Impact of Structure on Complexity Carla Gomes Bart Selman Cornell University Intelligent Information Systems.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Impact of Interference on Multi-hop Wireless Network Performance Kamal Jain, Jitu Padhye, Venkat Padmanabhan and Lili Qiu Microsoft Research Redmond.
Advertisements

Time Complexity P vs NP.
Optimization Problems in Optical Networks. Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM) Directed: Symmetric: Undirected: Optic Fiber.
Optical networks: Basics of WDM
A Hierarchical Multiple Target Tracking Algorithm for Sensor Networks Songhwai Oh and Shankar Sastry EECS, Berkeley Nest Retreat, Jan
Novembro 2003 Tabu search heuristic for partition coloring1/29 XXXV SBPO XXXV SBPO Natal, 4-7 de novembro de 2003 A Tabu Search Heuristic for Partition.
CPSC 422, Lecture 21Slide 1 Intelligent Systems (AI-2) Computer Science cpsc422, Lecture 21 Mar, 4, 2015 Slide credit: some slides adapted from Stuart.
Agent-based sensor-mission assignment for tasks sharing assets Thao Le Timothy J Norman WambertoVasconcelos
1 Backdoor Sets in SAT Instances Ryan Williams Carnegie Mellon University Joint work in IJCAI03 with: Carla Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University.
Wavelength Assignment in Optical Network Design Team 6: Lisa Zhang (Mentor) Brendan Farrell, Yi Huang, Mark Iwen, Ting Wang, Jintong Zheng Progress Report.
1 EL736 Communications Networks II: Design and Algorithms Class3: Network Design Modeling Yong Liu 09/19/2007.
Hardness Results for Problems P: Class of “easy to solve” problems Absolute hardness results Relative hardness results –Reduction technique.
Statistical Regimes Across Constrainedness Regions Carla P. Gomes, Cesar Fernandez Bart Selman, and Christian Bessiere Cornell University Universitat de.
Wireless Distributed Sensor Tracking: Computation and Communication Bart Selman, Carla Gomes, Scott Kirkpatrick, Ramon Bejar, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, Johannes.
CP Formal Models of Heavy-Tailed Behavior in Combinatorial Search Hubie Chen, Carla P. Gomes, and Bart Selman
Methods for SAT- a Survey Robert Glaubius CSCE 976 May 6, 2002.
Constraint Satisfaction and the Davis-Putnam-Logeman-Loveland Procedure Henry Kautz.
AAAI00 Austin, Texas Generating Satisfiable Problem Instances Dimitris Achlioptas Microsoft Carla P. Gomes Cornell University Henry Kautz University of.
Wireless Distributed Sensor Challenge Problem: Demo of Physical Modelling Approach Bart Selman, Carla Gomes, Scott Kirkpatrick, Ramon Bejar, Bhaskar Krishnamachari,
Formal Complexity Analysis of Mobile Problems & Communication and Computation in Distributed Sensor Networks in Distributed Sensor Networks Carla P. Gomes.
Analysis of Algorithms CS 477/677
Wireless Distributed Sensor Tracking: Computation and Communication Bart Selman, Carla Gomes, Scott Kirkpatrick, Ramon Bejar, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, Johannes.
1 Backdoors To Typical Case Complexity Ryan Williams Carnegie Mellon University Joint work with: Carla Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University.
Structure and Phase Transition Phenomena in the VTC Problem C. P. Gomes, H. Kautz, B. Selman R. Bejar, and I. Vetsikas IISI Cornell University University.
Carla P. Gomes CS4700 CS 4700: Foundations of Artificial Intelligence Carla P. Gomes Module: CSP2 (Reading R&N: Chapter 5)
Carla P. Gomes CS4700 CS 4700: Foundations of Artificial Intelligence Carla P. Gomes Module: Instance Hardness and Phase Transitions.
CP-AI-OR-02 Gomes & Shmoys 1 The Promise of LP to Boost CSP Techniques for Combinatorial Problems Carla P. Gomes David Shmoys
1 CS 4700: Foundations of Artificial Intelligence Carla P. Gomes Module: Satisfiability (Reading R&N: Chapter 7)
Constrained Pattern Assignment for Standard Cell Based Triple Patterning Lithography H. Tian, Y. Du, H. Zhang, Z. Xiao, M. D.F. Wong Department of ECE,
1 Understanding Problem Hardness: Recent Developments and Directions Bart Selman Cornell University.
Carla P. Gomes School on Optimization CPAIOR02 Exploiting Structure and Randomization in Combinatorial Search Carla P. Gomes
Hardness Results for Problems
Controlling Computational Cost: Structure and Phase Transition Carla Gomes, Scott Kirkpatrick, Bart Selman, Ramon Bejar, Bhaskar Krishnamachari Intelligent.
1 Combinatorial Problems in Cooperative Control: Complexity and Scalability Carla Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University Muri Meeting March 2002.
Radial Basis Function Networks
1 Distributed Computing Optical networks: switching cost and traffic grooming Shmuel Zaks ©
Learning to Search Henry Kautz University of Washington joint work with Dimitri Achlioptas, Carla Gomes, Eric Horvitz, Don Patterson, Yongshao Ruan, Bart.
Distributions of Randomized Backtrack Search Key Properties: I Erratic behavior of mean II Distributions have “heavy tails”.
Tractable Symmetry Breaking Using Restricted Search Trees Colva M. Roney-Dougal, Ian P. Gent, Tom Kelsey, Steve Linton Presented by: Shant Karakashian.
Energy Efficient Routing and Self-Configuring Networks Stephen B. Wicker Bart Selman Terrence L. Fine Carla Gomes Bhaskar KrishnamachariDepartment of CS.
Network Aware Resource Allocation in Distributed Clouds.
Structure and Phase Transition Phenomena in the VTC Problem C. P. Gomes, H. Kautz, B. Selman R. Bejar, and I. Vetsikas IISI Cornell University University.
ANTs PI Meeting, Nov. 29, 2000W. Zhang, Washington University1 Flexible Methods for Multi-agent distributed resource Allocation by Exploiting Phase Transitions.
Explorations in Artificial Intelligence Prof. Carla P. Gomes Module 3 Logic Representations (Part 2)
Clustering of protein networks: Graph theory and terminology Scale-free architecture Modularity Robustness Reading: Barabasi and Oltvai 2004, Milo et al.
Algorithms for Allocating Wavelength Converters in All-Optical Networks Authors: Goaxi Xiao and Yiu-Wing Leung Presented by: Douglas L. Potts CEG 790 Summer.
Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSPs) CPSC 322 – CSP 1 Poole & Mackworth textbook: Sections § Lecturer: Alan Mackworth September 28, 2012.
Το Πρόβλημα Routing and Path Coloring και οι εφαρμογές του σε πλήρως οπτικά δίκτυα Ευχαριστίες: οι διαφάνειες αυτές βασίστηκαν εν μέρει στην παρουσίαση.
Heavy-Tailed Phenomena in Satisfiability and Constraint Satisfaction Problems by Carla P. Gomes, Bart Selman, Nuno Crato and henry Kautz Presented by Yunho.
1 Optical Packet Switching Techniques Walter Picco MS Thesis Defense December 2001 Fabio Neri, Marco Ajmone Marsan Telecommunication Networks Group
Explorations in Artificial Intelligence Prof. Carla P. Gomes Module Logic Representations.
NP-COMPLETE PROBLEMS. Admin  Two more assignments…  No office hours on tomorrow.
NP-Complete problems.
Quality of LP-based Approximations for Highly Combinatorial Problems Lucian Leahu and Carla Gomes Computer Science Department Cornell University.
ANTs PI meeting, Dec. 17, 2001Washington University / DCMP1 Flexible Methods for Multi-agent Distributed Resource Allocation by Exploiting Phase Transitions.
Accelerating Random Walks Wei Wei and Bart Selman.
1 Combinatorial Problems in Cooperative Control: Complexity and Scalability Carla P. Gomes and Bart Selman Cornell University Muri Meeting June 2002.
Critical Density Thresholds and Complexity in Wireless Networks Bhaskar Krishnamachari School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Cornell University.
Balance and Filtering in Structured Satisfiability Problems Henry Kautz University of Washington joint work with Yongshao Ruan (UW), Dimitris Achlioptas.
Network Science K. Borner A.Vespignani S. Wasserman.
Lecture 8 Randomized Search Algorithms Part I: Backtrack Search CSE 573 Artificial Intelligence I Henry Kautz Fall 2001.
Formal Complexity Analysis of RoboFlag Drill & Communication and Computation in Distributed Negotiation Algorithms in Distributed Negotiation Algorithms.
1 P NP P^#P PSPACE NP-complete: SAT, propositional reasoning, scheduling, graph coloring, puzzles, … PSPACE-complete: QBF, planning, chess (bounded), …
CS 4700: Foundations of Artificial Intelligence
Impact of Interference on Multi-hop Wireless Network Performance
CS223 Advanced Data Structures and Algorithms
Analysis and design of algorithm
Chapter 11 Limitations of Algorithm Power
Algorithms for Budget-Constrained Survivable Topology Design
CSE 6408 Advanced Algorithms.
Presentation transcript:

Impact of Structure on Complexity Carla Gomes Bart Selman Cornell University Intelligent Information Systems Institute Kickoff Meeting AFOSR MURI May 2001

Outline I - Overview of our approach II - Structure vs. complexity - – results on a abstract domain III - Examples of Application Domains IV - Conclusions

Overview of Approach Overall theme --- exploit impact of structure on computational complexity –Identification of domain structural features tractable vs. intractable subclasses phase transition phenomena backbone balancedness … –Goal: Use findings in both the design and operation of distributed platform Principled controlled hardness aware systems

Part I Structure vs. Complexity

Quasigroup Completion Problem (QCP) Given a matrix with a partial assignment of colors (32%colors in this case), can it be completed so that each color occurs exactly once in each row / column (latin square or quasigroup)? Example: 32% preassignment

Structural features of instances provide insights into their hardness namely: –Phase transition phenomena –Backbone –Inherent structure and balance

Are all the Quasigroup Instances (of same size) Equally Difficult? Time performance: 165 What is the fundamental difference between instances?

Are all the Quasigroup Instances Equally Difficult? % 50% 150 Time performance: 35% Fraction of preassignment:

Complexity of Quasigroup Completion Fraction of pre-assignment Median Runtime (log scale) Critically constrained area Overconstrained area Underconstrained area 42%50%20%

Phase Transition Almost all unsolvable area Fraction of pre-assignment Fraction of unsolvable cases Almost all solvable area Complexity Graph Phase transition from almost all solvable to almost all unsolvable

Quasigroup Patterns and Problems Hardness Rectangular PatternAligned PatternBalanced Pattern TractableVery hard Hardness is also controlled by structure of constraints, not just percentage of holes

Bandwidth Bandwidth: permute rows and columns of QCP to minimize the width of the diagonal band that covers all the holes. Fact: can solve QCP in time exponential in bandwidth swap

Random vs Balanced Balanced Random

After Permuting Balanced bandwidth = 4 Random bandwidth = 2

Structure vs. Computational Cost Balanced QCP QCP % of holes Computational cost Balancing makes the instances very hard - it increases bandwith! Aligned/ Rectangular QCP

Backbone This instance has 4 solutions: Backbone Total number of backbone variables: 2 Backbone is the shared structure of all the solutions to a given instance.

Phase Transition in the Backbone (only satisfiable instances) We have observed a transition in the backbone from a phase where the size of the backbone is around 0% to a phase with backbone of size close to 100%. The phase transition in the backbone is sudden and it coincides with the hardest problem instances. (Achlioptas, Gomes, Kautz, Selman 00, Monasson et al. 99)

New Phase Transition in Backbone % Backbone Sudden phase transition in Backbone Fraction of preassigned cells Computational cost % of Backbone

Why correlation between backbone and problem hardness? Small backbone is associated with lots of solutions, widely distributed in the search space, therefore it is easy for the algorithm to find a solution; Backbone close to 1 - the solutions are tightly clustered, all the constraints “vote” to push the search into that direction; Partial Backbone - may be an indication that solutions are in different clusters that are widely distributed, with different clauses pushing the search in different directions.

Structural Features The understanding of the structural properties that characterize problem instances such as phase transitions, backbone, balance, and bandwith provides new insights into the practical complexity of computational tasks.

Examples of Application Domains

Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM) is the most promising technology for the next generation of wide-area backbone networks. WDM networks use the large bandwidth available in optical fibers by partitioning it into several channels, each at a different wavelength. Fiber Optic Networks

Nodes connect point to point fiber optic links

Fiber Optic Networks Nodes connect point to point fiber optic links Each fiber optic link supports a large number of wavelengths Nodes are capable of photonic switching --dynamic wavelength routing -- which involves the setting of the wavelengths.

Routing in Fiber Optic Networks Routing Node How can we achieve conflict-free routing in each node of the network? Dynamic wavelength routing is a NP-hard problem. Input PortsOutput Ports preassigned channels

QCP Example Use: Routers in Fiber Optic Networks Dynamic wavelength routing in Fiber Optic Networks can be directly mapped into the Quasigroup Completion Problem. (Barry and Humblet 93, Cheung et al. 90, Green 92, Kumar et al. 99) each channel cannot be repeated in the same input port (row constraints); each channel cannot be repeated in the same output port (column constraints); CONFLICT FREE LATIN ROUTER Input ports Output ports Input PortOutput Port

ANTs Challenge Problem Multiple doppler radar sensors track moving targets Energy limited sensors Communication constraints Distributed environment Dynamic problem IISI, Cornell University

Domain Models Start with a simple graph model Successively refine the model in stages to approximate the real situation: –Static weakly-constrained model –Static constraint satisfaction model with communication constraints –Static distributed constraint satisfaction model –Dynamic distributed constraint satisfaction model Goal: Identify and isolate the sources of combinatorial complexity IISI, Cornell University

Initial Assumptions Each sensor can only track one target at a time 3 sensors are required to track a target IISI, Cornell University

Initial Graph Model Bipartite graph G = (S U T, E) S is the set of sensor nodes, T the set of target nodes, E the edges indicating which targets are visible to a given sensor Decision Problem: Can each target be tracked by three sensors? IISI, Cornell University

Initial Graph Model IISI, Cornell University Target visibility Graph Representation Sensor nodes Target nodes

Initial Graph Model IISI, Cornell University  The initial model presented is a bipartite graph, and this problem can be solved using a maximum flow algorithm in polynomial time Sensor nodes Target nodes

Sensor Communication Constraints IISI, Cornell University initial model + communication edgesinitial model+ communication edges Possible solution  In the graph model, we now have additional edges between sensor nodes

IISI, Cornell University Constrained Graph Model sensors targets communication edges possible solution

Complexity and Phase Transition Phenomena of Sensor Domain

Complexity Decision Problem: Can each target be tracked by three sensors which can communicate together ? We have shown that this constraint satisfaction problem (CSP) is NP- complete, by reduction from the problem of partitioning a graph into isomorphic subgraphs IISI, Cornell University

Average Case complexity and Phase Transition Phenomena

Phase Transition w.r.t. Communication Level: IISI, Cornell University Experiments with a random configuration of 9 sensors and 3 targets such that there is a communication channel between two sensors with probability p Probability( all targets tracked ) Communication edge probability p Insights into the design and operation of sensor networks w.r.t. communication level

Phase Transition w.r.t. Radar Detection Range IISI, Cornell University Experiments with a random configuration of 9 sensors and 3 targets such that each sensor is able to detect targets within a range R Probability( all targets tracked ) Normalized Radar Range R Insights into the design and operation of sensor networks w.r.t. radar detection range

Distributed Model

Distributed CSP Model In a distributed CSP (DCSP) variables and constraints are distributed among multiple agents. It consists of: –A set of agents 1, 2, … n –A set of CSPs P 1, P 2, … P n, one for each agent –There are intra-agent constraints and inter- agent constraints IISI, Cornell University

DCSP Model We can represent the sensor tracking problem as DCSP using dual representations: –One with each sensor as a distinct agent –One with a distinct tracker agent for each target IISI, Cornell University

Sensor Agents Binary variables associated with each target Intra-agent constraints : –Sensor must track at most 1 visible target Inter-agent constraints: –3 communicating sensors should track each target xx01 s1 s2 s4 t1t2t3t4 s3 xxx1 1x00 xxx1

Target Tracker Agents Binary variables associated with each sensor Intra-agent constraints : –Each target must be tracked by 3 communicating sensors to which it is visible Inter-agent constraints: –A sensor can only track one target 11xx10xxx xx1xxx1x1 t1 t2 xxx10xx11t3 s1s2s3s4s5s6s7s8s9

Implicit versus Explicit Constraints Explicit constraint: (correspond to the explicit domain constraints) –no two targets can be tracked by same sensor (e.g. t2, t3 cannot share s4 and t1, t3 cannot share s9) –three sensors are required to track a target (e.g. s1,s3,s9 for t1) Implicit constraint: (due to a chain of explicit constraints: (e.g. implicit constraint between s4 for t2 and s9 for t1 ) 11xx10xxx xx1xxx1x1 t1 t2 xxx10xx11t3 s1s2s3s4s5s6s7s8s9

Communication Costs for Implicit Constraints Explicit constraints can be resolved by direct communication between agents Resolving Implicit constraints may require long communication paths through multiple agents  scalability problems 11xx10xxx xx1xxx1x1 t1 t2 xxx10xx11t3 s1s2s3s4s5s6s7s8s9

Conclusions and Research Directions

Future directions Study structural issues and inpact on complexity, as they occur in the distributed environments e.g.: –effect of balancing; –backbone (insights into critical resources); –refinement of phase transition notions considering additional parameters;

DCSP Model With the DCSP model, we plan to study both per-node computational costs as well as inter-node communication costs We are in the process of applying known DCSP algorithms to study issues concerning complexity and scalability

Summary We have made considerable progress in our understanding of the nature of hard computational problems - structure matters! We have harnessed a variety of mechanisms with proven impact on time-critical problem solving. A rich spectrum of applications taking advantage of these new methods are on the horizon in planning, scheduling and many other areas. Future focus on Dynamic Distributed models

The End