 331/531 Dr M M Awais 8-Puzzle f(N) = g(N) + h(N)
Find a Path s A D B E C F G Heuristically Informed Methods  Which node do I expand next?  What information can I use to guide this.
Problem Solving and Search in AI Heuristic Search
Search: Heuristic &Optimal Artificial Intelligence CMSC January 16, 2003.
Heuristic Search In addition to depth-first search, breadth-first search, bound depth-first search, and iterative deepening, we can also use informed or.
Search exploring the consequences of possible actions.
Game Playing. Introduction One of the earliest areas in artificial intelligence is game playing. Two-person zero-sum game. Games for which the state space.
Search exploring the consequences of possible actions.
Search CPSC 386 Artificial Intelligence Ellen Walker Hiram College.
Game tree search Chapter 6 (6.1 to 6.3 and 6.6) cover games. 6.6 covers state of the art game players in particular. 6.5 covers games that involve uncertainty.
Adversarial Search 2 (Game Playing)
Why Minimax Works: An Alternative Explanation Mitja Luštrek 1, Ivan Bratko 2 and Matjaž Gams 1 1 Jožef Stefan Institute, Department of Intelligent Systems.
Chapter 3 Solving problems by searching. Search We will consider the problem of designing goal-based agents in observable, deterministic, discrete, known.
Adversarial Search and Game-Playing
Informed Search Methods
Review: Tree search Initialize the frontier using the starting state
Instructor: Vincent Conitzer
Heuristic Functions.
Adversarial Search and Game Playing (Where making good decisions requires respecting your opponent) R&N: Chap. 6.
Heuristic Search Introduction to Artificial Intelligence
Pengantar Kecerdasan Buatan
Lookahead pathology in real-time pathfinding
Minimax Pathology Mitja Luštrek 1, Ivan Bratko 2 and Matjaž Gams 1
Artificial Intelligence
The A* Algorithm Héctor Muñoz-Avila.
Minimax Pathology Mitja Luštrek 1, Ivan Bratko 2 and Matjaž Gams 1
Path Planning in Discrete Sampled Space
Announcements Homework 3 due today (grace period through Friday)
Alpha-Beta Search.
Informed search algorithms
Heuristic Search Thank you Michael L. Littman, Princeton University for sharing these slides.
NIM - a two person game n objects are in one pile
Artificial Intelligence
Alpha-Beta Search.
Instructor: Vincent Conitzer
Search and Game Playing
Alpha-Beta Search.
Pruned Search Strategies
Lecture 3: Environs and Algorithms
Agent-Centered Search
Announcements This Friday Project 1 due Talk by Jeniya Tabassum
Solving problems by searching
Alpha-Beta Search.
HW 1: Warmup Missionaries and Cannibals
Thinking too much: Pathology in pathfinding
Search.
HW 1: Warmup Missionaries and Cannibals
Search.
Alpha-Beta Search.
Motion Planning for a Point Robot (1/2)
CS51A David Kauchak Spring 2019
Informed Search.
Minimax Pathology and Real-Number Minimax Model
Unit II Game Playing.
Solving problems by searching
Presentation transcript:

Agent-Centered Search Mitja Luštrek Department of Intelligent Systems, Jožef Stefan Institute

Introduction Setting: mobile agent (robot) in an known/unknown environment (labyrinth with/without map). Objective: to reach the goal from the starting position in as short time as possible. Two phases: planning of the path, execution of the plan. Traditional search: first planning of the whole path, then execution of the plan. Agent-centered search: planning of the beginning of the path from the starting position, execution of the partial plan, planning from the new starting position...

Why Agent-Centered Search Planning long in comparison to execution: environment very large, environment not wholly known, environment changing. Agent must act in real time. Results: shorter planning, longer execution (path not optimal), shorter sum.

Traditional Search – A* Multiple paths from the starting position. Agent keeps expanding the most promising path until the goal is reached. Evaluation function for path ending in position n: f (n) = g (n) + h (n) g (n) ... the length of the shortest path found so far from the starting position to n; h (n) ... heuristic evaluation of the length of the shortest path from n to the goal. If h (n) is admissible (optimistic – always smaller or equal to the length of the shortest path from n to the goal), A* finds the shortest path.

A* – Example The agent’s environment is divided into squares, some of them impassable. The agent can move up, down, left and right. The distance between adjacent squares is 1. h (n) is the Manhattan distance from n to the goal.

A* – Example 4 3 2 1 GOAL 5 START 6 7 8

A* – Example 4+1 3 2 1 GOAL 5 START 4 6+1 7 6 8

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3 6+1 7 6 8

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3 2 6+1 7 6 8

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 3 7 6 8

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3 7 6 8

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3 7+2 6 8 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3 7+2 6 8+3 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3+6 7+2 6 5+6 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3+6 7+2 6 5+6 3 8+3 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 7+2 6 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 7+2 6 5+6 4+7 3 8+3 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 1+8 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 1+8 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 7+2 6 5+6 4+7 3+8 8+3 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 0+9 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 1+8 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 7+2 6 5+6 4+7 3+8 8+3 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 0+9 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 1+8 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 7+2 6 5+6 4+7 3+8 8+3 7

A* – Example 4+1 3+2 2+3 1 0+9 GOAL 5 START 4 3+4 2 1+8 6+1 4+5 3+6 2+7 7+2 6 5+6 4+7 3+8 8+3 7

Agent-Centered Search Agent searches local search space, which is a part of the whole space centered on the agent. Makes some steps in the most promising direction. Repeats until it reaches the goal. In game playing (chess), the search is performed around the current position: the whole game tree is too large (environment very large), it is not known in which part of the space the game will head (environment not wholly known). This is an example of two-agent search, I focus on single-agent search.

LRTA* Learning real-time A* Agent updates h (l) for every point l in the local search space: h (l) = min (d (l, n) + h (n)) d (l, n) ... the length of the shortest path from l to a point n just outside the local search space, h (n) ... heuristic evaluation of the length of the shortest path from n to the goal. Moves to the adjacent position l with the lowest h (l). Repeats until the goal is reached. Updated h (l) can be used in later searches.

LRTA* – Example Same setting as for A*. The local search space is 3 x 3 squares centered on the agent.

LRTA* – Example 4 START 3 2 1 GOAL 5 6 7 8

LRTA* – Example 4 START 3 2 1 GOAL 5 6 7 8

LRTA* – Example 8 START 7 6 1 GOAL 5 2 4 3

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 9 2 8 3 7 6 5 4

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 9 2 8 3 7 6 5 4

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example, search restarted 10 START 11 12 1 GOAL 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example, search restarted 10 START 13 12 1 GOAL 11 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example, search restarted 10 START 13 12 1 GOAL 11 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example, search restarted 10 START 13 12 1 GOAL 11 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Example, search restarted 10 START 13 12 1 GOAL 11 2 3 9 6 5 4 8 7

LRTA* – Extensions Unknown environment, agent’s sensory range very limited: minimal local search space (only the agent’s position). Unknown environment, the task is exploration: maximal local search space (all known positions), agent moves towards the closest unvisited position; node counting – agent moves towards the least frequently visited adjacent position. Unknown starting position: minimize the worst-case execution time; min-max LRTA*: a minimax tree is built around the agent’s position; the agent’s actions minimize the length of the path to the goal; possible configurations of the environment maximize the length of the path to the goal.

Search Pathology Minimax [Nau, 1979; Beal, 1980; Bratko & Gams, 1982; etc.]: in practice, the more moves ahead one searches, the better he plays; in theory, under apparently reasonable conditions, the more moves ahead one searches, the worse he plays; this is caused by minimax amplifying the heuristic evaluation used in the leaves of the game tree. Agent-centered search [Bulitko et al., 2003]: one would expect that the larger the local search space, the more likely an agent is to choose the optimal path; in some cases, the larger the local search space, the less likely an agent is to choose the optimal path.