ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Three approaches to heuristic search in networks
Full text PdfPdf (1.85 MB)
Source Journal of the ACM (JACM) archive
Volume 32 ,  Issue 1  (January 1985) table of contents
Pages: 1 - 27  
Year of Publication: 1985
ISSN:0004-5411
Authors
A. Bagchi  Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Calcutta, India
A. Mahanti  Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Calcutta, India
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 6,   Downloads (12 Months): 36,   Citation Count: 8
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   review   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2455.2458
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Three different approaches to heuristic search in networks are analyzed. In the first approach, as formulated initially by Hart, Nilsson, and Raphael, and later modified by Martelli, the basic idea is to choose for expansion that node for which the evaluation function has a minimum value. A second approach has recently been suggested by Nilsson. In this method, in contrast to the earlier one, a node that is expanded once is not expanded again; instead, a “propagation” of values takes place. The third approach is an adaptation for networks of an AND/OR graph “marking” algorithm, originally due to Martelli and Montanari. Five algorithms are presented. Algorithms A and C illustrate the first approach; PropA and PropC, the second one; and MarkA, the third one. The performances of these algorithms are compared for both admissible and inadmissible heuristics using the following two criteria: (i) cost of the solution found; (ii) time of execution in the worst case, as measured by the number of node expansions (A, C), or node “selections” (PropA, PropC), or arc “markings” (MarkA). The relative merits and demerits of the algorithms are summarized and indications are given regarding which algorithm to use in different situations.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
BAGCHI, A., AND MAHANTI, A.Admissible heuristic search in AND/OR graphs. Theor. Comput. Sci. 24, 2 (1983), 207-219.
3
 
4
MARTELLI, A.On the complexity of admissible search algorithms. Artif lntell. 8 (1977), 1-13.
 
5
MARTELLI, A., AND MONTANARI, U.Additive AND/OR graphs, in Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Stanford, Cal.,). Aug. 1973, pp. 1-11.
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
PEARL, J.Knowledge versus search: A quantitative analysis using A*. Artif. lntell. 20 (1983) 1-13.

CITED BY  8


REVIEW

"George A. Bekey : Reviewer"

This paper compares the performance of five heuristic search algorithms, related to the now classical A* algorithm introduced by Nilsson [1]. The five algorithms are classified into three “approaches.” The first approach is the class  more...